The Name 'Rus' Is Ukrainian, Not Russian

Where did this myth come from?

Russia built its entire identity on appropriating the name “Rus.” The very name “Rossiya” is a Grecized form of the word “Rus,” adopted by Peter I in 1721 for the Muscovite Tsardom. The Kremlin claims that “Rus” always meant Russia, and Ukraine is merely an “outskirts” (okraina) of Rus with no claim to this name.

In reality, the opposite is true: “Rus” is Kyiv and the Dnieper lands, while Muscovy acquired this name much later through political usurpation.

What did “Rus” mean in the sources?

The Primary Chronicle (early 12th century)

The oldest Rus chronicle clearly defines “the Rus land” as the territory around Kyiv:

“The Polyans, who are now called Rus” — meaning the Polyans (a tribe living around Kyiv) are those now called Rus

The Chronicle also describes how the Varangians of Rurik “came to the Slavs” in the north, and then Oleh “sat in Kyiv” and proclaimed it “the mother of Rus cities.” That is, Rus began not with Novgorod or Suzdal, but with Kyiv.

Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos (10th century)

The Byzantine emperor Constantine VII in his treatise “De Administrando Imperio” (c. 950) distinguishes:

“Rus” (Ρωσία) — the territory around Kyiv
“Outer Rus” (ἡ ἔξω Ρωσία) — Novgorod and other northern lands

For Byzantium, “Rus” was Kyiv. The north was only the “outer,” peripheral part.

Arab sources (9th–10th centuries)

Arab geographers Ibn Rusta and al-Masudi (10th century) describe “Rus” as a people living near “a great river” (the Dnieper), with their capital at Kuyab (Kyiv). No Arab source associates “Rus” with Moscow or Suzdal.

The Bavarian Geographer (9th century)

The “Bavarian Geographer” (c. 830) — one of the earliest mentions of the Rus — places them in the Dnieper region, not in the northeast.

Two meanings of “Rus”

Harvard scholar Omeljan Pritsak in his foundational work “The Origin of Rus’” (1981) traced the evolution of the name in detail:

“Rus” in the narrow sense (before the 12th century)

Until the 12th century, “Rus” in the narrow sense meant exclusively the Kyiv lands — the Middle Dnieper region centered on Kyiv. This is confirmed by dozens of chronicle references:

“He went from Rus (from Kyiv) to Suzdal” — meaning Suzdal was not part of “Rus”
“He arrived from Suzdal to Rus” — again, Rus = Kyiv
Chernihiv, Pereyaslavl, and Kyiv are “Rus” cities. Suzdal, Vladimir, Rostov — are not

The Chronicle consistently contrasts “Rus” (the Kyiv lands) and “the Suzdal land” as different geographical and political spaces.

”Rus” in the broad sense

Later, the name “Rus” spread across the entire territory of the Kyivan state — from Novgorod to Chernihiv. But even in this broad sense, Kyiv remained the center of Rus, while the Suzdal/Muscovite land was considered the periphery.

How Moscow appropriated the name

The Muscovite principality: not “Rus”

Until the 14th–15th centuries, the Muscovite principality did not call itself “Rus”:

In chronicles it is called “the Muscovite land”, “the Suzdal land”, “Zalesye” (the land beyond the forests — from Kyiv’s perspective)
Muscovite princes held the title “Grand Princes of Moscow and Vladimir”, not “of Rus”
The inhabitants of Muscovy were called “Moskal” or “Muscovites” — not “Rus people”

Ivan III and the claim to “all Rus” (15th century)

Ivan III (1462–1505) was the first Muscovite ruler to systematically claim the title “Sovereign of all Rus.” This claim had political, not ethnic, motivation — Moscow sought to legitimize its westward expansion, including into the lands of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania where Ukrainians and Belarusians (the true “Rusyn” people) lived.

Notably, Lithuania and Poland categorically rejected Moscow’s right to the title “Sovereign of all Rus,” since part of Rus (the Ukrainian and Belarusian lands) was under their control.

Peter I: from “Muscovy” to “Russia” (1721)

The turning point came on October 22, 1721, when Peter I proclaimed the Muscovite Tsardom the “Russian Empire” (Rossiyskaya Imperiya). This was a deliberate rebranding operation:

The name “Rossiya” (from Greek Ρωσία) was chosen to link Muscovy to the heritage of Kyivan Rus
Peter I replaced the name “Muscovy” with “Russia” in all official documents
Foreign ambassadors were compelled to use the new name
Europeans continued to use the word “Muscovy” for decades afterward

The French engineer Guillaume Levasseur de Beauplan (17th century) in his “Description of Ukraine” (1651) clearly distinguishes “Ukraine” (or “the Rus lands”) and “Muscovy” as different countries.

Who actually called themselves “Rusyn”?

Paradoxically, the population of Ukrainian and Belarusian lands called themselves “Rusyn” for far longer than the population of Muscovy:

In Galicia and Transcarpathia, the ethnonym “Rusyn” was used until the 20th century
The Rus Voivodeship (Palatinatus Russiae) with its capital in Lviv existed until 1772
Danylo Romanovych (13th century) held the title “King of Rus” — not of Moscow
The Cossack state was called “the Zaporozhian Host of Rus”
“Rus” (Ukrainian) brotherhoods operated in Peremyshl and Lviv from the 15th century

Meanwhile, the inhabitants of Muscovy:

Were called “Moskal” or “Muscovites” until the 18th century
Only began calling themselves “Russkie” en masse after Peter I’s reforms

As Serhii Plokhy states: “Moscow did not so much inherit the name ‘Rus’ as appropriate it — along with historical claims to territories where the true Rusyns lived.”

Why this matters

The appropriation of the name “Rus” is the foundation of the entire Russian ideological construct:

If “Rus” = Russia, then Kyiv is a “Russian” city
If “Rus” = Russia, then Ukrainians are “breakaways” from the “single Rus people”
If “Rus” = Russia, then Russia has a “historical right” to Ukraine

But if we accept the truth — that “Rus” = Kyiv and the Dnieper lands, while Moscow is “Zalesye” that appropriated someone else’s name in the 18th century — then the entire imperial construct collapses.

Ukraine did not “steal” the name Rus. Ukraine is Rus. And Russia is Muscovy, which renamed itself.