- Part one -
WHAT WAS?
There was strife. It is obvious. Apparently, two parties were fighting for power in Novgorod. The party of Vadim the Brave and the party of a certain Gostomysl. Historically, his identity has not been established, according to legend, he is considered a Novgorod mayor. This legend went widely from the historian Tatishchev, who even derived Rurik's genealogy from Gostomysl. At the same time, Tatishchev refers to the chronicles, which do not exist. Either he invented, or those chronicles disappeared … In general, Tatishchev in the scientific world enjoys an almost dubious reputation …
L. N. Gumilyov suggests that Gostomysl is not a name at all, that it was rather a party of “gostomysl”, that is, people who sympathize with foreigners and guests. Here they are, the state thinkers, and hired the Varangians in order to establish a favorable order for them.
And then everything went on, as often happened and happens in history. The mercenaries, sensing their strength and the weakness of a peaceful city, simply seized power in Novgorod. And when two years later, in 864, Vadim the Brave raised an uprising against them, they cruelly dealt with him and his supporters.
"Insulted Novgorodians, saying, as if to be a slave to us and to suffer in every possible way from Rurik and for his sake … That same summer, kill Rurik Vadim the Brave and many other Novgorodians, beat his advisers" (Nikon Chronicle).
Following Novgorod, the Vikings seized power in other Russian cities.
Promotional video:
SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP
Few historians have paid attention to the special relationship that developed between Novgorod and the princes of Rurik's house. Usually active dislike for them, dislike of Novgorodians is explained by the democratic traditions of the free city. But this only applies to a situation that arose in later centuries. And then, in the original times, there were no such traditions, neither democratic nor aristocratic. And there were no princes in Russia at all. They started from Novgorod!
But if Novgorod summoned the Varangians of the Rurikovichs and, as it happened, imposed them on all of Russia, then the Novgorodians should, according to all the laws of logic, collective responsibility, psychology, speak at all angles what kind of Varangians are good, brave, how they protect the people and how bad it will be for everyone, if they leave. That is, they should be the main support of Rurik.
However, it was the opposite! All Russia recognized the Rurikovichs, but Novgorod did not like them and did not hide it. It seems as if the Novgorodians knew something about the Rurikovich … Like, it is you in other cities of Russia that you can hang on your ears that you were summoned, but we know that you are bandits-invaders … And the Rurikovich seemed to know that Novgorodians know a thing or two about them … In any case, they were very reluctant to go there to reign. For example, when the inheritance was distributed between Olga's grandchildren, Novgorod was assigned to Vladimir, because he could not claim the best, since he was the son of Svyatoslav from the slave girl Malusha. On you, which is useless for us …
Does it look like the relationship between "good princes" and "grateful peyzan", with a bow, invited the princes to own them?
And Novgorod was in no hurry with the adoption of Christianity, remaining faithful to its pagan deities, protecting the Magi from the princely reprisals. We are accustomed to the idealized popular image of the Magi, with long hair and a lean, fine-looking facial expression. In fact, and often these were possessed personalities who, in the 11th century, walked across the Russian land from Suzdal to Novgorod, burning women alive, blaming them for either famine or all other troubles. And these fanatics Novgorod covered themselves, saved from the princely wrath. We can say that the Novgorodians finally and irrevocably became Christians only in the 13th century, when the Magi, again hoping for popular support, raised an uprising, but the Novgorodians turned away from them and, moreover, dealt with them.
Undoubtedly, the distance from Kiev as the center of Russian Orthodoxy was reflected in the initial and long-term rejection of Christianity. But it is quite possible that hostility to the Rurikovichs also affected here. The people in advance with prejudice perceived everything that comes from them, including the new faith.
And here the reader can say: “Yes, the invention of the vocation of the Varangians is self-deprecation. But horseradish radish is not sweeter and hour after hour is not easier! It turns out that bandits and mercenaries became our princes-rulers ?!"
HOW DYNASTIES ARE CREATED
Alas, this is the story. The ruling dynasties very often came from outside. And not always from among the noble and well-meaning. For example, desperate warriors, the Turkmens themselves lived hard and hard, fleeing from enemies in the desert. But at the same time, many ruling dynasties of Asia consisted of people of Turkmen origin, former guardsmen, guards and mercenaries. Even the main oppressor of the Turkmen, the Persian Nadir Shah, was a Turkmen by his mother.
Rich Egypt in all the slave markets of the world bought up boys, raised them in military camps and created them an army and a Mameluke guard. Then the Mamelukes of Polovtsian origin seized power in Egypt and founded their own, Bahrit dynasty of sultans. From slaves to sultans!
I have already spoken about the Vikings. Three centuries after the start of their campaigns, they themselves fizzled out, and the European states grew stronger and drove them out of Europe. The Norman Vikings settled only on the peninsula called Norman, and created their own state there - the Duchy of Norman. "Duke" in the original sense - the leader of the tribe. Then Wilhelm, the former Varangian, and now the Duke of Normandy, crossed the English Channel, defeated the Anglo-Saxons at Hastings and became the founder of the English royal dynasty …
So we weren't the first and the last.
WHY WAS NESTOR WRITING THIS?
The Tale of Bygone Years was created three centuries after the events in Novgorod. For three centuries Russia has been ruled by princes from the Varangian dynasty Rurik. They, the Rurikovichs, baptized Russia and introduced it into the mainstream of a new, Christian civilization. They, Rurikovichs, are everywhere and everywhere, from Kiev to Novgorod, from Vladimir to Volyn. Over these three hundred years, probably ten to fifteen generations have changed in the country. What should and what could the warriors, monks and smerds think of their princes, and what could they remember, three hundred years after they came to power? What did the princes inspire their subjects?
Of course, that their power is from God, that they were called and called!
And it is quite clear that Nestor thought so and wrote so.
Well, if we assume that he knew the truth, could he write, sitting under the arm and sword of the Kiev prince, that the Rurikovichs came from bandits who had seized power in a bandit manner?
Very, very doubtful. Later, much later, chronicle writing became, as it were, an everyday work, a duty, a service of monasteries. By that time, the church had become more independent and even influenced the princes, threatening them with a curse in the event of sedition, and most of all - in case of suspicions of collusion with Catholics, with the Catholic rulers of Europe and the Baltic states. And at the time of the creation of the "Tale of Bygone Years" the church, introduced into the spiritual power by the Rurikovichs, was completely controlled by the Rurikovichs, and apparently there was no need to talk about any uncensored chronicle. Evidence of this is the fate of one of the first chroniclers, Nikon, who fled from Kiev to Tmutorakan from the wrath of Prince Izyaslav …
However, suppose the incredible: the chronicler Nestor knew the truth about the Varangian Rurik and wrote the truth!
But all studies say that the chronicle was then edited by the monk Sylvester under the supervision of Vladimir Monomakh, and then again edited by an unknown monk under the supervision of Mstislav, the son of Vladimir Monomakh.
Moreover, I do not exclude that Vladimir Monomakh himself had a hand in The Tale of Bygone Years. He had all the grounds and prerequisites for this. First, absolute power over the monastic chroniclers. Secondly, own personal interest in the word, in literary creation. And most importantly - education, culture and great literary talent.
One way or another, and Vladimir Monomakh and his son in ancient times knew that what is written with a pen cannot be cut down with an ax. And therefore they carefully watched that what they needed was initially written.
EVERYONE WRITTEN SO …
D. S. Likhachev considered the plot about the Varangians "a legend of artificial origin."
V. Ya. Petrukhin, the author of the scrupulous monograph "The Beginning of the Ethnocultural History of Russia in the IX-XI Centuries", objects, proves the naturalness, which manifests itself precisely in its contradictions: if these were later inserts, then they would have taken care of smoothness.
But they both agree on one thing: the plot is in keeping with tradition.
In Likhachev's work - the traditions of medieval history, which trace the origins of the ruling dynasty to a foreign state.
Petrukhin has indigenous folklore traditions of various countries and peoples.
And it seems to be true: the Jews have such a legend, the Koreans, the Czechs, the Saxons have a legend that they called the Britons!..
One thing confuses me: what is this folk tradition, self-deprecating people? Indeed, even the self-names of peoples often say the opposite. People are more inclined to exalt their own and belittle others. The self-names of some peoples in translation often mean: "real people", "real people", "big people" and even just "people". How does one combine with the other?
Everything quite accurately falls into place, if we assume that these "folk traditions" were provoked by representatives of the ruling dynasties. For justification, for the establishment of legality and the rise of the dynasty and its rule.
The proof of the contrary is the conquest of England by William of Normandy. There was no need to elevate and legalize anything here: everything is legal anyway - the stronger state conquered the weaker one. Therefore, there are no legends. It seems that if Wilhelm or his closest descendants wanted, there would be authors, and they would form, and legends about the vocation of the Normans would go down in the history of England. But Wilhelm's descendants did not need this.
TOTAL
Again, you have to start from the beginning. Because from the very beginning, ideology intervened in the matter - that is, moods, opinions, likes and dislikes, emotions … which still exist today. For example, in some modern studies criticism of the "Norman theory" goes so far as to be accompanied by quotations from … Hitler! Like, there is one single line of conquest. Completeness, gentlemen …
The "Norman" theory, the theory of the Norman, Western origin of Russian statehood and the Russian state arose in the 18th century, not somewhere on the side, in the West, but in Russia, in St. Petersburg, in the scientific, intellectual center of the country - in the Academy of Sciences!
And its founders, academicians Gottlieb Bayer and Gerard Miller, erected it not from scratch, but solely on the foundation of the Russian chronicles.
The founders and first members of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences were exclusively foreigners. Including such famous European scientists as Leonard Euler, brothers Johann and Daniel Bernoulli … The Academy was founded in 1725, and the first Russian academician was Lomonosov! - appeared only in 1745, twenty years later.
Believe me, I am least of all among those who like to be indignant at the "dominance of foreignism." And in relation to those times, I think it is mean and ungrateful. For foreigners created Russian science, the Russian academy. And spitting after them, first taking advantage of their mind and labors, is the limit of plebeianness and rudeness.
Another thing is that there were some among them who were condescending or condescending to the “Russian aborigines”. As well as the fact that there were those among the Russians who could not present anything to science, except for their local origin, and the lack of talent was justified by "German dominance."
In general, the story is old and forever new, like the world.
But it is obvious that by the middle of the 18th century a certain atmosphere of vaguely marked confrontation hovered in the academy. And when Gottlieb Bayer wrote a work about the Varangians, and then, almost twenty years later, Gerard Miller made an attempt to speak at a solemn meeting of the Academy of Sciences with a speech "On the origin of the people and the name of Russia", far and not only scientific passions flared up. Let us recall again the words of V. O. Klyuchevsky: “The reason for the fervor of these objections was the general mood of that moment … Miller's speech was not at the right time; it was the height of national excitement …"
In the struggle against the "Norman theory" in a hurry, in a fit of strangled pride, "in the midst of national excitement," the question was initially incorrectly formulated. We were not talking about vocation, but about the Varangians in general! Some argued that the Varangians were Slavs, others that they were our brothers - Lithuanians, and still others that there were no Vikings at all. But where can you get away from them, if Oleg's ambassadors to the court of the Byzantine emperors wrote: “We are from a Russian clan - Karla, Inegeld, Farlaf, Veremud, Rulav, Gudy, Ruald, Karn, Frelav, Ruar, Aktevu, Truan, Lidul, Fost, Stemid … These are the Russian names! And my irony here can be understood in two ways. After all, there really are "Russian" names. But - not Slavic. And therefore the fourth said that yes, there were Vikings, but in very small numbers and in Russian history they did not play any role. And the communist historians booze plainly:Norman theory does not correspond to the Marxist doctrine of history - and basta!
In general, there is no direct shadow from a crooked stick. The wrong question inevitably generates an ambiguous answer. A struggle flares up. During which the essence of the matter is finally lost.
But one way or another, namely, ideologists from history and historians from ideology imposed two historical complexes on the nation: the Norman complex and the complex of the Tatar-Mongol yoke. For them, this is a "struggle" that occupies their lives and even constitutes their food.
And inexperienced people have to live with it.
Initially, the national humiliation was not in the Varangians - there are such Varangians in the history of every nation - but in their “vocation”, in the wording: “Our land is great and abundant, but there is no order in it. Come to reign and rule over us."
I hope I was able to prove that this was not and could not be, that all this was invented to please the ruling dynasty.
That's all.
So we did not have and do not have any reasons for a national inferiority complex.
THE TRUTH IS ALWAYS UNPLEASANT
And so I systematically pour myself a cold shower. Generally useful. And in particular. In order not to delude ourselves: here, they say, how happy the Russian people will be after reading!.. I am almost sure that my refutation of the vocation of the Vikings will not cause much joy and even satisfaction. And not in individual groups of specialists, but in the mass of the population. For the most part, people do not want to know the truth. She is unpleasant to them, disgusting. There are many reasons. And personal (it turns out, I, who believed in all this, am now a fool?), But, above all, public.
We always talk about the eternal confrontation between the state and the intelligentsia, and more broadly - the state and the people. Who invented it - I don't know. But no one doubts, sort of like a foundation and a cornerstone …
In fact, our people have almost always been and are on the side of the state. Even so: the people and the state are one. And all the official myths of the state coincide in an amazing way and pander to the desires and moods of the masses. Or - over the centuries they are transformed so that they indulge. The same myth about the calling of the Varangians. What rejection he caused among Russian academicians in 1749! Now go and refute. Peck!
Moreover, the academics may be silent. But the broad masses will be indignant. Because the myth has acquired new content over the centuries. Like, we are not bastard and we don’t slurp soup, we are also Europe (!), Because we were founded by “noble princes of German origin” - and one angry reader wrote to me …
Well, the Vikings are still not an area of mass knowledge. But with the Tatar-Mongol yoke, it's just a disaster. Everyone knows everything! And everyone is sure of everything. It has grown into the skin, you start to tear it off - it bleeds. It hurts and insults! So that your face will be smashed for your filthy words that there was no yoke. Everything is hidden in the subconscious or completely erased, or distorted so that it becomes difficult. You see, to admit that the Russian people for three hundred (!) Years lived under the Mongolian boot, endured the yoke - this seems to be not at all shameful and even patriotic. And if you try to deny it, they will immediately call you an antipatriot. And the essence is all in the same transformation of the myth, in the service of its new lie. If we are Europe, then we could have nothing in common with the Asians, Mongol-Tatars, no common life in a common state, this is all spitefulness, but there was only eternal confrontation and eternal war. In which we, in the end,won. And to deny the yoke means also to deny our great victory over such a powerful enemy …
That's how it is twisted.
Moreover, the great Russian historians of the past began to write and affirm in the minds of the people all this, before whose names one cannot but bow in reverence. They were supported and continued by the Communists, and they are still continuing, I don’t know what to call them … And the people, as a result of mass processing from the school bench, once accepted and mastered, made the myths their own, blood.
Therefore, I warn myself and my readers not to flatter themselves.
MYSTERIOUS WORD - "RUSSIAN"
“And they went across the sea to the Varangians, to Russia. Those Varangians were called Rus, as others are called Swedes, and others are Normans and Angles …"
Everything seems to be clear. Rus, Rusichi, Russians derive their name from the Varangians, from some Varangian community of people called "Rus".
However, a person is so constructed that he wants to know everything, from the source, to the very beginning. But here we are faced with such a part of human history where it is sometimes impossible to reach the source. The fact is that very rarely a people is named as he called himself - by self-name. For example, Chechens are Nokhchi or Vainakhs, Germans are Alemanni, Albanians are skeptics (shkiptarians), Hungarians are Magyars, and so on. As a rule, the name of the people is most often given by neighboring tribes, and, moreover, by completely random signs - and therefore it is almost impossible to get to the root of the source.
The most striking example of this is the Hungarians.
In Kazakhstan in the sixties, for some reason, the legend about kinship Kazakh-Hungarian ties was popular among ordinary middle-literate strata of the population. There were figures in either country who successfully speculated on this and exploited the "related" theme in every possible way.
In fact, there is no relationship. True, there was a very close neighborhood. From where a certain number of words, common in sound and meaning, are derived.
In reality, the Hungarians are a people of Finno-Ugric origin. But with a fantastically bizarre fate. In ancient times, the Hungarians - by their self-name, Magyars - lived in the middle reaches of the Ob, in the area of today's Tobolsk and Tyumen. They constituted the southern part of the related community of the West Siberian Finno-Ugric peoples. In the north - the Khanty and Mansi, and in the south - the Magyars. And the appearance was the same as the present Khanty and Mansi.
In the first centuries of our era, the Great Migration of Nations began. It was initiated by the Huns, who plunged hundreds of tribes and nationalities into the general whirlpool, reshaping the original, traditional map of the peoples of the world. The Huns caught up with the northern wing, tore off the Magyars from their homes. And those for several centuries wandered in the conglomerate of Hunnic tribes, mainly Turkic in language. Hence the borrowed Türkic words in their lexicon. In Russia they were then known under the name of the Ugrians.
The capital of the Hunnic Empire, the headquarters of the leader of the Huns Attila was the Pannonian Lowland. The neighboring Germanic tribes deified Attila. This is evidenced by the ancient Germanic epic "Song of the Nibelungs", in which the leaders of the Germanic tribes come to bow to the king Etzel. Etzel is the Germanic pronunciation of the name Attila.
In the middle of the fifth century, the Hunnic Empire collapsed. The Magyars, surprisingly preserved as a single tribe, remained to live in Pannonia. And they, Magyars, Finno-Ugric by origin, language, the neighboring Germanic tribes were called Huns, Huns, Khungrs. So the country is still called - Hungaria. In our opinion - Hungary, Hungarians. Although they have a neighborly relation to the Huns-Huns.
But if you compare, put the present Khant or Mansi and the Hungarian next to each other, then guessing the relationship will be very difficult. Over the centuries, almost the most important thing has changed - the appearance of a person, the genotype of a nation. But the most important thing remained - the language.
And to this day one of the most popular names in Hungary is Attila.
These are the fantastic ways in which the names of peoples sometimes appear! For comparison, I will cite the same "Tatars" or "Tajiks". Several allied clans in the Mongolian steppe called themselves "Tatars". The Chinese extended this name to all nomads. However, at the behest of Genghis Khan from 1206, all his subjects became "Mongols". But the ethnonym "Tatars" reached Eastern Europe and survived: this is how the Russians began to call the subjects of the Astrakhan, Crimean and Siberian khanates, which remained after the collapse of the Golden Horde. Including the subjects of the Kazan Khanate, who are actually Bulgarians or Bulgars …
The same is with the “Tajiks”. In Central Asia in the 7th century, the Arab soldiers who came here were called "Tajiks". But modern Tajiks are Persians. What whirlpools of history seethed here - it's hard to even imagine, my head is spinning …
That is why the practically insoluble mystery of history is the origin of the ethnonym "Russian". Indeed, in Scandinavia there was not and is not present, no traces of the clan (tribe, people) "Russia" have been revealed. This means that a wide scope opens up for fantasies and hypotheses. What they didn’t invent, where they didn’t look for the roots of the word. From the Ruthenian Celts and Roxolani Iranians to the Syrians!
To me, from the host of versions, the version of V. Ya. Petrukhina - traditional, leading from the chronicle. Let's remember - the Slavs made up only part of the population of Staraya Ladoga and Novgorod, and the other two parts made up the Mery and Chud. That is, the Finno-Ugric tribes. Who have long called the natives of the Scandinavian side "ruusi" or "roosi". And the Old Scandinavian roots of this word mean: "a rower, a participant in a campaign on rowing boats."
Here a lot of things coincide not even in words, but in the logic of life. Because the "Varangians" and "Vikings" have never been a family, a tribe, that is, an ethnos. They were a social group. And they were named not on ethnic grounds, but on social grounds. That is, "Rus" - because "participants in the campaign on rowing ships." Professional title!
Let us recall: the Vikings-Vikings on the rivers, on boats made their raids on the cities of Western and Eastern Europe.
The Slavic population of towns and villages was sedentary, handicraft and agricultural. And only the Varangian-Rus staggered around the world, from the Baltic to Byzantium. And since they were often mercenaries of the East Slavic city-states, they seemed to represent them in the neighboring peoples and states of the Slavs. And the neighboring peoples-states began to call the population of Kiev and Chernigov "Rus" after the name of the Vikings.
At the same time, in Kiev itself, Chernigov and other cities, the princely warriors began to be called "Rus", and then all citizens of the Kiev state. In one century the ethnonym has become universal! And their own, Slavic, home-grown river robbers in Novgorod were called ushkuiniks. From the word "ear" - a big boat …
The double name is also quite understandable - both the Varangians and the Rus. This is very typical for communities with mixed languages, as was the population of Novgorod. Slavic and Finno-Ugric. But for all that, let me remind you that any version remains and most likely will remain a version, more or less substantiated. And the solution to the word "Russian" will remain in secret history.
Sergey BAIMUKHAMETOV
- Part one -