GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

From: Anders Berg <>
Subject: Re: Yaroslav I & Ingegerda
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 11:08:29 +0200

Russell Martin <> wrote:
>There are other candidates for the identity of Riurik from amongst known
>personages, of course. Kruse (1836) first proposed the identification of
>Riurik with R/orik, as did Beliaev later (1929). Other views abound as
>well (Lowmianski, 1963). Whatever the case, this is not an argument
>based on coindence of lifespans; the identification is suggested on the basis
>of a dizzyingly vast array of Scandinavian and other sources. Nothing
>about it is conclusive, of course, but there is a case that can be made
>here.

Since the First Chronicle is so unreliable, and I don't doubt that at
all, and since Rurik isn't mentioned in any other sources (or is he?),
isn't it a rather pointless exercise to try to find "candidates for the
identity of Riurik from amongst known personages"? There are no solid
base for such proposals. You can't just look up a fellow with the same
name (or a remotely similar name) in the same time period (give or take
a hundred years!) and argue for identity, on the basis of "a dizzyingly
vast array of Scandinavian and other sources", which in most cases would
be the Icelandic sagas. 19th century genealogy, if you ask me.

>Pritsak does explain origin of Scandinavian names. I suggest you look at
>his *Origins of Rus'*.

I haven't read Pritsak, but I agree with Jared: we do see a lot of strange
etymology and linguistics around! Could you make a summary of Pritsak's
arguments?

At the moment, given the evidence from the chronicle, the Scandinavian
names and, not the least, the archaeological findings which prove beyond
doubt a substantial Scandinavian presence in "Russia", there is no reason
to disbelieve a Scandinavian origin of the Rurikids.

Cheers,

/Anders Berg

This thread:

• Re: Yaroslav I & Ingegerda by Anders Berg <>