Talk:Rurikids

Duke of Mačva, Duke of Bosnia, Ban of Slavonia, Ban of Mačva, Ban of Bosnia...

Can anyone please explain when the Rurik Dynasty ruled over these countries on the Balkan Peninsula? These places are quite far from any East Slavic principalities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.28.128.153 (talk) 00:48, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Shuyski family

• I propose Vasily IV Shuyski to be added to the end of the table. Shuyskies are descendants of Rurik, and he was, if though just for 4 years, a tsar.Garret Beaumain (talk) 18:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Catherine the Great descent from Rurik

Catherine the Great was widely known as "that German petty princess," motivating her own propaganda to highlight her Russian and Eastern Orthodox credentials. This was already in progress when she was the Russian heir-apparent's wife -- aiming at gathering potential support for the future -- and continued unabated during her reign as Catherine II, Empress of All Russias.

Descent from the House of Tver

4. Rurik of Novgorod

5. Igor I of Kiev m Olga, Regent of Kiev

6. Svyatoslav I of Kiev

7. Vladimir I of Kiev

8. Yaroslav I of Kiev m Ingegerd of Sweden

9. Grand Prince Vsevolod I of Kiev a.k.a Vsevolod Jaroslavich (fourth son) m Anastasia/Maria/Eirene Monomakhine, daughter of Emperor Constantine IX and descendant of Skleros family of Byzantium

10. Vladimir II of Kiev, a.k.a Vladimir Vsevolodich Monomah m Gytha of Wessex-daughter of Saint King Harold Godwinson of England

11. Grand Prince George I of Kiev a.k.a Yuriy Dolgorukiy, 1st Prince of Suzdal (son of second marriage)

12. Vsevolod III, Grand Prince of Vladimir m Maria of Ossetia

13. Yaroslav II, Grand Prince of Vladimir, Yaroslav Vsevolodovich m Fjodosia Igorievna of Ryazan, maternal granddaughter of Rostislav I of Kiev, Prince of Smolensk

14. Yaroslav III of Tver, 1st Grand Prince of Tver, Yaroslav Yaroslavich m Xenia Yurievna, daughter of a boyar

15. Michael of Tver, St Michael Yaroslavich, 1st Grand Prince of All Rus m Anna Dmitrievna of Rostov, granddaughter of Boris Vasilkovich, Prince of Rostov, and Maria Yaroslavna of Muron

16. Alexander I, Grand Prince of Tver a.k.a Alexander Mihailovich m Anastasia, of Halych

17. Uljana Alexandrovna of Tver m Algirdas, Grand Prince of Lithuania and Ruthenia

18. Alexandra of Lithuania m Ziemowit IV, Duke of Masovia, a descendant of Empress Theophanu

19. Maria of Masovia m Bogislas IX, Duke of Pomerania

20. Sophia of Pomerania m Eric II, Duke of Pomerania

21. Bogislas X, Duke of Pomerania m Anna of Poland, a granddaughter of Jogaila, the eldest son of Uljana of Tver the aforementioned

22. Sophia of Pomerania m Frederick I of Denmark and Norway

23. Elisabeth of Denmark m Ulrich III, Duke of Mecklenburg

24. Sofie of Mecklenburg-Schwerin m Frederick II of Denmark and Norway

25. Augusta of Denmark m John Adolf, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp

26. Frederick III, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp m Marie Elisabeth of Saxony

27. Sophia Augusta of Holstein m John, Prince of Zerbst

28. John Louis, Prince of Zerbst m Christina Eleanor von Zeutsch

29. Christian August, Prince of Zerbst m Johanna Elisabeth of Holstein-Gottorp

30. Catherine the Great, Empress of All Russias m Peter Fedorovich Romanov, matrnal grandson of Peter I of Russia

31. Paul I of Russia m Maria Fedorovna of Württemberg

32. Alexander I of Russia, Helena Pavlovna of Russia, Maria Pavlovna of Russia, Catherine Pavlovna of Russia, Nicholas I of Russia and so forth.

Descent from Princes of Smolensk

8. Vladimir II Monomah, the aforementioned

9. Mstislav I of Kiev, eldest son of the first marriage

10. Rostislav I of Kiev, Prince of Smolensk, a younger son

11. Rurik II of Kiev, Rjurik Vasili Rostislavich m Anna Georgievna of Turov, daughter of Georgiy Yaroslavich of Turov

12. Jaroslava Rjurikovna of Kiev m Sviatoslav Igorjevich of Vladimir-Volhynsk, son of Igor Sviatoslavich of Chernigov and Eufrosinja Yaroslavna of Lodomeria

13. Agafia Sviatoslavna of Novgorod m Konrad, Duke of Masovia, great-great-grandson of Dobronega of Kiev, daughter of St Vladimir I of Kiev

14. Casimir, Duke of Kujavia m Eufrosyne of Silesia, daughter of Casimir I, Duke of Opole

15. king Ladislas IV of Poland m Jadwiga of Greater Poland

16. Malgorzata Kunigunda of Kujavia m Bernard I, Duke of Swidnica of Silesia

17. Elisabeth of Silesia m Boleslas II, Duke of Opole, grandson of Euphemia of Greater Poland, herself graddaughter of Vyacheslava Yaroslavna of Halych

18. Ladislas, Duke of Opole, Palatine of Hungary m Elisabeth of Valachia, daughter of Basaraba Alexander I, Prince of Valachia

19. Catharina of Opole m Henry VIII, Duke of Glogau, son of Henry V, Duke of Glogau and Anna of Masovia-Plock, herself maternal granddaughter of Jevna Ivanovna of Polatsk

20. John I, Duke of Glogau m Scholastica of Saxony

21. John II, Duke of Sagan m Catharina of Troppau, daughter of Salomea Czastalowicz

22. Anna of Sagan and Glogau m Charles I, Duke of Munsterberg, grandson of king George I of Bohemia

23. Jadwiga of Munsterberg m George, Margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach, son of Sofia of Poland

24. Anna Maria of Ansbach m Christopher, Duke of Wurttemberg

25. Eleanor of Wurttemberg m JoachimErnest, Prince of Zerbst

26. Rudolf, Prince of Zerbst

---

23. Jadwiga of Munsterberg m George of Ansbach

24. Sabine of Ansbach m John George, Elector of Brandenburg

25. Sophia of Brandenburg m Christian I, Elector of Saxony

26. John George I, Elector of Saxony

Descent from the House of Halych

7. Grand Prince Vsevolod I of Kiev a.k.a Vsevolod Jaroslavich, the aforementioned, m Anastasia/Maria/Eirene Monomakhine, daughter of Emperor Constantine IX and descendant of Skleros family of Byzantium

8. Vladimir II of Kiev, a.k.a Vladimir Vsevolodich Monomah m Gytha of Wessex

9. Mstislav I of Kiev a.k.a Mstislav Vladimirich, eldest son, m Christina Ingesdotter of Sweden

10. Iziaslav II of Kiev a.k.a Iziaslav Mstislavich, elder son

11. Mstislav II of Kiev a.k.a Mstislav Iziaslavich m Agnes of Poland, a 6th-generation descendant of Empress Theophanu, herself estimated to have been with a Skleros descent

12. Roman II of Kiev the Great a.k.a Roman Mstislavich

13. King Daniel I of Halych a.k.a Danylo Romanovich m Anna Mstislavna of Smolensk and Novgorod,daughter of Mstislav the Bold, Prince of Novgorod and Prince of Halych, a 4th-generation male-line descendant of Grand Prince Vladimir Monomakh

14. King Leo I of Halych a.k.a Lev Danylovich m Constance of Hungary, daughter of Maria Laskarina (the aforementioned, Laskaris-Angelos-Komnenos) of the Nicean Empire and Bela IV of Hungary, himself descendant of Grand Prince Vladimir Monomakh and of Empress Theophanu

15. King George I of Halych a.k.a Yurij Lvovich m Euphemia of Kujavia, granddaughter of Agafia Svjatoslavna of Novgorod and Conrad of Masovia, himself a descendant of Empress Theophanu (Euphemia also descended from Vladimir Monomakh)

16. Maria Yurievna of Halych m Trojden, Duke of Masovia

17. Ziemowit III, Duke of Masovia m Euphemia of Troppau

18. Ziemowit IV, Duke of Masovia m Alexandra of Lithuania

19. Maria of Masovia m Bogislas IX, Duke of Pomerania

20. Sophia, Duchess of Pomerania of Stargard m Eric II, Duke of Pomerania of Wolgast

21. Catharina of Pomerania m Henry I, Duke of Brunswick

22. Catharina of Brunswick m Magnus I, Duke of Lauenburg

23. Dorothea of Lauenburg m Christian III of Denmark and Norway

24. Dorothea of Denmark m William, Duke of Brunswick-Lunenburg

25. George, Duke of Calenberg m Anna Eleanor of Hesse-Darmstadt

26. Sophia Amalia of Brunswick-Calenberg m Frederick III of Denmark and Norway

27. Frederica Amalia of Denmark m Christian Albert, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp

28. duke Christian August of Holstein m Albertina of Baden

29. Johanna Elisabeth of Holstein m Christian August, Prince of Zerbst

30. Catherine the Great

Descent from the House of Chernigov

4. Yaroslav I of Kiev, the aforementioned, m Ingegerd of Sweden

5. Svyatoslav of Chernigov, Grand Prince of Kiev, third son

6. Oleg Michael of Sevjersk, Prince of Chernigov, m Theophano Musalonitissa

7. Vsevolod II of Kiev m Maria Mstislavna of Kiev, daughter of Mstislav I of Kiev, descendant of a brother of Svyatopolk

8. Svyatoslav III of Kiev m Maria Vasilkovna of Polatsk, daughter of Vasilko Svyatoslavich, Prince of Polatsk

9. Vsevolod IV of Kiev

10. Michael of Chernigov, saint, Grand Prince of Kiev m Maria Romanovna of Halych, daughter of Roman II of Kiev and Predslava Rjurikovna of Ovrutsk

11. Rostislav of Slavonia, ban of Macsva (Serbian march) m Anna of Hungary, daughter of Bela IV of Hungary and Maria Laskarina

12. Kunigunda of Chernigov m king Otakar II of Bohemia

13. Venceslas II of Bohemia

14. Elisabeth I of Bohemia m John of Luxembourg, king of Bohemia and titularly of Poland

15. Bonne of Bohemia m John II of France of Valois

16. Jeanne of France m Charles II of Navarre

17. Charles III of Navarre m Eleanor of Castile

18. Blanche II of Navarre m John II of Aragon

19. Eleanor I of Navarre m Gaston of Foix

20. Infanta Catherine of Navarre m Gaston de Foix, Count of Candale

21. Anna of Foix-Candale m king Vladislaus of Bohemia and Hungary

22. queen Anna of Bohemia and Hungary m Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor of HOuse of Habsburg

23. Maria of Austria m William, Duke of Julich-Cleves-Berg

24. Maria Eleanor of Cleves m Wojciech Fryderyk, Duke of Prussia

25. Magdalena Sibylla of Prussia m John George I, Elector of Saxony

26. Maria Elisabeth of Saxony m Frederick III, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp

27. Augusta Maria of Holstein-Gottorp m Frederick VII, Margrave of Baden-Durlach

28. Albertina Frederica of Baden m Christian August of Holstein-Gottorp

29. Johanna Elisabeth of Holstein-Gottorp m Christian August, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst

30. Catherine II of Russia m Peter III of Russia

31. Paul I of Russia m Maria Fedorovna of Württemberg

32. Alexander I of Russia, Helena Pavlovna of Russia, Maria Pavlovna of Russia, Catherine Pavlovna of Russia, Nicholas I of Russia and so forth.

Descent from Ruthenian consorts of early Kings of Hungary

4. Yaroslav I of Kiev, the aforementioned, m Ingegerd of Sweden

5. Grand Prince Iziaslav I of Kiev, second son, the eldest who survived father, and his immeddiate successor

6. Sviatopolk II of Kiev

7. Predslava of Kiev m Almos of Hungary

8. Bela II of Hungary m Jelena of Serbia

9. Geza II of Hungary m Euphrosyne of Kiev, daughter of Ljubava Dmitrievna Savidich and Mstislav I of Kiev, eldest son of Grand Prince Vladimir Monomah

10. Bela III of Hungary m Agnes of Antioch

11. Andrew II of Hungary m Gertrude of Merania

12. Bela IV of Hungary m Maria Laskarina

13. Constance of Hungary m king Leo I of Halych

14. king George I of Halych m Euphemia of Kujavia

15. Maria Yurievna of Halych m Trojden of Masovia

16. Euphemia of Masovia m Casimir I, Duke of Teschen

17. Premislas I, Duke of Teschen m Elisabeth of Silesia Bytom

18. Anna of Silesia Teschen m Henry IX, Duke of Silesia in Lueben etc

19. Louis III, Duke of Silesia in Ohlau m Malgorzata of Silesia Opole

20. John II, Duke of Silesia in Lueben m Jadwiga of Silesia-Brieg

21. Frederick I, Duke of Liegnitz and Brieg m Ludmila of Bohemia

22. Frederick II, Duke of Liegnitz m Sophia of Brandenbirg-Ansbach

23. Sophia of Silesia m John George, Elector of Brandenburg

24. Joachim Frederick, Elector of Brandenburg m Catharina of Brandenburg-Kustrin

25. Anna Catharina of Brandenburg m Christian IV of Denmark and Norway

26. Frederick III of Denmark and Norway m Sophia Amalia of Brunswick-Calenberg

27. Frederica Amalia of Denmark m Christian Albert, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp

28. duke Christian August of Holstein m Albertina of Baden

29. Johanna Elisabeth of Holstein m Christian August, Prince of Zerbst

30. Catherine the Great

Descent from Princes of Tmutarakan, Novgorod, Lodomeria and Volhynia

8. Yaroslav I of Kiev, the aforementioned, m Ingegerd of Sweden

9. Vladimir Jaroslavich, Prince of Novgorod, the eldest son, predeceased the father

10. Rostislav Vladimirovich, Prince of Rostov, Novgorod and Vladimir-Volhynsk

11. Volodar, Prince of Przemysl and Tmutorokan

12. Volodymyrko of Halych

13. Yaroslav I of Halych m Olga Yurievna of Suzdal, daughter of Yuriy Dolgoruky, Grand Prince of Kiev, Prince of Suzdal and Rostov, and a daughter of khan Aepa of the Polovtchy

14. Vyatcheslava Yaroslavna of Lodomeria m Odo, Duke of Poznan and Kalisz

15. Wladyslaw III of Poznan

16. Premislas I of Poland m Elisabeth of Silesia, daughter of Henry II, Duke of Wroclaw and Anna of Bohemia

17. Constance of Poland m Konrad I, Margrave of Brandenburg

18. Agnes of Brandenburg m Albert I, Prince of Zerbst

19. Albert II, Prince of Zerbst m Beatrix of Saxony (Wittenberg)

20. John I, Prince of Zerbst m Elisabeth of Henneberg

21. Sigismund I, Prince of Zerbst m Jutta of Querfurt

22. George I, Prince of Zerbst m Anna of Lindow-Ruppin

23. Ernest, Prince of Zerbst m Margaret of Podebrady, daughter of Henry I, Duke of Munsterberg from Bohemia, son of Kunhuta z Sternberka and George I of Bohemia z Kunstat Podebrad

24. John II, Prince of Zerbst m Margaret of Brandenburg

25. Joachim Ernest, Prince of Anhalt m Eleanor of Wurttemberg

26. Rudolf, Prince of Zerbst m Magdalena of Oldenburg

27. John, Prince of Zerbst m Sophia Augusta of Holstein-Gottorp

28. John Louis, Prince of Zerbst m Christina Eleanor von Zeutsch

29. Christian August, Prince of Zerbst m Johanna Elisabeth of Holstein-Gottorp

30. Catherine the Great, Empress of All Russias m Peter Fedorovich Romanov

31. Paul I of Russia

32. Alexander I of Russia and so forth

Fair use rationale for Image:Gagarin arms.jpg

Image:Gagarin arms.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Moscow-Vladimir

At the point where it refers to the Grand Dukes of Moscow-Vladimir, is that accurate? as far as I know the Muscovite dukes were simply Grand Dukes of Moscow, not Grand Duke / Prince of Moscow-Vladimir.Rcduggan (talk) 15:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The Muscovite rulers were initially just Princes of Moscow (i.e. "Duke of Moscow"). Leadership of the Rus' came from the title Grand Prince which was associated not with Moscow but with Vladimir (originally associated with Kiev), though Grand Prince of Moscow was also used because 1) after the fragmentation period the different between Prince and GP wasn't as respected in actual usage and 2) GP of Vladimir became effectively the same thing as Moscow after Donskoi, whose descendents monopolized the honour of GP of Vladimir. Article atm is highly misleading. Rulers of Kiev after 13th cent. and rulers of Galicia had no more (less in fact) recognition as head of Riurikid dynasty than the rulers of Vladimir. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

But rulers of Volhynia/Galicia WERE recognized as Kings of Russia, the only Russia of the time.Goliath74 (talk) 19:22, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Finno-Ugric Origin

FU too specific when Varangian will suffice. Scandinavian in textbooks, but DNA shows FU and Slavic (RUNewsweek) origin. It is all academic at this point since all the early medieval Baltic trading centers, Reric, Hedeby, Jumne, Ladoga were ethnically mixed. - Athrash | ^Talk 22:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe it should be considered exclusively for the Lands of Free Novgorod as it carried a special status in the history of the Rus and covered a great area. The further south this assimilation was deminishing. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 03:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

DNA test actually showed a non-slavic origin, and suggested connections to finno-ugrics. Some russian scolars tried to explain it in a strange way, but there are many other scolars, who explain it the way it is .

Additionally, Djagfar Tarihi bulgar chronicles says the original name of Rurik was Lachyn (which meant "clear falcon" or "saint falcon"), and he was a member of volga-bulgarian Dulo-dynasty (Attila the Hun's dynasty). According to D.T. he was the son of Aydar (797-855) and he was the younger brother of volga-bulgar Khan Gabdullah Djilki (822-882). According to Djagfar Tarihi, the Dulo-dynasty were originally finno-ugrian. D.T. is said to be forged - by the same russian scolars who says Rurik is scandinavian. Actually, I don't see the reason, why they want Rurik so much, to be a viking origin? Why is it better, than the finno-uric truth?

Anyways, finno-ugric theory is strenghtened by the fact that Rurik's coat of arms were the trident tamga, which cannot be found among neither among Scandinavian, nor slavic tribes, but was the sign of Dulo-dynasty.. Rurik was not a varangyan, but his ally, Askold (in D.T.: As-Khalib) was a varangyan mercenary in Kiev between c.a. 870 and 882. Askold and Rurik fought side by side against volga-bulgarians, most of the times they fought on the same side in battles. Maybe that's why many people thought Rurik is also a varangyan, but he came from a famous dynasty, it is not a coincidence, he was on the right spot at the right time, he was raised to rule, and he know how to rule, he was not a simple varangyan mercenary warrior, he was a born ruler.

This is 3 (!) evidence for finno-ugric and more specificly for Dulo-dynasty connections. What we have against it? Oral traditions and a short sentence in a russian chronicle. Why the scandinavian origin theory is the main theory than? Xxlrutin (talk) 07:54, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Genetic studies of Rurikids But while genetically related to the later Baltic Finnic peoples, the Rurikids do not possess the DYS390=24 mutation associated with the Finnic languages, theirs remaining the ancestral DYS390=23, with the Rurikid haplotype itself (all values considered) more closely associated with [North] Germanic speakers (Varangians).[11].? This Rurik genetics argument is wrong. It is not scientifically true. The above-mentioned argument Rurik DYS390 = 23, because the marker value is the highest in Finland (see map - Semargl- SOURCE:[12], it is Family Tree DNA research results collected in 2015.It was the last direct link to today's knowledge. Jaakko Häkkinen 2012 data is not OK. Can it be repaired or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.78.95 (talk) 18:55, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Is this Jaakko Häkkinen - original research is certainly not. If you even if you read what it says here DYS390 = 23. When the Finns have DYS390 = 23markeri value most in Europe (see the map VARANGIANS inEurope, Semargl -FamilyTree DNA) - so why can not write that it is not Finnish? Such leadership conclusions can not be made on the basis of science. Have you checked the removing of the official investigation results. In my opinion, Family Tree DNA studies have formal investigation. Semargl collect them information. If Jaakko Häkkinen script is not properly in 2015 and whether it is right to rely on Wikipedia for writing? Have you noticed - it has been removed. WHY? What is the value of the writing that no longer exists - it is out of date information, and therefore deleted the reference see the result is Not Found -The Requested URL /home/jphakkin/N1c.pdf was not found on this server. What is Wikipedia's responsibility for incorrect data? - I'm just trying to help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.78.95 (talk) 08:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Do you understand -Ymblanter - nothing genetics and Family Tree DNA of modern research. If you understand that if you do not remove the short writings, based on scientific research from 2014 to 2015, look at > [2] . You will then return the text of which is also based on Family Tree DNA results and Jaakko Häkkinen 2012 written text, but it is out of date information.

So Wikipedia accepts writing that does not exist. But does not accept text that should be up-to-date research results, such as Family Tree - information Varangians areas in Europe - http://www.semargl.me/haplogroups/maps/153/ . Semargl in 2015 data to be the same source (Family TreeDNA) as Jaakko Häkkinen in 2012 data, but Jaakko Häkkinen is incorrectly interpreted the results, and the information is out of date. Now the same thing is a map n011 Varangians in Europe. Why is it can not be published? Why the disclosure is considered a mistake, even if the current text is clearly a mistake. Why does not correct the wrong information?

Ash - then so be it - it is your Wikipedia scientific level. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.78.95 (talk) 16:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Bloodline

I think the dynasty name can be only passed through male heir otherwise it becomes chaotic as the article itself. The bloodline, I believe, can be traced not only to Rurik, but also to Adam and Eve =) Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 03:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

Setting of nationality of whole dynasty, as is lasting more than 1000 years, seems to be impossible. Rurik was probably Norse or Finn, but his descendants intermarried with Slavic, Greek, Mongol, German or Latvian wives (as every noble in these times). Nationality of nobles was recent invention and they feel nationality of states they ruled. Language is not helpful, as they talked Russian and later French. BTW Wilhelm the Great was French speaking. Setting of nationality based on possible nationality of the founder is nonsense. Is Elisabeth II. Saxon? Or Juan Carlos Frank? Nonsense...--Yopie (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Alright, you win, but it still sounds logical to me that the founder of the dynasty determines it's ethnic affiliation.Alphasinus (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

King of Galicia-Volhynia

I am trying to start a reasonable discussion on whether or not the title should remain.

Please follow WP:BRD so that we can find consensus and move forwards without this becoming an issue. I have restored the title as per BRD until the discussion ends and consensus is found. Chaosdruid (talk) 04:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Coat of Arms

It is a big mistake using the Double-headed eagle as a coat of arms of Rurik Dynasty. The first Russian eagle came only in 1472 with Ivan III after his marriage with Byzantine princess Sophia Palaiologina. It is not the arms of coat neither Rurik nor Rurik Dynasty.

The coat of Rurik, some researchers (S. Gedeon, M. Rapov, A. Kuz'min, V. Merkulov) interpret as a schematic representation of a falling falcon on its prey. While others see it as an image sceptre, an anchor, a trident or fork. A stylised version of the image is the current coat of Ukraine.

About Rurik's coat of arms you can read [[3]] in Russian language.

Now we do not know for certain how Rurik's coat looked but we know for certain about the coat of arm of his grandson Sviatoslav I of Kiev in 972. You can see the first image from [4].

MelVic (talk) 22:29, 15 July 2012 (UTC)MelVic

• Eagle was used by Rurikid Ivan III of Russia. --Yopie (talk) 08:24, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

This article is not about Russian Tsardom this article is about Rurik Dynasty we have to use Rurik's coat of arms or his closest lineal descendant here. Using Byzantine's coat of arms here is nonsense. MelVic (talk) 09:07, 17 July 2012 (UTC)MelVic

• And this article is not about Ladoga. Most known Rurikids used eagle.--Yopie (talk) 23:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Why we can not use the Double-headed eagle as a coat of arms of Rurik Dynasty.

1. It is not the native Rurik dynasty coat. It only came from Byzantine Empire in 1472 with Ivan III after his marriage with Byzantine princess Sophia Palaiologina.
2. It was only used by 4 Rurik dynasty rulers: Ivan III of Russia, Vasili III of Russia, Ivan the Terrible, Feodor I of Russia.
3. Rurik dynasty began in 862, double-headed eagle was used from 1472 and stopped using them in 1598 when the last Russian ruler from Rurik dynasty Feodor I of Russia died. So it was only used 126 years. In 2012 Rurik dynasty has 1150. Please compare 126 vs 1150.
4. The double-headed eagle has been keeping on using by other Russian monarchy dynasty the House of Romanov and Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov. So most people associate the double-headed eagle with the House of Romanov and Russian Empire.
5. Russian tsars can not represent all Rurik Dynasty. They come from the branch - Monomahovichi (ru:Мономаховичи) -> Yurievichi (Юрьевичи) from Vladimir II Monomakh via Yuri Dolgorukiy. There have been a lot of other Rurik dynasties branches.
6. This article is about Rurik dynasty but is not about the Tsardom of Russia or the Russian Empire.

MelVic (talk) 23:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)Melvic

Yes, this article is not about Staraya Ladoga. But Staraya Ladoga municipality took Rurik's coat of arms. I already wrote:

The coat of Rurik, some researchers (S. Gedeon, M. Rapov, A. Kuz'min, V. Merkulov) interpret as a schematic representation of a falling falcon on its prey. While others see it as an image sceptre, an anchor, a trident or fork. A stylized version of the image is the current the coat of Ukraine.

Now we do not know for certain how Rurik's coat looked but we know for certain about the coat of arm of his lineal descendant Sviatoslav I of Kiev.

It is the Coat of arms of Sviatoslav I of Kiev. All branches of Rurik dynasty come from Sviatoslav I of Kiev. MelVic (talk) 23:59, 17 July 2012 (UTC)MelVic

1. Information about the coat of arms of Rurik dynasty in English you can find here -[5]. Actually this topic is not very popular in the English speaking World so if you want to write about it you have to use Russian and Ukrainian sources some of them I gave above. It is like you want to write about Czech History you can find more information in Czech language than in English or Russian.
2. Why we can not use the Double-headed eagle as a coat of arms of Rurik Dynasty I explained before and I am looking forward to getting your comments. Furthermore you agree with me that the Double-headed eagle came to Russia from Byzantine Empire. It did not come from Rurik or from his descendants. Russian rules have used it to express their relationship with the East Roman (Byzantine) imperial dynasty, you can read the article Third Rome. If you know after the marriage of Ivan III and Byzantine princess Sophia Palaiologina Russian rules started being called as a Tsar from Latin Caesar. In time of the Russian Empire no-one except the Imperial House of Romanov could use the double-headed eagle as a coat of arms.
3. The most famous ruler from Rurik Dynasty was Vladimir the Great which arm of coats is well known.

MelVic (talk) 08:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)MelVic

The trident tamga was the coat of arms for the Dulo-dynasty: and Rurik's coat of arms were also the trident tamga, which cannot be found among neither among Scandinavian, nor slavic tribes. . Djagfar Tarihi says he was a far descendant of Attila the Hun, because Rurik was a member of the Dulo-clan, and his original name was Lachyn. His father was Aidar and his brother was Gabdullah Djilki, he was one of the two leaders in volga-bulgarian civil war in the 860's AD, which was taking place for the rule over Itil-Bulgaria. His opponent was his own brother Djilki. Djilki was supported by muslims, Lachyn (Rurik) was supported by non-muslims (tengriists). Neighbouring Kazaria supported Lachyn, because their goal was to split Itil-Bulgaria and make Kiev and Novgorod (Bashtu and Urus-Galidj) a new region separated from bulgars. Xxlrutin (talk) 08:09, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Fringe Finno-Ugric theory

I have reverted the addition of a long section about a fringe Finno-Ugric theory since it lacks all scientific value since it is based on a claim made by a Finnish writer that central Sweden was inhabited by Finno-Ugric tribes, even as late as the 9th century AD, when all archaeological evidence, and all documentation, both local and foreign (ranging from runestones to the writings of Roman explorers), clearly shows that Southern and Central Sweden, up to far north of the Roslagen/Uppland area near Stockholm, has been inhabited by Scandinavians, i e Germanic people, since prehistoric times. The Sami people, the only Finno-Ugric people that has inhabited parts of the Scandinavian Peninsula, have never lived even anywhere near the Uppland area, but much further to the north. So a claim based on a theory that has as little scientific value as claiming that Elvis Presley is still alive doesn't belong in the article. Thomas.W (talk) 22:47, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

A response to you given below - RasboKaren (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

The special argument, Thomas W. - TW argument does not have any scientific basis. This Elvis - definition applies to him. See genetic studies 2014- 2015, Rurik`s N1c1 - L550 (xL1025) and spesifin YFull Y4339* > Proto- Rurik haplogroup is the FIN. General Finnic peoples nowdays (62%) of also N1c1 haplo; It has spread to Siberia - Ural Baltic Sea / Finland and then to Sweden. Sweden does not typically N group (only 7%), it is also original Finnic - before Germanic peoples the rise in southern Sweden, which has spread to only 900 in 1100 century Småland -Stockholm height. Where the indigenous - residents (N-haplo) were Finno. In addition, Finland was transferred from the 1200's a man of the population (N group), the average in Sweden Stockholm - Finsta area - the source can be found - Pope bullas 1171 AD and PhD. Moberg; > Http://www.ukforsk.se/bok0/finnar.htm. always 1500's. The best known of the migration was later Finnish forest migration (1580 >). Which is also one of the Rurik - cousin (Family Tree DNA). In general, the claim that Finns have no DYS390 = 23 marks excellent value - is a false allegation. Here is a map - a source of Family Tree DNA studies in 2015 and built on the map n011 Varangian number - the largest number in Finland and / or coming from Finland SOURCE: http://www.semargl.me/haplogroups/maps/153/ WHY mm. Finnish genetics has spread Viking - groups (N-haplo) involved extensively in Europe. This link, which brings scientific studies of Finnish and Finnic peoples of territories in Eurasia. Hunters yDNA N and mtDNA U - groups and Finnic- Finno - languages ​​areas, the link> https://sites.google.com/site/liukkohistoria/

Banning Finnish language speeded up Swedification of Sweden Proper

User Thomas.W - please do not remove appropriately sourced and important information, based on guesses of ethnical backgrounds of other Wikipedia contributors.

There could not be Medieval "Swedish" sources of the Finnic- and Finno-Ugric-inhabited Kvenland - of course -, since the First ever account written in Swedish came out as late as the 14th century, Eric's Chronicle (presumably written in Turku, Finland).

As a name for a country, Kvenland seems to have gone out of ordinary usage already by the 13th century, unrecognized by scholars by the 14th century. Accordingly, the terms "Kvenland" and "Kven" are not found in Swedish literature.

However, for instance in c. 1157, in his geographical chronicle 'Leiðarvísir og borgarskipan', the Icelandic abbot Níkulás Bergsson described the lands near Norway the following way:

"Closest to Denmark is little Sweden (Svíþjóð), there is Öland (Eyland); then is Gotland; then Hälsingland (Helsingaland); then Värmland (Vermaland); then two Kvenlands (Kvenlönd), and they extend to north of Bjarmia (Bjarmalandi)."

There is other similar written evidence and much archaeological and DNA evidence for the support. My job, however, is not to write a doctoral thesis to you about this. Instead, I have appropriately provided distinguished archaeologists and historians and their works as sources.

A DNA study conducted on the prehistoric skeletal remains of four individuals from Gotland (in Southern Sweden) supports the area having been ethnically interconnected with Finland and Kvenland during the primeval era:

"The hunter-gatherers show the greatest similarity to modern-day Finns", says Pontus Skoglund, an evolutionary geneticist at Uppsala University in Sweden.

It is widely accepted knowledge that still as late as in the end of the Middle Ages, Skellefteå - formerly Finnish "Heletti" - formed the border of the Finnish- and Swedish-speaking zones in what today is Northern Sweden, and that thereafter too the Finnic language zone has continued shifting much further north.

Simultaneously, Finnish place names have typically been replaced by Swedish names. Of Finnish "Heletti" became Swedish Skellefteå, of Finnish "Kainuunväylä" became Swedish Kalix River, and so on. This development had began centuries before from much further south in the modern-day area of Sweden.

It is also a commonly known fact, that the gradual evanescence of the Finnic language spoken in the area of the modern-day Norrland, Sweden, and the continued shifting further north of the Finnic language zone took place for the most part due to the restrictions and bans imposed against the use of the Finnic language spoken in the modern-day area of Sweden in the past.

In attempts to have the Finnish population of Sweden Proper "Swedified" and assimilated into the mainstream Swedish society, the use of the Finnish language had become strictly prohibited in Sweden Proper before the mid-17th-century.

By the end of the 18th century, a large part of the descendants of all Finnic people historically inhabiting the territories of the modern-day Sweden had become linguistically and culturally assimilated into the Swedish mainstream society. During the previous two centuries, various laws and regulations had been passed to speed up the "Swedification" process of the Finnic people of Sweden Proper, including total banning of the use of the Finnish language.

During the reign of Christina, Queen of Sweden, a proclamation of 1646 called for the burning of houses of all those Finns who did not want to learn Swedish in the area of Sweden Proper. Reading books written in Finnish lead in some cases to imprisonments still in the 18th century.

For clarification, this part could be discussed to a little larger extend in the article itself too, if necessary. The rest of my answer to user "Thomas.W" below: - RasboKaren (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

This hodge-podge of oddball claims is as WP:Fringe as it can be and doesn't even merit an answer. What's next on your agenda? Claiming that the Greeks of antiquity were also Finns? Thomas.W (talk) 09:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

In the originally 6th or 7th century Widsith - copied in the 10th century Exeter Book - the Samis are called "Scridefinns" (Skiing Finns) and the Kvens and/or Finns are referred to as "Finns": "Caesar ruled the Greeks, Caelic the Finns ... I was with the Greeks and Finns and also with Caesar". RasboKaren (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Just one comment: Gotland is an island in the middle of the Baltic Sea, halfway between the Scandinavian Peninsula and the Baltic countries, so claiming that the 9th century AD population of Roslagen/Uppland north of Stockholm were Finns based on someone claiming that a few prehistoric skeletal remains found on an island far away from not only the Roslagen/Uppland area but the Scandinavian Peninsula as a whole could possibly have been of Finno-Ugric origin is plain silly. And proves that the whole theory is extremely fringe. Thomas.W (talk) 11:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Findings of distinguished Swedish and Finnish scientists were provided to prove your point incorrect. E.g., the prehistoric remains of the people in Gotland were shown to match closest with those of the modern-day Finns. Gotland has been a part of the country of Sweden since the birth of Sweden, and it is a part of Scandinavia as well. In the Viking Age, Sweden did not yet exist.

Currently, the land inhabited by the Svea people ("Swealand") during the 9th century is shown too far up north (without sources too). Accordingly, the map needs to be removed. It is not known how large part of the modern-day area of Sweden was still Kvenland at the time of Rurik's birth. However, closely coinciding with the information provided in Orkneyinga, Hversu Noregr byggdist states that a descendant of Fornjót "ruled over Gothland, Kvenland (Kænlandi), and Finland".

Results published in April, 2012, of a DNA study conducted on the prehistoric skeletal remains of four individuals from Gotland support the area having been ethnically interconnected with Finland and Kvenland during the primeval era, further pointing to the overall information provided in the Orkneyinga and "Hversu" accounts being accurate: "The hunter-gatherers show the greatest similarity to modern-day Finns", says Pontus Skoglund, an evolutionary geneticist at Uppsala University in Sweden.

A work of Professor Emeritus Matti Klinge is also given as a source for Kvenland having bordered the Coast of Roslagen at the time of Rurik's birth. The Forest Finns are not discussed in the article, although the source about the banning of the Finnish language came from a book which focuses on the Forest Finns. The use of the Finnish language did not become banned from the Forest Finns alone, but all the Finnish-speaking people alike in the area of Sweden Proper, including Kvens, Tornedalians, Birkarls, etc. - - RasboKaren (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

History and support for theory of Finno-Ugric origins

The information removed by Thomas.W presents no personal views of the undersigned.

Instead, the info presents findings pertaining to a critical view shared by a number of distinguished experts. That view is today supported also by the recent Family Tree DNA studies. Accordingly, not presenting this school of thought represented by all these scientists and their related findings in this article would - of course - be wrong.

Thus, the wrongfully removed info was re-inserted to the article. Please note, that the related sources are appropriately attached, among them historians who are Rurikid descendants themselves, including Vasily Tatishchev, the author of the first full-scale Russian history.

Based on the findings of the internationally renown Professor Matti Klinge, for instance, the Finnic- and Finno-Ugric-inhabited ancient area of Kvenland included the shoreline of the entire Gulf of Bothnia, on both the present-day Swedish and Finnish sides of the Gulf.

The Doctor of Philosophy Matti Klinge, has served as a Visiting Professor at the University of Paris 1970-1972 and has held the Swedish Professorship of History at the University of Helsinki between 1975 and 2001. Klinge is one of the most prolific Scandinavian historians.

The border of the ancient Kvenland and the primarily Swedish-inhabited area in 814 AD (approximately when Rurik is believed to have born) can also be seen pictured in the map of "The Public Schools Historical Atlas by Charles Colbeck".

To juxtapose the recent Rurikid DNA studies in this informational context is appropriate and important, as the studies pinpoint that "the N1c1 Rurikid princes belong to the so-called “Varangian Branch” in" "the so-called “Finno-Ugrian”" "genetic haplogroup N1c1".

Under the headline Genetic studies of Rurikids, a link was deleted, due to the information on that link being outdated. The "outdated" notification is stated on the top area of that link page. - RasboKaren (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

This edit was blocked for 48 hours for edit-warring and came back as an IP sock, also blocked. Dougweller (talk) 14:04, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Genetic studies of Rurikids But while genetically related to the later Baltic Finnic peoples, the Rurikids do not possess the DYS390=24 mutation associated with the Finnic languages, theirs remaining the ancestral DYS390=23, with the Rurikid haplotype itself (all values considered) more closely associated with [North] Germanic speakers (Varangians).[11]. This Rurik genetics argument is wrong. It is not scientifically true. The above-mentioned argument Rurik DYS390 = 23, because the marker value is the highest in Finland (see map - Semargl- SOURCE:[12], it is Family Tree DNA research results collected in 2015.It was the last direct link to today's knowledge. Jaakko Häkkinen 2012 data is not OK. Can it be repaired or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.76.78.95 (talk) 18:22, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Novgorodian tribes

Since the Novgorodian tribes were partly Finno-Ugric (Chud and Ves) and partly Slavic (Slovenes and Krivich), I added [Finno-Ugric and Slavic] to define the ethnicities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuisco (talk • contribs) 17:18, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Do you have any evidence that Chud and Ves participated in the invitation? Neither Solovyov nor Klyuchevsky mention this. I strongly suspect this is not correct.--Ymblanter (talk) 00:39, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The Primary Chronicle. It mentions also Slavs. Do you mean that they also were not participating?Tuisco (talk) 19:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

The Primary Chronicle says very clearly: "Новгородцы же - те люди от варяжского рода, а прежде были словене." This does not leave much of interpretation. It says indeed the Chud and Ves were among the tribes who inveted the Varangians but does not say there were Novgorod tribes, only that they previously paid tribute to Varangians.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Theory of Dmitry Ilovaysky is a fringe theory. Theory of Vasily Tatishchev is not.

Why should views of a poorly known Russian historian Dmitry Ilovaysky be introduced - e.g. in the Rus' people article -, but not the views of the better known Vasily Tatishchev (just compare the multiple Google search results for Tatishchev over Ilovaysky)?

In his writings, Dmitry Ilovaysky expounded a hypothesis of Azov Rus, which was alleged to have been centered on Sarkel and Tmutarakan. The hypothesis of Ilovaysky has not been shared by other historians. Therefore, this can be called a fringe theory. However, the "Finnish theory" represented by Vasily Tatishchev has been shared by a number of well known historians since the 1700s, including historians who are Rurikid descendants themselves. An unbiased presentation of this view needs to be included. The recently conducted Rurikid DNA studies support the views of these historians, concluding the following:

... "the N1c1 Rurikid princes belong to the so-called “Varangian Branch” in" ... "the so-called “Finno-Ugrian”" "genetic haplogroup N1c1".

Based on the "Family Tree" DNA study, the members of the "Varangian Branch" represented by the "Rurikid princes") are “Finno-Ugrian”. They belong to the "Finno-Ugrian" haplogroup.

The prehistoric remains of the people in Gotland were brought up just because they too were shown to match closest with the modern-day Finns. Gotland has been a part of the country of Sweden since the birth of Sweden, and it is a part of Scandinavia as well. In the Viking Age, Sweden did not yet exist.

According to the closely coinciding information provided in both the medieval Orkneyinga and the 'Hversu Noregr byggdist' accounts, a descendant of Fornjót "ruled over Gothland, Kvenland (Kænlandi), and Finland". Results published in April, 2012, of a DNA study conducted on the prehistoric skeletal remains of four individuals from Gotland support the area having been ethnically interconnected with Finland and Kvenland during the primeval era, further pointing to the overall information provided in the Orkneyinga and "Hversu" accounts being accurate:

"The hunter-gatherers show the greatest similarity to modern-day Finns", says Pontus Skoglund, an evolutionary geneticist at Uppsala University in Sweden.

A work of Professor Emeritus Matti Klinge is also appropriately given as a source for Kvenland having bordered the Coast of Roslagen at the time of Rurik's birth. Here are a couple of faulty elements in the article, which need fixing:

1. The "imitation" of the 1905 map picturing Europe in 814 needs to be removed, because It has critical inaccuracies, as described before

2. The current Rus' people article continues misusing two Family Tree Rurikid DNA study pages as sources. The pages do not state that Rurik was from "Roslagen" or "Uppland". Tthey cannot be used as sources for the claim.

3. In the current Varangians and the Rus' people articles, the land inhabited by the Svea people ("Svealand") during the 9th century is shown to reach too far up north, and no sources for the claim are shown.

4. The Rurikid dynasty article continues providing a claim supported only by a broken link: "...[North] Germanic speakers (Varangians)." (the last time I removed the broken link was on November, 21, 2012, as can be seen here). - - RasboKaren (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism

How is it vandalism to remove swathes of unsourced and unreadable redlinks? It might be a good idea to check out WP:BURDEN and WP:NOTVAND. bobrayner (talk) 05:59, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

It is not vandalism, but did you try to source them before removal?--Ymblanter (talk) 08:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I assume the reverter has nothing to say in his defense. The valueable data will be reinserted. --Ghirla^-трёп- 07:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

It would be great if we could source them though.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:26, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Personally, I'm concerned about the use of surnames as a substitute for the identities of particular nobles. If those redlinks ever turn blue, and if the list is ever properly sourced, and if we can overlook the fact that it's impossible for readers to digest, it's still likely that some links would point to an article about a different topic, not whoever the hypothetical source is talking about. That does not seem "valuable" to me. For example, the most notable Pronsky is this lady; are we going to declare that she and all her kin are "of Rurik stock" due to a surname alone?

Calling me the "reverter" is both deceptive and irrelevant; Ghirlandajo made the first revert.

Anyway; let's move forward. The onus isn't on me. It's on the person inserting the content. Where did this list come from? bobrayner (talk) 14:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Anyone? Where did the list come from? bobrayner (talk) 14:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not certain as to whether anyone has responded to you on your talk page, but I've found a link from one of the other pages regarding the Rus' people (and various surrounding pages) which appears to be the common denominator. Links from this page lead to elaborate lists of those tested (although I haven't found any detailed information as to how any of those tested were located or precisely how their lineage was determined). Personally, I have no objection to using the DNA information but do feel a concern over a lack of indication that the outcomes have been interpreted in a variety of ways and that the source documentation itself explicitly warns that the findings are a scientific list to be interpreted with caution. I'm hoping Ymblanter can shed some further light on when this list was added & what the circumstances of consensus as to its use were (when he/she finds the time). My dealings with this editor have been very positive. I'm assuming that Ymblanter hasn't responded to you due to being busy on other projects on other wikis. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:34, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I am actually not really involved, I never added nor removed this info, I just suspect that it could be rather easily sourced. But I do not have sources at hand; to source the info, I would need to search.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:56, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for taking time out to drop by, Ymblanter. Unless bobrayner still has profound objections, I'm leaving this on the backburner for the moment. There are so many pages that need fleshing out and a good tidy that I'm not going to touch it until or if I have time. I've pointed him in the direction of some of some source info and would suggest that it's highly likely that the editor/contributor who added this info may no longer be active here. Finding out what the interpretations are, as you suggest, merely a matter of a little research. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 07:34, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Ivan the Terrible

Article abruptly refers to Ivan the Terrible without saying where he came from, whose son he was, how he got the throne, etc.:

"Beginning with the reign of Ivan the Terrible, the Muscovite branch used the title "Tsar of All Russia" and ruled over the Tsardom of Russia."

Can somebody who knows the history improve this part of the article to make it comprehensive? (PeacePeace (talk) 01:20, 17 April 2019 (UTC))