Yes seems likely related. The Rus' people are believed to have originated in present day Sweden. Does not feel impossible that there were trade routes connecting Greenland to Kyiv theough Scandinavia.

The fact that the slavic people and the Vikings were very close to each other, to the point where it was common for Slav (mostly from Poland) and Viking ruling families to inter-marry, is well established [1].

The Vikings went quite farther than Kyiv, as the existence of the Varangian Guard [2] (part of the Byzantine army) attests to (Varangians was the name the Vikings were known by in the Bizantine Empire). And as we know, they also reached the Canadian coast [3], so it's not the least surprising to me that their trade extended from Greenland to at least, Kyiv.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings#Intermixing_with_the_S...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varangians#Varangian_Guard

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Anse_aux_Meadows

Native Russians (русичи, "sons of Russia"), were citizens of the town of Russia (now Old Russa, but old town was near to shore), which was on Russia river (now Porussia river). At times of Plague of Justinian, they abandoned their town and spread at large territory from the Caspian Sea to Spain. At about the same time Volyn` Kingdom, last kingdom of all Slavs, was broken into pieces, so tribes were left without a ruler. Nine eastern Slavic tribes and Russians are formed (Kievan) Russia. Later, Russia was broken into pieces (Red, White, Black Russia). Much later, Moscow kingdom captured Kyiv, so Petro I added "tsar of all Russia" to his title, then Catherine the great, born in Prussia, forbid to accept all official letters without "to Imperator of Russia" in the title, so Moscow kingdom changed it name to "Russian Empire", but instead of "R-oo-s-ia" they call themselves with foreign accent: "R-uh-ss-ee-ya". (Use Google Translate to check original pronunciation in various Western languages and in Russian language).

Most commonly accepted theory is that it was through the fusion of Viking elite + local Slavic tribes which led to the formation of the identity of the Rus, a people who would be the civilisational ancestors of modern Ukrainiains, Belorussians and Russians.

AFAIK, this narrative is broadly accepted by all of these modern peoples

Russians (Russish, русские) are members of Russian Orthodox Church, Christians. They are not a tribe or nation, like Catholics are not a nation. Russian Federation doesn't contain a region named "Russia" (now Ukraine). They are various nations grouped together ("Jail of Nations") and converted to Christianity and Russian language in a process called "Russification", when locals are forbidden to speak their native language or pray to their own gods. However, "Scratch a Russian and find a Tartar" means that Russish are not fully converted to Christians and are pagans by their nature. They hate (Rotten) Western culture in general.

You cannot merge Western nations, such Ukrainain (Kievan Russia, Red Russia), Belarus` (White Russia), Latvia (Black Russia), and Russian Federation (Moscovia and colonies), which opposes West.

> Russians (Russish, русские) are members of Russian Orthodox Church, Christians. They are not a tribe or nation, like Catholics are not a nation.

"Viking" is not an ethnicity. It was more of a job title.

You describe process that happened from 900AD. By this logic there are no nations of France, UK, Italy etc...

British nation and Great British Empire is not a same thing. Italians and Holy Roman Empire is not a same thing. Erzyas, Finns, Mokshas, Tartars nations, etc. and Russian Empire is not a same thing.

Where did you get that nonsense from?

It's openly available in any post-soviet country.

I agree, post-Soviet countries are full of nonsense rhetoric. But there is no reason to carry it with you.

> Russian Federation doesn't contain a region named "Russia" (now Ukraine).

> when locals are forbidden to speak their native language or pray to their own gods

> Scratch a Russian and find a Tartar

> means that Russish are not fully converted to Christians and are pagans by their nature

I am seriously disturbed by the fact how fast these kind of discussions degrade into fascist skull measurement exercises.

The whole trend of invoking the matters of Russian racial purity feels dangerously close to western 19-20 century rhetorics on people of Africa or Jews. Russians are Tatars, who are in turn pagans? What???? Russians comprise of multiple ethnicities (yes, including Tatars). And Tatars are largely muslims, not "pagans", don't be a racist!

In real life the evil "Jail of Nations" not only does not forbid you to speak the native language, but actually teaches them and even allows their use in legal documents, unlike the good "Russia now Ukraine" which actually restricts the use of native language of 1/3 of the population, and it's not just the legal documents, it's also press and spoken communication in public places (i.e. if you are a shop owner, you can get fined for speaking Russian). How does that fit into your racial theories?

Also, you'd probably want to lookup the word "colony". I get where this narrative of "colonial Russia" is coming from, but you'd have to completely uninvent the meaning of the word for it to make sense. Colonies are foreign (typically overseas) territories with a separate administration. There is a huge formal difference between colonies and incorporated territories. Russia didn't have any real colonies for at least 1.5 of a century.

You can't just invent new random meanings for words just so that you can use their connotations in your propaganda - what you are doing is purely Orwellian newspeak.

That's pretty much confirmed already; Kievan Rus' (middle ages government) with Rurik = Hrœrekr of Ladoga in 862, who was an Old Norse speaker; not even four generations later his family was already native Common East Slavic speakers, assimilated to the locals, like the very name of Svyatoslav I of Kiev shows. The process was extremely similar to what happened in Italy with the Longobardi and in Spain with the Visigoth.

And that Kievan Rus' is the ancestor state of Ukraine (aka Ruthenia), Belarus (white Ruthenia/Rus') and Russia (Rus'-ia). The very trident that you see in the Ukrainian coat of arms is almost certainly a Rurik symbol: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_arms_of_Ukraine#Tryzub

>Russian state going rogue in an invasion

I'm not even a tiny bit surprised. The Russian government is one of those states where you don't expect anything reasonable, human, or moral.

Trident is an anchor, symbol of Christianity, like cross or fish. The cross is the top part of an anchor, while the anchor itself is in the lower part. Anchor has such complex geometry because it weaved from wire. Similar anchors in full form can be found on some rare ancient Greek coins made in Khersones seaport (now Sevastopol). The anchor is similar to the symbol used by Rurik dynasty, so they liked it.

There is an episode of 'In our time' more or less discussing this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00vrx8g

> barbarian looting

Good bait, but the linked article seems to mostly be along the lines of "Russians securing works of art for a potentially sinister purpose".

Kiev grown on trade with Byzantium; mostly slaves, gold etc.. It some point it was 5th largest city in Europe. Then Avars and Mongols invaded. It is all well documented.

a city of 60-80k, heart of slavic world razed to the ground, paving the way later for Moscow ascension. Makes me thinking of the Khwarazmian Empire or Jin, Chu Kingdoms where millions where killed

There's a lecture series on Ukrainian history by Timothy Snyder available on youtube[1]; a few of the lectures cover this period.

[1]https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh9mgdi4rNewfxO7LhBoz...