Talk:Varangians/Archive 1

Greek fire
Why was Greek fire removed?--Wiglaf 20:13, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

map
the map depicting tribes living in today's eastern europe has perhaps an error. slavic tribes are shown in the are of the carpatian mountains, nevertheless it is known that these mountains were inhabited largely by romanic people. i must stress that the area inhabited by romanic people was quite large thus not to be ignored.


 * I strongly disagree with the text by the map - neither Baltic tribes nor the so called Chudes were cultures in non-European Russia!
 * Please see also my comment on the discussion page of the map. 80.235.61.87 18:02, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Cwens/Cwenland
An anon contributor from 213.216.199.xxx continues pushing his theory without discussing and providing references. Until he starts discussing, his contributions will be reverted on sight. mikka (t) 20:55, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Ghirlandajo's theories
Ghirlandajo reverted to a lead section where northeastern Scandinavia was the main source of Varangians. I would really love to see solid references for his theory that the Varangians were Fenno-Ugric.--Wiglaf 20:49, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. I don't know what the fuck is going on in this page anymore, there seems to be a four-way edit war. Wiglaf, I am not insisting Varangians came from Norway, and this is not original research. If they didn't come from Norway, just remove it! Christ! Adam Bishop 07:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Read this: assume good faith.--Wiglaf 10:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Same to you :) Adam Bishop 22:57, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


 * "Gentlemen! You're not supposed to fight in here...this is a WARROOM!" :) Please correct me if I'm wrong, here Mr. Bishop, but you were probably thinking of the Varangian Guard's most famous member, Harald Hardråda of Norway. He and his fellow Norges won much reknown (and booty) in the service of Constantinople. But Harald and his stout lads were the exception. Most of the Varangians appeared to be Swedes. The Norwegians tended to sail westwards. The Jomsvikings, who included members from all over, are sometimes misidentified as Varangians. So it is easy for confusion to reign on such matters...this period is not called the Dark Ages for nothing. I'm no expert...I could'nt read a Runestone if you paid me a million dollars (but I would certainly be willing to learn fast and try;). But let's have good faith all around, and a horn of Wiki Ale, ere we sail on our voyages. Peace Brothers--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 01:58, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes I suppose I may have been...or maybe it's not very useful to divide Norway and Sweden (and Denmark) 1000 years ago as if they are their modern identities. I apologize for being so abrasive, I am more frustrated with the Finnish/Cwenland person than anyone else in particular. This is happening quite a lot lately on other articles too, and I should probably take a break. Adam Bishop 03:49, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I would agree with you, except these divisions which took place 1000 years ago are the origins of their modern identities. We are prisoners of our pasts. I do agree about the Finno-Ugric part. I don't see how Ghirl came up with that. Might as well say the Varangians were Hungarians, it would make about as much sense. Sigh, I know what you mean... I might need a Wikibreak too. A dear friend of mine has just bid the project farewell plus I've got this Annoying twit stalker bitching me out over my FA. I really want to cry havoc and let slip a few choice words of the sort you've used here. But I think I'll have a beer and go to bed instead. Cheers--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 09:27, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure why Wiglaf thinks that was Ghirlandajo, it was User:Carolina de la Gardie (and a bunch of IPs before that). Maybe something got confused in all the reverting that was going on. Adam Bishop 16:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I stopped to understand Wiglaf's accusations several months ago. Probably he needs a break from all the tough editing he makes latterly. --Ghirla | talk 17:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Who lived in northeastern Scandinavia during the Viking age
In the "Varangians" article it appears stated in Wikipedia now that "the Varangians (Russian: Variags, Варяги) were Scandinavians who travelled eastwards, mainly from the northeastern parts of Scandinavia, in what are now Norway and Sweden".

That sentence tells part of the throught. We ought to let the Wikipedia readers also know who were the people living in northeastern Scandinavia at the time. Earlier, we could see Wikipedia informing its readers as to who (which peoples and/or tribes) lived in northeastern Scandinavia (where the Varangians "mainly came from") during the Viking age.

In Scandinavia and elsewhere there is a widely and commonly accepted understanding and consensus among historians and researchers regarding the undisputed fact that during the Viking age the people inhabiting the northeastern Scandinavian areas were Finns who were also known as Cwens in historical texts, and Samis, botht being members of the so called Fenno-Ugric family of peoples.

At the time, from the northwestern coastal areas of the Scandinavian Peninsula also the Norse were making advances up north towards the north-eastern coastal areas of the Scandinavian Peninsula. Similarly, from the east (south-east) the Finnish Karelians and Slavic groups - such as the Novgorodians - were making advances towards the area in question as well.

Please, allow this important fact remain in the text. We shall now make a reference to the text regarding the historical Cwenland area in northern and northeastern Scandinavia, part of which belongs to the modern day Republic of Finland, not only to the kingdoms of Norway and Sweden.


 * Argh, do not make a confusion. Varangian guards were mostly, or almost all, germanic scandinavians. The fact that Finnic-ugrians inhabited a much larger area in the past dos not come into that. If it causes such misunderstandings, the term northeast scandinavia should not be used in this thing. After all, what is notheastern scandinavia? a confusing thing. geograohucally, it now denotes some norrlandic regions of sweden and possibly norwegian finnmark. But thinkin about what it may have meant to medieval people (who apparently did not even know the word scandinavia, but may possibly have understood a concept of "northeastern territories of dane-norwego-gotic-sueco peoples"), they may have thought the Roslagen coast or something like that. Suedois 11:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Primary Chronicle
I wonder why Ghirlandajo does not bother to consult the Primary Chronicle before making accusations. Here is a quote in Russian:

''В год 6367 (859). Варяги из заморья взимали дань с чуди, и со словен, и с мери, и с кривичей. А хазары брали с полян, и с северян, и с вятичей по серебряной монете и по белке от дыма.''

It clearly says that a large part of European Russia paid tribute to the Varangians before the famous invitation.--Wiglaf 20:58, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

How large is that part? Didn't most of East Slavic tribes pay tribute to Khazars and/or Magyars before, during, and, for a while, after the invitation? Goliath74 19:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Guard Loyalty Quote
Memory may fail me, but I think the quote "Alive they would have defended him...", at the end of the eighth paragraph in the Varangian Guard section, is from one of the Byzantium trilogy of books by John Julius Norwich. --TB 18:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Swedes, Norwegians and Danes
Does anyone dispute that there were a number of Norwegians an Danes among the Varangians? If you remove Danes and Norwegians because Scandinavia is already mentioned then you would have to remove Sweden as well. The text should reflect that most Varangians were probably from Sweden, but that many and some very notable Varangians were from Denmark and Norway as well. Inge 10:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * All Scandinavians were a rather integral unit at the time meaning that since they spoke the same Old Norse they had no problems in organizing common activities. Scandinavians from areas of present-day Norway, Denmark, Scotland, England, Ireland, Iceland and Baltic countries surely took part in the trips. However, since more than 80% of all the eastern coin finds of that era are from areas of present-day Sweden indicating a commanding participance from those areas in the Varangian trips, that should not be down-played. --Drieakko 11:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Drieakko, please don't engage in original research. The "concentration of coins" may indicate the area of the intensive trade; it has nothing to do with ethnic origins of people whose participation in "eastern trade" is a moot point. Actually, the earliest and by far the largest "eastern coin finds" in Europe were discovered near Yaroslavl where I live. Does it mean that the Varangians were composed of the Slavs and Merya? -- Ghirla -трёп-  13:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The Swedes should not be downplayed, but as you point out the Scandinavians were in many areas an integral unit. The coin finds are important, but should not be the sole deciding factor. Since the Swedes are mentioned spesifically and we know Norwegians and Danes were important elements among the Varangians they should not be downplayed either. Now they are. The disputed sentance should be reworded to reflect the leading Swedish element and that the Danes and Norwegians were important elements (much more so than "Scotland, England, Ireland, Iceland and Baltic countries")Inge 11:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Note that the article now mentions "Scandinavians" and "present areas of Sweden". There is no mention of "Swedes". For example, based on coin finds, Skåne seems to have been an important source of Varangians, but at that time its inhabitants considered themselves Danes whereas today it is a part of Sweden. I don't think that Varangians considered themselves especially "Swedish" even though they had close ties with areas that are today parts of Sweden. I listed non-Scandinavian areas just to point out that Scandinavians had spread outside of their core countries. --Drieakko 12:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Fine: correct my use of Swedes, Danes and so forth to areas in present day Sweden, Denmark and so forth. That was not precise enough of me, but have you heard the Norwegian term flisespikkeri? :) Inge 12:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ghirlandajo, kindly provide reference that provides information of present areas of Norway and Denmark to have been remarkable sources of Varangian participants. I have not seen that claimed in any publication. --Drieakko 13:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Now a citation needed tag has been added to a fairly uncontroversial statement. Do you not agree that Varangians came from Sweden, Denmark and Norway? I agree that all articles should be well sourced, but this tagging seems to be some sort of tactic. If you two have a grudge please take it outside. Inge 13:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Heh, there is no grudge whatsoever. Kindly avoid attempts to turn things personal. Like said, eastern Scandinavian activities are generally agreed to have emerged mainly from areas within borders of the present-day Sweden based on archaeological finds - basically all eastern artifacts that Varangians brought back home from their travels seem to have ended there. Individuals surely seem to have taken part in the trips from all Scandinavian communities. At that time Scandinavians lived in areas covering present-day southern and central Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, northern Germany, eastern England, coasts of Ireland, coasts of Scotland, Åland archipelago in Finland, Baltic coasts, Normandia in France and parts of Russia. As far as I see it, there is no need to emphasize present-day nation-states known as Norway and Denmark. --Drieakko 14:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You'll have to demonstrate using sources that Scandinavians living in Iceland, Normandy, or Shetland Islands could also be properly called "Varangians". Beit Or 14:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I will object to your statements that all eastern artifacts brought back by the Varangians have ended in Sweden. As with all archaelogical finds it is not straightforward to determine who put them there so we will have to look at the finds themselves. With regards to your coins I will have to point out that coins from the east were in common use in Norway during the Viking age. this link provides information on several kinds of Islamic coins found in Norway and states that about 700 such coins have been found so far. This link states that arabian along with german and anglo-saxon coins were the common currency in Norway before and long after the Norwegian kings started to mint their own. This more than suggests that people from Norway were heavily involved in eastern trade ie varangian activiaty. Inge 14:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Gotland alone has more than 100 000 eastern coins from Viking Era found there, which alone is much more than all other Scandinavian areas combined. Skåne has some 20 000, Uppland and Öland less than 10 000 coins found in each. The point here is that even though all Scandinavians took part in the Varangian trips, Varangians seem to have originated mainly from areas within present-day Sweden. --Drieakko 15:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * And the text reflects that. Inge 15:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I continue being uncomfortable with the article listing present-day nation states as the source of Varangians. That does not reflect the situation one thousand years ago in a proper way. We could also then go saying that since Åland, today a part of Finland, surely was a source of many Varangians being an integral part of Svearike, then present-day Finland also was one of the sources of Varangians. That would again give a very incorrect impression. --Drieakko 15:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * We have to take one step back here and think this through. We are writing in order to inform people on the Varangians. We may know and I believe it is common knowledge in general that the present Scandinavian states were very different in the Viking age. The politics, culture and demographics were different. But since the people of that time most likely distinguished among themselves groupings such as swedes, danes, norwegians and so forth and we have the descendants of those people in roughly what is today known as swedes, danes and norwegians. It is also known that kingdoms called Sweden, Norway and Denmark started to emerge during that time and even though the political system and state boundaries have changed we have today the sucessor states of Sweden, Denmark and Norway. When we know all this and may assume that it is common knowledge it is forgivable to in the very least in the name of convenience use the same terms without further explanation. If someone doesn't know this we are not to blame and such a person may find that information by clicking on the blue link to the respective countries. I believe it wouldn't be so bad if we just called them Norwegians, Danes and Swedes in stead of inhabitants of present day ... It is much worse if we because we are preoccupied with getting everything 100% authentic feel the need to define the words we use in every single context. History dealing with this time isn't an exact science. It is OK to use the word Norwegian both for a 10th century and a 21st century native or inhabitant of Norway. Your Finland example is good for proving your point, but using common sense in practice we both see why that won't be an issue.Inge 16:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I tend to support Drieakko that modern states should go from the lead. Unless there is verifiable data proving that the Varangians issued from Sweden (why were they not called Swedes, then?), any nationalist-driven attempt to assign the Varangians to a modern state, at the expense of others, will be treated as original research and tendentious editing. It's like saying that Kievan Rus was a precursor state of Russia, rather than Ukraine and Belarus. Please be more tactful. Having finished my Greco-Scythian and chateauesque projects, I'm going to work full time on the Norse-Rus relations now. From what I have read, there is plenty of evidence connecting the Varangians with Norway and Denmark (Harald III and Rurik come to mind), but I'm not aware of any compelling evidence for their Swedish provenance, except the fact that much of the Norse trade was concentrated in this central land of the Norse world. -- Ghirla -трёп-  19:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, "area of present-day Sweden" and "Swedes" are two different things. Main purpose of Varangians was trade, and the money from the east remained mostly on the area today known as Sweden. And in there especially in Gotland which was in a favourable position to organize eastern activities independently from Viking Age kings. This is not a matter of Varangians being "Swedish" since the area today known as Sweden was not "Swedish" in the Viking Age. --Drieakko 20:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * As a side note: there is no indisputable evidence of Rurik's place of birth. It is also not meaningful to use Viking Age upper class members to identify Varangian origins, since Scandinavian nobility of that time was largely related to each other regardless of their whereabouts. A "Danish" king could easily lead an army mostly of "Swedish" men. --Drieakko 21:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * None of my entries in this debate have been nationalist driven. If you think so please read them again and ask me to clarify the statements you have a problem with. None of us have tried to make the Varangians a precursor state of any kind. I made the point that (for example) using the term Norwegian for both the 10th century and 21st century inhabitants or natives of Norway is fairly uncontroversial. Using the terms Norwegians, Swedes and Danes does have the advantage of not connecting the people to a present day state. If you say present day Sweden/Norway/Denmark you are technically correct, but a casual reader will connect that with the present day state. As in even though the Varangians from Skåne most likely thought of themselves as Danes a reader will likely interpret present day Sweden as Swedes. But now that all mention of a more spesific origin has been removed the dispute is puy to rest, even though I think a reader would benefit from knowing the spesifics as well. Inge 13:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

old talk
The following phrase removed
 * <-- said by whom? not in the mentioned chronicles --(these Slavic and Finnish tribes are said to have rebelled against a previous Scandinavian rule) -->

Varangians ARE the first mentioned rulers of Slavs, of hypothetically Scandinavian origin. It looks like the above statemnt resulted from a series of editorial "improvements". Mikkalai


 * Mikkalai, have you ever read the primary chronicle???? It explicitly says what YOU pretend it does NOT.--Wiglaf 12:39, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes I did read it. It does NOT say what I say it does not. Read for yourself.

Въ л4то 6367. Имаху дань Варязи из заморья на Чюди и на Слов4енехъ. Мери и на Вс4хъ и на Кривич4хъ.

Въ л4то 6370. Изъгнаша Варягы за море и не даша им дани. И почаша сами в собъ володати. И не б4 въ нихъ правды, и въста род на род, и быша в нихъ усобиц4, и воевати почаша сами на ся. И р4ша сами въ себъ:"&#1087;&#1086;&#1080;&#1097;&#1077;&#1084;&#1098; &#1089;&#1086;&#1073;4 &#1082;&#1085;&#1103;&#1079;&#1103;, &#1080;&#1078;&#1077; &#1073;&#1099; &#1074;&#1083;&#1072;&#1076;4&#1083;&#1098; &#1085;&#1072;&#1084;&#1080; &#1080; &#1089;&#1091;&#1076;&#1080;&#1083;&#1098; &#1087;&#1086; &#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1091;." И идоша за море къ Варягомъ, к Руси, Сице бо ся зваху ти Варязи Русь, яко се друзии зовуться Свее, друзия же Урмане, Англяне, инии Г4те.

The text says only that initially Varangians collected contribution from slavic-fennic tribes, but neither they ruled nor lived there. (text says: varangians from over the sea). Of course, one can speculate differently, but it will be only speculation. Not to say that the chronicle itself is a third-hand source of these times.

So let's not translate it into our understanding, and say what it says: varangians robbed slavs, then were driven away, then were invited specifically to rule, and say it with the proper attribution, too.

If you have any other original source on this issue, you are velcome to quote. Mikkalai 17:59, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

As for Rus == Swedes, the Chronicle specifically says: "These varangians were called Rus, just as the other ones were called Swedes, still others were Germans, Angles or Goths. So that was their name." Mikkalai 18:21, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, but "Swede" was not a simple concept in Viking age Scandinavia. There was the Swedish king, but he was the king of peope who usually only called themselves, Geats, närkingar (Nerike), västermän (Westmannia), södermän (Sudermannia), Gutar (Gotland, the Goths of the chronicle), and Ros-byggjar (Roslagen). If you want to have a look at the controversy of "Swede", look at Ancient Uppsala.--Wiglaf 18:45, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Exactly why do you consider this piece irrelevant? : "The Slavic inhabitants called these Swedes Rus'." Inform me, please.--Wiglaf 19:01, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Sorry for being imprecise. This detail better be confined to the Rus' article. Also, there are no Slavic sources from the 8th century to confirm your claim. Also, it is very likely that at these times the Ladoga area was inhabited by Fennic peoples, rather than Slavs. Mikkalai 20:06, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Of course, the Ladoga area was in most likelihood settled by Fenno-Ugric tribes before the Slavs. My question concerns why you removed a piece that was inserted 19:40, 10 Jun 2003, by Adam Bishop. I find it relevant and will put it back.--Wiglaf 20:29, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * The phrase in question cannot be as a matter of fact with respect to this time frame. For these times for which documentation is scarse one must be very careful. Thre is too much misinformation and loosely grounded conjectures and extrapolations on this issue floating around already. Either you prove it, or it is out. Mikkalai 22:07, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

OK, so after over a year, you demand conclusive proof for the veracity of a sentence. Since the text consequently needs some revision, I have moved a discussion on early Russian scholarship to the page where it belongs.--Wiglaf 05:27, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * We don't have conclusive info about some things related to certain times. How would you like a phrase: "Varangians lived in Kiev in 7th century and were known as Rus"? Where is the burden of proof? there are well-known things, at least easily verifiable, and there are not so easily verifiable ones. I've never heard of someone conclusively claiming that slavs called someone Rus in 8th century or earlier. faldan?rustah?saint bertran?constantine? Which other early references are missing? If there are such, then most definitly they would be extremely important to be referred here as an important argument. Mikkalai 01:58, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * We do have one source, the authors of the Primary Chronicle. Every time I read it, I am struck with the pride the author shows of being Slavic. Still, when he describes the "Rus'" he clearly states that they were Varangians (who he defines as Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon), and that they came from across the sea. He clearly states that the Rus' were Varangians and that the Varangians who settled in Eastern Europe were called "Rus'".--Wiglaf 15:41, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Now I seem to uderstand what our problem is. I am not arguing against that slavs called them Rus. I am arguing against the date. It is 860 in the chronicle, which is 9th century, not 8th (people got confused over centuries in this way all the time). Of course, one may reasonably extapolate that 60 years ago they were most probably called Rus as well. But we are talking about solid evidence here. Mikkalai 16:19, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I am sorry but what is solid evidence? There is rarely anything you can call solid evidence in academia. If everything written in Wikipedia was based on solid evidence, I don't believe that there would be many pages. What we can say is whether most scholars agree on this or that.--Wiglaf 20:44, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, you better be sorry :-). The problem is not with evidence, but with interpretations thereof. In our case there is nothing, zilch, nada to interpret in the first place. Mikkalai 23:54, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * There is a source called the Primary Chronicle written for Slavs and by Slavs. In this text a Slav or Slavs call those Varangians "Rus". I call it a source, you call it "nothing, zilch, nada". We can agree to disagree.--Wiglaf 19:51, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Sigh... You are not listening. (or you have a short attention span and comment only very last sentence in the discussion, out of context. Shall I recount the whole discussion each time I make a new comment?) I don't question the fact itself. Yes, YES, YES!!!, I do agree slavs called them Rus. I am questioning the date, the timestamp, the year when it was reportedly happening. We don't know about the 8th century. We know only it is reported for the 9th century. If you know any report related to 8th century that mentions the word Rus as used by slavs, please, don't withhold this information. Mikkalai 21:39, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Calm down. I agree with you. I thought you meant "ever".--Wiglaf 15:30, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * We do know, however, of a non-Varangian Rus (Rhos) that populated the northern coast of Black Sea in 7th century, according to "Zhitias" of various Greek saints written by Greek chroniclers. Shakhmatov tried to get around this problem by trying to introduce the "early wave of Viking expansion" but had no archaelogical evidence or written accounts to support it.

Yeesh, if I knew three years ago, when I heard about Varangians for the first time, that they were so contentious a topic, I would never have bothered studying them :) Adam Bishop 05:32, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, in the West it is not a contentious subject. The main reason why I am interested in it is because my wife is Russian and has a phD in history. My mother-in-law is a professor of history at the Academy of Science in Moscow. Let's say that Rurik and Poltava are part of my life.
 * My wife says that the problem with the role of the Varangians in the creation of Kievan Rus' is that some people in the former Soviet Union feel that it is a "national defeat".--Wiglaf 17:08, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Why don't you call it pluralism instead? I smell double standard here: when two americans speak differently, it is democracy, when two Russians disagree, it is stupid brawl, and when a Russian disagrees with an American, it is WWIII. Mikkalai 23:54, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * For the record: I don't doubt in validity of Normanist theory. History knows quite a few cases when a bunch of tough guys seize a power in a foreign land only to dissolve in the local population, possibly leaving some of nobility to remember their roots. And I see no particular glory in varangians but their skills to keep power in their hands. Mikkalai 00:08, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I quoted a RUSSIAN.--Wiglaf 19:51, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Is there, by any chance, a written source supporting Varangians was vikings? One source, a single place it is written that they were vikings? Dan Koehl 19:47, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, off the top of my head, there is the account of Liutprand that dicusses some Varangians returning home to Sweden from Constantinople, through Germany, and the German emperor imprisons them because he thinks they may be spies for the Danes (who were what we consider Vikings). Adam Bishop 06:16, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

why were the varangian warriors considered so powerful and dangerous if they were "always defeated"? also by this time greek fire was no longer in use. the mythical status of these people had to come from somewhere, as did the desire for them as mercenaries.

Oh sorry, you misunderstood me. I did not at all speak about what people consider. This page is full at that, my children, under ten years of age, consider a lot of things. I asked for ''One source, a single place it is written that Varangians were vikings? '' You know, history, sources...?

Dan Koehl 14:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

About the map
Are the Slavs not a Non-varangian culture? Either a map should be changed or the capture. Goliath74 18:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Reference to PVL
It would appear to a casual observer that the following paragraph: "In 862, the Finnic and Slavic tribes rebelled against the Varangian Rus, drove them overseas, but soon started to conflict with each other. The disorder prompted the tribes to invite the Varangian Rus "to come and rule them" and bring peace to the region. Led by Rurik and his brothers Truvor and Sineus, the invited Varangians (called Rus) settled around the town of Holmgard (Novgorod)." describes real events and people. It should be made clear that it is no more than an essay on the PVL. For example, there exists enough scholarship that suggests that Truvor and Sineus were not real people or if they were, their names were different. The paragraph needs to give credit to PVL, rather than appear as a reference to real events. Goliath74 18:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Varangian Guard in Norse sagas
I'm concerned about the parenthetical bit of the following assertion:


 * Perhaps the most famous member of the Varangian Guard was the future king Harald Sigurdsson III of Norway, known as Harald Hardråde ("Hardreign", which means "ruthless").

I've recently made a study of Old English, a language closely related to Old Norse, and it seems to me that the name "Hardråde" should mean "stern council" or "hard council," not "hard reign" or "ruthless." The distinction between "hard council" and "hard reign" may seem to be splitting hairs (though the Harald Hardråde article backs me up), but I'm a bit more concerned about the "ruthless" interpretation. I'm afraid that may be going too far, from a language standpoint. I don't know if the word "ruthless" accurately describes the man or not, perhaps it does, but my concern is with the words themselves rather than with an interpretation of Harald's nature.

Now, I realize that, despite their close kinship, Old English is not Old Norse. That's why I wanted to solicit discussion here. It sounds wrong to me, but I'm not confident enough in my interpretation to be bold and just make the change. Can anyone else shed light on this for me? &mdash;CKA3KA (Skazka) 20:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Old Norse Hard-ráði as a man's name is a bahuvrihi meaning "having hard advice". What that implies, would have to be discussed. Perhaps "advised to do hard deeds" or "advising others to do hard deeds". Anthony Appleyard 21:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Or maybe "keeping a hard discipline". --Drieakko 21:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * A literal meaning is better than something speculative, especially if the speculative is original research. No_original_research —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.255.7.177 (talk) 00:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC).
 * If you just translate it "advice", you lose the second meaning "rule" and vice versa. Translation needs to reflect both, and there is no fully fitting English word. To just specifically mean "rule" Old Norse had another word . That's why they usually leave it without translation. --Drieakko 04:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * And here is the ráði etymology and meanings. --Drieakko 04:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hard-ráði's old Finnish translation "ankara" means someone who keeps hard discipline. Again, the Finnish word has no exact English translation either. --Drieakko 04:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

The Old Norse verb ráða and modern Scandinavian råda mean both "advise" and "rule", and it is the last meaning that fits a king best. It is my intuitive interpretation of Hårdråde that it means someone who rules with an iron fist.--Berig 22:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The English translation I am most familiar with is "Hard Ruler", and I believe I can provide citation for this if necessary. --Grimhelm 13:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The Russian translation used in academic sources is Суровый правитель, which means roughly the same. -- Ghirla -трёп-  16:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

General Russian History
The Varangians (or Varyag) - NO relation to the Vikings - were invited in 862 to rule over the Rus'. After chasing away the Varangians, the Rus' fell to quarelling amongst themselves. At this time "they begged the Varangians to send someone to come rule over them". Three brothers, Rurik, Sineus and Truvor, came. Only Rurik ruled from Novgorod ("new city"), Sineus at Beloozero ("white lake") and Truvor at Izborsk. When, within a year, Sineus and Truvor died, Rurik consolidated his power at Novgorod. "And it was from this that the Rus' were born". Thence proceeded the Rurikid dynasty, which ruled until sometime in the 14th century.

With the moving of the capital to Kiev by Grand Prince Igor, trade commenced down the Dnieper River and along the Black Sea, leading to a trade treaty between the two in 905, which laid out provisioning, treatment and other aspects of trade. The treaty bade its signatories to swear "by God or Perun" to uphold the terms of the treaty. After campaigning by the Rus' in the modern day Balkans, the treaty was renewed in 945, largely a repeat of the prior treaty, but with some more favorable terms for the Rus'. With the arrival of the Princess Anna (renamed Olga after her marriage to Igor, came the first efforts to convert the Rus' to Christianity. Both her husband and older son (Sviatopolk?) resisted Olga attempts, but on the accession of Vladimir (the Saint), he converted and bade his subjects also to convert "or risk the Prince's displeasure". The various Grand Princes continued their campaigns against the steppe tribes (e.g. Derevlians, Pechenegs, etc.) with considerable success.

Novgorod and Pskov were notable for their early attempts at representative democracy - only landowners were permitted to vote, but all, including those from outlying townlands, were encouraged to participate. Also notable was the replacement of the system of wergeld (similar to the 'eye-for-an-eye system of law) for a more modern code. Chief among these was Iaroslav the Wise (reigned 1019-1054) and his sons. Rus' grew in size and influence though most of their trade remained with the Byzantines. In the late 11th century, the Russian Primary Chronicle, or the Tale of Bygone Years, as it is somtime called was begun. Some attribute full or patrial authorship to the monk Nestor, while others believe that was an amalgam of the many monks who labored to produce the Chronicle. The Chronicle went through three major contemporary redactions - the first by Sviatoslav the Accursed (for the murder of his brothers Boris and Gleb), then by Vladimir Monomakh (reigned 1113-1125)(named for his relation to the Byzantine Monomachus clan, in 1113, and finally sometime after Vladimir's death. Vladimir's redaction was given particular favor, owing to his great piety and generosity to the church.

Please note that the proper transliteration is 'tsar', not 'tzar'.

Though the above information is taken from the Russian Primary Chronicle (Laurentian Redaction, Samuel Cross and Olgerd P. Sherbowitz-Wetzor, Medieval Academy of America), it is recalled from memory, as I do not have tge volume with me. There all, omissions, errors or other irregularities are mine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fiann Rua (talk • contribs) 05:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC).


 * "NO relation to the Vikings" needs some explanations from your side. "Viking" is a largely unhistorical Western word for Scandinavian looters and generally for all Scandinavian warriors during the same era that Varangians operated. Varangians are often called Vikings in publications. Also, "After chasing away the Varangians, the Rus' fell to quarelling amongst themselves" would indicate that Varangians and Rus' were originally different people, which was very unlikely the case. --Drieakko 05:39, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Map of "Varangian Guard in Norse sagas"
The new map presented in the section "Varangian Guard in Norse sagas" marks southwestern Finland as one of the main areas of Viking settlements. Kindly note that not a single Viking grave has been found from mainland Finland. Neither is there practically any evidence that Vikings would have even wasted their time trying to plunder Finland as there was not much to plunder compared to much more lucrative targets. --Drieakko 04:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Furthermore, there is evidence of only one small Viking settlement in Newfoundland, so splating settlement color all over the area is nonsense. In Greenland, Norse people only lived on the west coast. There were no settlements on the east coast. I seriously doubt Vikings made any raids all the way east to Kola Peninsula and Novaya Zemlya, they just made a few plunders to Dvina delta in the White Sea. --Drieakko 15:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment on Clarity
An observation from a non-expert ...

I see that there is a lot of debate in this discussion page on who precisely the Varangians were and were not. This debate seems to be traslating into a lack of clarity in the article that needs to be addressed. Parts of the article seem to loosely imply that "Viking" is another word for Varangian without explicitly stating this or clarifying. A similar relationship is implied without adequate clarification for the term "Rus". The article needs to be clearer about what these terms mean and, to the extent that there are debates about the origins of the peoples, elucidate the debates rather than watering down the descriptions. --Mcorazao 21:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

One Kari found both from sagas and Bysantium sources
I have traced name Kari mentioned as one of shipowners whose signature is in 912 agreement made in Byzantium and as well as in ole Norseman saga describing Gotland. And Kari, even in wrongly written form Kary is an old ancient Finnish name, and still in use in Finland.

I someway agree to the opinion that Finnish history writing is for reason or another tried to diminish to childhood level by some certain historians. Also adopted in certain questions here in Wikipedia. I can see at ones one example of article of Arvid Adolf Etholen. The person who created it allocte him to Russian categoty, even Russificate his name Arvid Adolf Etholen which he used whole his life, to Etolin in Russian way of writing. I know personally five of his grand, grand, grand children and they all are still Etholens. The Finns formed nearly half of the new settlers from Russian Empire which settled to Sitka and elsewhere to Russian Alaska before Alaska was sold to United States in 1867. Their descendats were numbered still 1031 persons in Alaska in 1930.

JN


 * The Finnish male name Kari is an abbreviation of Russian name Makari, originally Greek Makarios, meaning "happy" or "blessed". The name became common in Finland only at the end of the 19th century after it was used in Juhani Aho's popular novel "Panu". See Uusi suomalainen nimikirja, ISBN 951-1-08948-X. --Drieakko 14:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Funny, I have heard it is "civilized" version of Karju. But I cannot remember how long that

(nickname for ....) has been in Finland. (Karelian version, not to be taken so seriously.) Rich is language of Finnos and Urgis, competites with Creece in language riches in the number of words, if memory functions, about 10.000 words in both languages. By the way, which one is the older version,.... or Christianity in Finland?

JN

Origins of Rootshis / Ruotshis
Maybe this early outsider travellers describition of Novgorod helps to clear the origin of Rootshis / Ruotshis.

"I saw wooden bath houses, and they heat them fiercely, and then they undress and are naked both sex together and pour somekind of tanning fluid over themselves and take young twigs and beat themselves until they emerge half dead. Then they pour cold water over themselves or go to swim in the river. That rerives them. And they do this every day, not compelled by anybody they tormet themselve. And they do this in order to bathe themselves, not in order to tormet themselves." This seems to have been written in 910 - 920 and is also mentioned in couple of English books describing old Novgorod and Russia. Most likely the original writer was Arab traveller from Bagdad Califate. Unfortunately I cannot remember in which books. History is created from this kind of little pieces of information preserved now more than thousand years. The same way than history in nations collective memory bank.

JN

There has never been any questions about the origins of Rootshis / Ruotshis. It comes from eastern coastal areas of Sweden Roslagen. Since it's the closest part of Sweden to it's eastern neighbors like Finland and Estonia, in both languages the whole Sweden is still even nowadays called Rootsi/Ruotsi in Estonian  and Finnish accordingly.--Termer 01:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

PS: "Varangians" BTW is nothing more than Russian word for Vikings originating from the ancient Russian Chronicles. I think this should be clearly stated in the article since there is no such a word in English as Varangians or Varyags. In English Varangians are called vikings. --Termer 01:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * "Varangian" is an English term, and it originates from a true historical term that was used about Scandinavians travelling in the east. However, "Viking" is a recent term, not historically used about the Scandinavians who did comparable travels in the west. There were no "Vikings" at the time of Varangians, that is just an invention of the rather contemporary popular media. --Drieakko 03:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ups, I didn't notice this at first. Please have a source available that refers to 'Varangian' as an English term. Since you have a point there that Vikings is a word in modern English only, I added this note. At the same time, Vikings in modern English and Varangians mentioned by the old Russian chronicles are the same thing. And that should be clearly stated in the article.--Termer 05:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You have the references there. In some contemporary publications, the term Viking is mainly used about the early Varangians. Later on they were so disconnected from their Scandinavian past, that using that term about them is not meaningful any more. In general, however, the entire "Viking Age" concept was a creation of the 18-19th century romanticists, so labelling things anachronistically as "Viking" should be used with great care. --Drieakko 05:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Please Drieakko address this concern to Encyclopedia Britannica. Once you have convinced the editors there that its wrong to say Varangians(Vikings), please let me know, I'm going to reconsider my position. So far it's commonly accepted that both "Varangians" and "Vikings" refer to the same people. And since you have not provided any evidence for your claims, I have to insist and add the clarification to the article. Please do not revert it unless you can back up your claims with as reputable source as Encyclopaedia Britannica. In case you insist without any further evidence, I would have to nominate this article for Original research. Thanks!--Termer 05:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The term "Varangian" is never used about the Scandinavians that travelled in the west. There is no doubt (IMHO) that the Varangians originally were more or less the same people that were later labelled as Vikings, but they continued to exist in the east as a group long after the "Viking Age" was over and done with. Over-simplification of this issue is not meaningful. --Drieakko 06:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The term "Varangian" of course is not used by anybody regarding the Scandinavians that traveled to West since the name originates from the Russian Chronicles and is primarily used by Slavic historians. Since the Russian Chronicles didn't have a slightest idea what happened in Normandia...they couldn't have applying "Varangian" to the Vikings over there. The Vikings that traveled eastwards are also sometimes refereed to as "Eastern Vikings". The main difference, I'm sure you're aware of it, is that the Vikings traveled to West were ancient Norwegians and Danes, The Vikings that traveled east and became known as "Varangian"-s by Russians were mostly the ancestors of Swedes. In the western tradition though, they both always have been referred to as "Vikings". Therefore "early" and "some" are disputable in the current edit but since it clarifies things a lot, it's fine I think.
 * Thanks for the last edit Drieakko! Even though you didn't provide any factual evidence in your post to support your opinions, the last edit you've made is more or less according to the facts. Therefore there is no need to tag this article with disputed in the common state.
 * The only obvious problem there remains is the accuracy of the green map. There are places like Germany and Livonia, Gotaland, Svealand etc. different names from different centuries at the same time on the same map. Hope that the one who made it could fix it according to the era.--Termer 07:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, good that we have consensus now. But please note, that nobody was calling Normandian Norsemen as "Vikings" at the time, as the term has only been used from the 18th century onwards, long after the "Viking Age" was all gone. The term "Varangian" originates from Norse, and appears in Greek texts as well. --Drieakko 11:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * This is getting interesting! Of course nobody called  anybody "Vikings" in Normandy at the time  since the spelling in Old English from the 9th century was WICING. I can't possible imagine what could be the motivations behind an opinion that Vikings AKA wicings AKA Varangians AKA Variages were different and the reason behind this is: nobody called Scandinavians Varangians in the west. It would be the same as saying that Swedes and (Finnish:)Ruotsalaiset are not the same since nobody has ever called the Swedish people Ruotsalaiset in English.  Since the Swedish people call themselves  Svenskarna they could go ahead based on the logic here and say that none, either the English or the Finns are talking about them once they refer to Swedish or Ruotsalaiset. Well, I'm done here for now, since all this,  srry to say: is too far out I think....--Termer 03:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Nobody was using the word "Viking" or any of its variants about the Norsemen and other Scandinavians at the time. Outsiders used the word "Northmen" about them. Themselves they had no collective name as they did not form any collective group. --Drieakko 04:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

PPS: regarding the discussion up there if Vikings AKA Varangians were ethnically Germanic or Finno-Ugric, excuse me, is silly. Simply because no land has ever been isolated. And as there have been Scandinavians with Germanic origins settling in the eastern shore of the Baltic sea and vice versa, Finno Ugric tribes settled in Scandinavia, looking at the history or at Vikings as ethnically monolith unity either way, Finno-Ugric or Germanic is ..how did they put it up there national-chauvinistic-pseudo-history--Termer 02:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is nonsense. No Finnic people around on those trips. Finnic peoples had their own and brief plundering period from the late 11th century onwards until the early 13th century, but they did not have any notable presence in the earlier Scandinavian travels. --Drieakko 03:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

since you say they did not have any notable presence, that means you're saying there was some presence. Since myself wasn't there at that time, I can't say either way. Only common sense says that none of those tribes, either Germanic Scandinavian or Finno-Ugric were not isolated from each other. And as yourself pointed out else where, modern DNA evidence are saying exactly the same thing.--Termer 05:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

PPPS: Image:Muromian-map.png should clearly say that it refers to ethnic croups according to the ancient Russian chronicles and therefore is from their viewpoint. From the Western viewpoint Chudes were called most often Eistneskr in the old Norwegian. On the image Varangian_routes.png there is a place called Livonia, even though the Russian province was placed approx at that place over there later in history. Back then during the Viking times there was no such a place on the map. Even though there was a Finno-Ugric tribe called Livonians back then but not over there where the name is placed on the map.--Termer 03:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Origin of the name Varangian
There is a geographical region in Northern Norway called Varanger. In Norwegian the people living around the White Sea have always been known as Varangians. These fact have been used by Norwegian national-romantics to claim the Varangians as Norwegians. Though this is obvioulsy not accurate, it seems plausible that the term Varangian stem from this area, rather than the glacial period mentioned in the article. --Tokle 13:18, 26 May 2005 (UTC)


 * That sounds interesting. Do you have any sources on this etymology?--Wiglaf 17:43, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I think Thor Heyerdahl mentions it in his book about the origins of norse mythology "Jakten på Odin" (The hunt for Odin). But I might be wrong. --Tokle 10:22, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * There might be a possibly interesting connection to the modern, 'feringhee' of India, an 'farang' of Indo-China, both words denote a stranger(generally disparaging.)--Brendandh 23:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)Brendan


 * Those probably come from "Frank" by way of Arabic "faranj" or "ifranj" or "ferengi". Adam Bishop 02:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Silly me,quite right. However, it would have been nice to think of the intrepid chaps going up the Indus or Mekong!--Brendandh 00:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The section concerning the etymology of the term Varangians states that the first attested usage of the word was in Byzantium while [quote]:

“The first datable use of the word in Norse literature Væringjar appears by Einarr Skúlason in 1153”.

This statement is somewhat misleading since it tends to imply that there are no records of the word before 1153 in Scandinavia. The Byzantine first attestation of the word might very well be the first example of the word having its designated meaning in discussion here – the same or coinciding meaning as being referred to in the later attested Icelandic manuscript by the use of the word “væringjar”. The first attested usage of the word itself in Scandinavia might how ever very well predate even the Byzantine attestation. The word appears on two different rune stones from the Viking age in the singular genitive form uereks (“wærængs/wærings”; Ög 68$) and singular nominative form uirikR (“wærængR/wæringR”; Ög 111$) where it is being used as either a proper name or nick name. Both stones are raised in the memory of a fallen brother during the campaign of Canute the great in England in the year 1015. Granted these carvings can’t be dated to any specific date or even year but both the information on the stones as well as the linguistics themselves are conclusive in that these rune stones predate at least the Icelandic attestation of the word by a wide margin. Útgarðaloki 20:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The picture is NOT that of varangians
This is a sculpture of the legendary founders of Kiev- Kyi, Schek and Khoryv, and their sister Lybid. Kiev was founded in the 6th century well before the vikings age. See wiki page on Kyi, Schek and Khoryv. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.7.244.172 (talk) 19:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Worried about mixing Rus
Rus were majority Slavs. Varagians were Norse Men. There is a clear distinction.

-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.150.192 (talk) 19:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It appears from both the Primary Chronicle and other medieval sources that the term Rus changed from the 9th century and onwards. Initially, it referred to Scandinavians, but later it referred to Slavs and Slavicized Scandinavians. The evolution of the term is not unique, but well-attested in other parts of Europe, such as Franks, Bulgarians and Normans.--Berig (talk) 19:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Kiev Statue
This picture is incorrectly labelled and should be removed. The statue depicts Kiy, Sheck and Horyv, and their sister Lybed. These are the mythological Slavic founders of Kiev proper and not Varangians by any standard applicable.

In fact I shall just do so. Too bad, it's a pretty picture, but it isn't Varangian.

Cheers.

64.180.240.89 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 06:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I deleted this
In Russia, Varangian remained a synonym for Swedes until the late 16th century.<-ref>As in the Novgorod Chronicle on Pontus de la Gardie's Swedish troops.

The Novogorod Cronicle call Varangians for Scandinavians. Therefore this text has nothing to do with it. ANd it just seems like some Swedish patriotic pov pushing to me.

Lets say if there really was a russian text somewhere who agree with this. Then why is it important to a head line? It doesn't change the facts of the sources. As in the novogord chronicle. All Scandinavians were varangians. --Bananaboss (talk) 20:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

"the varanggian were mostly Swedes". <- I removed this to. Both Rurik and Ivar vildfarmne seems mostly to be Danish bc of their family tree. There are no mention of "mostly swedes", in any saga or chronicle. So it need to be cited. --Tesko111111 (talk) 20:32, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I can't argue against the mighty legions of Norwegians and Danes that must have dominated both the western and the eastern routes.--Berig (talk) 20:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Varangians or Varyags like always pointed out is the Russian and the Greek word used to denote Vikings, meaning pagan northerners -early medieval Scandinavian ship-borne explorers, traders and warriors etc.--Termer (talk) 22:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Absolutely, but what Varangian meant in the 17th century is not the same thing as what it meant in the 9th, just like Rus changed meaning from the 9th to the 11th centuries. Most words slowly change meanings.--Berig (talk) 05:24, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, all the meanings during different eras are part of etymology -for WP purposes and regarding the current titles it matters most of all what the words mean today. and in that sense this article still remains to be WP:Content forking violation of Viking. They both speak about the "northerners -early medieval Scandinavian ship-borne explorers, traders and warriors etc.", exactly the same thing just different POV. One name Vikings has been used in the west and Varangians or Varyags in the east, the eastern name has just also sneaked into English but even the EB says Varangians(Vikings) . To be honest I'm still not getting it what justifies a separate article for that name used here. --Termer (talk) 05:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * PS. It would only make sense I think if Viking had a section, "Eastern Expansion - Varangians" or something and then this here would be the main article for that-one.--Termer (talk) 06:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I finally might have got it why there has been such a resistance to make a connection between Varangians and Vikings earlier in this article. It appears there has been a Finnish scholar (Kuussaari, 1935) who has claimed that:

There is in North-Estonian shore on Viru County a place called Varangu (https://et.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varangu_(Haljala)) - Sorry only in Estonian text (do online translate with Chrome). Varangu is on the top of the Estonian Northern bank, and on the bottom of the bank is "Kunda bay", near the "Lammasmäe" site of the oldest (7000-8500 BC) settlement in Estonia, belonging to mesolithic Kunda culture. The bay is nicely shaded to protect from wind and storm - excellent for housing ships. Varangu is some km inland. So potentially the Varangians we people of Varangu. To me it seems likely - knowing intimately Russian language -, that the name Varjag or Varangian is not of Slavik language origin. Ok, Varjag - maybe can be expressed in Slavic but carries no meaning. But Vara-ngian, clearly is of Finnic origin - the Russian/Slavic tongue does not turn to pronounce Varang. Alternatively it has also been suggested for the name Varangu could originate from Germanic language "varang" / "vaering" supposedly "contract" or "covenant", refering maybe to the crew of the ship ("Men of oath"). Alternatively - as "vara" is called in Finnic languages "wealth" -, it is possible that the name comes from that term and refers to the "wealthy tradesmen". It is also noteworthy that according to Estonian archives that in the place of "Varudi-Vanaküla" / "Varudi-oldvillage" near "Varangu" coins have been found that were made on the borders of Roman Rooma empire borders (near Turkey) during the rule of emperor Caracalla (198–217 AD), that is some 600 years before Rus (https://dea.digar.ee/cgi-bin/dea?a=d&d=AKhealaps201703.2.31.1). The refered article states - In Estonia no other similar coins have been found. Actually also not from any other Baltic or Scandinavian states. Also such coins have not been found in the centre of Roman Empire in Italy. Propably the coins found their way to the North-Estonian shore via Black sea and Dnjepr river, via todays Ukraine and Belarus areas. At same site has been found tetradrahm coins mited in Alexandria on years 161-169 during reign of Lucius Veruse. There have also been found in Estonia near "Võrtsjärve" in "Rannu" Rooma Emperor Nero´s (54–68 AD) silver coin. This hints to the fact that Estonian boat-people were traveling all the way to Rome and Turkey already. Finnic boatpeople especially from Saaremaa / Oeselia are well known - fought on the side of Livonians and Kuronians - burned down Sigtuna fortress and carried it´s gates to Novgorod. Both Livonia and Kuronia both originally Finnic areas - the origin of Baltic amber, on the other side of the Amber road, on the other end of which were in Venetia, Italy (the Veneti). It is noteworthy that on the Kaliningrad area are two places called Truso and Kaup - both Finnic origin words, that latter meaning "goods" and/or "trade". A.Pääbo studying the Venetic language, that has until today been unuccessfully translated based on Indo-European languages, proposes that the original Veneti people, who were the source of Amber for the Latins, were also Finnic who used their own syllabic script suitable for tradesmen (see: http://paabo.ca/papers/pdfcontents.html). I would also like to hint to the extent of the Y-DNA haplogroup N, that suggests the Finnic area to have reached to at least Curoninan lagoon, supporting that the Amber tradesmen to Latins were in Fact Finnic origin. (see: https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_N1c_Y-DNA.shtml). The population reaches all around Baltic sea - formerly known also as Varangian sea. As the Finnic people have never known to have conquered anyone - most-propably at least all of the Baltic sea can be considered to be Finnic peoples habitat before arrival of the Goths and Indo-Europeans to Europe.

There is more about it at []--Termer (talk) 03:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * A nationalistic Finnish fringe theory from the 1930s that sometimes pops up. It should be removed as soon as it appears in any article per WP:FRINGE.--Berig (talk) 05:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, agree, an idea that the word Varangian comes from the Finnish word "vara/vartio" is a bit too far out. At the same time equally fringe theory is that the Varangians or the eastern Vikings or Vikings in general were racially pure Swedes or Norsemen. The way A Brief History of the Vikings By Jonathan Clements ISBN 0786715995 pp.12 puts it:

So Kuussaari is right on target with at least one thing: the Varangian theory which is taught in schools was the Swedish version. And considering the fact that the article here claims the Varangians were "Swedes", that point of Kuussaari is still valid. In case you haven't heard about Viking cohorts, these proto-Swedish migratory people or proto-Swede in general, that's fine. But the article telling yu that Varanians were Swedes (Even though you linked it to the tribe) and Gotlanders is still misleading since Vikings had no nationality. It would be OK to say that the majority of Varangians originated from Gotland and mainland Sweden I guess. --Termer (talk) 06:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Source for term viking
No source has stated that vargian was vikings, see my question above. I remove the term viking. Dan Koehl 14:03, 16 May 2005 (UTC) if any queries Contact: Abishek email: abishek07@gmail.com


 * I wish people would not misunderstand and misuse the term "viking." It was a profession, not a nationality or ethnicity. Many young men -- Norse, Swedes, Danes, even some Finns, and later some of the Icelanders -- "went viking" in their youth. It was a way to acquire wealth and gain military experience by raiding weaker societies, especially among younger sons. It doesn't differ that much (in its purpose) from younger sons in Great Britain 500 or 1,000 years later who became knights errant or professional soldiers. Generally, one would give up being a viking after awhile, go back home, and buy some land. Or buy a ship or two and become a merchant. Some undoubtedly stayed at it for life; one of my professors used to call these guys "the equivalent of surf bums." --Michael K. Smith (talk) 23:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The English Varangians
I dropped by out of curiosity, as I'd come across the featured Greek Runestones article and followed my thought-tangents here....somewhere in my readings on the Byzantine Empire, or during travels in Greece or to Istanbul, I came across mention that in the later years of the Guard's existence most were English; as noted in the article it was the English and Danes who helped "hold the fort" in 1204; the article's lede says "Angles", however; the source I remember, whatever it was, maybe used - at best, if not "English"- "Anglo-Saxons"...I also seem to recall something to do with the Siege of Rhodes, seen in some account/display of the respective ramparts of that city, with "Varangian" a reference to mostly-English defenders; how the Varangians connect to the Hospitaliers I wouldn't know but I remember remarking on it during my visit there several years ago. Perhaps the Hospitaliers coopted the term for their English-cum-Nordic sub-regiment? Or remnants of the Guard who had joined the Hospitaliers? Wish now I had taken notes, but back then I had no idea I'd ever be a wiki editor....Skookum1 (talk) 03:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

A bit confused were the varangians mercenaries pirates or both?
Were the varangians mercenaries as well as pirates also traders or a combo of same? Thank you!THEEDSON1 (talk) 00:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Wasnt there a Varngian Guard?
Wasnt there a Mercenary band of Vikings or varangians the "Varangian Gurad" who even Moslem rulers employed? Didnt see this in article.Varangiansword (talk) 18:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Er....its all there in section 4 titled Varangian Guard--Charles (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Not all violence
The text says: "Engaging in trade, piracy and mercenary  activities, they roamed the river systems and portages of Gardariki, reaching the Caspian Sea and Constantinople."

However the "Primary Chronicle" clearly states the Russ (who where Varangians) were asked by the native tribes to rule the lands we now call Russia, because these native tribes were fighting amongst each other and needed a peacekeeper.

No violoence whatsoever. But peacekeepers. 82.168.243.40 (talk) 16:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Messy article
I would just like to point out that the article is in serious need of some editorial work. Since there are clearly varying opinions on the subject of the origins of the Varangians, an effort needs to be made to keep these separate in the article. As it is, elements of several different theories are thrown together into a single, confusing text. While I personally agree with those participants in the discussion on this page who feel that some of the theories are too strongly influenced by modern chauvinistic nationalism, it seems better to include them in a distinct section of the article than to have them continuously popping up in random places throughout.

Maitreya (talk) 21:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Danes?
Danes are Scandinavians as well, so the sentence from the top of the article "this term also includes the people of Denmark and England" should probably be changed to "this term also includes the people of England".


 * The wording might be confusing at the moment...what it is trying to say is that the people the Varangians came into contact with didn't know or care how they divided themselves at home, and considered Scandinavians, Germans, and English one big group. The Varangians were actually Swedish, usually, but later also included Danes and English. Does that make any more sense? Adam Bishop 04:02, 14 November 2005 (UTC)


 * No it doesnt because today's South-Sweden was Denmark until about 1650 bc. So actually the Svear/Swedes was not Varangians, and properly not Vikings either.


 * He means "people from the area known as Sweden." "Sweden" and "Denmark" are commonly recognized geographical designations. The ever-changing politics among the three later Scandinavian states has nothing to do with it. And sign your posts, please. --Michael K. Smith (talk) 23:14, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Please stop mixing your own opinion with facts, Swedes and geaths and gotlanders have runstones saying that they died in east, Uppland has many runstones. Just because you dislike Swedes, don't get childish.//Just a visitor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.104.28.12 (talk) 22:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Genetics vs. the Primary Chronicle
From the article on Rurik:

"A recent DNA research project by Dr. Andrzej Bajor of Poland, under the auspices of the Family Tree DNA Rurikid Dynasty Project of FamilyTree DNA company, seeks to more accurately place Rurik within the light of history and out of the shadows of legend, while simultaneously trying to map his modern descendants. The DNA results of 191 men claiming to be Rurikid descendants indicate that most (68%) of the them had haplogroup N1C1, formerly designated N3a1 typical for Finno-Ugrian people.[2][3] Further genetic studies seem to indicate the existence of two major haplogroups among modern Rurikids: the descendants of Vladimir II Monomakh (Monomakhoviches) and some others are of N1c1 group (130 people or 68%), while the descendants of a junior prince from the branch of Oleg I of Chernigov (Olgoviches) and some others (total 45 peoples or 24%) are of R1a and R1b haplogroups typical for Slavic, Germanic and Celts peoples. According to the Russian Newsweek magazine it indicates that it could have been a non-paternity event in the Chernihiv branch during wars between royal clans [4]."

From another article on the N haplogroup: "Haplogroup N1c1 The subclade N1c1 is defined by the presence of markers M178 and P298. (It was previously known as N3a.) N1c1* has higher average frequency in Northern Europe than in Siberia, reaching frequencies of approximately 60% among Finns and approximately 40% among Latvians and Lithuanians.[24] It's also more diverse in Northern Europe than in Siberia.[25]"

Also, it's interesting how in this article, we have the following: "Norse sagas According to the sagas, the West Norse entered the service of the Guard considerably later than the East Norse. " My guess is that the "East Norse" were Finno-Ugrians, Balts and Slavs.

All of this contradicts the Scandinavian (Germanic) origin of the early "varangians." Rurik's descendants were Slavic speaking carriers of a Finno-Ugric y-chromosome. Other than the primary chronicle, is there any actual evidence that the early varangians were Germanic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.117.103.189 (talk) 19:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

History and support for theory of Finno-Ugric origins
The information removed by Thomas.W presents no personal views of the undersigned.

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

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

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

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

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

To juxtapose the recent Rurikid DNA studies in this informational context is appropriate and important, as the studies pinpoint that "the N1c1 Rurikid princes belong to the so-called “Varangian Branch” in" "the so-called “Finno-Ugrian”" "genetic haplogroup N1c1".    - RasboKaren (talk) 01:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


 * This edit was blocked for 48 hours for edit-warring and came back as an IP sock, also blocked. Dougweller (talk) 14:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Some pieces of missing information
See the describtion of the clothes weared by Varakki / Varangian women by Ibn Fadlan in 921. Unfortunately otherwise exellent transliteration by James E. Montgomery "Each woman has, on her breast, a small disc, tied around her neck, made of either iron, silver, copper or gold, in relation to her husband´s financial and social worth. Each disc has a ring to which a daggar is attached, also lying on her breast." In the footnotes Montgomery states "Note than Ibn Fadlan does not describe how the women dress but concentrates on their accessories." It is clear that Montgomery did not know of the Baltic Finnish style for their clothes and their jewellery to with this describtion exactly fits.

The common old Norsemen name for Varakkis / Varangian "Eastway (Wanderers)" is "Austrveg". The Karelian equivalent name for "Austrveg" is "Hobianvalgia ves" = Silverwhite water (river). Where is the Russian name? It is totally missing from old Russian chronicles. Thus it seems quite clear that the Varakkis / Varangians were not of Slavonic origin.

According to old describtion of ancient Kolmogar / Holmogor / Novgorod "the place is formed of five quarters (blocks), each named after the founders where they lived, Tshuudi, Vepsä, Meri, Krivitshi, and Slovene (Pomor)." The rest of population lived outside of these quarters (blocks). This according to Red Book of Russia. The first justice was carried out by the tradition of old Baltic Finnish tribes "heimokäräjät" (tribal court) where each of free men was free to speak and claim his demands to the tribal chieftan which the Russians started to call "kuningaz" (knjäz).

At first the spoken language at "käräjät" / "veche" was Vadjan (Vatja / Vod) language, only later repcaced by Novgorodian dialect of old Slavonic. See also "The Red Book of the Peoples in Russia / Vods." With this knowledge we can assume that there were somekind of "Pigdin language", literally named Siansaksa after the influence of Vendis (Pomors) = Pig Saxon in use which combined Finnish, Aestis, Livonian, Karelian, Vatjan (Vod), Vepsä (Ves), Old Norse and Old Slavonic language words. This seems to have been the main trade language in Roshland during the days of Varakkis / Varangian "Idäntien / Hobianvalgian / Austrveg" Wanderers.

The road out of Novgorod toward north was named Tshuudi Road and started from Tshuudi quarter (block) of Novgorod.

There were farther south, in addition to Novgorod, also two Varakki / Varangian "Winter Stellungs", one located near nowadays Smolensk, (The Gate of Roshland) and another few mil(es) south of nowadays Voronezh at Borshevo.

The annual trade volume in the hey days of Austrveg between the Baltic and the Black Sea was estimated to be southward 10.000 tons of which half were furs and the second half slaves. Kvenugard / Cvenigor = Kainuunlinna = Kyva = Kijev become the main slave market place (orjatori / slavetorg) where the mainly Slav slaves were sold to and bought from Turkish steppe tribes.

The Itil Bolghars did not at first allow the Varakkis / Varangians sail south of their capital Bolgharia located on the east bank of Itil, nor the Arab traders north of Bolgharia. The Mirza (Kuningaz) of Bolghars earned annually, when allowing the trade between Varakkis / Varangians and Arabs, Persians, and Khazars, about 70.000 sable (lustre marten) skins, of which one was equal in value than 6.000 squirrel skins. No wonder that the Vojevoid of Kyva (Kijev) asked help from Norsemen "konung" (kuningaz) Harald Eriks Son to invade in 965 to Itil Bolgharia and open the trade route down the Itil to the Khazar (Caspian) Sea and Califate of Bagdad.

Before year 965 the slave trade along Valgia (Karelian) / (Great Water) (Meri) / Jul (Mari) / Rava (Moksha) / Rav (Erza) / Itil (Bolghar) / Volga (Slavonic) south of Itil Bolgharia was in the hands of Jewish traders from Kasaria / Khazar Kingdom. The Finnish name for Khazars is Kasaarit which might, or might not, be originated from word kassari (cashier), the (Jewish) financier of (slave) trade in Itil Bolgharia.

The word Norman (Nordman) seems to be a false, or shortened version of old English, meaning actually Norsemen. In Finnish language the word "Pohjanmies" (Bottom Man) combines all ancient Scandinavian tribes (Danes, Norwegians, Swedish) under the same name. If someone shows me that the above described is nonsense, I would be grateful if the other sources are also shown to show why there is another history of Varakki / Varangian armed traders from Baltic Sea who used the Roshland rivers as their trading routes. Thus, why select a Norseman from Bottom Sea as a kuningaz for Land of Rosh? Rosland was an island, as clearly described by Arab historians, infact, the island from where Rurik (Rurikka / Hraerekr) came to the Land of Rosh (Rus / Oruss).

JN


 * Duh! --Drieakko 16:32, 5 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Curious, I always thought Pohjanmies referred to "pohjoinen"(north) rather than "pohja" (bottom) -Mackie

What an occult nonsense. You are such an pan germanic occultist i have had no interests to read it all... I've noticed even term "Kyi" or Kiev where you are even giving a "germanic" name.... How ever, occultist, the term Kiev derives from a prince Kij or "scepter" in Slavic. And IF the Slavs would be ever "swedish slaves", especially Russian people then we would be still speaking Swedish or German language. Which we are not. But oppositely - Swedish people remained at least 500 words in Slavic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.182.41.58 (talk) 10:14, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Stop perverting the history: Varangians WERE NOT any Vikings (Jarls)
Varangians were Venetic elite military units (as was their profession since their childhood) who were by several authors called differently; Adam von Bremen for example gives quite good explanation about the SLAVIC (never "germanic") military tribe of Vagrians (Varangians). Their capital city "was called Stargrad (Stargard) - means OLD CITY and after "conquest" of Slavic Rus (the term comes from mythological beings who live nearby the water (Veneti were Sea people), RUSALKE; rosa (a dew)) their city was moved to the NEW CITY, called Novgorod. Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.182.41.58 (talk) 10:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Harald Hardradi was in the Varangian Guard, so what the hell are you talking about?? Norwegians were in the Varangian Guard; in its later years it include English and others from the British Isles....it was not a nationality or ethnicity, but ultimtely a profession; as for those early ones who founded Kiev, it's known who they were.  And they were not Finns.Skookum1 (talk) 08:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Split off Varangian Guard to a new article?
Hi folks,

It strikes me that the section of this page on the Varangian Guard is only partially relevant to the group of peoples called "Varangian", being the Rus of Scandinavian origin. Ultimately the Guard seems to contain mostly Saxons and other non-Varangians (including Icelanders) and really ought to be referenced as a regiment of the Byzantin Imperial tagmata/army, and not as a subset of an article on an ethno-political group to which it was only tenously linked. Thoughts? KC Gustafson (talk) 10:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * In some history of Constantinople or the Byzantine Empire, maybe Colin Mansell's Constantinople: City of the World's Desire, I don't think it was in Ostrogorsky or Obolensky, or maybe it was in the Military Museum in Istanbul, in which I was overwhelmed (amazing place), it's explained how the Varangian Guard in its last days had a lot of English and I think Normans in it, that the Scandinavian element had faded away for the most part. Sorry I can't provide the cite.Skookum1 (talk) 08:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You have to differentiate between nationality and ethnicity. The people of Iceland were, and still are, ethnic Scandinavians, as were the Normans and much of the population of England (the Danelaw) a thousand years ago. Thomas.W (talk) 09:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

THE VARANGIANS: Who were they ?
Historians often mention the Varangians in connection with certain events on the eastern shores of the Baltic, and in Northern Russia. Let's look at some explanations from different perspectives. The term is generally thought to come from Swedish, but many Finnish researchers, such as Kuussaari, claim it has a Finnish origin.

One Finnish source identifies the Varangians as "Scandinavians", but in reality - more precisely - they were probably Fenno-Scandians. (Kuussaari, 1935) The Finns are conspicuous for their absence in both, the Swedish and Russian (Slavic or "Great" Russian) accounts. Varangians quite likely originally were Baltic Finns, distinguishable from Swedes by their Uralic language. They lived on the shores of Western Finland and Estonia/Livonia and the Baltic islands, and were later joined in their guard duties by the Swedes, who - among some others - were called Vikings.

(Kuussaari, 1935) This is called the "Riga, Åland, Gulf of Finland triangle." Vikings are often equated with Varangians, who came to consist of both Finns and Swedes, as the latter turned eastward and joined the Finns in the beginning of the second millennium. Varangians never invaded the British Isles - those invaders are called Vikings (the Finns are thought to have participated on those tours as well).

Russian accounts suggest that eventually there were more than one kind of Varangian. They knew of several types of Varangians, and they generalized the term to include Swedes, as the Finns became a part of the Swedish realm. A symbiotic relationship formed between the Finns and Swedes who helped to fend off the Slavs. The Finns and the Swedes got along well, and there is no written record of any significant fighting between the two cultures. The relationship, however, slowly turned rather parasitic in the beginning of the 1600's, since Sweden benefitted from the Finnish soldiers, but Finland - on the other hand - suffered.

When the Vikings went East, it was with and under the sanction of inhabitants of the Baltic shores - eg the Finnish Tavastians, Karelians and Ingerians. Originally they were, according to Kuussaari, Finnish soldier merchants, who had an excellent reputation as good guardsmen because they had to protect their western and eastern flanks. Unfortunately, the Varangian theory - which became to be taught in schools - was the Swedish version, which took away from the Finns their ancient heroic Kalevalan heritage.

During the "great migrations", these people developed into various warrior types such as Kaleva, Kolbias, "kalpamiehet", Karelian "kylfings", and others who had come to some type of mutual understanding regarding what territories each group controlled, and - above all - the organization of armies. They were merchant warriors that formed an alliance to protect against Viking raids from the west so that some warning system would be in place even during their long journeys. They were soldier traders who travelled all the way to the Volga to trade with the Bolgarians - and beyond.

They had developed elaborate early warning systems, based on relay shoreline fires, so that the minute a Viking or any other unfriendly ship appeared, the curl of smoke could be seen in fires, off into the distant Baltic. It was previously thought that these seafaring people had adopted the Viking ship as their means of transportation as they built excellent large ships with at least a hundred oarsmen.

However, the early Finns had Viking style ships of their own, and they were seafaring people already from earlier times, long before the Viking raids began to the eastern shores of the Baltic, as we can also clearly see from the ancient rock art found in Karelia. This rock art resembles similar early art found in Sweden.

Kuussaari claims that the word Varangian comes from the Finnish word "vara/vartio", which in Finnish means "guard" and "vaara" means "danger" or "hill." Fires were lit on hills, which were part of their early warning system. This worked very effectively and the people in charge of the organization became known as Varangians. The Finnish epic Kalevala mentions these people, their activities and the vaaras - the fells - where they lit fires at. Place names with "vara" stems were located in the Varangians' domain. The prefix was extensively used in the coastal and island areas controlled by the Finnish tribes who had adopted spme Swedish seafaring ways, which included ships with oarsmen:

For example (In Finnish and - the closely related - Kven languages): Varangin vuono (the Varangian Bay - Varangerfjord in Norwegian, Varjag vuoda in Lapp (i.e. Sami);  Varangin niemi (the Varangian Bay);  Vargava, Varanka, Varanpää (Lokalahti);  Also Vargata, Varjakka, Varkal, etc.

(Kuussaari, 1935) The term var, according to Thomsen, comes from the old Swedish word var (= faithful), but Kuussaari does not agree, that this meaning is connected with the word. The Vikings too were faithful. However, they never were referred to by that term. The var word is therefore connected with guarding. In the absence of hard facts to prove these assertions, one has to consider all possibilties, keeping in mind that the Finnish position in the North is always downplayed, while the Russian and the Swedish roles are magnified by royal historians.

Thus for instance, the Finnish language is often considered to have received words from the Germanics and Slavs, instead having been the donor. Dictionary.com: http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=varangian - varangian \Va*ran"gi*an\ reveals one of the Northmen who founded a dynasty in Russia in the 9th century; also, one of the Northmen composing - at a later date - the imperial bodyguard at Constantinople.

Not everyone agrees therefore, that Varangians were Baltic Finns, and the search for the source of the word "Varangian" and "Viking" is continued by some scholars. Up to recently, a Swedish derivation of most related words has received acceptance. However, the term in some English dictionaries - for instance - is said to be from the old Norse word "Väring."

- - Due to an earlier wrongful deletion, the above article was reposted by user Art Dominique (t) on May 9, 2006, 18:18 - -


 * If someone actually wastes his time by reading the above rant, he might be interested to know that Art Dominique's main source (a book by E. Kuussaari published in 1935) represents the genre of national-chauvinistic pseudo-history. It has nothing to do with academic scholarship.--217.112.249.156 22:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Not true. Kuussaari is a well-known academic in Finland. His work is well researched and the bibliography is 3 pages long. You don't know what you are talking about, but it sounds good. My source is Kuussaari 1935.


 * In 1113 AD, the Primary Chronicle tells that Rurik was an invited ruler by the Finnic and Slavic tribes, who had defeated the Vikings in 862. Historians (e.g. Kuressaari, 1935) believe this to be because Rurik was Finnic, which recent DNA studies confirm indeed to have been the case.
 * DNA has proven Kuressaari's "rant" to match the truth, and his "academic scholarship" greatly applaudable, and his careful research and accurate reasoning brilliant, and your view simply "national-chauvinistic pseudo-history", that was piled of worthless tails just to make you feel better about yourself, pseudo-"Viking" :) Ruridikian (talk) 14:21, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The article states the Varangians were Swedes. how can this be considering Sweden didnt exist until the 13th century? 88.90.129.185 (talk)
 * Total BS. Sweden (Swedish: Sverige = Svea rike) means country/realm of the Swedes (Svear), and the Swedes as a people were described by name by Roman explorers two thousand years ago as "a powerful tribe distinguished not merely for their arms and men, but for their powerful fleets". So yes, Sweden existed long before Viking times. Thomas.W (talk) 18:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

The Finnish Theory of Rurik and Varangians
The mere fact that this confusion exists amongst scholars, tells us that the Varangian term broadened so that no clear denotation could be made. The Vikings probably could not travel East without first having come to terms with the guardians of the Eastern Baltic shores. When the Vikings came to Russia, they came accompanied by the Finns who knew every river, forest and lake, and were excellent warriors, and guards. They also knew where all their ancient trading centers were located. When they met the Russians for the first time, it was natural that the Russians would refer to them as Varangians, and they soon came to realize that there were different kinds of Varangians.

The meaning of "Varangian" which is most pervasive, is that of guardianship. It was the Finns who had the reputation for being good guardsmen, while the Vikings had the reputation for being sea wanderers, traders and raiders (notice:  Vanrangian guards, not Varangian sea-wolves;  Varangian guards, not wanderers). That is the legacy of the excellent reputation for guarding that the Baltic Finns acquired in the ancient world, which merged with the term "Viking." Confusing ? Much of ancient history is, because everyone wanted credit for themselves at the expense of other ethnic groups; it is the duty of historians to dig down to the truth.

Much of ancient history unfortunately is merely ancient propaganda. Mongolians are said to be bad invaders. But were they worse than Russians or Romans? Were the Russian invaders gentle, while the Mongolians were fierce. Did they spare less people? Probably not, as everyone was cruel to their enemies in those days. We should read about history from as many sources as possible to avoid getting a historical bias. Still today the Russians lament the Mongolian raids, and the Finns lament the Russian raids. Can anyone claim they were better, including the Finns ? Who were worse off, the Russians under attack by Mongolians or the Uralic people under attack by the Slavs ? Could the results answer that: the destruction of the Uralic tribes;  survival and increase of Slavic population.

Could the Varangian's world have been part of the ancient Kingdom of Finland mentioned in the Nordic sagas ? The Finns' heritage, the knowledge of their vast ancient kingdom - was it taken away by the new Swedish rulers and the Slavs from the south ? The Nordic Sagas and other independent sources of the time seem to indicate just that. When the Catholics brought their religion to Finland via Sweden, did they also change Finnish history ?

And the Slavic historians cannot - unfortunately - be trusted with even their own history, let alone that of another ethnic group, due to their documented omission and falsification of history to glorify themselves at the expense of other ethnic groups. Even today, a strange silence about the original people prevades the official descriptions of Russia. Very little is mentioned about even the people shown in official travel pictures, which obviously aren't Slavs, while they go to great lengths in describing the glories of Slavic (equated with Russian) culture.

Very few people are aware of the fact that the Slavs murdered most of the ethnic Finno-Ugric cultural heros, both in this century and in centuries gone by. Considering that the whole north, from the Ural Mountains to Norway, was populated by Finnish tribes, it seems odd that no great importance has been attributed to them in the Swedish or Russian literature. Something - of course - must be said. That little, unfortunately, is often lies, or a stretched truth. Thus, the Russians openly claim that the Finnish people were never in any high positions.

Russian history sources would never tell you for instance, that in the inauguration ceremony of the last Russian tzar, three of the seven generals of the tzar's personal body guard unit were actually Finnish, or that a couple of the last governors of Alaska during the Russian rule were Finnish. No Russian would be able to tell you that Finnish-Swedish Jaakko De la Gardie (he grew up in Finland, where he was brought up by his Finnish grandmother --> Finland was then part of the Swedish realm, a.k.a. Sweden-Finland)) marched his Finnish army of Finnish spldiers to Moscow, nor that De la Gardie also held his army of Finnish men (the army also included some merchant soldiers) in Novgorod for six long years. Today the fascists in Russia claim that the North never even belonged to the Finns, and that the Slavs are the original people of the North. The Finns merely squatter.  Clearly, a lot of work remains to be done to reveal the true nature of ancient Finnish civilization in the North, of which the Kalevala and the Nordic Sagas tell about.

When the Vikings eventually joined the Varangians (now they were Vikings, Varangians and Rus too) in their guard duties, about the time the slavs were setting up shop in the north, the Russians referred to them too as Varangians. Possibly others such as Angles who may have joined them. Vikings were never referred to as Varangians on their own raids to western Europe, which is natural, since they were Vikings, not Varangians. In Sweden, they were Vikings, but when they entered the Finnish realm, they too became Varangians.

The Finnish term "Varakko-ruotsit" (Varangian-Rus) refers to these seafaring Finnish people according to Kuussaari. The word (ros=row in old scandinavian) "ruotsi"in Finnish used to mean "rower," but later the word meant "Sweden." Some Swedish sources say that "Rus" comes from the word "Roslagen" which is a town in Sweden, and some say it came from a Swede called Ruser.

The "Varangians" established trading posts on the Volga and assisted the eastern Finns, and even the Slavs in the business of trade. Rurik and his accompanying Varangians camped around in the Finnish areas and in the north of Novgorod amongst the native Finnish-speaking population. We can be fairly sure that many of Rurik's men were Finns. The Varangian routes spread out through Russia to the Mediterranean. Eventually the Varangians became trusted guards of the Emperor in the Byzantine Empire.

Many Varangian trading posts were situated along the rivers such as the Neva and Volga, and the Lake Ladoga. All those areas were in the possession of the local Finns. The story is told that when Rurik defeated the strongest Slavic settlement, Novgorod, in A.D. 862, the Varangians became the rulers of northern Russia, with Finns assuming many of the leadership roles (according to Finnish history), especially north of Novgorod. As explained above, the Russian history denies that the Finns were ever in any leadership roles - what-so-ever - in Russia, but the truth is that the local Finns demanded Finnish speaking representatives. We must be careful in judging history from just one perspective. This area in some 14th century maps was still labelled Rurima (Rurikland or Rurinmaa in Finnish).

For political reasons, the Swedes and the Slavs tended (and continue to do so today) to downplay the role of the Finnish related people in the north. It is in no way "fanatical nationalism" to correct history - nor is it revisionism. It is simply the search for the truth. As in geneology, one must be prepared to find a horse thief or a murderer, or to stop digging. However, historians of Soviet Russia, the Kings of Sweden and the Czars were obliged to glorify their crowns and to erase the heroic deeds of the adversaries. This type of protected totalitarian history writing has attempted to present Finland as a place which was inhabited by savages before the Swedes.

The epic Finnish poetry of the Kalevala reveals, that the Finns had a high level of civilization for a long time before either the Swedes or the Russians came to their lands. Thus, it is not at all an accident that a number of non-Finnish historical sources discuss Finnish and Kven kings. Since the Finnish history was carried on in a rich oral tradition, it could not be destroyed in a fire, or robbed, and it is through this evidence that the Finns are able to contradict the later Swedish and Russian written accounts about the role and extent of the Finnish civilization in the north prior to Swedish rule. This is why any serious student of Finno-Ugric history must have a working knowledge of the Kalevala.

One thing is for certain: The Finnish traders traveled east long before they were joined by Swedes. Would it make sense that the Russians came into contact with Finnish "Varangians" or traders first, then both Swedish and Finnish when the Finns came under the Swedish kings in the second millennium ?This may be the reason Vikings were not called Varangians in Britain. Russians came into contact first with Finnish speakers, then Swedish speakers. Did the Russians change the name when the Swedes joined, or did they keep the original term ?

Under the Swedish rule, the Finns were obliged to serve in the Swedish (Sweden-Finland) army. Their strength was greatly reduced by the Swedish kings' ambitions far away from Finland, especially in Poland, and the disastrous march on Moscow that followed. During this time, while the door to the henhouse was open, Russia helped itself to Finland, Ingria, and Estonia. The Slavs had arrived on the shores of the Baltic while the Swedish army was destroyed on the same road Napoleon took years later. The Russians were now free to establish permanent cities closer and closer to Finnish northern and Baltic strongholds, especially St. Petersburg - on the Ingrian Finnish land.

- - Due to an earlier wrongful deletion, the above article was reposted by user Art Dominique (t) on May 9, 2006, 18:18 - -

When discussing labels, please dont mix up scandinavians and vikings, they are not the same. Vikings means pirat, and most scnadinavian, on whatever river thay sailed, were not vikings. The earliest described viking was Phillipus II of Macedonia, and he was not really considered a viking. Dan Koehl (talk) 23:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

The comments vandalized and removed from here by user mikka (t)
As we know, some of the Wikipedians participating in the discussion and commentating here lived still very recently - and some still live - under a tidily guarded totalitarian society.

Unfortunately, - used to the systems imposed and forced to them - a part of these people try now imposing the same totalitarian ways and their totalitarily forced ("taught") information to the world community in large.

Some of these people in question persistently refuse to even consider viewing anything but the distorted lessons taught to them in their totalitarily led school systems, under which much of the most important events of the world history were widely and commonly falsified to fit the needs of the totalitarian leaderships.

The Wikipedia user mikka (t) participates in this type of totalitarian behavior in Wikipedia, when the information he faces does not fit what he has previously believed or thought correct.

The discussion comments in the beginning of this page as of today - relating to who the Varangians were and to where they came from - present a very valid view point, and must be left untouched or vandalized by the Wikipedia user mikka (t).

Drow Ssap (t) - 15:27, March 15, 2006 -- revisited 19:01

After vandalism, above text reverted back by Art Dominique (t) at 18:29, March 15, 2006

Harald Harfagri
Recently an anon tried to replace Harald Hardraada by Harald Harfagri. The latter article (or a redirect?) seems missing. Can anyone fix the miss? Mikkalai 18:53, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * OK. I did it myself. Mikkalai 18:56, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The evolution of this article
I have had this article unwatched for a few months and I discovered that the Normanist version is given in the past tense and limited to 18th century Germans, whereas the anti-normanist version is given in the present tense. Moreover, non-existent Norse sagas are referred to. Mikkalai et al, can we start a serious discussion on why this is considered NPOV?--Wiglaf 22:33, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I guess that I will have to read every article about this matter now, to check what has happened.--Wiglaf 22:46, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I guess so. Why didn't you have it on your watchlist? Being a non-expert, I detected this substitution of Haralds by simply being naturally suspicious to anons. Much other stuff could have passed thru my eyes unnoticed. Mikkalai 00:02, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I unwatched because I was very tired of this controversy. I will have a look at the pages in due time.--Wiglaf 06:54, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Varangians=Vikings
Well, after providing direct sources from Encyclopedia Britannica that clearly referred to the fact that Vikings and "Varangians" are the same thing, still User:Drieakko insists that Viking is an unhistorical name, Varangian is historical. I'm sorry but that didn't explain anything. So I open a discussion to avoid edit war. It's a fact that "Varangians" are used by the ancient Russian chronicles for naming the people that are known as Vikings in the West. Variagians is the Russian name for Vikings. Please open an English dictionary, there is no such thing as "Varangians" in English. So what's going on in here? --Termer 05:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Since I can't see any response or discussion here, I'm going forward and restoring the clarifying notes to the article refd by Encyclopedia Britannica .--Termer 05:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The term "Viking" is not unhistorical, it is even found on some certain rune stones of the era. De facto, the term "viking" is already used in the Beowulf saga from the 8th century. --MoRsE 14:46, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * It is unhistorical in the meaning which currently has been assigned to it. Those who are today labeled to have been "Vikings", would never have used that term about themselves, nor did anyone else use it about them either. Originally, "Viking" was an Old Norse word for petty plunderers and pirates and as such certainly appears in contemporary sources. Romanticist historians from the 18th century onwards picked the word up to describe the entire era and society all the way up to kings and other men of power, eventually cementing the current upscale meaning for the word. --Drieakko 16:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Drieakko, I have no objections if you'd add this opinion to the article with direct reference to the source. I guess I'm stuck with my unhistorical bias, something that I learned long time ago: the Vikings in modern English=Varangains by the Byzantine sources and The Russian primary chronicles. And since all the sources I've happened to come across recently say the same, even the Russian Primary chronicles translated into English in 1953 speak of Varangians who lived all the way up to the lands of the French and the English. With this clearly referring to the people what we in modern English know as the Vikings. The alternative viewpoints should be always listed though, so please go ahead and cite any sources that support the viewpoint. Thanks--Termer 07:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The contemporary meaning of "viking" was a person "who left to do viking" ('drog i viking'), which meant that they were on a seabourne journey, as explained on e.g. the runestone "Västra Ströstenen 1" in Skåne, Sweden. --MoRsE 09:18, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am aware that the word "viking" is seeked from everywhere to assert the case. In the reference you gave, the researcher has interpreted the rune stone word "uikiku" as the same as "viking". --Drieakko 09:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please also note the web page, it is the Riksantikvarieämbetet who has made the translation, which puts much emphasis behind it. There is also a quote in the text down there, which says: "Att utelämna n framför vissa konsonanter bland annat k är ett vanligt drag i vikingatida inskrifter. Så är fallet i ordet uikiku 'viking'." --MoRsE 12:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If we look at Icelandic sagas, they use the word "vikingr" a few times (search for e.g. ). Commentary on the meaning of the word in sagas is, according to the English saga translators :


 * "Raven was by-named the Viking. He was nought but an evil-doer." "Vikingr" is frequently used as a synonym for evil-doer, thief, and robber. Thus in our own saga we read: "Snorri the Priest and Sturla scattered the vikings", namely, Uspak and his band. So also the term is used of Thorir Thomb and his companions, who elsewhere are described as the worst of robbers and evil-doers ("Grettir's saga", xix). The first settler of the bay of Bitter, Thorbiorn Bitter, is even in "Landnama" said to have been "a viking and a scoundrel" (ii, ch. 32, p. 159). This sense of the word is supposed to be due to degeneracy, by lapse of time, from something nobler which once upon a time was implied by it. That probably is a mere mistake. The viking's profession, whenever it is mentioned, is chiefly defined as robbery, arson, and manslaughter. Perpetrated on foreigners = natural enemies, it mattered not, especially as it served the end of military distinction at home; exercised on fellow-citizens, living under laws of their own making, its real nature appeared in its true light; hence, from the first, the viking was -- abroad, a hero; at home, a scoundrel.
 * This nineteenth century explanation nicely resembles the disbelief of the translator to accept the fact that the word "viking" was not used in the meaning he thought it should have been. --Drieakko 14:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've updated Viking and made another Viking about 2 weeks ago if not more. So all these points + the cultural rehabilitation of the Vikings in Britain, looks to me should be covered over there.--Termer 01:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The arliest documentation of the word viking, is of Philippus II of Macedonia. Unless you didnt undertood that before, viking means pirat. Its not a people, its not a hero standing on ship, with a long beard, its an activity, which could be performed by just anyone, from any country. Phillpus II, father of Alexander the great, was NOT a varangian. Please wake up. Read the sources. Whatever romantic things happened with the word viking during the last century, there will always only be a lot of confusion until the the people using engligh langue, logically assimiliate, that Viking=scandinavian is something that need to be cleaned out. Viking only mean pirat, nothing else. Good luck battling for any other interpretion. Repeating a lie, will never make it true... Dan Koehl (talk) 23:59, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Varakki or Varangi from Baltic Sea
Thus, both names were used for Eastway Wanderers, originated from Baltic Sea area, mainly from Vuojonmaa (Gotland), Moonsund Archipelago, Luotola (Åland) Islands and Roslagen Archipelago. Mixture of armed pedlars of different ethnic origin. Thanks to Termer of Eistneskr name for "white eyed Tshuudis behind the stretch". Yes there were Livonians living along the coast of Gulf of Liivi, later renamed (Gulf of Riga), numbered about 70.000, good sailors and terrible fighters. Their reputation as warriors effectively blocked the shortest river route using Väinä (Daugava / Dvina ) River from Varangi pedlars to Byzantium. Behind the Livonians along Väinä River there were Vendi (expelled out of Pomerania by Deutsch) Slavonic feodal principalities at Jersika (Jekabpils) and Polatsk. It was the Vendis, not Kyva (Kijev) Rosh which were by the time penetrating along river courses toward Ilmajärvi (Lake Ilmen) and Kolmogor. By the time of heyday of Eastway Wanderers there were no Scandinavian or German origin people living in eastern shores of Baltic Sea. They appeared later after 1184 to the area. By this time the easier southern connection through Mediterranean was in use.

Peharps one can give the actual route used by Varakkis / Varangians / Rhos-Varangis between Vatja Kalmogor / Norsemen Holmgord (Novgorod) and River Dniepr.

Peharps also some Norsemen expert can give the Varangi names for their trading posts at the mouths of Sääsjoki, Syväri and Alavoistenjoki in addition to Nevanlinna, all on the shore of Lake Neva (Nevajärvi) or Lake Laatokka to complete the story of Varangians.

Funny, but it seems strange that Ghirlandajo seems not know that her hometown (with different Meri name) was part of the Finno Valgia (Volga) Meri (Merja) tribal "state" which controlled all trade on this "Russian water highway" from hillfort Uglich to hillfort Obranjosh at the confluence of Oka River. The Nestor Chronicle seems to have been based, regarding to Volga Oka area´s early East Slavonic history, to first Rostov Bishop Leontij´s written notes in old Church Slavonic as stated by two other Soviet historians in 1975. At least Meri tribes resisted furiously up to by c. 1000 all attempts to baptize them to Greek Orthodoxian faith. Thus I just wonder were these small principalities as mentioned by monk Nestor in Kijev really part of Kyva (Kijev) Rosh. If the Eastern Slavonic Orthodox church was presented there, it does not mean that the area was automaticly under "Russian (Kijev) control". And when the non Slavonic population at last were baptized they received also a new baptized Slavonic names as was the case of Inkerikkos / Izhoras later on. Thus Izhora Gabriel was in fact Izhora Kaapo or Kaapro. Interestingly the first Eastern Slavs entering to Volga - Oka area came from Ilmajärvi (Novgorod) in small numbers before 900s by way of Vishnij Volotshek portage to upper Valgia (Volga), following the river northward as far as to place which become later Jaroslavl. Then turning south and proceeding through the lowland watershed-portage beyond Rostov, through Jurjev-Polskij or Suzdal to Rosta the Meri (Merja) capital at the place of later Vladimir on the north bank of Kliazma River. The Varangians traders settled in Jaroslavl, Rostov and Suzdal and organized trade by this route to Kliazma valley and then eastward to Volga. To avoid having to rely entirely of the goodwill of the Itil Bolgars, an alternative route was opened (with agreements with Meris and Mordvas) from the confluence of the Kliazma with the Oka, proceeding up the latter river into the lowland area which continues southward into the Don basin. A direct route to the south of Rosta was too difficult, owing to the extensive marsh that stretches from the Kliazma valley to the great bend of the Oka below Räsan. JN

polutasvarf
Did this tradition of allowing the emperors bodyguard to plunder the palace after his death really exist? It seems extremely unwise or even downright crazy to offer your bodyguard a huge bonus in case of your death unless you expressly state that this applies in case of natural death only. That would be tantamount to offer a huge bonus for doing a poor job or even assassinate you. Enoksson is mentioned as a source, but he is a modern historian. What is the primary source? Heimskringla does mention this in Harald Hardrades saga but this is written perhaps seventy years after the death of Harald and in the opposite corner of Europe. Unless someone provides a better source I will rephrase this part of the article to indicate doubt that it was really like that.

Sensemaker