Where did the Russians come from? Are there Russian genes? What science says. Geneticists have discovered the secret of the origin of the Russian people Who are the Russians and where do they come from
Russian genes: what science says Where did the Russians come from? Who was our ancestor? What do Russians and Ukrainians have in common? For a long time the answers to these questions could only be speculative. Until genetics got down to business.
Adam and Eve
Population genetics is the study of genetic roots. It is based on indicators of heredity and variability. Geneticists have discovered that all of modern humanity goes back to one woman, whom scientists call Mitochondrial Eve. She lived in Africa more than 200 thousand years ago. We all have the same mitochondria in our genome - a set of 25 genes that any person has. And they are transmitted only through the maternal line. At the same time, the Y-chromosome in all current men is also raised to one man, nicknamed Adam, in honor of the biblical first man. It is clear that we are talking only about the closest common ancestors of all living people, their genes have come down to us as a result of genetic drift. It is worth noting that they lived at different times - Adam, from whom all modern males received their Y chromosome, was 150 thousand years younger than Eve. Of course, these people can hardly be called our "ancestors", since out of the thirty thousand genes that a person possesses, we have only 25 genes and a Y chromosome from them. The population increased, the rest of the people mixed with the genes of their contemporaries, changed, mutated during migrations and the conditions in which people lived. As a result, we received different genomes of different subsequently formed peoples.
Haplogroups
It is thanks to genetic mutations that we can determine the process of human settlement, as well as genetic haplogroups (these are communities of people with similar haplotypes that have a common ancestor, in which the same mutation took place in both haplotypes), characteristic of a particular nation. Each nation has its own set of haplogroups, which are sometimes similar. Thanks to this, we can determine whose blood flows in us, and who are our closest genetic relatives. According to a 2008 study conducted by Russian and Estonian geneticists, the Russian ethnic group genetically consists of two main parts: the inhabitants of South and Central Russia are closer to other peoples who speak Slavic languages, and the native northerners are closer to the Finno-Ugric peoples. Of course, we are talking about representatives of the Russian people. But, what is most surprising, there is practically no gene inherent in Asians, including Mongol-Tatars, in us. So, the famous saying: "Scratch a Russian, you will find a Tatar" - turned out to be fundamentally wrong. Moreover, the Asian gene also did not particularly affect the Tatar people, the gene pool of modern Tatars turned out to be mostly European. In general, based on the results of the study, in the blood of the Russian people there is practically no trace of Asia, because of the Urals, but within Europe, our ancestors experienced numerous genetic influences of their neighbors, whether they were Poles, Finno-Ugric peoples, peoples of the North Caucasus or ethnic group Tatars (not Mongols). By the way, the haplogroup R1a, characteristic of the Slavs, according to some versions, was born thousands of years ago and was frequent among the ancestors of the Scythians. Some of these Pra-Scythians lived in Central Asia, some migrated to the Black Sea region. From there, these genes reached the Slavs.
Ancestral home
Once the Slavic peoples came out of the same territory. From there, they already dispersed around the world, fighting and mixing with their indigenous population. Therefore, the population of the current states, which are based on the Slavic ethnic group, differ not only in cultural and linguistic characteristics, but also genetically. The further they are geographically apart, the greater the differences. So u Western Slavs common genes were found with the Celtic population (haplogroup R1b), in the Balkans - with the Greeks (haplogroup I2) and the ancient Thracians (I2a2), in the eastern ones - with the Balts and Finno-Ugric peoples (haplogroup N). Moreover, the interethnic contact of the latter occurred due to Slavic men who married Aboriginal women. And yet, despite the many differences and heterogeneity of the gene pool, Russians, Ukrainians, Poles and Belarusians clearly correspond to one group on the so-called MDS diagram, which reflects the genetic distance. Of all nations, we are closest to each other. Genetic analysis allows us to find the "ancestral home" mentioned above, where it all began. This is possible due to the fact that each migration of tribes is accompanied by genetic mutations, which more and more distorted the original set of genes. So, based on genetic proximity, it is possible to determine the original territorial. For example, according to the genome, Poles are closer to Ukrainians than to Russians. Russians are close to southern Belarusians and eastern Ukrainians, but far from Slovaks and Poles. And so on. This allowed scientists to conclude that the original territory of the Slavs was approximately in the middle of the current area of settlement of their descendants. Conditionally, the territory of the subsequently formed Kievan Rus. Archaeologically, this is confirmed by the development of the Prague-Korchak archaeological culture of the 5th-6th centuries. From there, the southern, western and northern waves of the settlement of the Slavs have already gone.
Genetics and mentality
It would seem that since the gene pool is known, now you can understand where the people's mentality comes from. Not really. According to Oleg Balanovsky, an employee of the Laboratory of Population Genetics of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, there is no connection between the national character and the gene pool. These are already “historical circumstances” and cultural influence. Roughly speaking, if a newborn baby from a Russian village with a Slavic gene pool is taken immediately to China and brought up in Chinese customs, culturally he will be a typical Chinese. But, as for appearance, immunity to local diseases, everything will remain Slavic.
DNA genealogy
Along with population genealogy, private directions for the study of the genome of peoples and their origin are emerging and developing today. Some of them are classified as pseudo-sciences. So, for example, the Russian-American biochemist Anatoly Klesov invented the so-called DNA genealogy, which, according to its creator, is “an almost historical science, created on the basis of the mathematical apparatus of chemical and biological kinetics.” Simply put, this new direction is trying to study the history and time frame of the existence of certain clans and tribes based on mutations in the male Y-chromosomes. The main postulates of DNA genealogy were: the hypothesis of the non-African origin of Homo sapiens, which contradicts the conclusions of population genetics, criticism of the Norman theory, as well as the lengthening of the history of the Slavic tribes, which Anatoly Klesov considers the descendants of the ancient Aryans. Where are such conclusions from? Everything from the already mentioned haplogroup R1A, which is the most common among the Slavs. Naturally, this approach has generated a sea of criticism, both from historians and geneticists. In historical science, it is not customary to talk about Aryan Slavs, since material culture, the main source in this matter, does not allow determining the continuity of Slavic culture from the peoples of Ancient India and Iran. Geneticists even object to the association of haplogroups with ethnic characteristics. Doctor historical sciences Lev Klein emphasizes that “Haplogroups are not peoples or languages, and giving them ethnic nicknames is a dangerous and unworthy game. No matter how patriotic intentions and exclamations she hides behind. According to Klein, Anatoly Klesov's conclusions about the Aryan Slavs made him an outcast in the scientific world. About how the discussion around the newly declared science of Klesov and the question of ancient origin Slavs, so far we can only guess.
0,1%
Despite the fact that the DNA of all people and nations is different, and in nature there is not a single person identical to another, from a genetic point of view, we are all extremely similar. All the differences in our genes that gave us a different skin color and eye shape, according to Russian geneticist Lev Zhitovsky, make up only 0.1% of our DNA. For the other 99.9%, we are genetically the same. Paradoxically, if we compare the various representatives of the human races and our closest relatives of chimpanzees, it turns out that all people differ much less than chimpanzees in one herd. So, to some extent, we are all one big genetic family.
Tatyana Shingurova
Russia is a country on whose territory representatives of various ethnic groups coexisted side by side for thousands of years. Some of them managed to maintain their identity, while others, as a result of mixing, gradually lost their characteristic features and distinctive features. It is widely believed that the Russian ethnic group in its pure form no longer exists today. The Kramola portal cites a number of studies proving the opposite.
Typical Russian face
What does the Russian ethnos really look like? Did he manage to maintain the purity of his blood, or did he completely dissolve, mixing with other peoples? Let's try to figure it out.
At the end of the 19th century, anthropologist Anatoly Bogdanov, who studied the biological nature of man, wrote that the commonly mentioned expressions about typical Russian beauty, a typical Russian face are not a reflection of some abstract concepts, but quite specific ideas about how a person of the Russian type looks like.
The anthropologist of our time, Vasily Deryabin, based on the method of multidimensional mathematical analysis of mixed features, concluded that there is a significant unity of Russians throughout Russia, and it is extremely problematic to single out clear regional types with pronounced differences.
Anthropologist of the Soviet era Viktor Bunak focused on the fact that the Russian people are based on Slavic roots, although he did not deny the presence of some part of Finno-Ugric, Baltic and Pontic blood. The scientist believed that the Russian population descended from the original type of the Slavs, who arose at the junction of the Baltic anthropological zone with the neo-Pontic one.
The vast majority of anthropologists agree that typical Russians belong to. Therefore, it is fundamentally wrong to believe that every Russian has a drop of Tatar blood. A vivid confirmation of this is the almost complete absence of epicanthus in Russians - an anthropological trait characteristic of representatives of the Mongoloid race.
The Tatar trace is a myth
Geneticists, along with anthropologists studying the issue of the origin of races, came to the conclusion that among all the Eurasian peoples, Russian is perhaps the most purebred. Thus, American geneticists, who conducted a large-scale experiment, came to the unequivocal conclusion that the population of the northwestern, central and southern parts of Russia is practically devoid of any traces of the blood of the Turkic peoples, the impurities of which, according to a widespread but erroneous opinion, should have remained since the time of the mythical Tatar-Mongol invasion. Experts from the United States found that approximately 4,500 years ago, a boy was born on the territory of the Central Russian Plain, who had a gallogroup different from his father, today classified as R1a1. The incredible viability of this mutation determined its dominance in the following millennia over a large area of Eastern Europe. To date, representatives of the R1a1 halogroup are 70% of men in the European part of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, 57% in Poland, 40% in the Czech Republic, Latvia, Slovakia and Lithuania, 18% in Sweden, Germany and Norway. Interestingly, even in India, 16% of men belong to this group, and among representatives of the upper castes, this figure reaches 47%.
Genetic progenitors
Today, the assertion is widespread that there are no real Russians in Russia anymore, that they have completely mixed with other peoples. However, according to Russian geneticist Oleg Balanovsky, practical DNA research completely refutes this myth. The scientist believes that Russians are a monolithic people. The Russians received resistance to assimilation from their genetic ancestors - the Slavic tribes, who managed to preserve their identity during the Great Migration of Nations. The research group headed by Balanovsky found that the Russians had a characteristic higher degree of variability than, for example, the Germans, but less than that of the same Italians.
Another important question, to which Balanovsky was looking for an answer, concerns how justified it is to consider Finno-Ugric peoples as the ancestors of modern Russians. The scientist notes that the study of the gene pool of the northern branch of the Russians indicates the inadmissibility of interpreting the key features inherent in the Russian ethnos, as such, which they inherited exclusively from the assimilated Finno-Ugric peoples.
Today, geneticists have unequivocally established the presence of two genetic progenitors of the Russian ethnic group: northern and southern, which became the basis for the formation of two groups of Russian populations. At the same time, it is extremely difficult to talk about their specific age and origin.
Representatives of the northern group of Russians have a significant similarity in terms of Y-chromosomal markers transmitted through the male line with the Baltic peoples, while the relationship with the Finno-Ugric peoples, although traceable, is more distant. The signs transmitted through the female line through DNA mitochondria indicate the presence of similarities in the gene pools of the inhabitants of the Russian North and Western/Central Europe.
The study of autosomal markers also reveals the proximity of northern Russians to other European peoples and the maximum distance from Finno-Ugric peoples. All these data, according to geneticists, give reason to believe that an ancient Paleo-European substrate was preserved in the territory of the Russian North, which subsequently underwent significant changes as a result of the migration of the ancient Slavs.
At the same time, most of the Russian populations belong to the south-central group, which is included in a single genetic cluster with Belarusians, Poles and Ukrainians. East Slavic populations are characterized by a high level of unity and are strikingly different from representatives of the Turkic, North Caucasian and Finno-Ugric peoples living in the neighborhood. Interestingly, the territories dominated by the population with Russian genes almost completely coincide with the possessions that were part of the Russian Kingdom during the reign of Ivan the Terrible.
Where do purebred Russians live?
To find out in which territories they live the largest number native Russians, in addition to studying the genotype, it is necessary to conduct a number of additional studies. According to the latest census conducted in Russia, 80% of the respondents, that is, over 111 million people, identified themselves as Russians. By region, the highest concentration of Russians is observed in: the Moscow region (excluding the capital) - 6.2 million, the Krasnodar Territory - 4.5 million, the Rostov region - 3.8 million, St. Petersburg - 3.9 million and in Moscow itself - 9.9 million. However, it would not be entirely correct to consider Moscow the city with the largest concentration of the primordially Russian population.
Doctor of Biological Sciences Elena Balanovskaya associates modern megacities with black holes into which the gene pool of the Russian people is sucked and disappears without a trace. In her opinion, the Russian gene pool was preserved in its pure form only in the indigenous rural populations of Central Russia and the Russian North.
Domestic scientists generally call the Russian North a real ethnographic reserve of Russian culture, where for many centuries an archaic way of life was preserved almost untouched and where the Russian gene pool was naturally conserved.
Russian ethnographers, having set themselves the goal of identifying the regions where the greatest concentration of the original Russian population has been preserved, took as a basis the population, more than half of whose representatives married each other, while their children continued to remain within these populations. The total population of the original regions within the Russian area was 30.25 million people, and excluding cities - 8.79 million. At the same time, the leading position among 22 regions went to the Nizhny Novgorod region, which accounted for 3.52 native Russians.
Also, Russian scientists conducted a study concerning the places of residence of people with native Russian surnames. Having compiled a list of the 15,000 most common surnames among Russians, they compared them with data by region. As a result, it turned out that the largest number of people with Russian surnames live in the Kuban.
Instead of a preface
I once posted this post in the community "Ukraine and Russia",
from where it was very quickly removed by the Great Russian moderators, suffering from
chronic chauvinism and pathological megalomania. Obviously they fear
how they do not want the Russians to know the truth about their history. However, I consider
its duty to convey to people the historical truth, which for
historians have hidden and continue to hide for centuries ...
Everyone knows that Russians trace their origins back to the medieval
states of Rus', and therefore have long called themselves "Russians". However
few people know that the names "Rus" and "Russian" have nothing to do with
to the Eastern Slavs. Don't believe? What, you really don't believe? well then
take the "Tale of Bygone Years" by Nestor the chronicler, and carefully read
the first few pages, which outlines the initial history of Rus'. For those, who
does not have this entertaining book, which can be quite seriously called
The Bible of both the Russian and Ukrainian people, I will give some quotes.
Everyone knows the famous legend about the calling of the Varangians, when the Eastern Slavs,
tired of civil strife, they decided to invite them to reign in their land
overseas ruler. Here is how Nestor the chronicler describes it: "And they followed
the sea to the Varangians, to Rus'. Those Varangians were called Rus, as others are called
Swedes, and other Normans and Angles, and still other Gotlanders - so are these. "From
this fragment shows that one of the peoples is called Rus, which the Slavs
called "Varangians". There is an opinion among anti-Normanists that the Varangians
were not Scandinavian Normans, but Slavs; they say, so the merchants were called,
and the very name "Varangian" comes from the word "goods". However, the above
example clearly indicates that Nestor classifies the Varangians as
Germanic peoples such as the Swedes, Normans and Angles. It's quite understandable
that if the Varangians had at least something to do with the Slavs, Nestor would not
I would compare them with the Germans.
Thus, the Rus were not originally Slavs, but, like the Vikings,
belonged to the Germanic language group. Only after Rurik
began to reign in Novgorod, Rus or Russians were also called
Slavic tribes. The chronicle clearly testifies to this:
"And from those Varangians the Russian land was nicknamed." If this is not enough for someone,
I give another quote from Nestor the chronicler: "And the Slavic people and
Russian is one, after all, they were nicknamed Rus from the Varangians, and before that there were Slavs.
Well, what do you say about this, gentlemen chauvinists? It's quite understandable
that these gentlemen simply have nothing to say here: "The Tale of Bygone Years"
fully proves that the state of Rus, whose history is so amused
Russian chauvinists, founded by no means Eastern Slavs, but foreigners -
representatives of one of the German peoples. Anti-Normanists can
you like to splash saliva and bang your head against the wall, but you can’t argue against the facts:
the book of Nestor the chronicler is the oldest document that tells
about the history of Rus', and we have no reason not to believe it.
The only exaggeration, in my opinion, is the fact
vocations of the Varangians: it is unlikely that the Slavs were so stupid as to turn
to people who were known throughout Europe as the most notorious marine
robbers. The Viking Varangians did not need to be called: they always came on their own.
Therefore, it seems to me that Nestor was slightly cunning when he wrote about calling
Varangians. In fact, it was about the banal capture of Novgorod by the Vikings
led by King Rurik. The tale of calling, obviously, was subsequently
invented by the princely chroniclers, so as not to remind the Slavs once again,
that they were conquered by foreign Normans. This eliminated the danger
Aboriginal uprisings against the invaders and legalized the right of the Rurikovich
to the princely throne.
However, the best proof that Rus or Russians originally
were strangers - newcomers from Scandinavia - says the attitude of the indigenous
inhabitants of the Dnieper region to their past - to the history of Kievan Rus. This
period is almost completely absent in Ukrainian folklore. You do not
you will find not a single Ukrainian folk song, not a single fairy tale, not a single epic
in Ukrainian, dedicated to this period. It seems like
after the Tatar-Mongol invasion, the Ukrainian people were struck by a mass
amnesia. Doesn't this seem strange to you? After all, other peoples have preserved
quite a lot of oral folk art dating back to the era
Middle Ages. For example, in England, legends about the king were very popular.
Arthur and the ballads of Robin Hood. And in Ukraine, almost all folklore is dedicated to
much later period - XV-XVIII centuries, where the main character was a Cossack
(all sorts of literate people need not worry: the word "Cossack" is given in Ukrainian
transcription. These are Russian "Cossacks" written through the letter "a"; Ukrainian Cossacks
always and everywhere should be written through "o". If someone does not agree with this, let
will sue me ... Ho-ho-ho).
Of course, there are smart people who will say that, for example, Western Ukrainians
preserved fairy tales about the prince (or king - as anyone likes) Danil Galitsky.
But this is most likely the result of the work of later authors and collectors,
trying to protect the Galicians from the Polish cultural influence.
Be that as it may, traditional Ukrainian folklore has nothing to do with
era of Kievan Rus. What does this indicate? Only that for a simple
people it was a foreign power; the so-called "Russians" were the invaders
for the inhabitants of the Dnieper region. That is why the name "Rus" did not take root in
Ukraine: you will not find a single folk song where Ukraine is called
"Rus" or "Russian land". And the fact that the Poles during the time of the Commonwealth
called the Ukrainian lands "Russian Voivodeship" says only that
it was the official name of the Dnieper region, while the original was
"Ukraine". Pro-Russian chauvinists can scoff as much as they like about
this name, comparing it with the word "outskirts", but the name "Ukraine"
mentioned in ancient Russian chronicles from the 11th century. Therefore, Ukraine
already existed in those distant times, which means that the Ukrainian
people. For Ukrainians, Russian princes and all those who came with them were occupiers.
Obviously, the Old Russian language was the language of the northern Slavs, who came from
Novgorod together with Oleg, so he did not get distribution among
the local population, who spoke Ukrainian from time immemorial. After that,
how the Russian principalities were actually destroyed by the invasion of the Tatars
Mongols, everything Russian was very quickly forgotten and practically erased from
memory of Ukrainians. Isn't it a strange attitude to "own" history?
Such forgetfulness is shown by the people only in relation to strangers and
invaders, which were the notorious Russians ...
Why, in this case, the ancestors of the Russians, unlike the Ukrainians, not only
preserved memories of Rus' in the form of epics that have survived to this day only
thanks to popular memory, but also adopted the name from the invaders of the Normans
"Russians"? Obviously, the reason is that at the time of the arrival of the Varangians, the ancestors
Ukrainians and Russians were on different stages development. By this time
Kyiv has been standing on the banks of the Dnieper for several centuries and has been a center of trade
in all Eastern Europe. By the beginning of the 9th century, the glades had already formed if
not a state, then at least a powerful tribal union. Completely different
the situation was with the ancestors of the Russians: "and there was no truth among them, and a clan arose
people, and they had strife, and began to fight with each other," writes Nestor
chronicler. That is, the northern tribes were divided and did not represent
any ethnic or territorial association. Therefore, the arrival
Varangians had only a beneficial effect on them, putting an end to strife and
contributed to the formation of the state.
Another reason why the Russians kept the memory of Rus' is that
after the Tatar-Mongol invasion, the Norman Rurik dynasty
continued to rule the territory modern Russia up to the 17th century.
It is quite understandable that thanks to them, the memory of past times continued
persist both at the level of the political elite and among the people. However
with the accession of the Romanov dynasty, who belonged to the ancient boyar
genus and, obviously, having purely Slavic roots, the name "Rus" begins
to be replaced by a new one - Russia. With education Russian Empire titles
"Rus" and "Russian" began to be withdrawn from circulation altogether. Yes, Karamzin
in his famous work "History of the Russian State" instead of the word
"Rus" uses the word "Russia" even where it refers to the most ancient
times, and only occasionally resorts to the epithet "Russian".
Obviously, such a strange attitude towards ancient name was associated with
that the Russian authorities were already aware that the history of Rus' did not fit
into the concept of a great empire: the ancient Russian state was founded by invaders
Scandinavians, and this went against the idea of \u200b\u200bthe "greatness" of the Russian people.
It turned out that the Russians were unable to govern themselves and invited
(or they themselves came) strangers. However, there is nothing shameful or
humiliating: the Normans influenced the history of many European
states, for example, England, and there no one is ashamed of this, and even more so
doesn't try to hide.
All these theories of the anti-Normanists, who categorically reject the Norman
version, have no basis. It's nothing more than a whim and
a whim of people who do not want to admit the obvious facts. Their arguments
revolve around one thing: we don't like it, therefore it's not true.
Finally, it should be noted that the history of Rus' is one of the few
examples in history where foreign occupation has had a beneficial effect
on the conquered population: the Eastern Slavs, who were constantly subjected to
attacks of neighboring peoples, not only defended their freedom (thanks to
Normans, of course), but over time they were able to create a powerful state,
which could not be ignored. Looking at how the current rulers
Ukraine and Russia rule their countries, you involuntarily think: maybe
you should use the experience of the Eastern Slavs and again "call" the Varangians
(that is, the Scandinavians) to restore order? Moreover, the Scandinavian
States have recently confidently occupied the highest lines in
ratings of the most developed and prosperous countries. And what do you think?..
Russia is a state with a rich history, rich culture and interesting people. But not all of these people know for sure what their country owes such a name to. Although what is there to talk about, if not all historians and linguists have a common opinion on this issue. We will try to consider the most reliable theories and find out why Russia has such a name.
A brief excursion on the "evolution" of the name "Russia"
Everyone knows that the history of our country originates in the Old Russian state, founded by the notorious Rurikovichs. They called it Kievan Rus, because. its capital was the glorious city of Kyiv, and the population was the Russian people.
Kievan Rus in the heyday
By the end of the 13th century, the Moscow principality was formed, which was called "Russia". And for about a century, the word "Russia" came into use. Researchers suggest that this is due to the peculiarities of the pronunciation of our people, which is why the letter “u” in the word “Russia” gradually turned into “o”. But "Russia" was used much less frequently than "Rus", "Russian land" and "Muscovy". The very word "Rosiya" (then still without a double "s") arose in Byzantium in the 10th century for the Greek designation of Rus'. "Ρωσία" - this is how "Rosia" looks in Greek, and it was in this form that it was supposedly written for the first time. And here is the first mention in Cyrillic, dating back to 1387:
The first mention of Russia in Cyrillic The territory of the Russian state gradually grew, and the population was replenished with peoples of other nationalities - along with this, the word "Russia" was increasingly used. Officially, it was fixed in 1547. Then the whole country began to be called the Russian (Russian) kingdom. Ultimately, we have what is called a separate people as Russians, and a large multinational state is called Russian. By the way, the Latin name "Russia" was already found in Western European sources in the 11th century. Thus, it was the word "Rus" that became a derivative of "Russia". But already regarding Rus' and the people of the Russians, scientists have different opinions. By the way, the name of Ukraine most likely came from the consonant Old Russian word "Ukraine", meaning the border area or land near the edge. But with Belarus it’s even easier - its name comes from the phrase “Belaya Rus”. Well, now consider the existing theories about the origin of the word "Rus" and "Russians".
Norman theory
In this case, it is said that Rus' is none other than the Vikings or the Normans. The fact is that in The Tale of Bygone Years it seems to indicate that the East Slavic tribes turned to the Varangians, and it is clarified - to Rus', who were one of the tribes there. If you stick to this theory, then you should refer to the Old Norse word "Róþsmenn", which means rowers or sailors. Therefore, the name of the Norman tribe of the Rus is quite to have such an origin. Actually, Rurik himself is a Varangian from the Rus people. He was called by the Slavic tribes to become their ruler, because. at that time they were mired in civil strife.
The Norman theory is supported by many Byzantine and European sources, where Rus' was identified with the Vikings. In the same sources, the names of Russian princes are indicated in the northern mode: Prince Oleg - X-l-g, Princess Olga - Helga, Prince Igor - Inger. Another interesting argument is the work of a certain Constantine Porphyrogenitus “On the Administration of the Empire”, written in the middle of the 10th century. The names of the Dnieper rapids are given there. The funny thing is that two languages are used for this: Slavic and Russian. In the latter version, a Scandinavian similarity can be traced. Be that as it may, the Scandinavians definitely visited the East Slavic territory. This is evidenced by numerous archaeological finds. Moreover, they are dated just at the time of the “calling of the Varangians”. By the way, the spelling of the double "s" was finally fixed only under Peter I.
Slavic theory
The name of Rus' is often associated with the name of one of the tribes of the Eastern Slavs - Ross (or Russ). It is believed that they settled along the Ros River, which is one of the tributaries of the Dnieper. But many researchers consider this theory far-fetched, and the very existence of a Slavic tribe with that name, in their opinion, is doubtful. Firstly, in fact, then the river had a name with “b” at the root, that is, “Rs”, and secondly, this assumption arose during the Soviet Union, when they tried in every possible way to challenge the Norman theory. Therefore, many statements are doubtful. They should also include the fact that the Rus were so nicknamed because of their light brown hair color.
The very river Ros More plausible can be considered the opinion of Lomonosov, who believed that the people of the Rus (or Rus) have a connection with the Baltic Prussians (also Slavs). Yes, and archaeological finds testify to the connection of the Baltic Slavs with the northern population Ancient Rus'.
Sarmatian (Iranian) theory
The Sarmatians are nomadic Iranian-speaking tribes who occupied the territory of modern Ukraine, Russia and Kazakhstan in the middle of the 1st millennium. These guys had such tribes as the Roxolons and the Rosomani, whom many eminent scientists consider the ancestors of the Rus. This is where the name Rus came from.
Sarmatians are another possible ancestors of ours. Why not a modern Russian brigade?
Swedish theory From the 6th to the 5th century, the Swedes visited those lands and said they saw Finnish tribes there, whom they called the Rotsi.
Military theory There is also a version that says that "Rus" was called a special military class even at the time of the birth of the ancient Russian state. Over time, the name passed to the whole people.
Conclusion
Why does Russia have such a name? Because the derivatives were the words "Rus" and "Russian", the origin of which is associated with the name of one of the rivers on the territory of the Slavs, and with the Varangian tribe, and even with the Sarmatians and their tribe of Roxolans. To date, the Norman theory seems to be the most plausible, supported by historical facts and archaeological finds. So it is possible that Mother Russia is so called thanks to the legendary Vikings who once came to the lands of our ancestors.