Was this guy even real? I've read some historians opinions recently, that Rurik actually never existed. That the word Rurik comes from West slavic word for Hawk, that was a symbol of some Obotrites tribes who lived on German territory back then and then came to Russia, and that Rurik is a mythical figure was added into Russian history chronicles way later, and there's no mention of him in IX or X century sources. There was a danish guy named Rorik , but thats like different person

NORDS BUILT RUSSIA
SLAV(E)S NEED TO ACCEPT REALITY

ARYAN VICTORY

Rurik was a Finn. Ironic that our worst enemy was created by ourselves.

>>510627880
>>510628199
uhm source?

>>510627782 (OP)
The only historians that disagree seem to be Russian and it's because it conflicts with their nationalist view because it means that Russia founded by Swedes and that the name of Russia itself is derived from a Swedish tribe
>>510628199
If by Finn you mean he was a Swede that raided Finland then sure

>>510627782 (OP)
Ask /his/ if you want a slightly higher chance of talking to someone other than a retard, bot, glownigger, or lying jew.

SLIGHTLY.

>>510627782 (OP)
It's pretty certain that the ones that invented the viking ships, knew trade and most importantly knew how to run a state, would end up dominating the Russian rivers.
If Rurik existed or not is guesswork, but that Vikings created Russia is certain.
Just imagine how much easier life would be with access to cheap iron and civilization at large when you could use vessels meant for the sea on the Russian rivers?

>>510627782 (OP)
It’s like Ragnar Lothbrok, it’s probably an amalgamation of accomplishments from a specific timeframe attributed to one guy for ease of recall but maybe it was one guy who was a fucking badass
Does it really matter either way?

>>510629938
It matters to Russians because it undermines their nationalist propaganda I mean the name for their group identity(ethnicity) is just derived from the Swedish tribe who conquered them every time you call them Russian it just reminds them that their history has always been that as slaves which is where the word "Slav" comes from

>>510629938
>Does it really matter either way?
The guy considered to be the founder of Russia, i personally didnt even know until recently that there's a signifiicant portion of historians, that think he never existed. Interesting stuff

>>510627782 (OP)
Why does it really matter, if Rurikid dynasty did actually exist and they were not of Slavic origin?

>>510628199
Varangian Russes and Rurikids were Norse, not Finnoids. We have actual historical sources on their names, culture and even tribes they belonged to - Sueones. There are no genetic studies on ancient Rurikids, let alone Rurik. You are coming from studies on Russian aristocratic families in 20th century, which claimed to be descendants of Rurikids. Besides, N haplo is not indicative of only Finnics.
And what is actually ironic - you trying to talk shit about "creating" anything, when your state is literally Russia's creation, but now is utterly butthurt towards it. Ingrates.

>>510629496
>The only historians that disagree seem to be Russian
Some Russian historians, you mean. Normanism is accepted and mainstream. There was a period of staunch anti-normanism during soviet times, mostly for political reasons of anti-westernism as a whole. And funnily enough today it is khokhols who continue soviet antinormanism, because they've put origin of Rus' in Kiev.

>>510630363
A lot of countries have mythical founder figures. This is not uncommon. Look at Rome.

>>510627931

>>510627782 (OP)
I'm literally a diviner and seemed to get a "no" on Rurik existing, so there you go.

they have pretty confidently traced the paternal line of known descendants of Rurik to some eastern Swedes as well as Viking-associated ancient DNA samples from the Baltic, it's a pretty solid origin theory