TheRurik dynasty,[a] also known as theRurikid orRiurikid dynasty, as well as simplyRurikids orRiurikids,[1] was a noble lineage allegedly founded by theVarangian princeRurik, who, according to tradition, established himself atNovgorod in the year 862.[2][3][4] The Rurikids were the rulingdynasty ofKievan Rus' and its principalities following itsdisintegration.
As a ruling house, the Rurikids held their own for a total of 21 generations in male-line succession, from Rurik (d. 879) toFeodor I of Russia (d. 1598), a period of more than 700 years.[14][15] Numerousprincely families have claimed to trace their lineage to Rurik. They are one of Europe's oldest royal houses, with numerous existingcadet branches.
The origins of the Rurikids are unclear, as its namesakeRurik, aVarangian prince who allegedly founded the dynasty in 862 through the "Calling of the Varangians", is considered to be a legendary, mythical and perhaps even entirely fictional character by modern scholars.[b]Nicholas V. Riasanovsky (1947) stated: '...no Kievan sources anterior to thePrimary Chronicle (early twelfth century), knew of Riurik. In tracing the ancestry of Kievan princes they usually stopped withIgor.'[18] As an example,Hilarion of Kiev'sSermon on Law and Grace (1050s), praisingVolodimer I of Kiev, only goes back to his fatherSviatoslav I and grandfather Igor of Kiev.[19] Even if Rurik did exist, scholars have long doubted or rejected hispaternity of Igor.[c] The connections between Rurik,Oleg and Igor, as attested in thePrimary Chronicle andNovgorod First Chronicle, are tenuous at best; in all other cases, these two chronicles base any particular ruler'slegitimacy on the fact that their father or grandfather previously "sat on the throne in Kiev", and never refer back to Rurik.[21] Legitimacy in theKievan Chronicle is also heavily based on a ruler being descended from his father and grandfather, with the exception of two 5-generation lists.[d] Before the mid-15th century, no historical source claims that Rurik founded a dynasty;[24] theHypatian Codex ofc. 1425 began its list ofknyazi of Kiev with "Dir and Askold", then "Oleg", then "Igor", up to 1240, and does not mention Rurik anywhere.[25] It was not until the 16th century that Rus' churchmen developed an explicit tradition,[24] described in the 1560Book of Royal Degrees byMacarius, Metropolitan of Moscow, according to which the reigningDanilovichi house of theGrand Duchy of Moscow (Muscovy) was part of a "Rurikid dynasty", which not only traced back all the way to the legendary Rurik, but was purportedly descended from a certain Prus, a supposed kinsman ofAugustus Caesar.[24] According Ostrowski (2018), the Rus' churchmen developed this concept of a R(i)urikid dynasty for the purpose of "bolstering the Muscovite dynastic state".[26] Although many later historians would accept the 16th-century Rus' churchmen's dynastic claim that the Danilovichi were descended from Rurik, they did not accept Prus as the ancestor of the Muscovite princes.[1] Because of these issues, various scholars have instead named the dynasty theVolodimerovichi, descendants of grand princeVolodimer I of Kiev.[27][16]
The scholarly consensus[28] is that theRus' people originated in coastaleastern Sweden around the eighth century and that their name is connected withRoslagen, orRoden, as it was known in earlier times.[29][30][31] According to the prevalent theory, the nameRus', like the Proto-Finnic name for Sweden (*Ruotsi), is derived from anOld Norse term for "the men who row" (rods-) as rowing was the main method of navigating the rivers of Eastern Europe.[32][33] The same root also underlies theFinnish andEstonian names for Sweden:Ruotsi andRootsi.[33][34]
The tributaries of theVarangians drove them back beyond the sea and, refusing them further tribute, set out to govern themselves. There was no law among them, but tribe rose against tribe. Discord thus ensued among them, and they began to war one against another. They said to themselves, "Let us seek a prince who may rule over us and judge us according to the Law." They accordingly went overseas to the Varangian Russes: these particular Varangians were known as Russes, just as some are called Swedes, and others Normans, English, and Gotlanders, for they were thus named. TheChuds, the Slavs, theKrivichians, and theVes' then said to the people of Rus', "Our land is great and rich, but there is no order in it. Come to rule and reign over us." They thus selected three brothers, with their kinsfolk, who took with them all the Russes and migrated. The oldest, Rurik, located himself inNovgorod; the second,Sineus, atBeloozero; and the third,Truvor, inIzborsk. On account of these Varangians, the district of Novgorod became known as the land of Rus'. The present inhabitants of Novgorod are descended from the Varangian race, but aforetime they were Slavs [преже бо бѣша Словѣни].
There is some ambiguity even in thePrimary Chronicle about the specifics of the story, "hence their paradoxical statement 'the people of Novgorod are of Varangian stock, for formerly they were Slovenes.'" However, archaeological evidence such as "Frankish swords, a sword chape and a tortoiseshell brooch" in the area suggest that there was, in fact, a Scandinavian population during the tenth century at the latest.[36]
A genetic study on the origins of the Rurikids (Zhur et al. 2023) analysed "for the first time", remains belonging to PrinceDmitry Alexandrovich. The study found that Dmitry Alexandrovich and most of the "medieval and modern Rurikids", starting with PrinceYaroslav the Wise, belong to paternal haplogroupN-M231 (N1a). The genetic results suggest that the formation of the Rurikid lineage included a population from easternScandinavia (Öland), a population fromCentral Europe or theIron Age Eurasian Steppe, and anEast Asian component via Siberian geneflow to Northeastern Europe.[37]
Personal seals of Rurikids. The trident (tryzub) is considered as symbol of Rus and was adopted by independent Ukraine in the 20th century as a Ukrainian coat of arms.[38]
Rurik and his brothers founded a state that later historians calledKievan Rus′. By the middle of the twelfth century, Kievan Rus′ had dissolved into independentprincipalities, each ruled by a different branch of the Rurikid house. The dynasty followedagnatic seniority and theizgoi principle. The house underwent a major schism after the death ofYaroslav the Wise in 1054, dividing into three branches on the basis of descent from three successive rulingGrand Princes:Iziaslav (1024–1078),Sviatoslav (1027–1076), andVsevolod (1030–1093). In addition, a line of Polotsk princes assimilated themselves with the princes ofLithuania. In the 10th century theCouncil of Liubech made some amendments to a succession rule and dividedRuthenia into several autonomous principalities that had equal rights to obtain the Kievan throne.[citation needed]
Vsevolod's line eventually became better known as theMonomakhovichi and was the predominant one. The line of Sviatoslav later became known as Olegovychi and often laid claim to the lands ofChernihiv andSeveria. The Izyaslavychi who ruledTurov andVolhynia were eventually replaced by a Monomakhovychi branch.[citation needed]
The 'Riurikide' dynasty and the ruling elite ... attempted to impose on their highly diverse polity the integrative concept ofrusskaia zemlia ('the Rus' land') and the unifying notion of a 'Rus' people'. ... But 'Kievan Rus'' was never really a unified polity. It was a loosely bound, ill-defined, and heterogeneous conglomeration of lands and cities inhabited by tribes and population groups whose loyalties were primarily territorial.[39]
This caused the Rurikid house to effectively dissolve into several sub-dynasties ruling smaller states in the 10th and 11th centuries. These were theOlgoviches ofSeveria who ruled inChernigov,Yuryeviches who controlledVladimir-Suzdal, andRomanoviches inGalicia-Volhynia.[39][40]
TheRomanovichi (Izyaslavichi of Volhynia) were the line ofRoman the Great, descended from Mstislav I of Kiev through his sonIziaslav II of Kiev and his grandsonMstislav II of Kiev, father of Roman the Great. The older Monomakhovychi line that ruled thePrincipality of Volhynia were eventually crowned kings of Galicia and Volhynia and ruled until 1323. The Romanovychi displaced the older line of Izyaslavychi from Turov and Volhynia as well as Rostyslavychi from Galicia. The last were two brothers of Romanovychi,Andrew andLev II, who ruled jointly and were slain trying to repelMongol incursions. The Polish king,Władysław I the Elbow-high, in his letter to the Pope wrote with regret: "The two lastRuthenian kings, that had been firm shields for Poland from the Tatars, left this world and after their death Poland is directly under Tatar threat." Losing their leadership role, the Rurikids, however, continued to play a vital role in theGrand Duchy of Lithuania and the laterPolish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Most notably, theOstrogski family held the title ofGrand Hetman of Lithuania and strove to preserve theRuthenian language andEastern Orthodoxy in this part of Europe. It is thought that the Drutsk and related princely families may also descend from Roman the Great.[citation needed]
Vsevolod's sonYaroslav II of Vladimir was the father ofAlexander Nevsky, whose sonDaniel of Moscow sired the ruling house of Moscow until the end of the 16th century; the princes of Moscow are often referred to as theDaniilovichi.[6]
Beginning with the reign ofIvan the Terrible, the Muscovite branch used the title "Tsar of All Russia" and ruled over theTsardom of Russia. The death in 1598 of Tsar Feodor I ended the rule of the Rurik dynasty. The dynasty was briefly revived in the person ofVasili IV of Russia, a descendant of Shuyskiy line of the Rurik dynasty, but he died without issue. The unstable period known as theTime of Troubles followed Feodor's death and lasted until 1613.[citation needed]
Russian andUkrainian historians have debated for many years about the legacy of the Rurikid dynasty. The Russian view sees thePrincipality of Moscow ruled by the Rurikid dynasty as the sole heir to the Kievan Rus' civilisation, this view is "resting largely on religious-ecclesiastical and historical claims" because the Eastern Russian lands managed to establish themselves as an independent state that was ruled by the Rurikid dynasty until the 16th century. This view started inMoscow as ruled by the original Rurikid dynasty between the 1330s and the late 1560s.[48] At the same time the Ukrainian view of sole succession is based on continuity from the Kievan Rus and its subsequentKingdom of Ruthenia,Lithuania-Ruthenia, and theCossack Hetmanate. For that it had utilised mainly territorial, ethnodemographic, social, and institutional arguments.[49]
The predominant Ukrainian view had gradually changed over time. After the decline of Kievan Rus, the rulers of Galicia-Volhynia claimed sole succession and the title of ruler of all former Rus lands as was noted in theKievan and thenGalician–Volhynian Chronicles.[50] Following the downfall of Galicia-Volhynia, monarchs of theGrand Duchy of Lithuania and Ruthenia and then thePolish–Lithuanian Commonwealthclaimed sole succession as well, which in turn was supported by the Ruthenian population and historians at the time. But that view had shifted by the mid 17th century, especially afterPereiaslav Agreement and publication ofKievan Synopsis in 1674[51] that viewed people ofGreat Russia,Little Russia andWhite Russia as a singleAll-Russian nation under the leadership of the Tsar. Though latter was challenged, but eventually became predominantly accepted until theHistory of Ruthenians was written at the break of the 18th and 19th centuries. This became the underlying foundation for a separate Ukrainian historiography with a later monolineal and exclusivist Ukrainian national theory being advanced by national historiography between the 1840s and the end of the 1930s. It was summarised most clearly byMykhailo Hrushevsky in hisHistory of Ukraine-Rusʹ, laying the foundation for the current sole succession view.
By the 1930s the priorAll-Russian nation ideology was modified to "allot equal rights to the Kievan inheritance to theThree Slavic peoples, that is the Russians, the Ukrainians, and theBelorussians", but later elevated the Russian nation as the elder brother to give the others "needed guidance in revolutionary struggles and socialist construction."[52]
^Including Hrushevsky (1904), Vernadsky (1943), Riasanovsky (1947), Paszkiewicz (1954), Franklin and Shepard (1996).[20]
^'Of the eighteen cases of a new ruler ascending to the throne, the [Kievan Chronicle] describes their sitting on the throne of their "grandfather and father" 15 times, 18 of their "grandfathers and fathers" twice, and of his "father and grandfathers" once.'[22] The two 5-generation lists in theKievan Chronicle includes the 12th-centuryRurik Rostislavich, but no mention of the supposed dynasty founder Rurik, which Ostrowski (2018) found remarkable: '[TheKievan Chronicle] makes no reference, allusion, or mention in any way to the Riurik who supposedly founded the dynasty, even more telling because of the ruler who he is extolling has the same name. When a connection with Riurik could be made with the addition of just one more generational antecedent, we find no attempt to do so before the mid fifteenth century.'[23]
^The Oxford illustrated history of the Vikings. Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press. 1997. pp. 138–139.ISBN9780192854346.
^Perrie, Maureen (2006).The Cambridge History of Russia. Volume 1. From Early Rus' to 1689. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 2,47–48.ISBN1107639425.
^Christian Raffensperger and Norman W. Ingham, "Rurik and the First Rurikids",The American Genealogist, 82 (2007), 1–13, 111–119.
^Library, New York Public (2003).Russia Engages the World, 1453-1825. Harvard University Press - T. p. 17.ISBN978-0-674-01193-9.Archived from the original on 3 November 2023. Retrieved30 October 2023.Thus the dynasty that had ruled Rus' for over 700 years-the Riurikid-ended. Boris Godunov was "elected" tsar, but his legitimacy was challenged
^abStefan Brink, 'Who were the Vikings?', inThe Viking WorldArchived 14 April 2023 at theWayback Machine, ed. by Stefan Brink and Neil Price (Abingdon: Routledge, 2008), pp. 4–10 (pp. 6–7).
^"Russ, adj. and n." OED Online, Oxford University Press, June 2018, www.oed.com/view/Entry/169069. Retrieved 12 January 2021.
^Franklin, Simon, and Jonathan Shepherd.The Emergence of Rus 750–1200. Harlow, Essex: Longman Group, Ltd., 1996. pp. 38–39.
^Zhur, K. V.; Sharko, F. S.; Sedov, Vl. V.; Dobrovolskaya, M. V.; Volkov, V. G.; Maksimov, N. G.; Seslavine, A. N.; Makarov, N. A.; Prokhortchouk, E. B. (2023)."The Rurikids: The First Experience of Reconstructing the Genetic Portrait of the Ruling Family of Medieval Rus' Based on Paleogenomic Data".Acta Naturae.15 (3):50–65.doi:10.32607/actanaturae.23425.ISSN2075-8251.PMC10615192.PMID37908771.Genome-wide data of the medieval and modern Rurikids unequivocally indicates that they belong to the N1a haplogroup of the Y chromosome...the contribution of three ancestral components to his origin: (1) the early medieval population of the east of Scandinavia from the island of Oland, (2) representatives of the steppe nomadic peoples of the Eurasian steppes of the Iron Age or the early medieval population of central Europe (steppe nomads from the territory of Hungary), and (3) the ancient East-Eurasian component....Previously, using these samples as an example, the gene flow of the peoples of Siberia (East Eurasian component) to the North and East of Europe was shown [34]. A high degree of homology in the Y chromosome of a representative of the Russian noble family and people of the early metal era led us to the hypothesis of the possible contribution of the East Eurasian gene pool to the formation of the northern European population of the early Middle Ages.
.png)
