Rurik, Founder of the Rurikid Dynasty - Rurik's name

(Mälaren was a part of the sea, not as now a lake)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A4laren says you're right (height difference is 0.7 metres on average, and there are locks in place to make sure salt water doesn't make it into Mãlaren). The Swedish version (https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A4laren#M.C3.A4larens_tillkomst) confirms that the land level rise has been ~5 meters since the end of the Viking age.

Okej. The point is that in Skåne (denmark) And Västergötland (with its neighbouring provinces such as Bohuslän (Norway) and Östergötland has been a natural place for an organisation and culture to florish.. during thousands of years. Megalithe foundings etc etc.. great fertile lands, many small rivers for transportation east and west. Close to everything, also trading.

Mälaren - was a bay in the sea, which was much bigger.. 3000 yrs ago it was much under water.. (land raised faster then than now)

add this to the fact that as late as:

Why not chosen few kings away from Olof Skötkonung until Gustav Vasa?
why the country is governed from Visingsö in the Middle Ages?
Why Birger Jarl must subjugate upland farmers in 1247 before he builds his kingdom?
Why Birger Jarl choose their burial place in Varnhem, Vastergotland?
Why Götaland HARADS- and parish division introduced in Uppland instead of maintaining its old division into folk-country, hundare and the dozen?
when the incorporation of the other parts of the country in this case should have been done?
it was done?
the kings who were involved?

but also all the megalith-foundings in Västergötland.. no in "Svealand"

Adam of Bremen wrote that the temple was called ubsola
If Adam did not write that the temple was in Uppsala, but it was called ubsola, it would be in the middle of sveonernas country in a hilly countryside south of Värmland and Finnedi - which disqualifies this Uppland completely. He also wrote that it ubsola nearby Birka is götarnas city.

Uppland Uppland name was not until the year 1296
If Uppland in the 1000's was called Tiundaland, Attundaland and Fjärdhundraland it is not obvious that, for example, the legend of Ale on uppländske refers to Uppland - Ale defeated by Adil on Vänern is whereupon his men rode home to his Upsalir. No note was made of the problems of getting through Tiveden and Västmanland. Upsalir addition, a plural form and is taken to mean 'halls up there'. Then fit Kinnekulle with their Little and Great Hall better into the puzzle, there is 'halls up there'. Yet the fall of 1297 wrote King Birger Magnusson, the three small lands north of Lake Mälaren as "tiundiam, attundiam & fiædrundiam", not "Linne".

Svealand name was not svealand until the 1400s
If Svealand in the 1000's was called Nordan Skog so is not likely to Mälardalen was Svear central settlement. Procopius mentioned in 500's, no Svear as he counted out thirteen people in Thule - Scandinavia. The samtide Jordanes mentioned 'suehans' associated with Skrid Finns and 'suethidi' in connection with 'Danes'.

Fyrisån name was not Fyrisån until the 1600s
If Fyrisån in the 900's name was Salaån it is not entirely clear that it was on these shores that Erik the Victorious fought with Styrbjorn Starke.
And why called Salaån not Uppsalaån? About Uppsala named Sala before it changed its name to Up-Sala would explain why Salaån named as it did.

Svear does Swedes and not exclusively people in Mälardalen
Already in 100's, wrote Tacitus that "Out in the ocean is svionernas communities" and continued the description of the sun on the other side of svionerna shimmering seen in the sea - thus realize that this sea is located in the west and should have been the North Sea, or Norwegian Sea, not the Baltic Sea.

So we cant say in the Geni - that - Björn den gamle (etc) was born in Uppsala county of today! or any of the areas of "Svealand"

Björn the old, king of the Svear

In Sweden we use it more or less now only as a distinction between parts of Sweden on the weathermap.

Other funny things - the three high graves at Uppsala the famous ones.. they are standing on already high small hills, that makes them look bigger.. and when they excated them they found traces of women.

The big tombs in Västergötland is still many times not even checked - due to silly ideas of the 1800 th century. And when they build Sweden to be stronger (mentally) against the Russians when Finland was lost..

There is no end of theories.

http://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-nb_digibok_2007111200097 proposes that Birka was in Møre, Norway - and that Sigtuna was the place that is today named Sykkylven.

We may never have proper proof.

The same arguments implies also to Norway and Denmark to some degree. Bohuslän is the absolutely most important province for the build up of the country.. And Skåne for Denmark.

However - we never think about this as these provinces no longer are a part of the nation-state.

Västergötland is in the middle of this.

Why does all Danish invasion attempts go up through any river of Västergötland - to later be defeated. Like Lena and Gestilren in the 1200:s .. Swedish forces seeking help from Norway (Bohuslän) and opposite when they needed help..

There are just so many things.. i could go on and on and on...

Theories, yes.. but how about empiria... them together makes the pieces of the pussle fit together.. regardless what angle you are looking from.

And it all has to be a process - ofcourse.

Science is not static - we cant allow it to be a scientific tyranny

Heidi Lie why are you creating duplicate profiles and adding confusion to the Tree around Rurik without citing any sources?

Why not engage with the many Geni Users interested in this part of the tree?

I've reverted the birth location to "Scandinavia" instead of "Uppsala, Uppsala, Uppsala County, Sweden".

If for no other reason than i don't think "Uppsala" of Rurik's time period was the same location as modern Uppsala (at least that is my understanding from following the discussions here on Geni).

"Scandinavia" (to me at least) encompasses Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland (including Karelia, ie Ladoga) Etsonia, Latvia and Lithuania so surely is a broad enough definition to capture where ever it was that he did come from. Uppsala, Hedeby, Vilnius, Murmansk where ever the Rus came from it was _somewhere_ in Scandinavia.

Thanks, Alex. I'm not sure I believe that Uppsala was a different place (although some people do think that), but I think we can all agree that there is not enough evidence to assert that Rurik was born in Uppsala.

Scandinavia is a part of following countries; Denmark, Norway, Sweden.

Why have people so hard to understand that?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Scandinav...

Thanks, Ulf. I think you mean it the other way around -- the following countries (and no others) are Scandinavia.

I think most of us know this already. It's useful to keep this in mind, but please remember that in colloquial usage it's very common for Americans to use the word "Scandinavia" to mean Scandinavia plus the other Nordic countries, plus the other Baltic countries. We have that problem in the Scandinavian yDNA project all the time.

We need to make sure we use place names correctly in database fields, but I don't fault anyone if they aren't so strict in conversation.

I think Alex's point was that Rurik was not born in modern Uppsala. If your point is that he wasn't necessarily born in Scandinavia, then we can look at that. I locked Scandinavia pending discussion, so we don't have an edit war.

My vote would be to leave it blank.

You are 100% correct Ulf, obviously my statement was technically incorrect but as Justin points out i am an English speaker so use the term as i understand it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia#/media/File:Map_of_Scandi...

Blank might be best, although i would find that very unsatisfying.
I suppose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Europe would be the most accurate term but hardly seems worth the effort.

You are missing some of the point, this is all a part of the Baltic region,
that could due as a name for it. They had a law called Birka lagen, that was the law for them all in this parts around the baltic sea, that continued a long time and ended first in the 1250's, in Sweden, it regulated trade and terms, as all businessmen, buyer and seller, must obey. The ships on the Baltic sea and the inlets to the rivers were very important under this time, so instead of just thinking name, you have to follow the routes of trades, to understand how it's connected, boundaries were very fluid so to speak...

I would suggest region of the Baltic see ! That would include all the players here!
And I dont think we can get any closer! Since the vikings were well traveleved and therefore imposible to say more clearly!

Good enough.

I hope he wasn't born in Dublin! :)

I'm partial to the theory he was born in Frisia ;)

you will never know.

Maybee he was born on a ship in the Baltic see or the north Atlantic.

Its really an error of their part that they did'nt write it down those kind of things. Would have made life so much easier for us today!

That's why I'm arguing for empty. It's the only answer that isn't making a guess.

Yes I would say empty too, but if people want some guess at all, that is problely the closest we get!

And Justin: Uppsala in Uppland of today didnt exist at that time, Old Uppsala did, but was named Aros. How hard can it be to follow logic. One plus one is not three.

Many international and big investigantions are totally wrong. Just because they are big doesnt mean they are more true.

:)

Please check this out. http://wadbring.com/historia/sidor/upsala.htm

"Uppland hette inte Uppland förrän år 1296
Om Uppland på 1000-talet hette Tiundaland, Attundaland och Fjädrundaland så är det inte självklart att exempelvis legenden om Ale den uppländske refererar till Uppland - Ale som besegrades av Adils på Vänerns is varefter hans män red hem till sitt Upsalir. Ingen notis gjordes om problemen att ta sig genom Tiveden och Västmanland. Upsalir är dessutom en pluralform och anses betyda 'salarna där uppe'. Då passar Kinnekulle med sina Lilla och Stora salen bättre in i pusslet, där finns 'salarna där uppe'. Ännu hösten 1297 skrev kung Birger Magnusson de tre små landen norr om Mälaren som "tiundiam, attundiam & fiædrundiam", inte "Uplandia".

Svealand hette inte Svealand förrän på 1400-talet
Om Svealand på 1000-talet hette Nordanskogs så är det inte särskilt troligt att Mälardalen var svearnas centralbygd. Procopius nämnde på 500-talet inga svear då han räknade upp tretton folk i Thule - Skandinavien. Den samtide Jordanes nämnde 'suehans' i samband med skridfinnar och 'suethidi' i samband med 'daner'."

Etc etc.

The geolocation of the official swedish story is so wrong it can be. It is time to change with massive archaelogical projects etc.

But great that we can already change Uppsala to be Scandinavia instead of a specific "landscape"/ province in Sweden.

If we would do that we would also reproduce the unitary state and its hierarchy to the top and the capital. Sweden is however a pluralistic country (many people) and doesnt need a history that confirms the unitary state, and its pyramid shape - geolocation.

Most likely the swedes brought (geats) their story with them when Stockholm was created and became more influential and the history was the applied to new geograpghy.

Just for curiosities. Also check the old map there from the link. Where Uppsala is today the name Arosia is, and Ubsola is in the middle of the country.

Johan regarding Ruric what is your argument here. That you think he was born in the old Ubsala or what exactly?

yes, not in present day Uppsala.

And if you want you can join in future excavations in Västergötland :)

And helping us all to lay a puzzle we lay together. the pieces has not been fitting together before.

Would love too join the excavation. That would be fun.

We just an early Christmas in my hometown wedensday. Problebly found the oldest bishop ever in place in my home town.
Everybody was buzzing with joy. the grave was intact and had not been touch for a 1000 years!

Sorry got myself sitetracked here

Du you have some articles or anything like that that can make us disbelievers accept the claim
I would find it fantastic if we could narrow it down tho the Old Ubsala or Aurosia!

Johan, it's a reasonable argument but not so certain as you say. Archaeology shows that the site of what is now Gamla Uppsala was occupied during the Bronze Age, with buildings and burial mounds.. It was not called Uppsala originally, but it's not clear when the name changed so it's not clear whether it could have been the place referred to by Adam of Bremen and Snorri Sturluson.

Both of them apparently thought it was at Gamla Uppsala. Adam says it was near Sigtuna. Snorri says it was in Old Sigtun at Lake Mälaren.

The problem is that archaeologists have not found anything that could match Adam's description. When I was in college the usual explanation was that Adam was exaggerating to make a more glorious past. Nowadays, there is this other theory that Adam and Snorri were wrong about the location, or that they have been misread.

Here is a balanced presentation of the main points:
http://www.wilmer-t.net/fornnorden/AncientNordic/Ubsola.html

Nothing is certain. I think the most reasonable position is to doubt both sides until there is more evidence.

Folke Johansson (latin: Fulco), died March 3, 1277, was a Swedish Catholic priest and archbishop of the diocese of Uppsala from 1274 until his death in 1277. Folke Johansson was Uppsala's first archdeacon and as such he appeared at the Archbishop seat movement from Old Uppsala to Aros, the current Uppsala, the 24 January 1273 and with that changing the old name from Aros to Uppsala.

Den 5 sept. 1258 medgav påven Alexander IV, på därom gjord anhållan, vederbörande rätt att få flytta 'ecclesia" i Uppsala med bibehållande av sitt gamla namn till en annan mer lämplig plats och gav biskopen i Västerås i uppdrag att å påvens vägnar verkställa denna flyttning, dit han ansåg lämpligt. I Gregorius IX:s dekretalsamling av 1234 uttalas den
bestämda meningen, att det endast tillkommer påven att medgiva
"translationes episcoporum et sedium mutationes",vilken bestämmelse vilar på Innocentius III:s brev till patriarken i Antiochia 31/2 1198. En dylik tillåtelse gav Innocentius också 25/s 1204 biskopen och kapitlet i Luna, nämligen att man skulle få flytta 'episcopalem cathedram" från Luna till Sarzana, som sedan förblivit biskopssäte. Flyttningen av Uppsala ärkebiskopssäte drog ut på tiden, tydligen emedan man ej förfogade över erforderliga medel.
http://samla.raa.se/xmlui/bitstream/handle/raa/683/1919_069.pdf?seq...