Y-DNA (37  + 3 additional markers) database including Rurikid and Gediminid princes and those males who are also suspecting their descent either from Rurik (the 1^st Russian prince, 9^th century), or from Gedimin (The Grand Duke of Lithuania, 13^th cent.). Contains currently the following surnames, Rurikids : Czetwertynski, Gagarin, Gorchakov, Kosonen, Khilkov, Kropotkin, Lobanov-Rostovsky, Mozarowski (and variants), Mozhaysky, Myshetsky, Niewmierzycki (and variants), Obolensky, Ossowiecki, Poscharsky, Putyatin, Puzyna, Rostowsky, Rzhevsky, Shahovskoi, Solomin, Szuyski, Tolloczko, Vadbolsky and Volkonsky, and Gediminids : Golitsin (Galitzine), Khovanskii (Chowanski), Chartorisky (Czartoryski), Trab, Trubetskoy (Trubecki), Urban(owicz), Svistunov, Cuthie (Jakutowicz), Barteit. However, not all of them were found to be genuine descendants of Rurik or of Gedimin, respectively. Besides, it was discovered that the Volkonsky/Obolensky branch is of Slavic descent (genetic haplogroup R1a1), and most probably princes in this branch are not descended from Rurik. By all means it seems that Rurik was a historical person, who was born on the Roslagen seashore (slightly north of Stockholm, Sweden). However, he was of the Finno-Ugrian descent (haplogroup N1c1 (earlier described as N3a) -  although, theoretically, this could have been the Obolensky branch which might be descended from Rurik). The prince Piotr Szuyski is also of Slavic descent (R1a1).

 

The prince Kropotkin is really descended from Rurik. However, by no means he is descended from the princes of Smolensk. His princely branch needs to be reconsidered again.

 

Gedimin, the Grand Duke of Lithuania, and Rurik the Viking chieftain and the 1^st Russian prince, were distant cousins. They shared a common male ancestor ab. 2000 years ago. This is not clear whether the noble Urbanowicz, Jakutowicz and Svistunov (Swistun, Swistunow) families are illegal descendants of Gedimin, or they rather belong to the Gediminid branches that were forgotten by genealogists.

 

The prince Jerzy Czartoryski of Canada decided to make his Y-DNA test in spite of this what historians speculate(d) about descent of his princely branch. It is believed that his G...Grandmother, the princess Izabella Czartoryska (nee Fleming) had her 1st son with the Rurikid prince Nikolai Vasilievich Repnin, while this was Armand-Louis de Gontaut-Biron, Duc de Lauzun, who fathered the 2nd son, Konstanty, from whom the prince Jerzy had descended. The prince Jerzy was found to be descended from a Germanic tribe (R1b1). He can still be descended from the French, since majority of them are of Germanic origin. This what counts here is that the prince Jerzy inherited the title of prince, as well as family tradition, from his legal ancestors, the Czartoryski princes. On the other hand, however, providing that he is really descended from the Gontaut-Birons, this duly means that he is a genetic descendant of the old French family, having  roots in 12th century.

 

The prince Stanislaw Antoni Czetwertynski was found to belong to the I2a2 haplogroup. By no means he is descended from Rurik. His genetic haplotype is typical for native population of the Belarussian-Ukrainian Polissiya region. This can also mean that the prince Tur(e), who raised the dynasty of the Turov-Pinsk princes, wasn’t at all descended from Rurik.

 

Since the two branches, i.e. the Chernigov-Kievan (Volkonsky, Obolensky) and the Muscovite (Szuysky) are somehow related by blood, it seems that two different members of the same ruling dynasty broke these lines. Myself, I think that the Chernigov branch was broken by the king Boleslaw II Smialy (either in the year 1069 or in the years 1077/78), while the Muscovite branch was broken by Mikolaj Lis, the voievod in Krakow (Cracow), the then capital of Poland. Lis left Ukraine in may 1190. 9 months later St. Jaroslav Vsevolodovich was born. According to some Polish genealogists the Lis clan might be originated from the Polish ruling Piast dynasty.

 

Results for people whose surnames are marked with green background were provided by Nikita Maximov, the Scientific Editor of the Russian Newsweek Magazine. They are not to be taken away from here unless a written permission from him will be obtained (nmaximov@gmail.com) .

 

Other results are freely available to anyone who wishes to use them for comparative and non-commercial purposes. However, neither test result can be taken away from here by a male (nor by his closest relative) who made his own Y-DNA test, but himself doesn’t wish to inform the public of his result.

 

This database can be useful to many males. By using this in a simple way they can check whether they have (or haven’t) descended from Rurik. It was also believed that the Gediminid princes were descended from Rurik on the Polotsk branch. However, the preliminary results do suggest that this is not really so, although Gedimin originated from Baltic Ugro-Finns. Its another idea would be to create the so-called modal Y-DNA pattern for Rurik, as well as for Gedimin. However, this can be possible later, when some more test results will become available. Nevertheless, the preliminary modal haplotypes for Rurik and Gedimin have been created.

 

 (The webmaster’s (Andrzej Bajor) test results were provided for the reference purposes, as a non-Rurikid descendant).

 

This database includes also a group of “Slavs” (haplogroup R1a1). They are compared with Adam Mozarowski who was believed to be descended from Rurik on the Muscovite branch. However, he isn’t. Most probably his great grandfather Antoni was an adopted son of Pawel, his great great grandfather. Vitaly Mozharowski (N1c1) is descended from one of Rurik’s cousins. This means that ancestor of the Mozarowski family came with Rurik to Staraya Ladoga in the year 862 A.D.

 

The tests were performed with the Family Tree DNA Co. http://www.familytreedna.com/ in the group program “Rurikid Dynasty DNA Project”. 37 characteristic markers are displayed in columns 1 to 37, respectively. The larger is the number of matching markers, the closer is kinship of the two males. If the markers are not perfectly matching, just for the sake of readability they have been displayed with different colours in reference to the modal Rurik (green field), the modal Gedimin (also the green field), the (possibly) Gediminid prince Bogdan Korybut-Woroniecki (violet field), the (possibly) Gediminid prince Tonu Trubetsky (pink field), and Adam Mozarowski (yellow field). Their marker values are shown with light yellow background. The more the background is becoming orange and red, the larger is positive genetic distance, while the more the background is becoming green and blue, the larger is negative genetic distance in each of the markers, respectively. This is shown in the label below. However, the (total) genetic distance from either the modal Rurik or Gedimin, or Bogdan Korybut-Woroniecki, or Tonu Trubetsky, or Adam Mozarowski, respectively, in all compared markers should not exceed a couple of units. If this is really so, it means that another tested male is their (distant) cousin, and this is indicated below by either green (compared with modal Rurik or modal Gedimin, respectively), violet (compared with Bogdan Korybut-Woroniecki), pink (compared with Tonu Trubetsky),  or yellow background (compared with Adam Mozarowski) in the column opposite to their surnames.

 

Mutation rates in markers marked with pink background are larger (0.003 to 0.005), and those marked with violet background are extremely large (above 0.005) compared with an average mutation rate (which is something like 0.0024). However, in the so-called genetic calculator one can also use different mutation rates in each of the marker panels. Estimated more precisely by the FTDNA Co., the average mutation rates are as follows : 0.00399 (markers 1 – 12), 0.00481 (markers 13 – 25), and 0.00748 (markers 26 - 37), respectively (http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility.html#MutationRate) . And this is also a clear evidence for this that the markers 26 – 37 are most important in genetic genealogy. When comparing the markers 1 –25 one can only SUSPECT that the two tested males might be related by blood if their markers are matching. By ALL MEANS one needs to check the markers 26 – 37, and especially the fast mutating markers like CDYa, CDYb and DYS 570, to be absolutely CERTAIN that, IN FACT, he IS related by blood with another man. A lot of Y-DNA test results do appear on the Y-search.org database (http://www.ysearch.org/) when the two males are e.g. perfectly matching on their first 12 markers; a certain mismatch, however, small, can appear on the 2^nd panel (markers 13 - 25); while a considerable mismatch on the 3^rd panel (markers 26 – 37) is a clear evidence for this that they have not been related by blood at all (in historical times – 50-60 generations ago).

 

Thanks to this project I can verify real mutation rates, and these have been displayed below. The rates are calculated per the entire 37 markers haplotypes and per century. The time that passed by is a difference between the year in which the Y-DNA tests were performed, and the year when the common male ancestor (CMA) was born.

 

Surname and given name	Surname and given name	Haplogroup	Common male ancestor (CMA)	Year born	Centuries to the CMA	Genetic Distance		Mutation rate per 37 markers haplotype and per century**
		(in blue SNP test)				FTDNA standard*	Webmaster’s standard*	FTDNA standard*	Webmaster’s standard*
RURIKIDS	N1c1	(***)	AVERAGE					0.5311	0.5293
Gagarin G.G.	Rzhevsky Nikolai	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.55	3@	3@	0.4649@	0.4649@
Gagarin A. P.	Rzhevsky Nikolai	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.55	4	4	0.4188	0.4188
Gagarin A. P.	Khilkov	N1c1	Andrei F. Starodubsky	Ab. 1290	7.18	4	4	0.5571	0.5571
Gagarin A. P.	Kropotkin	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.56	8	7	0.8368	0.7322
Gagarin A. P.	Putiatin	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.56	9	9	0.9414	0.9414
Gagarin A. P.	Vadbolsky	N1c1	Vsevolod Yurievich	1154	8.55	6	6	0.7018	0.7018
Rzhevsky Nikolai	Khilkov	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.56	4	4	0.4184	0.4184
Rzhevsky Nikolai	Kropotkin	N1c1	David R. Smolensky	Ab. 1130	8.79	4	4	0.4188	0.4188
Rzhevsky Nikolai	Putiatin	N1c1	Mstislav Vladimirovich	1076	9.33	7	7	0.7503	0.7503
Rzhevsky Nikolai	Vadbolsky	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.56	6	6	0.6276	0.6276
Khilkov	Kropotkin	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.56	3	3	0.3138	0.3138
Khilkov	Putiatin	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.56	6	6	0.6276	0.6276
Khilkov	Vadbolsky	N1c1	Vsevolod Yurievich	1154	8.55	4	4	0.4678	0.4678
Kropotkin	Putiatin	N1c1	Mstislav Vladimirovich	1076	9.33	10	10	1.0718	1.0718
Kropotkin	Vadbolsky	N1c1	Vladimir Monomakh	1053	9.56	5	5	0.5230	0.5230
Vadbolsky	Putiatin	N1c1	Mstislav Vladimirovich	1076	9.33	6	6	0.6431	0.6431
RURIKIDS	R1a1
Volkonsky John	Obolensky Yuri	R1a1	Taurussky Yuri	Ab. 1220	7.88	6	6	0.7614	0.7614
Volkonsky John	Volkonsky O.	R1a1	Volkonsky Fedor I.	Ab. 1330	6.79	6	6	0.8837	0.8837
Volkonsky O.	Obolensky Yuri	R1a1	Taurussky Yuri	Ab. 1220	7.89	7	7	0.8872	0.8872
GEDIMINIDS	N1c1
Khovanskii Askold	Chartorisky Alex	N1c1	Gedimin	Ab. 1270	7.38	4	4	0.5420	0.5420
Khovanskii Askold	Golitsin	N1c1	Patrikiy Narimuntovich	Ab. 1330	6.79	4	4	0.5891	0.5891
Khovanskii Askold	Trab	N1c1	Gedimin	Ab. 1270	7.39	4	4	0.5413	0.5413
Chartorisky Alex	Golitsin	N1c1	Gedimin	Ab. 1270	7.39	2	2	0.2706	0.2706
Chartorisky Alex	Trab	N1c1	Algirdas Gediminovich	Ab. 1307	7.02	4	4	0.5698	0.5698
Golitsin	Trab	N1c1	Gedimin	Ab. 1270	7.39	4	4	0.5413	0.5413
TAWAST	CLAN	(***; 3)	AVERAGE					0.4645	0.3787
Tawast Hannu	Stjerna Antti	N1c1	Tawast Henrik	Ab. 1500	5.08	4	3	0.7874	0.5906
Tawast Hannu	Tawast Veikko	N1c1	Tawast Christoffer	Ab. 1660	3.47	2@@	2@@	0.5764@@	0.5764@@
Tawast Hannu	Tawast J.	N1c1	Tawast Christoffer	Ab. 1660	3.47	3	3	0.8646	0.8646
Tawast Hannu	Tawast T.	N1c1	Tawast Alexander	1802	2.07	1@@	1@@	0.4831@@	0.4831@@
Tawast Hannu	Bergh P.	N1c1	Tawast Johan	Ab. 1590	4.17	2	2	0.4796	0.4796
Stjerna Antti	Tawast Veikko	N1c1	Tawast Henrik	Ab. 1500	5.08	2	1	0.3937	0.1969
Stjerna Antti	Tawast J.	N1c1	Tawast Henrik	Ab. 1500	5.08	3	2	0.5906	0.3937
Stjerna Antti	Tawast T.	N1c1	Tawast Henrik	Ab. 1500	5.08	3	2	0.5906	0.3937
Stjerna Antti	Bergh P.	N1c1	Tawast Henrik	Ab. 1500	5.08	2	1	0.3937	0.1969
Tawast Veikko	Tawast J.	N1c1	Tawast Frederik	1758	2.50	1	1	0.4000	0.4000
Tawast Veikko	Tawast T.	N1c1	Tawast Christoffer	Ab. 1660	3.47	1	1	0.2882	0.2882
Tawast Veikko.	Bergh P.	N1c1	Tawast Johan	Ab. 1590	4.17	0	0	0	0
Tawast T.	Tawast J.	N1c1	Tawast Christoffer	Ab. 1660	3.47	2	2	0.5764	0.5764
Tawast T.	Bergh P.	N1c1	Tawast Henrik	Ab. 1500	5.08	1	1	0.1969	0.1969
Tawast J.	Bergh P.	N1c1	Tawast Henrik	Ab. 1500	5.08	1	1	0.1969	0.1969
Vines Fred	Vines Ron	N1c1	Vines John	Ab. 1660	3.46	2@@	2@@	0.5764@@	0.5764@@
Vines Fred	Vines Paul B.	N1c1	Vines Edward	1725	2.81	1@	1@	0.5267@	0.5267@
Kosonen Roy	Kosonen Eino	N1c1	Kosoin Petteri	1713	2.94	1	1	0.3436	0.3436
Fletcher Brien	Fletcher Richard	N1c1	Fletcher John S.	1829	1.79	3	2	1.6760	1.1173
Komulainen Eero	Komulainen Jari	N1c1	Komulainen Samuel	1703	3.06	4	4	1.3071	1.3071
Lapinski “Wzorek”	Lapinski „Bodaj”	R1a11	Lapinski Jakub	Ab. 1510	4.98	4	4	0.8032	0.8032
Lapinski „Kus”	Lapinski „Bodaj”	R1a1	Lapinski Wit	Ab. 1450	5.58	5	5	0.8961	0.8961
Lapinski „Rosman”	Lapinski „Bodaj”	R1a1	Lapinski „Lapa”	Ab. 1420	5.88	4	4	0.6803	0.6803
Lapinski „Wzorek”	Lapinski „Kus”	R1a1	Lapinski Wit	Ab. 1450	5.58	5	5	0.8961	0.8961
Lapinski „Rosman”	Lapinski „Kus”	R1a1	Lapinski „Lapa”	Ab. 1420	5.88	3	3	0.5102	0.5102
Lapinski „Rosman”	Lapinski „Wzorek“	R1a1	Lapinski „Lapa”	Ab. 1420	5.88	6	6	1.0204	1.0204
VENTER	CLAN	(***; 4)	AVERAGE					0.8991	0.8991
Venter Piet #73298	Venter #89593	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	2	2	0.5780	0.5780
Venter Piet #73298	Venter #87173	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	2	2	0.5780	0.5780
Venter Piet #73298	Venter #87825	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	0	0	0	0
Venter Piet #73298	Venter #132347	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	0	0	0	0
Venter Piet #73298	Venter #143506	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	6	6	1.7341	1.7341
Venter #89593	Venter #87173	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	4	4	1.1561	1.1561
Venter #89593	Venter #87825	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	2	2	0.5780	0.5780
Venter #89593	Venter #132347	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	2	2	0.5780	0.5780
Venter #89593	Venter #143506	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	8	8	2.3121	2.3121
Venter #87173	Venter #87825	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	2	2	0.5780	0.5780
Venter #87173	Venter #132347	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	2	2	0.5780	0.5780
Venter #87173	Venter #143506	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	8	8	2.3121	2.3121
Venter #87825	Venter #132347	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	0	0	0	0
Venter #87825	Venter #143506	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	6	6	1.7341	1.7341
Venter #132347	Venter #143506	R1a1	Venter (v. Dempter) Hendrik	1663	3.46	6	6	1.7341	1.7341
Kossacki- Lytwyn Lukasz	Kossacki- Lytwyn Jacek	R1a1		1900	1.08	2	2	1.8519	1.8519
Plewako Stanislaw J.	Plewako Stanislaw G.	I2a2	Plewako Kazimierz	1822	1.87	1	1	0.5348@@	0.5348@@

·       ^* In almost 100 % of all cases, unexpectedly, some of the markers AMONG THE FINNs (N1c1) seem to be MUTATING SIMULTANEOUSLY (or very shortly one after another). This observation is valid in the case of the following pairs of markers : DYS 459 a and DYS 459 b, DYS 464 a and DYS 464 b, DYS 464 c and DYS 464 d, as well as CDY a and CDY b. The FTDNA Co. is not taking this phenomenon into account at all. For example, if two males are having 37 37 and 34 34 in CDY a and CDY b, respectively, the FTDNA Co. counts the genetic distance (GD) to be 3x2=6 in the both markers. I will try to reconsider this problem, and in the right column the GD = 3 in such case will be counted. The future will show which method is correct.

·       ^** To compare these figures with those mentioned above, one needs to divide them by 37x4 (4 generations per century), i.e. by 148.

·       ^@25 markers, i.e. only markers 1-25 are compared. However, in this case the result of simple division is multiplied by 37/25 to arrive at figures adequate for 37 markers tests.

·       ^@@The same result has been obtained for the 67 markers haplotype.

·       ^*** Average mutation rate is calculated only for those clans which can deliver at least 10 documented results. This average is calculated in the following way : 20 % of minimal, as well as 20 % of maximal results, are being discarded; the average is being calculated from the remaining 60 % of all the results among the clan.

·       ¹ By courtesy of Lukasz Lubicz-Lapinski and his Lapinski Clan Y-DNA project (l-lapinski@wp.pl; http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Lapinski)

·       ² By courtesy of Stanislaw J. Plewako (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Plewako/default.aspx?section=yresults)

·       ³ By courtesy of Hannu Tawast (hannu.tawast@pp.inet.fi)

·       ⁴ By courtesy of Robert Venter (venter.genealogy@comcast.net)

 

 

 

Genetic distance	-6	-5	-4	-3	-2	-1	0 (Perfect match)	+1	+2	+3	+4	+5	+6
Background

 

 

 

	Column Raw					1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	25	26	27	28	29	30	31	32	33	34	35	36	37	Additional Markers			Markers non matching either those of the mo- dal Rurikid  (green) or	Remarks
																																											41	46	57
Surname and (the 1st) given name   (FINNISH MONOMAKH BRANCH)	Number displayed here with coloured background indicates a kinship	Father’s given name	Date of birth (Also most distant ances- tor)	Place of birth	Haplo- group (in blue determi- ned by SNP test)	D Y S 3 9 3	D Y S 3 9 0	D Y S 19/ 3 9 4	D Y S 3 9 1	D Y S 3 8 5 a	D Y S 3 8 5 b	D Y S 4 2 6	D Y S 3 8 8	D Y S 4 3 9	D Y S 3 8 9 _1	D Y S 3 9 2	D Y S 3 8 9 _2	D Y S 4 5 8	D Y S 4 5 9 a	D Y S 4 5 9 b	D Y S 4 5 5	D Y S 4 5 4	D Y S 4 4 7	D Y S 4 3 7	D Y S 4 4 8	D Y S 4 4 9	D Y S 4 6 4 a	D Y S 4 6 4 b	D Y S 4 6 4 c	D Y S 4 6 4 d	D Y S 4 6 0	G A T A H 4	Y C A II a	Y C A II b	D Y S 4 5 6	D Y S 6 0 7	D Y S 5 7 6	D Y S 5 7 0	C D Y a	C D Y b	D Y S 4 4 2	D Y S 4 3 8	3 9 5 S 1 b	4 0 6 S 1	D Y S 5 2 0	Woroniecki (violet) or Trubetsky (pink) or Mozarowski (yellow field), respectively
	Modal Haplotype N2-A1	Pink background in this		Pink background in this	(^)	13	23	14	10	12	13			10	13	14	30							14																		10	It seems that these markers
	Modal Haplotype N2-A2	column indicates a person		column indicates a person	(^)	13	23	15	11	12	13			11	13	14	30							14																		11	and especially 395S1b
	Modal Haplotype N3a (N1c1)	whose princely descent is		whose princely descent is	(^)	14	23	14	11	11	13			10	14	14	30							14																		10	are invariant in a
	Modal Haplotype N3a2	proved with documents		confirmed by family tradition	(^)	14	23	14	10	11	13			10	14	14	30							14