Ethnonymy and toponymy

According to Cross & Sherbowitz-Wetzor (translators of the 1930/1953 English editions of the Laurentian Codex), the invitation of the Varangians 'has inspired a larger volume of controversial literature than any other disputed point in Russian history.'^[16] Contentions have centred on the meaning of the ethnonyms and toponyms used in the texts, whether Rus' refers to the Varangians (Normanism) or the Slavs (Anti-Normanism), and which versions of the texts were original and most reliable.^[16] In a broader sense, Normanism held that Scandinavians established the Kievan state, while Anti-Normanists argued that 'Kievan Rus' [was] essentially the creation of East Slavs who may simply have hired a Varangian military retinue to serve them.'^[5] Lind (2006) commented that 'ethnicity is a cultural construct and a fairly politically loaded one, but it is also a construct that people of the ninth and tenth centuries would not understand'.^[17]

The younger version of the Novgorod First Chronicle (N1L) preserves an older text than that found in copies of the Primary Chronicle (PVL), and sometimes directly contradicts it.^[18] Unlike the N1L's author, the compiler of the PVL was particularly interested in explaining the relationship between the terms Varangians and Rus'.^[19] This fitted with his larger geographical and ethnographical efforts of 'placing the Rus' in a biblical context', as well as 'want[ing] to map the peoples and regions with which this Rus' state came into contact.'^[20] Lind (2006) argued that the 'compiler, who was hardly Scandinavian, but still thought of himself as a Rus'', needed to solve the problem of himself natively speaking and writing a Slavic language yet self-identifying as Rus'.^[21] He knew that the name Rus' came from the Varangians in Scandinavia according the sources he had about the invitation of the Varangians in the mid-9th century, but also that the term "Varangians" had disappeared from texts such as the so-called Rus'-Byzantine Treaties of 907, 911, 944, and 971 that were presumably written only a few decades later.^[21]

Historicity

Modern scholars find the narrative of the invitation of the Varangians an unlikely series of events, probably made up by the 12th-century Orthodox priests who authored the Primary Chronicle as an explanation how the Vikings managed to conquer the lands along the Varangian route so easily, as well as to support the legitimacy of the Rurikid dynasty.^[22] Rurik is considered to be a legendary character by modern scholars; while some think he may be a mythical and perhaps even entirely fictional character (with Donald Ostrowski (2018) suggesting that "the chronicler" may have "created a fictional ruler named Riurik to provide [a] justification" for Igor's reign^[23]), others such as Norman W. Ingham and Christian Raffensperger (2007) think "Ryurik is [not necessarily] entirely fictional".^{[lower-alpha 3]} Nicholas V. Riasanovsky (1947) stated: '...no Kievan sources anterior to the Primary Chronicle (early twelfth century), knew of Riurik. In tracing the ancestry of Kievan princes they usually stopped with Igor.'^[25] The Primary Chronicle never calls Rurik a prince of Kiev; Ostrowski (2018) pointed out that the passage wherein Oleg "sat in Kiev" (Old East Slavic: понелѣже сѣде въ Кыевѣ, romanized: ponelѣzhe sѣde v" Kyyevѣ) makes no mention of Rurik, suggesting the author was 'more interested in the first Rus' ruler to reside in Kiev than with any founder of a dynasty'.^[26]

The term "Rurikid dynasty" was only coined in the 16th century, when Rus' churchmen developed this concept of a R(i)urikid dynasty for the purpose of "bolstering the Muscovite dynastic state".^[15] Because of these issues, various scholars have instead named the dynasty the Volodimerovichi (Volodymyrovichi), descendants of grand prince Volodimer I of Kiev.^[27][24] As a whole, some scholars consider the calling of the Varangians and the subsequent "foundation" of the "Rus' state" and "Rurikid dynasty" by Rurik a founding myth of Kievan Rus'.^[24] Through a translatio imperii, it was also adopted as a founding myth of the Grand Duchy of Moscow (Muscovy) in the 15th century,^[28] and the Muscovite Daniilovichi dynasty in the 16th century.^[29]

On the other hand, some of the developments mentioned in the narrative are generally found to be historically plausible.^[11] The scholarly consensus is that Varangians, also known as Rus', came from Scandinavia and gave rise to the Kievan Rus' state, although it was built on several existing local cities, socio-economic structures and cultural traditions.^{[lower-alpha 4]} Scholars such as Janet Martin (2009b) think that by the early 9th century, bands of Scandinavian adventurers known as Varangians and later Rus' started plundering various (Slavic) villages in the region, later extracting tribute in exchange for protection against pillaging by other Varangians.^[31] Over time, these relationships of tribute for protection evolved into more permanent political structures: the Rus' lords became princes and the Slavic populace their subjects.^[32] Scholars such as Paul Magocsi (2010) place more emphasis on the role later played by Oleg the Wise than that of the supposedly 'invited' Varangians Rurik and his brothers: 'Regardless of the uncertainties surrounding the origin of Rus', with Helgi/Oleh (reigned 878–912) we have a known historical figure credited with building the foundations of a Kievan state. (...) With Oleh's invasion of Kiev and the assassination of Askol'd and Dir in 882, the consolidation of the East Slavic and Finnic tribes under the authority of the Varangian Rus' had begun.'^[30] Oleg was the first "prince" (knyaz) of Kiev according to the Primary Chronicle, although he was not yet called a "grand prince" (velikiy knyaz).^[33] Oleg's relation to Rurik remains debatable, and has been rejected by several modern scholars.^[34]

Despite doubts about its historicity, the legend of the invitation of the Varangians has long been 'understood by scholars as a kind of a starting point of the Russian state'.^[35] Similarly, historiography has commonly assumed 'that the Riurikid dynasty ruled Rus'', supposedly 'founded by the Viking Riurik while the primary sources before the fifteenth century seem to be completely unaware of or, at the very least, unconcerned that Riurik did so.'^[35] As a 'starting point', the legendary Varangian invitation is favoured over more obscure narratives such as the possible mention of a "Rus' Khaganate" in the Annales Bertiniani, which has been a similar source of perpetual disagreement.^[7]