PreRussia

For a couple of decades, scientists have been arguing with unprecedented passion about when Russia arose, the Slavic race and the Russian ethnos were formed. There are several main hypotheses at once with solid ground each. Some of them contradict, while others rather complement each other. Historians still cannot agree on a single opinion. However, most of them agree on one thing – millennia of the fascinating history of Russia have hitherto been hidden from the Russian people and many facts have been deliberately distorted. Let's look at the most common and well-reasoned of these hypotheses.

The first Russian chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years" was written by the monk Nestor in 1110-1118 in the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. The monk proceeded from both oral traditions passed down from generation to generation and historical written sources in the monastery itself, comparing and verifying them against each other. The monk narrated events from biblical times to 1113. The linguist Shakhmatov revealed that this chronicle had predecessors. However, this is the first reliably confirmed Russian chronicle. It was rewritten several times, the original was lost. Shakhmatov, not without reason, believes that in the course of rewriting significant changes were made to the chronicle. Indeed, after the death of Prince Svyatopolk Stanislavich in 1113, the monk Sylvester from the Mikhailovsky Vydubitsky monastery rewrites the "Tale of Bygone Years" (bringing the story to 1117) in order to substantiate the claims of Monomakh, married to the daughter of the last Anglo-Saxon king Harald, to the grand ducal throne. The gaps in the narrative were filled with info from Byzantine chronographs such as George Amartol and from folk legends (for instance, from the story of Olga's revenge on the Drevlyans)[i], as well as from English sources[ii].

The oldest copy of Nestor’s chronicle that has come down to our days is the Laurentian manuscript of 1377, named after its creator Monk Lavrentius, to which he added a chronicle of North-Eastern Russia’s events before 1305. The book is written on a "charter" - a parchment made of specially treated calfskin. The chronicle was written either in the Nativity Monastery in the city of Vladimir or in the Annunciation Monastery in the city of Nizhny Novgorod. A later Ipatiev’s manuscript, discovered at the beginning of the XV century by a historian N.M. Karamzin in the library of the Ipatievsky Monastery in the city of Kostroma, is valuable for its description of events in Kiev, Galich and Volhynia before 1292. There are several other rewritings of Nestor’s chronicle as well.

According to the" Tale of Bygone Years", Russia, as a state, arose in 862, when the leaders of the Russian tribes called a Varangian (a Viking) - the Scandinavian Prince Rurik to rule. According to the chronicle, such a step was taken in order to stop the endless internecine struggle of the leaders of Russian tribes for leadership, because the foreign ruler equalized them all, so that no one was particularly offended. This allowed forcing everyone to obey and, thus, restore order in the Russian lands. We must note here, that till that event, Russian land did not bear the name of Russia. It was a union of several Slavic tribes or rather countries.

The chronicle entry for 862 says: "[The Prarussians] drove the Varangians out over the sea and did not give them tribute, and began to rule themselves on their own. And there was no truth among them, and some clans arose against other clans, and there was strife among them, and they began to fight with themselves. And they said to themselves: ’Let's look for a [foreign] prince who would rule us and judge us rightfully'.  And they went across the sea to the Varangians (…). Those Varangians were called Russ, just as others are called Swedes, and some Normans and Angles, and still others - Gotlanders (…). Chud, Slavs, Krivichi and all [other tribes] said to Russ: 'Our land is great and abundant, but there is no order in it, so come in to reign and rule us'".

That is, as follows from the chronicle record, the Varangians initially came to the Prarussian tribes to impose tribute on them, but were defeated and driven away. And then our ancestors turned to another tribe of Varangians (logically not to the one that attacked them), which was called "Rus", which later gave the name to the entire Russian state.

The artist Vasnetsov V.M. in 1909 captured on canvas his vision of the moment of Rurik's meeting in the painting "The Invitation of the Varangians":

The image from https://ru.wikipedia.org. According to international and Russian legislation it is free from licensing restrictions on publication as more than 80 years have passed since the author's death in 1926.

Rurik (Rorik) of Jutland (a peninsula in Denmark) came with his squad and two brothers. "And the eldest, Rurik, settled down in Novgorod, and Sineus in Beloozero, Truvor in Izborsk". Since the names of the brothers Sineus and Truvor sound exotic even for the Varangians, there is an opinion that they are the phrases (distorted by the chronicler) from the old Norman language “sine hus” and “thru varring”, which mean “with their home” (with relatives and servants) and a “loyal army”. Rurik really managed to stop internecine princely wars, unite tribes and principalities, and restore order.

All theories about the origins of Russia can be divided into three groups. Those which assert that Rurik was a foreigner from Scandinavia and that it was he with his squad and retinue who formed the state of Russia from "unorganized" Slavic tribes, are called a "Norman" group. The Normans are a generalized name for the neighboring Scandinavian peoples in the Northern Baltic States - the Swedes, Danes and Norwegians, who ravaged Western Europe and Eastern Slavic lands with sea robber raids from the VIII to the XI century. Therefore, the "Norman" group is divided into three almost identical versions, which differ mainly by whether Rurik was a Swede, a Dane or a Norwegian.

The dashing "raiders" from across the sea were called either Vikings or Varangians. Some historians consider these words synonymous. Others believe that the Vikings are sea robbers who, unlike pirates, did not rob ships, but neighboring countries. They say that the Varangians were not robbers at all, but the defenders of their commercial business (for example, on the trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks") or military mercenaries in various countries including in Byzantium and Russian principalities. The chronicle however says that it was the very Varangians, not the Vikings who raided and tried to impose tribute on Russia. So, there was a very fine line between Vikings and Varangians at that time. The hypotheses claiming that Rurik was a Slav, just from an overseas tribe, or that Russian statehood was formed long before the arrival of Rurik, belong to a "Slavic" group.

The theories of the third group claim that there was some other strong and militant Varangian state "Rus", which was at war with almost every country around (including Byzantium) and was located not in Scandinavia, but somewhere else. This Russia subsequently merged with the Slavic lands, exerted its "civilizational" influence on the Slavic principalities, leading most of them, and gave the united state its name. Such versions are called either by the location of this "other" Russia, or by the people who inhabited it. The main theories of each group are briefly outlined below.

Although to this day, based on the "Norman" theories, the year 862 is considered the official date of the formation of Russia, this date can only be accepted as just another milestone in its history. Western historians insist on this date in order to belittle the role of Russia, the ancient origin of the Russian people and the fact that the Russians created their own statehood independently. Obviously, the Russian tribes lived on these lands long before the arrival of Rurik. And not as wild nomadic hordes, but as organized principalities, with large cities already built up, some of which are mentioned in the chronicles. The ability to build fortresses at that time meant that the people were at a very high civilizational level, that there were already engineering solutions for the construction of buildings and fortifications, production technologies for both household and military products. That is, there were a division of labor, the classes of artisans, merchants, etc.

The historian Natalia Pavlishcheva in her book "False Rurik. What historians are silent about", writes that the Varangian Rurik did not come to an "empty place" as by the IX century the Slavic civilization had flourished for several millenniums, having long ago formed a special way of life that was radically different from the Western one and was based not on "law and order", but on justice and will. She points out that Rurik was not called to "own us" at all - but was simply hired as an "effective manager", "equidistant" from all local clans and, thus, able to serve the national interests. The modern "Westerners" worshiping the European pseudo-democracy, do not want to understand the main thing - from time immemorial in Russia, then the government did not "own the people", but was its hired worker: an objectionable ruler could not only be kicked out of the princely chorus with a kick in the ass, but generally executed. Let us recall the execution of Prince Igor, who was tied to two birch trees for his brazen attempt to collect tribute from the Drevlyans twice and was torn apart in half. Even famous Alexander Nevsky was expelled from Novgorod, despite his victory over the Swedes on the Neva, because, contrary to the opinion of the Veche, he attempted forcing Novgorod to pay tribute to the Tatar-Mongol Horde, although the city was not conquered by it. And Alexander's father was also expelled from Novgorod. The same fate would have befallen Rurik, if he had not justified the trust of the Slavs. Pavlishcheva proves that Rurik's epic was not the "beginning of the beginnings", but only a passing chapter of the several thousand year chronicle of Russia. [iii]

The incorrectness of the official date of the emergence of Russia is confirmed even by the fact that the first "official and reliable" mention of the Russian state in foreign chronicles, recognized in the West, falls on the year 839. That is 23 years before the coming of Rurik. There is a mention in the Bertin Annals (the chronicle of the Saint-Bertin monastery in France) that the ambassadors of the Ross people arrived to the Byzantine emperor Theophanes in 839 to establish diplomatic and trade relations and that their ruler was a Khagan. Here the title of the ruler is somewhat surprising, but the Russian Khaganate apparently existed indeed as it is written below. The Arabs and sometimes the Slavs themselves (on especially solemn occasions) called the prince of Kiev by the word Khagan up to and including the X century (possibly under the influence of the Khazar Khaganate). Whether these ambassadors came from Novgorod, Kiev, Ladoga or another part of Russia is unclear.

Thus, long before the advent of Rurik the Russian state had already been establishing diplomatic and trade missions with the neighboring countries. The material collected by several generations of individual Russian scientists indicates that the age of Russian statehood is about the same as that of Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece. Although this point of view has not yet been officially recognized, it is gaining more and more supporters among scientists over time.

Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov, in his work "Ancient Russian History from the beginning of the Russian people to the death of Grand Duke Yaroslav the First or until 1054," was resolutely against the "Norman" theory and wrote "about the distant antiquity of the Slavic people." Here is a quote from the 6th volume of his complete works (Moscow, Leningrad, 1952).

"At the beginning of the sixth century after Christ, the Slavic name became very famous; and the power of this people was not only terrible in Thrace, Macedonia, Istria and Dalmatia, but also contributed very much to the destruction of the Roman Empire. The Vends and Ants, uniting with their kindred Slavs, multiplied their strength. The unity of these peoples is not only shown by the current similarity in languages, but is also testified twelve hundred years ago by Iornand, who left the message that "from the beginning of the Vistula River to the north, there are populous Vendian peoples living in an immeasurable space, whose names, although different for different generations and places, but the Slavs and Ants are generally called." He also adds that from the Vistula they extend to the Danube and to the Black Sea. Before him, Ptolemy in the second century by Christ places the Vendians near the entire Vendian Bay named after them, that is, near the Finnish and Kurland bays. This author, moreover, let us know that Sarmatia was taken over by the great Vendian peoples. And Pliny also testifies that in his time the Vendians and Sarmatians lived near the Vistula... So, the Slavic-polish people justly call themselves Sarmatian; and I will not hesitate to conclude with Kromer that the Slavs and the Vendians in general are ancient Sarmatians… About antiquity [of the Slavs, - translator’s remark] we have a satisfied and almost obvious assurance in the greatness and power of the Slavic tribe, which has been standing on almost one measure for more than a thousand and a half years; and it is impossible to imagine that in the first century after Christ, it suddenly multiplied to such a great multitude..".

"In Southern Europe, the antiquity and power of the Slavs is evident from Herodotus, who Venedov and the Illyrians regard as one people and describe their habits, similar to those of the Medes [Euterpia, p. 36; Terpsichore, p. 128], which confirms the unity shown above. The antiquity of the Illyrians extends to fabulous centuries; the strength of their military dealings with the Greeks and Romans is known."

"Campaigns from the north of the Goths, Vandals and Lombards serve a lot to prove the multiplication of Slavic power. For although I separate them fairly from the Slavic generations, however, I have good reasons to assert that Slavs made up a considerable part of their armies; and not only ordinary, but also the main leaders were of Slavic breed. So, now it is quite clear how great the Slavic tribe was already in the first centuries after the Birth of Christ."

Lomonosov also claimed, based on the results of his historical research, that the Varangians were not a nationality, but a certain social group and could be either Swedes or Danes, or Slavs. He substantiates that the Varangians invited to Novgorod were the Slavs who lived on the shores of the Baltic between the Dvina and the Vistula and Rurik himself was the grandson of the Novgorod prince Gostomysl who invited him. Michael Lomonosov believed that Prince Rurik was a Slavic Varangian prince from Prussia, not Scandinavia. "The eastern shoulder of the Nemeni River, flowing into the Gulf of Kursk, is called Rusa which bears the name of the Varangian Russ." That is the name Rus (as well as Ros) has a purely Slavic origin and not brought from the outside by another people. And the Russian people have their roots as ancient as the Greeks and Romans do or even older. This is the essence of the "Lomonosov’s theory".

Lomonosov also points out the absence of Scandinavian words in the Russian language for this reason. In fact there are some but a very few indeed. Wilhelm L.P. Thomsen (1842 –1927) the professor of Copenhagen University and the President of the Danish Academy of Science (plus the member of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland) counted 16 Scandinavian words in Russian. And even these 16 are under question. For instance, the Russian word “Yakor (anchor) he refers to the Swedish word "ancare" or the Old Norse "akkeri". However, in Latin dictionary we find "ancora" — anchor and the mark — "Greek". So, this word had entered Latin from Ancient Greek thousands of years before the world heard of Scandinavia. As shown above, Russia had an intense relationship with Byzantine Empire where the Greeks were perhaps a major nation (the Slavs also were numerous there among others). Therefore it is almost certain that this word entered Russian from the Greeks of Byzantine, not Scandinavia. The majority of other words of those 16 are also more likely to be German, French or Greek rather than Scandinavian. But even if we assume all of these Russian 16 words to be of Scandinavian origin, it is still too miserable number. The numbers of German, French and Greek words in Russian are greater by a couple of orders of magnitude. This adds more doubts that the Variangians of the trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks" were Scandinavians and especially that Rurik came from Scandinavia.  

The Ioakim chronicle confirms that Rurik and his two brothers were Slavs and grandsons of the previous Russian Grand Duke of Novgorod Gostomysl (in the "Tale of Bygone Years" Gostomysl is not mentioned). Excerpts from it were presented by the historian Tatishchev in 1748 according to the manuscript of Joachim, the first bishop of Novgorod, appointed after the baptism of Russia. He died in 1030. Scientists have long been skeptical of the Ioakimov Chronicle as of an invention of Tatishchev, since its original was lost. But suddenly several facts from this chronicle were confirmed by archaeological excavations. In addition, Gostomysl was found recorded by the first prince in two Novgorod chronicles. Moreover, a certain Prince Gostomysl is also mentioned in Western chronicles. This was the name of the leader of the West Slavic tribe of the Veneds, who, according to some sources, died in 844 in a battle against King Louis II of Germany, and according to others, was able to escape to Novgorod, where he was "seated" (chosen) to reign. Today, historians no longer consider it "bad form" to refer to the Joachim Chronicle, but with reservations such as "perhaps" and "probably".

The "Legend of Slovene and Rus" by an unknown author also echoes the Joachim Chronicle, which some historians consider to be rather a recorded legend than a real story. According to these two works, the state of Russia was founded by the sons of Prince Scythian. The brothers Sloven and Rus came to Lake Ilmen and built two cities there: the first — the "great city" Slovensk in 2409 BC (later renamed to Veliky Novgorod, as some believe), the second — the city of Rus (now Staraya Russa, meaning “Old Rus”). From Sloven power passed to one of his sons, Vandal. It was he who actually created the so-called Russian Kaganate, "having conquered many lands and peoples on the coast of the sea." When Prince Burevoy, the grandson of a Vandal, ruled the state, the overseas invaders—Varangians (Vikings) coveted the wealth of the lands under his control. The prince resisted the invasion, but was defeated near the Kumeni River (now Kyumijoki, Finland) and with the rest of the squad took refuge in the city of Byarmy where he died soon after. The Varangians imposed heavy tribute on the conquered lands. But Burevoy’s son Gostomysl (“seated” on the throne in Novgorod) came to his father's aid. He managed to gather a strong army, expel the Varangians , stop paying tribute and re-unite the peoples into a single state. Gostomysl made peace deal with the Varangians (Vikings), and since then "there has been silence all over these lands."

Further, the Joachim Chronicle and the "Legend of Slovene and Rus" diverge somewhat. According to the legend, Gostomysl had two sons, but both of them did not survive their father. Therefore, Gostomysl had no one to transfer power to. Civil strife was brewing. Then, just before his death (in 844), the prince ordered to send envoys "across the sea to the land of Prussia" so that they would ask for a ruler from the family of Caesar Augustus. And so it was done. Rurik was invited. Note that Gostomysl sends an ambassadors to Prussia for some reason not by land, but by sea. The legend is largely consonant with the "Lomonosov theory", since Rurik was invited from somewhere in Prussia (although the Vistula and Dvina rivers are not mentioned), albeit Rurik is not the grandson of Gostomysl here.

By the Joachim chronicle, Gostomysl had four sons and three daughters, but all his sons either died in the war or of illness, and all the daughters were married to neighboring princes. One his daughters, Umila was married to one of the West Slavic princes from the island of Rugen (now in Germany, in old slavic – “Rujan”) and gave birth to three sons. Rurik, the eldest of them, was invited by Gostomysl to the Grand duchy in Novgorod in order to observe dynastic succession, the legality of power and prevent civil strife. Rurik came along with his brothers. The chronicle in the main also does not contradict the "Lomonosov’s theory", except that the grandson Rurik was invited not from the place of residence of the Rosses near the Rus River between the Dvina and the Vistula in Prussia, but from the then Slavic island of Rujan (Rugen).

The Rugs (Rujans in slavic) are often mentioned in foreign chronicles and the island Rugen is located just next to Prussia. At that time the island was inhabited by militant pagan Slavs who worshipped their gods in the Arkone temple in the city of the same name. Thus it becomes clear why Gostomysl sent ambassadors to Prussia "across the sea" according to the Joachim Chronicle. He probably sent them to Rugen.

Here is how the early medieval chroniclers described the Rujan Slavs: "... these are cruel people that live in the heart of the sea and are overly devoted to idolatry. They excel among all Slavic tribes; have a king and a famous sanctuary. (...) completely neglecting the benefits of agriculture, they always ready to make attacks on the sea, laying their only hope and all their wealth on ships. That is, the Rujans led the real Varangians’ (Vikings’) way of life.

The Rujans had a large fleet and extensive trade relations with Scandinavia and the Baltic States. They carried out frequent military attacks. For example, some provinces of Denmark before the era of King Valdemar I paid tribute to the Rujans. At one time their kingdom became so powerful that it controlled almost the entire Baltic Sea, which then was called the Sea of Rugs (Rujans) for quite a long time.

The island was the main pagan worship place of the Western Slavs. Back in the XI century, pilgrims from the distant and already seemingly Christian Czech Republic came to its main four-headed shrine – the idol of Svyatovit. The popularity of the four–faced idols was not limited only to Western Slavs - archaeologists found such idols in Eastern Slavic countries - in Ukraine, Russia and Bulgaria. The Slavs of the island defended their independence and their faith for a very long time - until 1168, when they were defeated by the Danish king. The temple of Arkon was destroyed. According to the Danish chronicles, King Rujana - Jaromir became a vassal of the Danish king, and the island became part of the bishopric of Roskilde. The Rujans were converted to Christianity. However, already in 1234, the Rujans not only freed themselves from Danish rule, but soon captured part of the nearby coast — Western Pomerania (now part of Germany), founding the city now known as Stralsund. Further, the Rujans participated in numerous wars. In the end they lost their independence and, being part of various German state formations over the next few centuries, gradually became culturally Germans. The Rujan Slavic dialect was still heard in some places on the island until the XVI century.

It is assumed that the island of Buyan, from Pushkin's famous fairy tale, is the island of Rujan. Today lighthouses are installed on the cape of the island where the temple city of Arkon once stood. The photo shows the remains of the Slavic fortress of Arkona. The rampart that used to protect the fortress is still clearly visible. There is an exhibition of Arcona Fortress artifacts in the tower.

As we see, the chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years", the Joachim Chronicle and the "Legend of Slovene and Rus" overlap with each other. According to each of them, Russia as a state entity (at least at the level of individual principalities) was actually formed centuries before the arrival of Rurik in 862. Also, all three sources agree that a certain Rurik was invited from across the sea. By origin Rurik is either a Varangian (Viking) or a Prussian, or a Western Slav.

If we suppose that Rurik came from the island of Rujan, then the inconsistencies between the three sources are significantly smoothed out since in this case Rurik is at the same time a Varangian from across the sea and a Slav living near Prussia. Some historians are inclined to this version. In this scenario Eastern Russia simply invited a Varangian (Viking) ruler from Western Russia. Understandably he became "legitimate" in both parts of Russia and therefore was able to unite the Eastern Slavic principalities with some Western ones into a single state.

Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian artist Ilya Glazunov was suddenly irresistibly drawn to visit the island of Rujan during his stay in the Western German Republic. At that time the students of the University of Berlin were conducting archaeological excavations there. He learned from them that a few days ago they had dug up a Slavic wooden boat of the IX century. Then Glazunov asked the archaeologists what other artifacts they found and received a somewhat irritated response from a Teuton which was forever etched into his memory: “Everything to magma here is Slavic!.." In Berlin Glazunov told about this to the deputy professor Herman. "I can tell you that in the Western Germany we have a huge warehouse full of Slavic artifacts and the ancient books written in Old Slavonic. After the end of the [Second World] War we took a lot of things to this vault and so far no one has been digging in it. <...> None of your Soviet or our scientists showed any interest in this." - the professor replied. Glazunov wrote about his trip in his book "Russia Crucified".[iv]

 

"The map of the placement of the West Slavic tribal unions of the Bodrichs (Obodrits) and Lyutichs (Velets) in the VIII—X centuries", by Vladislav Matveev (p.n. Trevbus) taken from the website https://commons.wikimedia.org under CC license.

It is worth noticing that there was also another Slavic union of several tribes called the Obodrits (Bodrichs) living not far from both the island of Rujan (Rugen) and Prussia on the mainland.[v]  In the 16th century an Austrian baron Sigismund von Herberstein, the ambassador to Moscow, wrote a book about Russia. He outlined the then generally accepted history of the emergence of the Russian state in medieval Europe. According to it the Varangians came from the Vagria region in northern Germany. Then it was inhabited by the union of Slavic tribes of the Obodrits (Bodrichs). The center of all Vagria was Stargard (Stargrad). After the capture by the Germans it now bears the name Oldenburg, which means the same thing in translation – the Old Town, that is Stargrad. And the capital of the tribe of the Obodrites in Vagria was Veligrad (Wiligrad, Lat. Magnopolis). This city is mentioned under the year 965 in the work of the Arab author Ibrahim Ibn Yaqub [vi] (at the end of the X century captured by the Germans and renamed to Mecklenburg). In the east, the Obodrites had founded Novgorod even earlier. When the inhabitants of Novgorod had discord they naturally turned to their ancestral homeland with a request to send them an authoritative prince. So Rurik and his brothers arrived in Novgorod to reign. The Obodrites played a significant role in the history of Germany and Prussia taking part in many of their foreign and internecine wars. In the end the fate of the Rujans (Rugs) befell them – they gradually became culturally like Germans lost their independence, were converted to Catholicism and forgot their native language.

"The map of the location of the West Slavic tribal unions of the Bodrichs (Obodrites) and Lutiches (Velets) in the 8th-10th centuries" by Vladislav Matveev (under the pseudonym Trevbus) taken from the site https://commons.wikimedia.org under the CC License.

Now let have a closer look at the Prussians. As proved by Lomonosov, in ancient times the Slavs formed a single Russian-Prussian tribe. When the Prussians separated into a separate ethnic group and became "independent", other Slavic tribes continued to live right next to them. Among them were those who continued to consider themselves Slavs – not only the Rujans and Obodrites already mentioned above, but also others, shown in the map (colored).

In pagan times a significant part of "independent" Prussia was again subordinated to Russia. The regions of Prussia, which directly bordered Russia at that time were inhabited by Prussians and Jews. Since 983, after the successful campaign of Prince Vladimir Krasno Solnyshko (Vladimir  Red Sun), these areas of East Prussia were again listed among the Russian possessions. Apparently not for long, since in 1037-1038, the Grand Duke of Kiev Yaroslav Mudriy (Yaroslav the Wise) made a campaign against the Yatvyags as part of a large several-year Russian offensive in the western directions. ^[vii]

The Prussians willingly went to the service of the Russian princes. In 1215 the Prussian combat detachment acted on the side of the freedom-loving Novgorod boyars’ veche (a parliament of the nobles) in their struggle with their prince as a striking military force[viii]. In Novgorod, one of its most ancient streets was inhabited by Prussian settlers and even bore the name “Prussian” (now Zhelyabov Street). So, the Prussians lived on the Russian soil since ancient times.

In 1225-1226 the Polish Prince Konrad Mazowiecki turned to the German Teutonic Order to protect against military incursions of pagan Prussians into the lands of Catholic Poles (although the Poles themselves committed predatory campaigns against Prussia). In 1230 the Papal curia approved the Teutonic Order for the conquest of Prussia issuing a special papal bull. Pope Gregory IX addressed the knights in it: "Gird up and be courageous and ready to fight with these pagans who have gathered to destroy us and our holiness; it is better to die in battle than to see the calamities of our people and the sanctity.^[ix]" Of course there was no threat from the Prussians to the Catholic world, it was pure propaganda. As a result of four difficult crusades stretching over half a century from 1231 to 1283 the Teutonic Order with the support of Poland eventually conquered Prussia piece by piece.

 

The map of the "Principality of late Kievan Rus" by SeikoEn, processed by the user Das steinerne Herz, taken from the Swedish site https://sv.m.wikipedia.org under the CC license.

The Prussians regularly raised uprisings and at one time the power of the order hung by a thread. But the Teutons won over the majority of the Prussian nobility by granting them privileges and was able to hold on. Since the Prussians put up such fierce resistance and did not belong to the peoples of the German group, they were subjected to almost total extermination and displacement outside their lands. The South Russian Chronicle reports on the mass migration of Prussians expelled by the Germans to the lands of Northwestern Russia in 1276-1277. [x]

After the final conquest of Prussia by the Teutons in 1283, the second even greater wave of migration of Prussians to the Russian and Lithuanian principalities surged. The main areas of resettlement were the Novgorod, Pskov, Galician-Volyn principalities and Lithuanian Rus. It is no coincidence that more than 70 notable Russian noble families (including the Romanov royal family which Peter-I the Great belongs to) trace their ancestry from immigrants from ancient Prussia. In their ancestral coats of arms there are corresponding symbols - a crown as a sign of origin from the legendary kings of Prussia, two crosses signifying the conversion of the Gland-Kambila and his descendants to Orthodoxy and a pagan oak. In some coats of arms there is a generic symbol of the most ancient Prussian rulers – a black single-headed eagle with outstretched wings, clawed paws, sometimes with a crown on the neck. ^[xi] Below is the Romanov family coat of arms which shows that not German but Slavic, essentially Russian blood coursed in the veins of Peter the Great.

 

This image of the "Coat of Arms of the Romanov Boyars" by Taubiy taken from the German website https://de.wikipedia.org under the CC License.

One of the Prussian settlers was Michael Prushanin, who arrived in Novgorod at the beginning of the XIII century with a large retinue and laid the foundation for the families of the Mishinich–Onciferoviches, Morozovs, Saltykovs, Burtsevs, Sheins, Rusalkins, Kozlovs, Tuchkovs and Cheglokovs. Having converted to Orthodoxy and settled on Prusskaya (Prussian) Street he as a wealthy man built in 1231 the church of St. Michael where he was subsequently buried. In the battles with the Swedes and Livonians (after 1237 the knights of the Order of the Sword was renamed to the Livonian Order) Michael showed himself to be an outstanding military commander. For instance, in the Battle of the Neva River in 1240 in the army of Alexander Nevsky the squad under his command destroyed three Swedish ships. His grandson Michael Krivets was at one time a Novgorod Head. ^[xii] The Russian writer M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin belonged to the Prussian Saltykov family. ^[xiii]

Apparently, three centuries ago the Prussians still remembered their Slavic origin and long neighborhood with other Slavs – the Rujans and the Obodrites. The city of Konigsberg (now Kaliningrad) during the Seven Years' War with Russia three centuries ago willingly accepted Russian rule. When Russian troops approached Konigsberg in 1758 the city unexpectedly surrendered without a fight and the residents of the city swore allegiance to the Russian Empress Elizabeth. The whole of Eastern Prussia followed it and swore an oath to the Russian Empress. Until 1762 the city and Eastern Prussia were the part of Russia. However, after the death of Empress Elizabeth, Peter III came to power. He did not hide his admiration for the Prussian King Frederick II, immediately stopped the military operations and made a peace with the Prussian king on extremely unfavorable terms for Russia. Peter III returned East Prussia to Prussia (which had been the part of the Russian Empire for four years) and refused all acquisitions during the Seven-Year War practically won by Russia. All the sacrifices and heroism of the Russian soldiers and the intuitive desire of Prussia for Russia - everything was crossed out in one fell swoop. Thus Catherine II (The Great) who dethroned him was a thousand times right.

In his speech on December 1, 1943 at the Tehran Conference Stalin bluntly stated: "The Russians do not have ice-free ports on the Baltic Sea. Therefore, the Russians need the ice-free ports of Konigsberg and Memel and the corresponding part of East Prussia. Especially considering that historically these are native Slavic lands." He seemed to know the history of the region well. No one objected to him. During the conversation of the heads of government at breakfast on November 30, Churchill said that "... the British have no objections to this."

As we can see, the statement of some radical Slavophiles that the Germans are the germanized Slavs has a basis. Moreover, one of the Slavic linguistic usages of the prefix "pra" (“pru” sounds “pra” in the word “Prussia) means predecessor. That also suggests that Prussia is the ancestral homeland of Russia.

However, foreign sources mention some other Varangian (Vikings’) Russia, which could serve as a catalyst for the development of Russia and give it its name. That another Russia united the Eastern Slavs and the Russians geographically and culturally. Before that these two peoples were perceived separately. All ancient Arab historians for a very long time divided the Slavs and the Russians, often pointing out the superiority of the latter over the former in military terms. For example, the scholar Ibn-Ruste wrote in his "Book of Precious Values" (903-925) [xiv] that "As for the Rus of ar-Rusiya, they live on an island surrounded by a lake. This three days long island is covered with forests and swamps and is unhealthy and damp to the point that as soon as a person sets foot on the ground it shakes because of the abundance of moisture in it. They have a king called Khagan-rus. They attack the Slavs, approach them on ships, land and take them prisoners, take them to Khazaran (Khazaria) and Bulkar (the capital of Volga Bulgaria, later the Kazan Khaganate (Khanate) and sell them there. ... They have no real estate, no villages, no arable land. Their only occupation is the trade in sables, squirrels and other furs... They have many cities... Their swords are Suleiman's" (Frankish work).

Scientists have been looking for a long time where this mysterious island could be, but have not come to a consensus. The islands of Rugen (Rujan), Gotland, Karelian Isthmus, Old Rusa, land in the Danube delta in the form of a triangle covered by rivers with sides of 65 and 70 km, the island of Khortytsia (St. George) near modern Zaporozhye and the Taman Peninsula near the Sea of Azov which was then an island (the Russian principality of Tmutarakan). But all these options turned out to be unsuitable upon closer examination. The question of what the Arab chroniclers meant remains open.

Many historians find evidences that the Varangian (Vikings’) state "Rus" from where the Varangians (Vikings)  could be invited to rule was located in the Northern Black Sea region or in Tavria (Taurida) in the Crimea) from the early centuries. This southern coastal people, like other Varangians, were skilled in shipbuilding and from time to time attacked the lands of Byzantium.[xv] The historian Kartashev A.V. wrote - "So, by now we can admit that there were some tribes in the pre-Caucasian Black Sea region, not pseudonymously, but originally called Rus... which joined the general flow of invasions of the Byzantine Empire and invested in the process of building the Russian state." It was these southern Rus, in his opinion, who "mastered the entire Central European trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks," from the lower reaches of the Elbe and Oder to the mouth of the Danube with access to the Black Sea." It was the merits of this people "at the turn of the VIII – IX centuries Russian military-commercial settlements appear on the Crimean coast”.

For Byzantine writers the habitation of the "Rosses" in Taurida is an established fact. Thus, Konstantin Porphyrogenitus (Byzantine emperor from 1913 to 1959) referred Prince Igor's Russia to "external Russia". It follows from his words that in addition to Russia in the Middle Dnieper there was also another, "inner Russia", which in this case should be located in the Northern Black Sea region.

A similar hypothesis was put forward by the historian Trubachev O.N. in 2005. ^[xvi] "We can consider the concept of transferring the name of a certain (North Pontic, Tauric, Indo-Aryan) Ross people to Slavic Russia, first the nearest, Azov-Don, then Dnieper, and so on up to the " Varangian Russia". The tone was set by the influential and more prestigious South and it was in the orbit of this ethno-cultural influence that Russia was constituted as an ethnos. The ethnonym (name of the people) Rus is really not natively Russian but imported from the south, somewhere from the Northern Black Sea region, possibly from Tavria (Crimea)." This word is definitely not from Scandinavia.

"The Indo-Iranian origin of the name suggests the existence of a certain Rus people in the northern Black Sea region (Hrōs (Zachariah Rhetor, 555)): "Forms related to the ancient Indian ruk- 'light, shine', ruksá- 'brilliant', are seen in Rocas, the name of the people near the Black Sea (Jordan), Rhocobae, the name of the city, in the same place (Pliny), Rosso Tar, a place on the western coast of the Crimea in the Middle Ages, 'pευέιυαλοί, the name of the tribe (decree of Diophantus, II century BC), revealing a variety of phonetics and word formation and the readable meaning of 'light, white' "". There is an opinion that the ethnonym "ros" has a much older origin than "Rus". Proponents of this point of view note that the people of "ros" were first mentioned back in the VI century in the "Church History" by Zachary the Rhetorician, where he is placed next to the people of the Amazons, whose habitat many authors consider the Northern Black Sea region. From this point of view, it is ascribed to the Iranian-speaking (Sarmatian) tribes of Roxalans or Rosomons mentioned by ancient authors.

The Nikon Chronicle also confirms the fact of the primordial ancient presence of "Rus" in the Northern Black Sea region and Crimea: "the genera called Rus ... live near the Euxine Pontus [in the Black Sea region]." ^[xvii] And the author of the "Words about Igor's Regiment" also connected the origin of the Russ with the Northern Black Sea coast and the Don basin." ^[xviii]

The described above similar hypotheses and evidences merge into a common "Northern Black Sea theory" of the origin of Russia. It consists of separate sub-theories, including the "Tauride theory" (Crimean), "Azov-Don theory" and "Indo-Iranian theory". This Russia later supposedly extended its influence to the East Slavic Old Russian state on the mainland either through the development of the trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks" or through the sending of his Rurik or other way.

The principality of Tmutarakan on the Taman Peninsula between the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea, cut off by nomads from the main Russia, was also considered as the Northern Black Sea Rus. Some historians considered this cut-off piece of Russia unviable and its existence probably a fantasy. However, the excavations carried out in 1955 at the settlement found the remains of the Church of the Most Holy built in 1022 by Prince Mstislav in honor of his victory over the Kasozhsky Prince Rededey mentioned in the "Tale of Bygone Years".^[xix] The legend of the unusual way this victory was won deserves to be mentioned here. Either unwilling to shed people's blood or being unconfident in the strength of his army, or believing in his outstanding physical strength, Prince Rezedei of Kasozha offered the Russian Prince Mstislav to face off not with the strength of armies but with their own fists in a duel. Mstislav accepted the challenge and prayed all day before the combat, promising the heavenly forces to build a temple to the Virgin in case of his victory. In a heavy fight he managed to defeat Resedey. Then he fulfilled his promise.

The Tmutarakan fortress is located on the site of the ancient Greek-Sind city of Hermonassa which arose no later than the VI century BC. Subsequently Hermonassa was a part of the Bosporus state^[xx] and other states until, as a result of the defeat of the Khazar khaganate in 965 (according to other sources in 968-969) by Svyatoslav the Prince of Kiev, it came under the rule of Russia. Below is a map of Russia of the 11th century with three enclaves – Tmutarakan, Oleshye and Belaya Vezha, cut off from the rest of the country by nomads (Polovts and Pechenegs).

 

The lower part of the map "Kievan Rus in 1015-1113" (with Russian exclaves including Tmutarakan) by Yuri (George) Koryakov from the website https://commons.wikimedia.org under the CC license.

Tmutarakan had an excellent harbor and traded with both Byzantium and other coastal states. The fortress of Belaya Vezha went to Russia from the Khazar Khaganate. And the fortress-port of Oleshye was founded in the tenth century at the mouth of the Dnieper by merchants and warriors of Kievan Rus, who traded along the Dnieper with Byzantium. The population of these exclaves was mixed, mainly Slavic, Turkic and Greek. Tmutarakan as well as the fortresses in other two exclaves due to too late entry into the Russian state are not suitable for the role of the mysterious ancient Varangian (Viking’s) Rus of the Northern Black Sea region which "civilized" the Slavic Russian state and gave it its name (albeit some authors still think otherwise^[xxi]). Anyway, Tmutarakan is interesting for us because it was located near the Genoese city of Tana, later renamed to Azov, which immediately after the collapse of the Golden Horde appeared to be inhabited by ... Russian Cossacks.

So, it is unclear exactly where this earliest North Black Sea Russia could be located. Could it initially concentrate around Kiev and develop itself without any Rurik at all? Yet, the name of the city of Kiev in the chronicles is either not mentioned at all or too late to play the role of the capital of original Russia. For the first time the name of the city appears only in the Laurentian Chronicle in the entry for 862 (whereas the Joachim Chronicle says nothing about Kiev at all).

According to the "Tale of Bygone Years" the Apostle Andrew the First-Called predicted the appearance of the city. When the apostle went to preach in Scythia he ascended the Dnieper River to the place of present-day Kiev and said to his disciples: “Do you see these mountains? The grace of God will shine on these mountains, there will be a great city and God will erect many churches.”

 

By the legend retold in the "Tale of Bygone Years", Kiev was founded by three brothers: Kiy, Schek, Horiv and their sister Lybid. It was named after Kiy, the elder brother. There are several other versions of the origin of Kiev: Scandinavian, Khazar, Jewish, Armenian, Scythian, etc. One of the versions says that the name of the city came from its first inhabitants who worked on the crossing of the Dnieper. Such workers were called cueans or kiyans. The crossing was a wooden deck on cues (pillars) driven into the bottom. Similar toponyms in other Slavic languages also speak in favor of this version: Kijevo in Croatia and Kujavia in Poland. The settlement founded then by Kiy and his brothers and sister for a long time remained such an insignificant settlement that the chronicler writes about it "gradok" (town).[xxii] The Tale of Bygone Years does not state the date of the foundation of Kiev. Polish historian M. Stryjkowski (1547-1593) in the third chapter of his 11th book claims that the city of Kiev was founded by Prince Kiy in 430. ^[xxiii] Yet, archaeological excavations stubbornly indicate that the first small settlements there appeared only in the VI-VII centuries. Some researchers interpret them as "already urban" [xxiv] whereas archaeology shows that the formation of Kiev as a real city occurred at the turn of the IX-X centuries.[xxv] Because of its late development Kiev is unlikely to play the role of the legendary "Northern Black Sea Rus" which presumably served as a catalyst for the development of Russia in earlier centuries.

 

The painting "Kiy, Schek, Horiv and Lybid is founding the city of Kiev. 482" by Arthur Orlonov from the website https://commons.wikimedia.org under CC license.

Polyan is the name of a large Slavic tribe (now Polish nation). In the era of spreading, part of the tribe settled along the middle course of the Dnieper on its eastern shore and was known as the Eastern Polyans. Part of the same tribe settled on the west bank, reached the Vistula and Odra and settled in the Gniezno area, thus becoming the Western Polyans and subsequently giving its name to the Poles and Poland. Since the Western Poles were in contact with many other peoples, some Polish historians believe that they originate not so much from the Slavs as from other peoples (there are different opinions from which one). However, scientific studies with the participation of Western experts clearly indicate that Poles are of purely Slavic origin from the point of view of linguistics and anthropology [xxvi] as well as genetics.[xxvii]

According to another legend about the founding of the Czech Republic, Poland and Russia, three Slavic brothers hunted together, but one day each decided to go his own way. Rus went east, Czech went west to Mount Rzip near Bohemia and Lech went north where he met a huge white eagle guarding its nest. He founded the settlement of Gniezno and chose a white eagle as his coat of arms. The "Czech Chronicle" of Kozma of Prague (the beginning of the XII century) tells about the arrival in Bohemia of a Slavic tribe led by the "forefather Czech". Lech is present in the Czech version of the legend [xxviii] while Rus is in both the Chech and Polish ones. ^[xxix]

The "Greater Poland Chronicle" (written approximately in the XIV century) says that "in ancient books they write that Pannonia is the mother and progenitor of all Slavic peoples...   Pan the Lord of the Pannonians had three sons of whom the firstborn had the name Lech, the second — Rus and the third — Czech. These three, multiplying in the genus, owned three kingdoms - the Lehites, the Russians and the Czechs also called the Bohemians."

This legend confirms the hypothesis that the Poles are “the people of the lakes”. The word lake in Western Aryan and Celtic sounds like "loch" (recall the famous freshwater lake Ness in Scotland – "Loch Ness"). There are an extraordinary number of lakes in Poland indeed. Perhaps that is why in the Middle Ages they were called lyakhs. The ethnic name "Lechites" is traditionally associated with the name of the mythical ancestor of the Poles – Prince Lech. Among the Tatars, Turks and Russian Cossacks in the XVI-XVII centuries Poland was called Lechistan. In Tajik it is still called “Lakhiston” and in Armenian a polish man is still called “lech”. The word Poles may have originated first as "po lyakhi" (which in Russian means either “to Lechites” or “by Lechites” depending on context) just as the name of the city of Poltava on the river Ltava stands for “po Ltava” meaning “by Ltava” (this is considered to be proven).

Rurik's vigilantes Askold and Dir reigned in Kiev in the second half of the IX century. They freed the city of Poles from paying tribute to the Khazar khaganate and boosted its development. In 879, just before his death, Rurik transferred power to Oleg (the regent of Rurik's young son Igor). Presumably after the Rurik’s death Askold and Dir did not obey Oleg. According to the chronicle, in 882 Oleg undertook a military campaign against Kiev. Along the way he conquered Smolensk and Lyubech. Approaching Kiev, Oleg saw that it would be hard to take such a fortified city standing on a high mountain. Therefore Oleg allegedly did not storm the city but pretended to be a Varangian (Viking’s) merchant carrying a caravan with goods to Byzantium. He ordered the soldiers to lie down on the bottoms of the ships and throw bags on top of them, imitating the goods. Unaware Askold and Dir with a small squad and merchants went down to the Dnieper to choose goods, leaving the gates of the city open. Oleg's warriors jumped out of their ships and pushed Askold and Dir's men away from their leaders. Then Oleg showed them the son of Rurik and said that they were not of a princely family and therefore could not reign, but he could since he was of a princely family and also a regent. After that by the order of Oleg both Kievan co–rulers were killed and his warriors rushed through the gates. Oleg captured Kiev and declared it to be the capital of united Russia - "the mother of Russian cities." Not all scientists agree that the events unfolded this way.

It must be said that Askold and Dir are somewhat mysterious princes. Firstly, it is extremely rare in history for two adequate adults to co-rule any principality. Secondly, both of them were not princely, which was very unusual at that time. Thirdly, as the legend tells, Rurik did not appoint them as the rulers of Kiev direction. They themselves "stumbled upon" it. Fourthly, although they were both killed together at the same time, their graves are located in different places of the city. There is a hypothesis that Askold and Dir were actually a one person with the name Askold (for Askold is spelled Haskuldr in Old Scandinavian). Another assumption is that for the sake of briefness one of the chroniclers (either Nestor or Lavrentyev) simply combined the successive reigns of two different Scandinavian princes at different times into one as there were no important differences between them.

When the era of Kievan Rus began IX century, its capital Kiev developed rapidly and by the XI-XII centuries reached its heyday. Kievan Rus gradually expanded its possessions by military force until the outbreak of internecine wars in the XII century. Unfortunately, during the Mongol-Tatar invasion of Russia, Kiev was stormed (on December 5-6, 1240), ruined and fell into decline.

Note that both the Joachim Chronicle and the "Legend of Slovene and Rus" appeared before the reign of Peter the Great. Later, in the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, Peter gave the order to the German and Danish historians to favor the "Norman" version of the origin of the Russian state. They pictured Russia as a state which was formed only by the efforts of Rurik (because the Russian people themselves were allegedly sloppy and incapable of self-organization into a state). And that is why Russia is a little more than a thousand years old and why the Germans have the right to rule Russia (since the Scandinavians - Swedes, Danes, Norwegians, where Rurik supposedly came from, belong to the German group of peoples). At that time almost all historical primary sources have disappeared somewhere without a trace. Only the censuses remained. This was done of course in order to legitimize the rule of the Romanov family of German origin (actually of Germanized Slavic Prussians as we discussed earlier). Now the portrait gallery of the rulers of Russia in the Kremlin opens with the image of Rurik.

A huge problem for the supporters of the "Norman" theory is the simple fact that the statehood and several large cities appeared in Russia earlier than in Scandinavia. In the IX century the Scandinavian Vikings did not have sufficiently formed states, they were just perfectly able to destroy them in reachable lands. There were only a few small towns in Scandinavia at that time, in fact. It is no accident that the Vikings called Russia "the land of cities." The typical occupation of Viking men then was the robbery of accessible countries, piracy and the sale of the loot. The common sense suggests that if Rurik was a Viking (Varangian) then most likely he came from some other place. For how could he establish the governance of the state in Russia and build cities if he had not had these in his homeland? In the USSR the role of the alien element in the formation of Ancient Russia was not reflected in mass history textbooks. Under Stalin, those suspected of "Normanism" were in trouble.

But in 1763 Lomonosov on the contrary was dismissed from the Academy of Sciences for disagreement with the "Norman" theory. The decree on dismissal was canceled only by the direct intervention of Catherine the Great (Catherine II) for the merits of Lomonosov in other fields of science and his popularity. Catherine the Great (a German by birth who continued the policy of Peter the Great) also supported the "Norman" theory. During Lomonosov’s life span his  works on history were not published at all. After the death of  the scientist almost all of his works disappeared without a trace with the exception of only a few "edited" by German professors from the Russian Imperial Academy of Sciences (mainly by Professor of history Gerhard Friedrich Miller, russified name Fyodor Ivanovich Miller). And even they were printed only years after Lomonosov's death.

One of the acts of the "Normans" was the dubious interpretation by the Russian historian N.M. Karamzin of the key word from the Lavrentyev census "The Tale of Bygone Years" (until the age of 30 the historian lived and worked during the reign of Catherine II). The phrase “Our land is great and plentiful, but there is no ‘naryad’ in it, come to reign and ‘volodet’ us” was interpreted by him as “Our land is great and plentiful, but there is no order in it, come to reign and own us.” Linguists of the Old Slavic language relying on a large number of examples from historical sources defines "naryad" as "order, arrangement, law and order, organization", "activities for the arrangement, organization of something, management, supervision", "order to send to work, to service, assignment, order", etc . There are the expressions "naryad for firewood", "naryad for an apartment", etc. in Russian language. This means an order for the issuance of firewood, the provision of an apartment, etc.[xxx] "To go to ‘naryad’" means to go on guard duty by order. Thus this phrase should be understood as the fact that we do not have a ruler. It is no accident that in several other chronicles (for instance in the Novgorod Fourth Chronicle[xxxi]) this phrase reads like "our land is good and great, it is abundant in everything, but there is no ‘naryadnik’ in it." The word "naryadnik" directly means "manager, boss, leader" according to the "Dictionary of the Russian language of the XI—XVII centuries".

What do the archaeological excavations say? They testify that in fact the Varangians (Vikings) appeared on Russian soil long before the advent of Rurik starting from the VI century and in some places even before the Slavs (in the north of Ladoga, for instance).[xxxii] Some of them were in the service of Russian princes. Others mastered the way "from the Varangians to the Greeks" in order to profitably trade furs with rich Byzantium from the Scandinavian and Russian northern lands.[xxxiii] To do this they built their support towns along this route from north to south. The so-called Staraya Ladoga (Old Ladoga), the first capital of Russia, lies just along this path on the banks of the full-flowing Volkhov River near its confluence into the Ladoga Lake. The river flows from the great lake Ilmen near which a fortified Novgorod city appeared in 859 on the site of the former Novgorod settlements. Staraya Ladoga as a settlement was founded by Slavs around 700 and was agricaltural.[xxxiv] As a city it was erected in 753 originally by the Varangians but a few years later Slavs it was recaptured by the Slavs.[xxxv]

 

The image of the fortress "Staraya Ladoga" by Dionisius1976 (pseudonym) from https://pl.wikipedia.org under CC License.

Thus, the Russian Slavs had owned the city of Staraya Ladoga for more than a century and Novgorod had been built 3 years before the arrival of Rurik.

It should be noted that with the exception of the reconquest of Staraya Ladoga no serious conflicts were recorded between the local Slavs and the Scandinavian Varangians which further confirms the fact that the Vikings were present in Russia for a very long time and were already perceived as "their foreigners". Of course the Varangians (Vikings) themselves were primarily interested in peace so that they would not have to defend their transshipment towns and transports with blood all along the trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks" (that would make this commercial project impossible). The idea of such a way was to sail on ships on rivers and drag ships between rivers. This route is drawn on the map below.

 

Map of the Varangian Routs (Varangianroutes.png) from the free repository commons.wikimedia.org under CC License.

Between the rivers the ships rolled on logs laid under them. Many later wondered where the equestrian Cossacks acquired such skills in dragging ships by land, especially during Yermak's campaign in Siberia. As we can see the Varangians (Vikings) where their teachers.

The excavations also indicate the massive presence of Prussians, Finno-Ugric, Tatars and many other peoples in Russia. In the author's opinion, proceeding from all the remaining secondary sources and indirect evidences, it is most likely a certain Varangian Rurik was invited indeed by the Russian principalities to rule. He was rather a Western Slav (Rujan, Obodrit, etc.) or a Slavic Prussian than a Scandinavian. It has been confirmed by the Bertin Annals recognized in the West that the statehood in Russia arose before the arrival of Rurik. So, the age of Russia is really determined incorrectly even by Western evidences. Below is the list of foreign documents about the Russians and Slavs in general from Anton Belyakov's study "Keys to Russian History..." ^[xxxvi] (2018).

1. I century. The famous Roman writer and politician Tacitus (lived from 50 to 120) mentions rugs (Rujans) on the southern shore of the Baltic.
2. II—III centuries. The Gothic historian Jordan (lived in the VI century) reports on the struggle of the Goths in the Baltic States with the Rugs.
3. Between 307 and 314 years. In the Verona Document (the list of Rome's allied countries obliged to supply troops for Rome's needs but retaining some political independence) the Rugsare named among the Roman federates.
4. Before 337. The Byzantine writer of the first half of the XIV century Nikephoros Gregorr mentions a Russian prince who held a court position under Emperor Constantine.
5. The second half of the IV century. The historian Jordan (lived in the VI century.) mentions the Rogs as part of the Germanic power and then speaks of the Rosomon tribe which broke out of obedience.
6. Between 379-395 years. Russian chronicle from the reign of Vladimir Svyatoslavich to Ivan IV inclusive) speaks about the "battle with Russian soldiers" of Emperor Theodosius troops. It also mentions the Russian attack on the Selunsky Grad.
7. 434-435 years. The Rugs appear on the Sava River near the town of Novieduna (present-day Yugoslavia) where they come into collision with the Goths.
8. 454 year. A part of the Rugs joins the Huns and together with them are defeated by the Gepids and the tribes acting on their side including most of the Rugs. The defeated retreat from the Danube to the Dnieper and the Black Sea and some of them retreat to the Adriatic coast.
9. 469. The Rugs are defeated by the Goths in the struggle for Pannonia.
10. 476 year. Odoacer (who is Rug according to the Gothic historian Jordan) the commander of a detachment of barbarian mercenaries in the Roman army (and later the king of Italy) as the head of an army consisting of Rugs, Skirrs and Turks overthrows the last emperor of the Western Roman Empire. He is called the Russian prince from the island of Rugen.
11. 489 year. The Gothic King Theodoric opposes the Italian King Odoacer. There are rugs in both armies.
12. 493 year. Theodoric treacherously kills Odoacer. The Rugs participate in the proclamation of Theodoric as King of Italy.
13. The middle of the VI century. The Rugi seize power in Italy for a while and raise their leader Erarich to the royal throne.
14. 568 year. The Avars occupy Pannonia and the Lombards pass through the Slavic kingdom of Rugiland (in present-day Austria) to Northern Italy.
15. VI century. The Syrian author Pseudo-Saccharum mentions the Ros people in the Black Sea region.
16. VI century. As-Sa'alibi, the historian of the beginning of the XI century at the court of the Ghaznavids (now Southern Afghanistan) in the story about the construction of the Derbent Wall by Khosrow I (531-579) mentions the Russ along with the Turks and Khazars.
17. VI century. Zahir al-din Mar'ashi, the 15th-century Persian author from the Caspian region mentions the Russ in the North Caucasus region.
18. 626 year. The Byzantine poet Konstantin Manassi (XII century) names the Russians among those who besieged Constantinople together with the Avars.
19. 643 year. At-Tabari, the Arab historian from Baghdad (838-923) twice calls the Russ as enemies of the world, especially the Arabs.
20. 765 (or 773) year. The Byzantine chronicler Theophano (died 817) mentions Russian helandiy (ships).
21. 773-774 years. Russian Count Erno is mentioned in the French poem about Ogier the Dane (XII—XIII centuries) who led a Russian detachment defending Pavia (the capital of the Lombards) from the army of Charlemagne. In Northern Italy the Russ occupy the Garda area near Verona (the Scandinavians then called Eastern Russia "Guards").
22. Ca. 778. The famous heroic French poem of the Middle Ages "The Song of Roland" names the Russ among the opponents of the Frankish army. "Russian cloaks" are also mentioned.
23. The end of the VIII — beginning of the IX century. In the poem "Renaud de Montebane" (late XII — early XIII century) based on ancient folk tales a Russian count is named among the entourage of Charlemagne.
24. The end of the VIII century. In “The Life of Stefan Surozhsky” the Russian Prince Bravlin is mentioned. The name of the prince probably comes from Bravalla at which in 786 there was a great battle between the Danes and the Frisians. The Frisians were defeated and many of them left their country moving to the east.
25. The end of the VIII century. "Geographer of Bavaria" in his list of peoples and tribes who inhabited the areas east of the Frankish state in the IX century (found in the Bavarian State Library, Munich) mentions the Russ located next to the Khazars as well as certain Ros (Rots) somewhere in the interfluve of the Elbe and Sala: Attoroses, Viliroses, Hoziroses, Zabroses.
26. VIII—IX centuries. Popes Leo III (795-816) and Benedict III (855-858) send special messages to the "clerics of the Rogs". Apparently, the Rug communities continued to keep apart from the rest of the Christians.
27. 839 year. The Bertin Annals report the arrival of a representatives of the people of Ros whose ruler bore the title of Khagan to Louis I the Pious (in a company with the ambassadors of the Byzantine Emperor Theophilus).
28. Before 842. The description of the life of Saint and Bishop George of Amastrid tells about the attack of the Roses on the Byzantine city of Amastrida (Asia Minor).
29. Between 836-847. The outstanding scientist Muhammad ibn Musa al Khorezmi in a geographical composition mentions the Russian Mountain from which the river Drus originates.
30. 844 year. The Arab historian from Khorezm Al-Yakubi reports on the Rus attack on Seville in Spain.
31. 844 year. The head of the post offices of northern Persia and geographer Ibn Khordadbeh in his "Book of Ways and Countries" calls the Russ a kind of the Slavs.
32. June 18, 860. The attack of the Rosses on Constantinople is documented in the Byzantine chronicles.
33. 861 year. The Byzantine Greek Konstantin-Kirill the Philosopher, the future creator of the Slavic alphabet (together with Methodius) discovers in the Crimea the gospel and the psalter written in Russian scripts, learned the spoken language and deciphered the writing (meeting with a person who spoke this language).

As we can see since the VI century (3 centuries before the arrival of Rurik) Russia in one form or another is constantly present in Western European, Arab and Byzantine sources. Moreover, as other researchers have already noted, these Russ operate throughout Europe - from the Pyrenees to the Caucasus Mountains and from the Baltic coast to the Mediterranean coast. If we take into account all the evidences then at least 14 Rus states are known: as many as four Rus(es) were in the Baltic States. Rus also existed on the banks of the Dnieper, on the Don, at the mouth of the Danube, in the Carpathian Mountains, on the coast of the Azov and Caspian Seas, in the Crimea, in Western Europe (on the territory of modern Austria), in Thuringia, in Saxony, and even some Rus (Ruzzika) was part of the Vandal kingdom in North Africa.^[xxxvii]

The question is how many of these Rus states scattered all over the earth were the fragments of a single Russian super-ethnos? How much were they related to each other? Which of them contributed and in which way to the creation of the Russian state of the Eastern Slavs? It is simply impossible to bring all this information, theories and hypotheses in one book. The most well-established and reasoned 3 groups of theories are the following:

- Norman

- Slavic (including Lomonosov's)

- North Black Sea (including Indo-Iranian).

The origin of Russia is such a topic where there are three opinions between two historians. There is a separate thick book dedicated to numerous inconsistencies in ancient Russian history where the author has dug up so many of them that in his opinion it's time to rewrite the entire history anew.^[xxxviii] As a matter of fact it is going to happen indeed as the now officially accepted Norman theory is very shaky under the blows of new and new pop-up facts.

Russia adopted the Orthodox faith from the Greeks through Byzantium. After the conquest of Byzantium by the Ottoman Turks, Russia considered itself to some extent its spiritual heir. Even during the time of the atheistic USSR some historians called Moscow the Third Rome (the second was Constantinople of Byzantium, later renamed to Istanbul). The relations of the growing strength of the Russian state with the decrepit Byzantine Empire were not always friendly. Below is the list of conflicts.

1. A successful robbery raid by the "great Russian army" on the Crimean Byzantine city of Surozh (Sugdea) in 750 (according to other sources – in 790) led by Prince Bravlin from Novagrad.
2. Rus' campaign against Byzantium (830s). The Russ raided on the province of Paphlagonia during the reign of Emperor Theophilus. The Russ plundered the city of Amastrida and withdrew. Perhaps it was a revenge for the failure of the Russian embassy mission to Byzantium in 839 (because the consulate was not established).
3. The campaign of Russia against Byzantium in 860. Although Constantinople (Tsargrad) was not captured the Russ took away a large booty. Presumably the campaign was led by the Varangian Kievan princes Askold and Dir. According to “The Tale of Bygone Years” this campaign took place in 866 by a Russian chronology (which was 6 years ahead of the Byzantine one), that is two years after Rurik's arrival in Russia.
4. The Russian-Byzantine War of 907 — the legendary campaign against Constantinople by Prince Oleg. According to the "Tale of Bygone Years" it led to the signing of peace in 907 and was followed by the conclusion of a trade agreement beneficial for Russia in 911.
5. The Russian-Byzantine War of 941-944 — the campaigns against Constantinople by Prince Igor. In the first campaign the Rus army failed at sea, the second campaign ended with the signing of a peace treaty and a tribute from Byzantium.
6. The Russian-Byzantine War of 970-971 — the campaign of Prince Svyatoslav, first in alliance with the Greeks against Bulgaria and then in alliance with the Bulgarian tsar (king) Boris II against Byzantium. The war ended with the withdrawal of Russian troops from Bulgaria and the death of Svyatoslav at the hands of the Pechenegs.
7. The Russian-Byzantine War of 988 — the successfull siege of Korsun in the Crimea by Prince Vladimir. After that the gradual baptism of the Russian people followed.
8. The campaign of Russia against Byzantium in 1024 — an “independent” non-state campaign of a detachment of the Russ led by Chrysochyrus to the island of Lemnos during the time of troubles of the power struggle in Russia. All 800 participants of the campaign were killed.

The Russian-Byzantine War of 1043 — fleet attack (400 ships) to Constantinople (Tsargrad) led by Yaroslav the Wise. It ended in failure - some ships were lost to a storm, others were burned by Greek fire.

These campaigns against Byzantium were aimed not only at extracting profit from robbery, trade or imposed tribute, but also the original desire of Russia to be a maritime power. Russia strived to get access to the sea and control the entire trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks" - from the cold Baltic to warm Byzantium. However, we cannot exclude that these campaigns were carried out by several different "Russian" states. Such campaigns taught the predecessors of the Cossacks the skills of making special small durable vessels that could sail both on the seas and rivers and be dragged by the ground.

So, what is the true age of Russia? According to Lomonosov – no less than that of Ancient Greece and Rome. Many researchers agree with his assessment. Some of them rely on the "Letter of Alexander the Great to the Slavs"^[xxxix], which reads as follows: "We, Alexander, are the son of the supreme god Jupiter in heaven and Philip, King of Macedon on earth, the ruler of the world from sunrise to sunset and from noon to midnight, the conqueror of the Median and Persian kingdoms, Greek, Syriac and Babylonian , etc . To the enlightened Slavic genus and its language. Mercy, peace, respect and greetings from us and our successors in the governance of the world after us. Since you have always been with us in loyalty in battle, reliable, brave and restless, we grant and freely give you forever all the lands from the full sea of the great Arctic Ocean to the Italian southern rocky Sea, so that no one dares to settle in these lands but only your kind and if any outsiders have been discovered here, they will become your serf or servant with their offspring forever. Given in the city of Alexandria, founded by us on the glorious river Nile in the 12th year of our reign with the permission of the great gods Mars, Jupiter and the goddess Minerva. The witnesses of this are the noble Altera, our treasurer, and the other 11 princes, whom, in the event of our death without sons, we leave our and the whole world’s heirs."

This is a very interesting and at the same time devilishly insidious document, first mentioned by the Czech historian Vaclav Gaik in the "Czech Chronicle" of the Brno Archive describing the events of 1348. In 1516 the Czech historian Joseph Pervolf of the University of Warsaw discovered a copy of this letter in Latin. In 1551 this document was printed in Polish, in 1596 – in German, in 1601 – in Italian. He becomes widely known in Europe and soon in Russia. It was believed that the original was kept in the archive of the Czech Kingdom. For five hundred years there have been heated debates and disputes among scientists about the authenticity of this document. Naturally, German-speaking scientists actively dispute the authenticity of the Letter because it gives priority to the Slavs and the Slavic language in Europe. And this was at a time when Ancient Rome, the cradle of Western civilization, was just beginning to gain its strength. Photos of the original text of the diploma are easily found on the Internet. We do not give it here as they are protected by copyright.

There are some indirect evidences that the document may be authentic. The Charter mentions the twelfth year of Alexander's reign. This date falls on 324 BC, the penultimate year of his life. A campaign to distant India has just ended. Although it turned out to be not very successful, almost all the states of the Ancient World lay at the feet of the Great commander. It is known that after the Indian campaign Alexander the Great was actively preparing for a campaign to conquer "wild, barbaric" Europe. Now Europe and North America are the centers of world civilization, but in that distant past Greece and Rome (to a lesser extent) were such centers while the rest of Europe was considered wild and barbaric.

Alexander's favorite technique was "divide and conquer" playing on contradictions in the camp of the alleged enemy. This slogan is as old as the world. It was widely used by many leaders, leaders, princes, tsars before Alexander and it is now. During the conquest of the Persian Empire Alexander skillfully opposed the population of provinces to the Persians. As a result he was greeted with flowers as a liberator almost everywhere. Cities opened their gates wide before him without a fight. After the conquest of Egypt he was proclaimed the vicar of the God on earth and in some places even the God. He skillfully timed the trip to India to coincide with the internecine war between the Ruler of India and the Ruler of the Indian city of Taxila. Only fatigue and the murmur of his soldiers forced Alexander to turn back.

In preparation for the conquest of the "barbaric West", Alexander was likewise looking for allies in Europe and found the Slavs to be them. In those distant times they lived on the territory of modern Greece, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Yugoslavia and Austria. Descendants of the defenders of Troy glorified by Homer, they took a lively part in Alexander's victorious campaigns. In addition, the land road from Greece to Europe ran through their lands. The ancient authors who wrote about the Slavs emphasized their love of freedom and bravery in battle. No better allies could be found. The Macedonian letter to the Slavs is a poisoned knife stuck in the back of Europe by the iron hand of the Great commander. With one stroke of his pen he split the unity of Europe for millennia, spilled rivers of blood, opposing one European nation to another. Now we can only guess where the whole course of history would have turned and what would have happened to Europe if Alexander Macedonian had not died suddenly on the eve of the already prepared campaign. Scientists are still arguing about the authenticity of this letter.

There is a hypothesis that in addition to the letter to all Slavs, Alexander the Great also sent a separate letter specifically to the Russians when passing through the Czech land. The copies of that letter also spread to the Slavic countries. Alexander granted the Muscovite ancestors lands not from Aquilon to Italy but from the Baltic Sea to the Caspian.[xl] The Russian empress Catherine the Great (Catherine II, German by origin) knew about the existence of such a letter and considered it a genuine historical document.[xli] In her "Notes on Russian History" she wrote "16. They say that the Russ helped Philip of Macedon in the war three hundred and ten years before the Birth of Christ, his son Alexander as well and for bravery in this they got a charter written in golden words, which seems to be in the archives of the Sultan of Turkey. But since the sultan's baths are heated with archival papers, it is likely that this letter has also been used for that purpose long time ago, if it was there."^[xlii] The opinions of historians are divided about the authenticity of this letter of Alexander the Great.

Back in the middle of the 19th century historian E.I. Klassen insisted that Slavic tribes existed even before the time of the city of Troy.[xliii] Lomonosov M.V. in his "Ancient Russian History" also emphasizes that "the greatness and power of the Slavic tribe began many centuries before the ruin of Troy."

I, the humble author of this article, watched the film “Troy” in English in remote Australia in 2004. At that time I had not yet gone into the specific details of the history of Russia. After a few minutes of watching the movie I suddenly felt some inexplicable kinship with the Trojans. There was something in their faces, manners, clothes, actions that made them not strangers to me. Even the very name of Troy seemed painfully familiar to me as if I had known it since birth. Then I had a "wild and impossible" thought that the Trojans were Russians. Now the scientists are beginning to prove that my feelings had some basis – Troy was inhabited by Slavs indeed. Probably the creators of the film so scrupulously embodied the images of Troy and the Trojans based on legends, myths and excavation data that I saw the Trojans as kindred people.

Troy (also known as Ilion) was located in Asia Minor near the Dardanelles and controlled the sea trade routes of Europe and Asia. Such a beneficial strategic location allowed the Trojans to control all the trade flows of the Mediterranean and Black Seas, made them rich and strong. It caused envy among the Achaean Greeks and some peoples of the Black Sea region. According to a legend the Trojans blocked the narrow strait with a tension chain, not letting merchant ships through until they paid the established fee. There are certain reasons to believe that Troy did not exist on its own but was rather a part of the state "Mediterranean Russia".^[xliv]  

Seven cultural layers have been discovered at the excavation site of Troy. They are associated with different periods in the existence of historical Troy. There used to be several “Troys” in fact. The city itself turned out to be much older than the Homeric Troy - it was originally built in the 4th millennium BC by the Pelasgians, the ancestors of the Slavs. “It is known from history” - wrote E.I. Klassen - that the Trojans were called first Pelasgians, then Thracians, then Teucrians, after that Dardanians and finally Trojans, and their descendants after the fall of Troy - Pergamians and Kemeians. He also notes that the Greeks called all of the Trojans, Macedonians and Phrygians to be Thracians, that the Thracians are descended from the Pelasgians. Among the Thracians as well as among the Pelasgians we meet many purely Slavic tribal names including the Russ and the Ruthenians, according to Herodotus. The Thracians wore forelocks as later the Little Russians (Malorossians) did; their graves were made in a mound, which is common among all the Slavs, their weapons were Slavic too. The most famous Thracian is Spartacus. After his capture by the Romans he almost demolished the Rome state by raising a slave rebellion. And since the Thracians were Slavs then the Trojans were too (as a part of the Thracians). The excavations found the majority of the buried Thracian girls with the specifically Slavic headdresses (kokoshniks).

Many sources call all the tribes of the Slavs with a common word - Wends. The chronicle of Fredegard, the 7th century A.C. says "... the Slavs, called Wends ...". Ion of Bobby (also the 7th century A.C.) in his description of the life of St. Columbia says - “The idea came to him to go to the Wends who are also called the Slavs.” The Anglo-Saxon writer Alcuin of the times of Charlemagne wrote "We call the Slavs Wends." The Germans used to call all Slavs “Vend”. The Finns and the Estonians still call the Russians "Vene". And the Finnish name of Lake Ladoga is Veneimiere, which means “the Sea of Vene”.

The main neighbor of Troy was the state of Paphlagonia inhabited by the Wends and located on the southern coast of the Black Sea, east of Troy. When the Greeks and their allies went to war against Troy, a detachment of the Wends of Paphlagonia came to its aid. And most of the other neighboring principalities of the Wends joined the defenders of Troy. At the end of the second song of the “Iliad” Homer gives a "Catalogue of ships" with the troops that arrived to help Troy. It lists the peoples who participated in Troy’s defense. Those are the Trojans (apparently from the towns around, not from Troy itself), the Wends, the Pelasgians, the Dardani, the Kikons, the Peons, the Thracians, the Phrygians, the Carians, the Lycians, the Medes and others. Most of these tribes (if not all) are Slavic. We may say that an ancient world war took a place there then.

It needs be noted that several Slavic tribes of the Black Sea region opposed Troy on the side of Greece. For instance, a detachment of Myrmidons led by Prince Achilles. This "ancient Greek" hero deserves a closer look. Achilles was the son of Peleus and the grandson of the Aegin ruler Aeacus. He was a noble Scythian from the city of Myrmikion near the Meotida Lake (the Sea of Azov). Exiled for his wild, cruel and insolent behavior, he settled in Thessaly (according to Leo the Deacon, a Byzantine historian of the 10th century). The cut of Achilles’ cape fastened with a clasp, the habit of fighting on foot, blond hair, light blue eyes are typical of the ancient Slavs. Leo Deacon, like all medieval authors, considered the Scythians to be not the Scythian nomads (Iranians) but the entire population of the southern Russian steppes (Achilles is not nomadic at all, indeed). Many medieval authors (for instance Eustace of Thessaloniki and Attaliot) considered Achilles to be a Tauro-Scythian and even a Russian.^[xlv] Leo Deacon refers to the Jewish prophet Ezekiel who emphasizes the connection of Achilles with the Russ people.

The abduction of Helen the Beautiful, the wife of King Menelaus of Sparta by Paris was not a reason, but just a pretext for war. The war was cruel and merciless. The siege of Troy lasted for 10 years.

After the fall of Troy the Wends left their land mainly in three ways - some went to the Armenian (then Iranian) highlands around the Lake Van where the state of Urartu was subsequently formed. The kings there had names Rusa-I and Rusa-II which is no coincidence - the Armenians have always firmly held on to Russia. Another group of Wends traveled by sea and reached the northwestern coast of the Adriatic Sea (subsequently the city of Venice arose there). After a certain period of time the Wends were scattered throughout Europe. They settled not only along the coast of the Adriatic Sea but to the north as well. They settled on the Danube, Dniester, Dnieper and Vistula, reached the Baltic Sea, Scandinavia, France, Ireland and Britain. The famous "Troyanian path" is the path along which the ancient Russians returned to their ancestral home, to the North. Professor Abrashkin A.A. writes about this in great detail.[xlvi]

Klassen E.I. writes that there was a river Rsa (also called Rasa) on the land owned by Troy. Wherever the Russ settle we find a river of that name. The present river Arake is an ancient Rsa; the river Araks in the Caucasus was called El-Ras by the Arabs, Orsay and Raskha by the Mongols, Ras and Oros by the Greeks. The Volga was called Rsa when the Russ and the Unna came to it from across the Caspian Sea; one of the rivers is still called Rusa in the Novgorod province where the ancient state of Alaunian Rus used to be;  the river Ros flowing into the Dnieper where the Dnieper Rus state used to be; the Russian Sea (the Black Sea) where the Black Rus state used to be; the river Rusa in Moravia where the Rusniaks are still living; the river Rusa being a right tributary of the Memel (the Neman) along which the Pomorian Rus state used to be (the successor of Alaunian Rus).

 

Perhaps, the list of Russian and semi Russian territories is even more extensive. The well-known linguist V.D. Osipov in his article "The Karian trace" says that in Karia (Asia Minor, the southwest of Turkey) a stone was found with an inscription dating back to the 16th century BC. It is read in Slavic. What do we know about the Carians? Almost nothing apart from the fact that the "father of history" Herodotus was half a Carian... He was born and raised in Halikarkas, his father's name was Luka. It was in the middle of the VI century BC. From Herodotus we learn that in those distant times the Carians were called "Lelegs". The Pelasgians, the ancestors of the Slavs, were also called Lelegs. And in the great city of Serbin (later renamed to Xanthos by the Greeks) founded in the VIII century BC or earlier (near the city of Lika the former capital of the Lycian Federation on the territory of modern Turkey) the "Obelisk of Xanthos" was discovered. It is a high tomb with a large column decorated with an inscription in the Lycian language. All attempts to translate the texts based on ancient Greek and other languages failed. Finally the text was fully deciphered by the priest Svetislav Bilbia (born in 1907 in Bosansko-Grahovo in Bosnia-Herzegovina) using the ancient Serbian language and the alphabet from Lydia and Lycia. So, the territory of modern Turkey also has some previous Slavic strata.

The Russian academician Chudinov V.A. easily deciphered many Etruscan inscriptions about an era that until recently was shrouded in mystery. ^[xlvii] He proceeded from Russian. The Serbian code of laws of the 8th century BC was found carved on a large stone in the alphabet "Serbica" (the so-called the Xantian Obelisk). It is read in Serbian with no much difficulty."

We know from the Vatican archives that after the fall of Etruria (Rasseni, Etruscan Twelve-Grad) and the assimilation of the Etruscans by the Romans, some of the Etruscans left the Apennines to the Russian Plain on the east (according to the instructions on the map) and founded a "second Etruria" there. The Vatican itself is built on the ruins of the City of the Dead named after the pagan goddess Vatican. The city was built by the Etruscans (which are the Slavs).

Among the indigenous Italian names purely Etruscan-Russian names are frequently encountered – Danilo, Ivan, Katia, Nadia, Nastia, Natascia, Vladmir, Tania. The Italians apparently do not realize that they have many namesakes in Russia. All the inscriptions of the Venedi-Etruscans of Italy are read only in Slavic. Here is an example of a short tombstone inscription: "Lar oe celua". Translation is not required even into modern Russian. It means "I kiss her coffin" – a sorrow for the deceased woman.

Other historians deduce the date of the birth of Russia from the fact that before Peter the Great (Peter-I) the so-called "calendar since the Peace Making" was widely used in Russia. To calculate the year in that old calendar we need to add 5508 to the year of the modern calendar. For instance, the 2020 year corresponds to 7528 in it. It was still in use during the reign of Peter the Great as a number of documents are dated according to it.

 

The cover of the "Ulojeniya..." (Set of Rules for Courts) from the free repository https://commons.wikimedia.org under the CC license.

Where did this calendar come from? And what does the date of "making peace in the star temple" mean in it? Here the opinions of historians differ again. Some researchers believe that at that time the Slavs in alliance with the Turkic tribes formed the state of Great Tartary. Christian theosophists believe that the chronology there is conducted from the date of the creation of Adam and Eve by God. The historians consider that the calendar’s zero-date is the moment of signing the peace treaty between China and Tartary. If this is so, then it means that the chronology was conducted even before that. These historians believe that both the Chinese and the Slavs had calendars going back to such a fabulously distant past that not even all the priests had complete knowledge about the events mentioned in the previous calendar. That previous super-ancient calendar is called «Круго Лѣть Числобога» (или «Сороковник») in Slavic, which literary means “Circles of years of Figuregod” (sometimes referred to as "Sorokovnik"). I can easily be found on the Internet as well as in the libraries of some universities and other educational institutions.

It was necessary to cut off some too distant past from that “previous super-ancient” calendar for daily practical use by the ordinary population, leaving the original calendar only for educated priests. Such a "cut-off date" or a new starting point was the date of the signing of the peace treaty after the grandiose war between the Slavs and China. The peace deal was signed in the city of the Star Temple in Northern China just 5508 years BC.^[xlviii] Thus, the Slavic state and China had existed long before that date, before the erection of the Egyptian pyramids (if we accept this standpoint).

Most of the above information has been known for a long time, but previously it was published only in the so-called "yellow" media. The "official" historians (supporters of the Norman theory) long ignored it all as "fairy tales", "myths" and "fantasies" under the pretext of the alleged absence of firm evidences. However, due to the rapid growth of the amount of "compromising material" against the Norman theory, a few years ago this information began to be published officially and scientists began to receive PhD decrees for their dissertations on this topic.

The firm evidences came in connection with the development of DNA analysis. At first it was believed that if human bones had lain for several millennia then the DNA chain in them disintegrated beyond recognition. However, later it turned out that DNA molecules decay very slowly in some conditions. Moreover first they break up into fragments, then into smaller fragments and only then into primitive molecules of several atoms. Sufficiently long fragments can be extracted from bones several tens of thousands of years old and even from the bones of some Neanderthals. That is, in one place bones may have some parts of DNA preserved, in another – others. By collecting many different pieces from different parts of the bone you can make up the entire complete DNA chain (mathematically). In practice, the situation is much simplified by the fact that scientists do not need a complete DNA chain to establish a race or ethnicity – only those parts of it that contain specific "markers" of one or another people.

In recent years the results of several authoritative DNA studies of fossil remnants have been published. They do confirm all of the above facts about the antiquity of the Slavs and even more. DNA analysis shows that Europe was first populated by the Slavs and only four thousand years later did the Western Europeans come there. Both events occured thousands of years BC. One of such publications is a series of books by Anatoly Klesov, the President of the Academy of DNA Genealogy of Russia, professor at the Moscow State and Harvard (USA) Universities: "The origin of the Slavs. DNA genealogy against the ‘Norman theory’" [xlix], "DNA genealogy of the Slavs. Origin and history" [l], "DNA genealogy of the Slavs. New discoveries." [li]

It turned out that both Slavs and Western Europeans came from Southern Siberia. The mutation mark that sits in half of ethnic Russians – DNA label R1A - originated in Southern Siberia about 24 thousand years ago. Our ancestors lived around the Lake of Baikal, in Altai and in the whole of Southern Siberia. They came there from somewhere else as then all the peoples on earth were constantly moving because of climate change, game shortages, etc. The ancestors of the Slavs (Proto-Slavs) came out of Southern Siberia about 20 thousand years ago. They moved along the "southern arc" - through Tibet, India, the Iranian plateau, Turkey and about 9 thousand years ago they reached the Balkans and then settled in Europe. This people became the ancestors of ethnic Russians.

Another mutation, the DNA label R1B, also originated in Southern Siberia and its carriers became the ancestors of Western Europeans. They moved from Southern Siberia to Europe along a longer "northern arc" - through Northern Kazakhstan, the Samara region, the Middle Volga, turned through the Caucasus, the Middle East, North Africa, the Iberian Peninsula, crossed Gibraltar and reached Europe about 5 thousand years ago too. By that time the Proto-Slavs had been living in Europe for 4 thousand years.

The ancestors of the Western Europeans went to war against the Slavs and managed to dislodge them from the territory of Western Europe about 4 and a half thousand years ago. The Slavs retreated to the Russian Plain and lived there for about two thousand years. Then the Western Europeans again moved on the Slavs. Near the Talenzi River (halfway between Berlin and the Baltic Sea) a gigantic battle that took place three thousand two hundred years ago at the end of the second millennium BC. Many bones and weapons were found there, including Slavic clubs and wooden hammers. Both infantry and cavalry participated on both sides. The bone remnants of at least several thousand dead bodies are there. The total number of combatants was obviously much higher, perhaps tens of thousands. For that time such a number of troops was incredible. Some historians dubbed this battle "the first world war in history." Pulling up such armies, ammunition and food by the roads required transport, logistic chains, hierarchical management and command system. That implies that the statehoods had already been sufficiently formed on both sides. Since all the towns that appeared later around the battle site got Slavic names, we may assume that this time the Proto-Slavs defeated the ancestors of the Western Europeans and stopped their further advance to the Russian plain. Subsequently many more attempts were made by the Western Europe to break through this border line formed six and a half thousand years ago, but to no avail. Of the latter are the wars of Charles XII, Napoleon and Hitler against Russia.

Apart from the above Klesov publicized some other surprising facts. One of them is that the Slavs are also descendants of the Aryans (Hitler would be shocked and disappointed by that). Another one is that neither the Slavs nor the Western Europeans bear the markers of the Africans, which casts serious doubt on the theory that Africa was the cradle of humanity and that homo-sapiens people came from there. Both points are based on DNA analysis and therefore cannot be ignored. However, here we deviated a bit from the initial topic. Thus, the ancient Slavs and their states existed tens of thousands of years before our era and were the contemporaries of Ancient Greece, Egypt and Rome if not older.

Похожие статьи:

Рассказы → Год 6888 от сотворения мира

Рассказы → Князь

Статьи → Русская нечистая сила

Видео → Кривописание отрезало нас от всей русской литературы до 1917 года.

Рассказы → Вера-Русь