The Origin of Rus'

Author(s): Omeljan Pritsak

Source: The Russian Review , Jul., 1977, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Jul., 1977), pp. 249-273
Published by: Wiley on behalf of The Editors and Board of Trustees of the Russian
Review

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/128848

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Wiley is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Russian
Review

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus'*
By OMELJAN PBrrSAK

I. The Normanist versus Anti-Normanist Controversy

1.
On September 6, 1749, Gerhard Friedrich Miiller (1705-1783), the
official Russian imperial historiographer and member of the Imperial
Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg, was to deliver an anniversary
speech on the origins of Russia, entitled "Origines gentis et nominis
Russorum." His talk was based on research published in 1736 by his
older compatriot, Gottlieb Siegfried Bayer (1694-1738), who intro-
duced sources like the Annales Bertiniani and works by the Emperor
Constantinus Porphyrogenitus into East European scholarship. From
these, academician Miiller developed the theory that the ancient
state of Kievan Rus' was founded by Norsemen, and it was this
theory that he began to propound in his speech.
Miiller was never to finish this lecture. A tumult arose among the
members of the Imperial Academy of Russian national background,
who protested such infamy. One of them, the astronomist N. I.
Popov, exclaimed, "Tu, clarissime auctor, nostrum gentem infamia
afficis! [You, famous author, dishonor our nation!]." The affair was
brought before the president of the Academy, the future hetman of
the Ukraine, Kyrylo Rozumovs'kyj (1750-1764; d. 1803), and the
Empress Elizaveta Petrovna (1741-1762), who appointed a special
committee to investigate whether Miiller's writings were harmful to
the interests and glory of the Russian Empire. One of the referees
was the famous author, Mixail Vasil'evi6 Lomonosov (1711-1762).
His testimony was devastating: Miiller was forbidden to continue his
research in Old Rus' history and his publications were confiscated

* This article, originally delivered as an inaugural lecture by Professor Pritsak upon

his assuming the Mykhailo Hrushevs'kyi Chair of Ukrainian History at Harvard Uni-
versity on October 24, 1975, is an exposition of the principal thesis of a six-volume
work entitled The Origin of Rus' to be published by Harvard University Press. It is
available in a bound brochure for $2.50 from the Harvard Series in Ukrainian Studies,
1581-83 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138. To avoid error,
transliterations and notations have been left as they appear in the original text.-Ed.

249

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 250 The Russian Review

and destroyed. The intimidated scholar eventually redirected his

scholarly work to a more harmless subject-the history of Siberia.
Nevertheless, September 6, 1749 remains an important date in
East European historiography. It marks the birth of the belligerent
Normanist versus Anti-Normanist controversy that has continued to
this day.

2.
The Normanists believe (the word believe is used here to charac-
terize the intellectual climate in question) in the Norse origin of the
term Rus'. They consider the Norsemen-or, more exactly, the
Swedes-as the chief organizers of political life, first on the banks of
Lake Il'men and later on the shores of the Dnieper River.
On the other hand, the Anti-Normanists embrace the doctrine that
the Rus' were Slavs who lived to the south of Kiev from prehistoric
times, long before the Norsemen appeared on the European scene.
To support this thesis, the names of several rivers are cited as evi-
dence, for example, the Ros', a right-bank tributary of the Dnieper.
The Anti-Normanists attribute to this "native" Slavic element a de-
cisive role in the state-building process of that period, particularly
that of Kievan Rus'. Official Soviet historiography adopted the Anti-
Normanist position for the following "scholarly" reason: "The Nor-
manist theory is politically harmful, because it denies the ability of
the Slavic nations to form an independent state by their own efforts."

3.

Let us now briefly examine the arguments advanced by the two

schools. The arguments of the Normanists, the most important being
A. L. Schlotzer, E. Kunik, V. Thomsen, A. A. Saxmatov, T. J. Arne,
S. Tomagivs'kyj, Ad. Stender-Petersen, are essentially the following:
(1) The Rus' received their name from Ruotsi, the Finnish designa-
tion for the Swedes in the mid-ninth century, which was derived
from the name of the Swedish maritime district in Uppland, Roslagen
(R6oslagen), and its inhabitants, called R6oskarlar (< roar-a rowing
or pulling). In a modified variant of this etymology, represented by
R. Ekblom and Ad. Stender-Petersen, Rus' originated from r6d(er)s-
byggjar-the inhabitants of straits between islands (< r6aer).
(2) The Primary Chronicle includes the Rus' among the Varangian

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus 251

peoples from beyond the sea, i.e., the Svie (Swedes), Urmane (Nor-
wegians), Angliane (English), and Gote (Gauts or Goths).
(3) Most of the names of Rus' envoys who appear in the treaties
with Byzantium (911, 944) are obviously of Scandinavian origin, e.g.,
Karly, Inegeld, Farlof, Veremud, etc. (911).
(4) The Annales Bertiniani, a contemporary source, says that c.
839 the Rhos envoys (Rhos vocari dicebant) who came from the
Byzantine Emperor Theophilos to the Emperor Louis I in Ingelheim
and whose ruler had the title Chacanus (Kagan, also appearing in
contemporary Islamic and later Kievan Rus' sources) proved to be
Swedes (eos gentis esse Sveonum).
(5) The Byzantine Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus, in his
book De administrando imperio (written c. 950), quotes the names of
the Dnieper cataracts in both Slavic (xcxaqvthLoTl) and Rus'ian
('PoLotr). Most of the Rus'ian names show derivation from the Old
Norse language, e.g., Ov0AoQoi (< ON (h)ulmforsi (dat.-loc.) equal to
Slavic ostrovni prax 'OorQoPouvugtdx = Greek xT vlYoLov Toi qQaYoIyv-
the cataract of the island).
(6) Islamic geographers and travelers of the ninth-tenth centuries
always made a very clear distinction between the Ris and as-
Saqaliba (Slavs).

4.
In opposition to this, the Anti-Normanists, who include S. Gedeo-
nov, M. Hrugevs'kyj, B. D. Grekov, S. Juskov, B. Rybakov, M. N.
Tixomirov, V. T. Pasuto, N. V. Riasanovsky, and A. V. Riasanovsky,
reply:
(1) The name of Rus' was not originally connected with Great
Novgorod or with Ladoga in the north, but with Kiev in the south.
Moreover, the Rus' existed in the Kiev area from times immemorial.
To support this thesis, two arguments are presented: first, the
toponymic, i.e., the existence of the names of several rivers in that
area such as the Ros'; second, the existence of the "Church History"
of Pseudo-Zacharias Rhetor, a Syrian source compiled in 555 A.D.
(long before the appearance of the Norsemen), which mentions the
Hr6s, or Rus', in connection with some North Caucasian peoples
found south of Kiev.
(2) No tribe or nation called Rus' was known in Scandinavia, and

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 252 The Russian Review

it is never mentioned in any of the Old Norse sources, including the

sagas.
(3) The Scandinavian names of the Rus' envoys who visited Ingel-
heim in 839 and signed the treaties with the Byzantine Empire in
the tenth century do not prove that the Rus' were Scandinavians
(Swedes). The Norsemen were only representatives of the Slavic Rus'
princes, specialists who carried out commercial and diplomatic func-
tions. For that reason, they were looked upon as men "of Rus'
descent" (ot roda rus'skago).
(4) One of the oldest Islamic writers, Ibn Khurdadhbeh, who wrote
c. 840-880, clearly calls the Ris a tribe of the Slavs.
(5) Archaeological material from the towns and trade routes of
Eastern Europe indicates that few Scandinavians were present in
this area.

5.
A critical examination of these arguments reveals both their weak-
nesses and why the debate has continued unresolved to this day. The
connection of the Rus' with the Finnish Ruotsi and Ro6slagen is
doubtful. Ruotsi goes back to *Ruzzi, not Rus'. Also, the Anti-
Normanists are correct in doubting the existence of a Scandinavian
(Swedish) tribe called Rus', even if they were peasants and not
empire-builders as formulated by Stender-Petersen. In the words of
V. Mosin (1931), "one finds oneself in a quagmire when one begins
to operate with terms derived from rus or ros [especially since Ros'
goes back to Ros, not Ros]...."
The Syriac Hr6s (555 A.D.) found in the work of Pseudo-Zacharias
Rhetor, and introduced into East European history by J. Markwart
in 1903, proved to have no relation whatever to Rus'. In an addenda
to Rhetor's "Church History," there is a very interesting report about
the Christian mission of a certain Kardast among the Huns in the
Northern Caucausus, including a list of Hunnic tribes. This report
stimulated the learned copyist to quote an Amazon episode from a
Middle Persian version of the Alexandersaga, in which the Greek
term heros (hero) is used for the gigantic mates of the Amazons. In
the Syriac adaptation, this Greek term assumed the form hros.
The Anti-Normanist explanation, which maintains that the pos-
sible existence of Scandinavian specialists at the court of some Rus'

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 253

princes does not necessarily prove the identity of the Rus' with the
Scandinavians, cannot be easily dismissed. However, Ibn Khur-
dadhbeh does not identify Rus' with the Saqaliba (meaning "Slavs").
The Arabic term jins (< Lat. genus) has the primary meaning of
"kind" or "sort." It may be assumed that in introducing the name
Rus into Arabic scholarship Ibn Khurdadhbeh was generalizing
("and they are a kind of Saqaliba") as to who these new trading
partners on the horizon of the Abbasside empire were. Within the
Arab cultural sphere (< Mediterranean culture), the term Saqlab
(Sclav-), meaning "fair-headed slave," was known earlier (sometime
in the sixth century) than the name Rus. Because the Rus came from
the north and corresponded to the anthropological criteria of the
term Saqlab (meaning "red-haired and ruddy-faced" in comparison
with the peoples of the Near East), the author added this phrase by
way of explanation.
The historian might rightly ask the question posed by British
archaeologist David M. Wilson (1970): "Why is there so little archae-
ological material of the Scandinavian period in the Russians towns?"
One may answer, says Wilson, only by analogy:

In England, the only town to yield really convincing Viking antiquities

in any quantity is York, and even this number has been exaggerated.
Structures from the Anglo-Danish period are rarely found in York; even
those that have been are not specifically Viking in character. The other
Viking towns in England [known from historical sources-O.P.] have
produced hardly any Viking antiquities. Yet, we know that the Vikings
were there.

6.

In summarizing the controversy, one must be critical of scholars

who have considered the issue from a narrow perspective and an
almost exclusive concentration on the term Rus'. Such an approach
is about as useful as studying the etymology of the name America in
order to understand the emergence of the Constitution of the United
States.
That the debate has continued unresolved to this day is due, in
my view, to the following reasons: historians have often substituted
political (or patriotic) issues for improved techniques of historical
methodology in their discussions; they have had limited knowledge

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 254 The Russian Review

of world history; and they have used source materials in a biased

way. The work of the historians in question can be compared to
mosaicists who piece together excerpts from sources of different
provenance, and who often disregard the semantics of the original,
since they have usually relied on simple translation instead of ac-
quiring knowledge of the sources and their cultural sphere.

II. Proposed Methodology

1.

The origin of Rus' is foremost a historical question. In analyzing

this problem, archaeology and linguistics are of secondary impor-
tance. The latter are certainly revered scholarly disciplines, but they
have their own methods and goals, and their own spheres of respon-
sibility. History begins-and I shall put stress on the word begins-
with written sources. It is impossible to extend history back to a
period without such sources, although archaeological and linguistic
data can be very useful in elucidating certain facts and situations.
Contrary to the conviction of Soviet scholars, however, archaeology
cannot be regarded as pre-history. There is no causal connection
between archaeology and history! History, which reflects the highest
stage of human experience, cannot appear deus ex machina from
archaeology. Only people with history can bring it to territories
without historical consciousness.
As an example of the frontier between history and archaeology, let
us take the year 1620. On the one hand, it marked the beginning of
history for New England, yet, on the other, it was the end of an
archaeological era in North America. Here, we can clearly see that
the subsequent historical period neither emerged nor developed
from the archaeological one (as Soviet archaeologists claim for
Kievan Rus'), but was brought from the outside by those with
previously-developed historical consciousness. In this sense, history
and archaeology are on mutual non-speaking terms.

2.
History, like any other exact science, is an abstract, intellectual
discipline. It is concerned first with establishing and systematizing
historical facts by analytic "experiments," i.e., research into specific
issues, and then the construction of relevant hypotheses. However,

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 255

since the historian can neither reconstruct the past "wie es eigentlich
gewesen" (contrary to Ranke), nor "re-experience" or "re-enact the
past" in his own mind (contrary to Dilthey and Croce), he must place
his analytic "experiment" in a broader theoretical context. As ex-
pressed by Marc Bloch, the basis for a proper understanding of any
"historical experiment" is the study, at the universal level (contrary
to Toynbee, however, there is only one, universal historical develop-
ment, not that of separate cultures), of the function of selected "his-
torical facts" that are part of a larger system, and not the study of the
historical facts themselves. This system or pattern contains various
points of intersection along lines demarcated by economic, cultural,
and political developments, which occur at both synchronical, i.e.,
static, and diachronical, i.e., dynamic, levels. The real task of the
historian is to recognize the system and to discover its common
denominators.
Now, a few words about source study. One should never approach
a source without prior philological and historical analysis. Con-
versely, reflecting the perspectivism of Ortega y Gasset, it is neces-
sary to embrace all the sources of a given epoch in order to recon-
struct the multiperspectivity inherent in them. History, I stress again,
is an exact science that can produce accurate answers only when the
full perspective of a given problem is discerned.

3.
Before dealing with the problem of the "Origin of Rus'," it is
necessary to settle some methodological questions. From what has
already been said, it is clear that there is only one possible way to
discuss the emergence of the Rus' state, and that is as a historical
experiment within a larger system.
History begins at Sumer in Mesopotamia in the third millennium
B.C. The ancient Greeks, who discovered the human being and
scientific history, together with the Romans, those pragmatic empire-
builders, transferred the focal point of western historical develop-
ment to the basin of the Mare Nostrum, or Mediterranean Sea. Until
the ninth-tenth centuries A.D., history was essentially concentrated
in the Mare Nostrum. Because China was isolated from Europe at
that time, it is excluded from discussion here.
Within this time span, i.e., from the period of the Roman Empire

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 256 The Russian Review

to the ninth century, three significant historical events, each produc-

ing chain reactions, took place that are relevant to the emergence o
Rus' in the ninth century:
(1) The desertion of the Roman Limes (Rhine-Danube line) by the
Roman legions (c. 400 A.D.);
(12) The organization of a new type of steppe empire-the Avar
realm centered in present-day Hungary (c. 568-799 A.D.);
(3) The intrusion of the Arabs into the basin of Mare Nostrum
(c. 650 A.D.).
The first historical event, the desertion of the Roman Limes, pro-
voked the migration of peoples and the organization of Germanic
semi-civilized realms and nomadic Paces within Imperial territory
and/or regions closest to the Roman frontiers. The most important
of these was the Germanic Frankish realm established first in the
Netherlands and then in Gaul, since the Franks were the only bar-
barians who adopted the "correct," catholic variant of Christianity.
Their cooperation with Papal Rome was to become the cornerstone
of Western European development.

4.
Before discussing the significance of the next two historical events,
the emergence of the Avar realm and the Arab intrusion, I wish to
present and define three sets of terms: 1) "officina gentium ... velut
vagina nationum"; 2) "nomadic empire" and "nomadism"; and 3)
"the nomads of the sea," specifically the Vikings and Vaerings
(Varjagi).
The first concept was introduced by the Gothic historian Jordanes
(551 A.D.). In describing the fate of the Goths he remarked: "From
the same Scandza Island [Scandinavia], which acts like a manufac-
tory [workshop] of peoples (officina gentium), or to be more exact,
like a vagina of nations, went out, according to tradition, the Goths
with their king Berig." There were two places in Eurasia where the
great migrations of peoples normally originated: the Arabian Desert
in the west-the "home" of all Semitic peoples; and the Gobi Desert
in Mongolia-the true vagina nationum of all Altaic peoples, i.e., the
Huns, Turks, Mongols, and Mandju-Tunguzes. For centuries scholars
advanced various theories to explain this unusual state of affairs.
Some medieval scholars even suggested that the nomads, like locusts,

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 257

were born at regular intervals from the sand and therefore reap-
peared in periodic population explosions. We, certainly, cannot ac-
cept this ingenious explanation and must also dismiss some recent
theories, e.g., that climatic changes dessicated the steppe and caused
movements that became a chain-reaction migration. Climatological
studies have proved that no significant changes in climate occurred
during the historical millennia. Also, careful study of primary
sources, such as the Chinese annals, has made it clear that the
nomads could migrate only if their horses were well-fed, healthy,
and strong. Therefore, population movement never took place during
times of famine or restraint. Arabia and Mongolia became the centers
of population migrations not because both were deserts, but because
both were located on the crossroads of important commercial high-
ways that connected agricultural and political centers. Having
moved there, the nomads assured themselves control of these com-
mercial routes and, at the same time, gained the opportunity to
blackmail the given sedentary power with options for retreat or
escape.
As for the terms "nomadic empire" and "nomadism," it is necessary
to point out that a nomadic pax is a confederation of several tribes
whose primary source of existence is the grazing of livestock. The
military mobility of these tribes ensures the functioning of interna-
tional trade and the control of trade routes, which are the real bases
of the nomad economy. A nomadic pax cannot emerge nor exist per
se. Rather, it always develops in response to the challenge of a
sedentary society. For instance, the moment a given agricultural
empire (Rome, Iran, China) developed economic stability and
achieved a measure of prosperity (i.e., established international com-
mercial ties), nomads were tempted to try their luck in obtaining a
portion of its El Dorado. The typical pattern was as follows.
Within a nomadic tribe in Arabia/Mongolia, a daring leader might
appear who is successful in robbing a wealthy caravan. His fame im-
mediately spreads, and people from the surrounding areas flock to his
territory in order to take part in the promising enterprise. Now be-
gins the period of training, like the one so vividly described in all
primary sources dealing with the emergence of the Mongolian power
led by Temujin/Cinggis Qa'an. Raids become more frequent and
grow constantly in size until the time is ripe for the leader to unite

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
258 The Russian Review

all Eurasian nomadic tribes-kindred and alien-and to start an open

war against the given sedentary empire. If the nomads are victorious,
their charismatic clan replaces the sedentary dynasty and within two
or three generations the acculturalization of the most active nomadic
elements occurs. Thus, one nomadic cycle is concluded.
To exemplify the parallelism and synchronism which existed be-
tween the nomadic races and sedentary empires, let us recall that
the third century B.C. was a time of development for not only three
sedentary empires (Rome, Arsacide Iran, and the Han dynasty in
China) but also for the nomadic pax of the Huns (Hsiung-nu) cen-
tered in Mongolia. By about 220 A.D. the power of all four of these
states had nearly simultaneously collapsed.
Hence, economic achievements, not natural calamities, were re-
sponsible for the activity of the vagina nationum of the Eurasian
desert steppe in the period 200 B.c.-220 A.D., just as later the eco-
nomic decline of the sedentary empires effected the disintegration
of the Hunnic Pax.
With regard to the last term, one may read about the nomads of
the steppe and the nomads of the sea already in the history of ancient
Egypt, and see there the cooperation which existed between the two.
In studying the so-called Viking Age in European history, one can-
not but see a striking similarity in the emergence and structure of
the realms established by the nomads of the sea. In their emergence,
the role of vagina nationum was placed either by some rocky island
coast or peninsula (e.g., Jutland, Scandinavia, Estonia), or by a
marshy interior, whose great lakes were connected by waterways to
a sea (Ladoga, later Novgorod) that was located near important trade
routes. The mobility that the nomads of the steppe attained by using
horses or camels was assured to the nomads of the sea by their ships.
Here let me also mention the role of capital which was provided
by professional international merchants. The latter were, of course,
interested in maintaining peace along international trade routes. Un-
til the sixteenth century only nomadic realms were in a position to
provide such a service. Therefore, we witness the close cooperation
that existed between the international merchants of Eurasia and the
nomadic charismatic clans. For instance, the future Cinggis Qa'an
was certainly a military genius, but without the capital provided to
him by the Muslim Khwarizmian merchants (who at that time con-

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 259

trolled the tradeways from Iran to China), he would have been un-
able to maintain his enormous army and to supply his soldiers with
arms and provisions. The moment a promising unifier of the steppe
emerged, the international merchants of the region did everything
possible to secure his cooperation. Therefore, we should not be sur-
prised to learn from the sources that, after China and Eastern Europe
were conquered by the Mongols, Iranian merchants from Central
Asia ruled them as governors, tax farmers, and the like.
Throughout the Middle Ages the towns in the Eurasian steppe as
well as those within the sphere of the Mare Balticum, or the Baltic
Sea, were created not by the native population, but by foreign in-
ternational traders. In Eurasia, these were, as already mentioned,
Iranians; in northeastern Europe, they were first Jews and Frisians,
and later Saxon-Germans of the Hansa.
Up to this point, I have used the terms "nomadism" and "nomads"
in the traditional sense. But these terms, taken from anthropology,
have no relevance as historical concepts. If we read that between
550 A.D. and 740 A.D. the Turks of Central Asia were masters of a
"nomadic" empire, and the Ottomans, being Turks, ergo nomads,
created an empire, we are faced with the following problem: Was
the Ottoman empire also "nomadic"? The answer is "no," since the
common denominator in that syllogism is not "nomadism," but em-
pire.
The only permanent element in the so-called Eurasian "pastoral
nomadism" was the idea of an empire, or pax. This was created to
produce economic profit and therefore always resulted in cooper-
ation between a steppe aristocracy and an elite among international
traders, who were usually of Iranian origin. This symbiotic relation-
ship was recognized by Kasghari, a philologist of the eleventh cen-
tury, who noted a Turkic proverb: Tatsiz Turk bolmas, bassiz birk
bolmas-"There is no Tat [Iranian merchant] except in the company
of a Turk, [just as] there is no cap unless there is a head to put it
on." When any ruling class of the steppe pax lost its charisma, it was
replaced by another. Similarly variable was the territory of the pax;
if necessary, a new territory would be acquired provided it had
similar significance from the viewpoint of economic strategy.
In order to keep the empire running, it was essential to maintain a
standing army and to have a functioning bureaucracy. As was the

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 260 The Russian Review

case in contemporary Western Europe, it was impossible for the

creators of the steppe pax to produce enough cash to pay for these
essentials until the thirteenth century. The only alternative was to
use the profits of a pastoral economy for that purpose-a solution
reminiscent of Western feudalism. But the Ottomans had no Eur-
asian steppe at their disposal. Their solution was, therefore, to create
a huge bureaucratic machinery without individual allegiances that
would produce cash from the conquered territories. Both this ma-
chinery and the elite military units (yeni6eri) were recruited from
specially trained slaves under the Qulluq system, an invention of the
Iranian long-distance merchants of Central Asia, who were often
absent from their homes for long periods of time. The system was so
perfectly constructed that even the head of the Ottoman Empire,
the Sultan, had to be the son of a slave girl.
But the Ottomans were not the first to introduce into history the
system of training slaves to produce a state's ruling elite. This had
already happened in the middle of the sixth century, when a small
band of young but enterprising adventurers from Inner Asia-of both
Altaic and Iranian origin and numbering a few thousand-appeared
in Europe. They called themselves Avars, a name which had be-
longed to a formerly strong steppe power. Use of this name assured
the new group the obedience of distant tribes which the former
Avars once terrified.
Having arrived in Central Europe, the pseudo-Avars chose the
Slavs, a hitherto unknown people, to serve two purposes. First, they
selected from the Slavs recruits for command posts, and, after
thorough training, these recruits became the so-called fsu-pdna
(> Slavic fupan), literally "the shepherds of the (human) cattle."
Second, they used the Slavic masses as cannon-fodder, called befulci
by the contemporary Frankish chronicler Pseudo-Fredegar, "because
they advanced twice to the attack in their war bands, and so covered
the Chuni [meaning Avars]." The selection by the pseudo-Avars of
the Slavs marked their discovery and at the same time their entrance
into history.

5.
From the eighth to tenth centuries there were only two types of
trading settlements in Eurasia: in the East there was the Persian var,
a version of an Oriental city (owned by an individual), or a mixture

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 261

of var with a classical polis; in the West there was a permanent or

semi-permanent trading place for traveling merchants called in
Germanic vik (in Romance, portus), located in the vicinity of a burgh
or bishop's see. The frontier between the var and vik types of settle-
ments was the river Elbe.
In both types there were local or foreign workers who served the
merchants as guards, mercenaries, shippers, etc., much as the later
qazaqs (Cossacks) did in Eastern Europe. To the west of the Elbe
these people were called Vikings; to the east of the Elbe, they were
known as Vaerings (> Varjag). From time to time these workers
wrested their independence from their employers. Since they had
learned all the details of a given trade, their coups were usually suc-
cessful and then interpreted by the medieval chroniclers as "mirac-
ulous tragedies."
It is futile to attempt to establish the nationality of the Vikings and
Vaerings. They had none! They were, above all, professionals ready
to serve anyone who needed their skills and could pay for their
services.
Here one should mention that the sources also confirm the co-
operation through trade between the nomads of the sea and rivers
and the nomads of the steppe, as well as between the nomads of the
steppe and their local helpers in towns-Viking, Vaering/Varjag, or
anyone else. One clear example is the case of the ancestors of the
Hungarians, originally Fennic nomads of the rivers, who became
partners of the Turkic nomads of the steppe.

III. Eastern Europe Enters the Historical Scene (Ninth Century):

Emergence of Rus'
1.
Eastern Europe entered the historical scene, i.e., the era for which
written records exist, in the ninth century as a result of its discovery
by the civilization of the Mare Nostrum, which created there its
colonial "duplication," the economic-cultural sphere of the Mare
Balticum. One may ask the legitimate question: Why did this occur
in the ninth century, and not in the fifth or twelfth? What incentive
stimulated the culture of the Mare Nostrum to discover Eastern
Europe shortly before the ninth century?
The emergence of the Arab Muslim empire c. 650 had split the
Mare Nostrum into two independent parts, the Muslim southern and

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 262 The Russian Review

eastern littoral, and the Christian northern shore. The greatest event
in the history of the Mare Nostrum after that was the Abbasside
revolution in 750. What caused this turning point? By 740 the Arabs
had already conquered all the territory they could control. In the
north, they had gone as far as Frankish Gaul, but Tours and Poitiers
convinced them that the Pyrenees were a reasonable frontier. In the
south, they had reached the Sahara Desert, but their camels could
not cross it, and so the Sahara became the frontier. To the east they
touched the Syr Darya and the Taraz rivers, where their encounter
with the waiting Chinese persuaded both sides that this, too, should
be accepted as a frontier.
There were no economic problems during this heyday of Arab
conquest, for immense booty supported the kind of welfare state
system that was emerging. But by 740 booty was no longer being
captured, and it became imperative to exchange the war economy
for a system of production. This meant that both the old Roman
(Western and Eastern) and the Persian factories had to be restored
to productive capability. The Abbasside government then confronted
a problem that is familiar to all of us today-that of energy gener-
ation. Until the industrial revolution of the nineteenth century, the
only profitable source of energy was slave labor. But where was one
to get slaves at that time? Neither Muslims nor Christians were per-
mitted by their religion to enslave their own believers. Wars waged
between the Christians and Muslims produced prisoners of war
whom both sides sought to exchange. But there was a vast territory
beyond the cultural world of that time, east of the Elbe River and
west and north of the Syr Darya River. This territory was soon recog-
nized as a reservoir of potential slaves, who were now appended to
the Mediterranean term Saqlab = Sclav. The idea of slave trade
may be repugnant to us today, but we should not forget that in the
Middle Ages, as in the days of the Roman Empire, slaves were re-
garded as an important commodity. The importation of slaves was a
highly respected profession, requiring experience, expediency, and
proficiency.

3.
The territory called Saqlabiya, described above, now became (as
did Africa from the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries) a hunting

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 263

ground from which one could obtain the important commodity

called saqaliba, or slaves. Arabic geographers during the Classic
period of Islamic science (tenth century) give a detailed description
of how hunters from the Christian West (Franks, Spaniards) and
from the Islamic East (Khwarizmians) pursued their trade. Special
factories whose purpose was the production of eunuchs were estab-
lished in Verdun in the west and in Khwarizm in the east.
The ninth-century Arabic author, Ibn Khurdadhbeh, who, as chief
of the Abbasside intelligence system, had expert knowledge of trade
routes and trading companies visiting the Caliphate, informs us that
only two international trading companies engaged in the Eurasian
slave trade: the Jewish Radhaniya and the non-Jewish Ris. A de-
tailed analysis of this source reveals that the two trading companies
were not active simultaneously, and that the former operated earlier.
In fact, the corporation of the Rfs replaced the corporation of the
RadhSniya in Eastern Europe. Along with the Annales Bertiniani,
which mention the existence of a ruler of the Ris (Rhos) in 839, Ibn
Khurdadhbeh's information, written sometime between 840 and 880,
is the earliest mention of the Ruis in the "existing" sources.
Now we are faced with an unexpected phenomenon. The Rus,
who had just emerged from obscurity, were already skilled inter-
national merchants. Who were these Ris? They were certainly not a
primitive tribal group with no knowledge of geography, foreign
languages, or economics. They must have possessed an idea of the
law of the merchant and-a very important point-they must have
attained creditability in the world of commerce.

4.
History shows us that international trade is closely tied only with
those empires which can protect the merchant, gain for him attrac-
tion, and assure him creditability. Only an imperial political tradi-
tion could provide such elements for groups of international traders.
In the eighth-ninth centuries only two such traditions existed: the
Roman (Western or Eastern) and Arab (Sasanian) imperial heritages.
As my research has proved, the Radhaniya and the Rus were both
based in Roman Gaul, the Radhaniya around Arles and Marseille,
the Riis in a region of present-day south-central France near Rodez
(the old Rutenicis, from Celto-Latin Ruteni or Ruti, which had

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 264 The Russian Review

changed into Rusi in Middle France, and into Rizzi in Middle

German).

5.
The Radhaniya discovered Eastern Europe as a commercial base
shortly after 750 and, as numismatic data has confirmed, their ac-
tivity continued until the 830s. They traded slaves for silver coins,
called dirhems, struck in Qayruwan in North Africa. The hoards of
dirhems found in Eastern Europe are limited to those minted be-
tween the 760s and 830s.
It is clear why the Radhaniya were the first traders to enter
Eastern Europe. With the division of the Mare Nostrum about 660,
neither Muslims nor Christians could travel and trade freely on the
sea, since they were in a continuous state of war. Only former Roman
subjects who were of Jewish faith could travel without danger from
Marseille to Qayruwan (North Africa) and from there to Constanti-
nople. Their destination was the capital of the Turkic Khazars, where
it was easy to get slaves. The Volga and Don Rivers soon developed
into a highway of slave trade, known in Arabic sources as Nahr as-
Saqaliba, which means the "Highway of the Slaves," not the "Slavic
River," as patriotic historians of Eastern Europe often render it.
As a result of the cooperation between the Radhaniya and the
Khazars, the military and economic leaders of the Khazar state con-
verted to Judaism. This act caused internal conflict, since the theor-
etical ruler of Khazaria, the Khagan, felt duty-bound to maintain the
Old Turkic religion.

6.
In the meantime, the non-Jewish fellow merchants from Rodez/
Rutenicis had determined to seek access to this eastern El Dorado.
Since they could not use the Mare Nostrum, they (like Christopher
Columbus at a later date) decided to circumnavigate.
Old Scandinavian tradition knows a paramount event whose date
modern scholars have established as c. 770. I refer to the Bravellir
battle between the Old Danish (Skjgldungar) and Frisian (Rutenian)
dynasties, which ended with the victory of the latter. Since among
the battle's participants the name Rus' and its correspondences are
attested, we may assume that by that time the Rodez company had
already entered into competition with the Radhaniya.

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 265

The Frisians began their maritime ventures with the Anglo-Saxon

colonization of Britain (c. 440 A.D.), and maintained a monopoly on
navigation in the north for a considerable time. But, as their trading
activity developed, they passed on more and more navigational ex-
perience to the Scandinavians, who during the eighth century made
astonishing progress in shipbuilding. Dorestad, a Frisian emporium
or "market town," located between a Carolingian fort and the fork
of the Rhine Delta, specialized in Eastern European ventures.
Having established their main berik (judicial district) and chief mar-
ket at Reric (< Beric) in the western Baltic Obodriti territory (prob-
ably in the vicinity of the later Liibeck), the Frisians gradually took
control of the Mare Balticum in cooperation with Scandinavian
chiefs who were eager to acquire new income. Soon "Birch" (Birka)
settlements sprang up at every prospective harbor place along the
Mare Balticum. These were the precursors of cities in the later
Hanseatic League, and among them was Birka, in the Swedish
Uppland, which acquired a leading role because of its commercially
strategic position. It seems that at one time the terms Rus' and/or
Birka (Birch) were a kind of trademark for the companies from
Rodez.

7.
Helped by Frisian intermediaries, the Rodez/Rus' trading com-
pany had at their disposal navigators, disciplined by fierce Scandi-
navian kings, the konungar. They soon developed a "Danish" society
that I call "the nomads of the sea," and by the end of the eigth
century started their activity as Vikings.
The Scandinavian peninsula was soon circumnavigated and the
area called Biarmia (Zavolo6skaja 6ud') was discovered. A route was
also discovered from Birka in the Swedish Uppland via Birca on the
Aaland archipelago and the Gulf of Finland to the Neva River. Both
routes continued to the Volga Basin. New routes to El Dorado fol-
lowed, and along these the trading company Rus' established settle-
ments. The most important was located on the peninsula near
Jaroslavl' and the later Rostov (Sarskoje gorodi?e of the Old Chron-
icle), originally populated by the Fennic Merjans. It was managed
by the charismatic Viking clan of Ynglingar. Another Frisian-Rus'
trans-Baltic route went from the Wendish Berik (> Reric, after 804
A.D. the Danish Haithabu) to the mouth of the Western Dvina River

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
266 The Russian Review

(Diina), continuing along its course until it reached the river O

the main western tributary of the Volga, through a system of p
ages.
In Gnezdovo, near the later town of Smolensk, 3826 grave mou
(tumvi) bear witness to Varangian activity during the eigth to te
centuries. Under the leadership of the Gothic Ylfingar clan, two
portant trade towns, Polock and Smolensk, developed. They wer
colonized by Baltic Wends, whose neighbors called them Kriv
Those settlements which acquired town status organized themsel
into city-states or into confederations of city-states, and invited
perienced members of the West Baltic charismatic clans to rule o
them. This was the case with the confederation of three tow
Aldeigjuborg (Ladoga), Beloozero and Izborsk, each representing
different "nationality" (Lagoda-the Ests, Beloozero-the Vepsia
and Izborsk-the Slavonic Wends), who invited the mighty Frisia
Danish king Hraerikr (Rjurik) to be their ruler. Novgorod ch
Gostomysl from a Wendic charismatic clan.
In short, by the period 800-860 Eastern Europe had already be
apportioned into two spheres of interest. While the south remain
divided between three formerly nomadic paces (Avars, Bulgars, a
Khazars), northeastern Europe ("Great Sweden" = Magna Scyt
became the dominion of a newly-activated society of the Ma
Balticum, led by charismatic clans and agents of the Rus' compan
Unhappily, no accounts of peoples who followed the routes esta
lished by the Frisian-Rus'-Viking cooperation have survived.
there is no reason to doubt that enterprising individuals and gro
of seafaring peoples tried their luck in East European trade, regar
less of their origin or ties to the aforementioned trading compan
On the other hand, some agents of the Rus'-Frisian business empo
could seek their fortunes outside this vast foreign country.
Let us now characterize the developing society of the Mare Balt
cum region. It was certainly not a national culture in the moder
sense. The "Danes," the Frisians, and the Rus' operating there app
as a multiethnic, multilingual and non-territorial community com
posed of "nomads of the sea" and of urban dwellers in Orien
(owned and controlled by lords) and partly polls type towns a
trading settlements. Confirming the theory that the market, as
economic organization, is the creation of traders and not of farm

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 267

or artisans, the Rus' and Frisians appear as international merchants.

In this kind of professional society, i.e., in a "lower" type of culture,
there is as yet no place for one literary or sacred language, which is
the basis of a "higher culture." In urban trading settlements, differ-
ent languages severed different functions. Vernacular (everyday
speech) was the medium of communication within the family and
clan, while a system of at least two or more linguae francae were
reserved to referential usage. In short, a professional society de-
veloped a low level, professional culture that was bound neither to
a specific territory nor to a higher religion that might be expressed
through one sacred, written language.
Considering this situation, Constantine Porphyrogenitus recorded
the names of the Dnieper cataracts in the two linguae francae used
by the representatives of the Mare Balticum culture along the re-
cently established tenth century Dnieper trade route. Along the
Volga route, Khwarizmian and Bulgarian-Hunic were used as lin-
guae francae, while in the North-Dvina Basin Cudian (Estonian) and
Middle Persian (Pahlavi) continued to serve as a means of inter-
national communication.
Clearly, then, it is impossible to speak of a national Swedish cul-
ture in the eighth to tenth centuries. In the society of the Mare
Balticum, all peoples, whether Norsemen, Wends (Slavs), Balts, or
Finns, were equal members. Since the most ancient and highly-
developed religious cult of the time was centered in Swedish Upp-
sala, a base suited by nature for seafaring adventure, personal names
of Scandinavian origin held great attraction for the region's peoples,
regardless of their ethnic origin. It was also a contemporary custom
(known from its usage by the Rurikids) to have two or three names,
depending on spheres of activity or marital connections.
The Kabar revolution in Chazaria, described by Constantine
Porphyrogenitus, was the struggle of the Khagan and his supporters
to free the realm from the supremacy of the majordomo (beg) and
the Judaism he imposed. After his defeat, the Khazar Khagan was
forced to leave the country and found refuge in the Rus' company's
settlement near Rostov. The Old Scandinavian and Oriental sources
hint that he later married a girl of the originally Uppsala-based clan
Ynglingar, the most illustrious dynasty within the sphere of the Mare
Balticum. Since the Khagan had political charisma, his stay in the

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 268 The Russian Review

commercial settlement of the Rus' company elevated it to the status

of an "imperial" political center different from the colonies headed
by other Rus' representatives, as, for example, the Dvina Ylfingar.
The result was the emergence of the K(h)aganat Rus', about which
our first information is dated 839 A.D.
It was probably not accidental that the Byzantine emperor was
concerned with the security of the Rhos envoys, because since the
time of Heraclius (d. 641) a traditional friendship had existed be-
tween the Byzantine and Khazar dynasties. The famous sermon by
Metropolitan Hilarion, Slovo o zakone i blagodati, had styled Volod-
imer the Great as Kagan. This meant that he was allowed to marry
Anna, who was porphyrogenita, that is, she was conceived in the
royal bedchamber. For that same reason, Anna was previously re-
fused to the western Emperor Otto II, who was considered a par-
venu.

Already during the 830s the Volga Rus' were to eliminate

Radhaniya from competition in Eastern Europe.

IV. The "Southern" Impact on the Emerging Rus' State

1.
Up to this point, we have observed the East European scene pri-
marily from a northern perspective, from that of the Mare Balticum.
Yet we have also noticed the interaction on the steppe that devel-
oped into a typical cooperation between the "nomads of the sea"
(the so-called Vikings/Vaerings) and the "nomads of the steppe" (the
Khazar Dynasty). This synthesis resulted in the Volga-Rus' Khag-
anate of the ninth-tenth centuries. By the turn of the tenth century,
however, two sets of developments had occurred in the sphere of the
Mare Nostrum which affected this synthesis, namely, Charlemagne's
conquest of the Avars and the Cyrillo-Methodian mission.
The first began with Charlemagne's conquest of the mighty East
Central European Avar realm, which resulted in the Renovatio
Imperii of 800 A.D. and the "pacification" of the Slavs, the slaves of
the former Avar Pax (863-885 A.D.). There can be no doubt that
Charlemagne's action had an economic goal-i.e., to establish a land
route to the Khazarian Itil, the famous "highway" Regensburg
(Ratisbona)-Itil along which Kiev and later Vienna were to develop.
The pacification of the Avars was not a simple undertaking. By

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 269

the 860s, both Romes (even though they were on non-speaking terms
-I refer here to the alienation between Patriarch Photius and Pope
Nicholas I) decided to fill the vacuum left by the dissolution of the
Avar realm by elevating the former slaves of the Avars, the Slavs.
Their barbaric tongue was now to become a sacred language along-
side Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. Since at that time only Constanti-
nople had scholars who could create a new literary language
and eventually translate Christian religious writing, the brothers
Constantine/Cyril and Methodius, friends of Photius, journeyed
from the eastern capital of Christendom to Moravia, located on
territory claimed by the Roman pope.

2.

The paradox of the Cyrillo-Methodian mission was that the

Moravian princes, those homines novi who inherited the charisma
of the Avar Pax, failed to take advantage of the extremely important
cultural weapon they were offered. Having adopted Christianity in
the Slavonic rite in the hope that their Bavarian neighbors would
treat them as equals, they were angered to realize that they had
chosen the wrong rite to serve this vital purpose. The Moravians
banished the Slavic missionaries and exchanged their "inferior" rite
for the Latin faith.
But by that time the Bulgarian rulers, who for almost two cen-
turies had been decimating their strength in a struggle for supremacy
with the Byzantine emperors, decided to merge with their Slavic
slaves into one state. They too were obliged to embrace Christianity
in order to be recognized as a European power. After long consider-
ation, Khan Bogoris personally accepted the Greek rite. His son,
Symeon, however, seized upon the opportunity to appropriate the
abandoned Slavonic rite. He invited the banished Byzantine mis-
sionaries to his domain and began to lay the foundation for an in-
dependent Slavic Bulgarian high culture. In contrast to the Moravian
princes, Symeon, a scion of the Attila dynasty, had no inferiority
complex: in his view the Byzantine emperors were the parvenus.
The Danube Bulgars were probably helped by the Black Bulgars
of the Taman peninsula who, as the descendants of Kobrat's Magna
Bulgaria (sixth and seventh centuries), remained on territory where
the Hellenistic culture of the Bosporus Kingdom survived. In the

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 270 The Russian Review

ninth and tenth centuries this was the only spot in Europe where th
idea of the transfer and fusion of cultures was alive. It was here tha
Constantine/Cyril learned Hebrew and was initiated into the art
translation. As long as the Bulgars were pagans, the danger the
posed was considerable, but not critical. The emergence of a pr
Bulgarian version of Eastern Christianity, however, was a direc
threat to Constantinople's cultural and religious hegemony, and
led Emperor Basil to undertake swift and repressive action, wh
earned him the title, "Slayer of the Bulgars." After 1018 Bulga
ceased to exist as a political power, and after 1036 as a cultu
power as well.

3.
The second half of the ninth century was also to be of basic impor-
tance for Eastern Europe, for during that time Kiev and the area of
the present-day Ukraine entered the realm of history. The impetus for
this development was the emergence of Constantinople as the eco-
nomic capital of Eurasia. This occurred during the rule of the able,
so-called Macedonian Dynasty of Byzantine emperors, who decisive-
ly defeated the Arab fleets and restored Byzantine supremacy over
the Mare Nostrum (especially at the battle of Mayyafariqin in 863).
Naturally, Constantinople then won the attention of the "Vikings,"
the only society in Eurasia, apart from Byzantium and the Arabs,
which maintained naval fleets during the ninth and tenth centuries.
The Carolingians, for instance, remained complete strangers to the
sea until after their demise.
Soon after the Rus' military encounter in Constantinople in 860
A.D., the famous "Route from the Varangians to the Greeks" came
into being. The Dnieper River replaced the Volga, and Kiev, the
former Khazarian garrison point on the Dnieper ford, emerged in
the second half of the tenth century as a promising satellite of the
new economic capital of the world-Istanbul (eis Ti v oxtLv), or Con-
stantinople. Around 930, Igor of the Volga Rus' Khagan dynasty
conquered Kiev.

4.

There are at least three periods in the history of the Khagans of

Rus': the Volga stage (c. 839-930), the Dnieper stage (c. 930-1036),

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 271

and the Kievan stage (1036-1169). During the first two, the Rus'
ruled over peoples rather than specific territories. They eliminated
competitors when necessary (like the Polock Ylfingar), extracted
tributes, and controlled the marketplaces along the following two
main international routes: 1) the Volga and Dvina trade routes, im-
portant during the ninth and the first half of the tenth centuries, with
their two branches of Islamic-centered commerce-the Bulgar and
the Itil; and 2) the Dnieper trade route of the tenth century from
the Varangians through Kiev to Greek Constantinople, then the cen-
ter of international economy. The third, or Kievan stage marked the
beginning of the cultural consolidation of Rus' and an attempt at
their nationalization.

5.
After 1036, the Kievan ruler Jaroslav routed the Pe6enegs (the
nomad successors of the Khazars) and established his own version
of the Roman imperium, centered now at St. Sophia in Kiev. He
adopted Church Slavonic (which, following the fall of the Danube
Bulgars, was again without an owner) as the realm's sacred language.
Jaroslav also began the transformation of Rus' into a territorial
community consisting of the lands of Kiev, Cernihiv, and Perejaslav.
The terms Rus' and rus'skaja zemlia (Rus' land) then appeared in the
second half of the eleventh century and beginning of the twelfth
century with the new, specific meaning of Southern Rus' (the Ukraine
of today). Only now, during this time, did a cultural revolution take
place. Transformed from a multiethnic, multilingual, and non-
territorial community with a "low" culture, Kievan Rus' was en-
dowed with a new "high" culture based on a foreign, written, and
sanctified Slavic language (traditionally known as Church Slavonic),
and as a result appeared on the stage of East European history.
This solution, whereby Kievan Rus' emerged as a political and
religious center, appears all the more logical since, after the fall of
the independent Danube Bulgarian state, its church and Slavonic
rite, with its relatively solid corpus of ecclesiastical and state "po-
litical" texts, were left without an owner. Consequently, it was pos-
sible for Kievan Rus' to acquire immediately a cultural province
without the danger of loss of identity. Thus the Rus' rite (rus'kyj
jazyk) originated with a Slavonic sacred language and the Cyrillic

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 272 The Russian Review

script. This Slavonic Rus' rite became the basis for the "nationaliza-
tion" or fusion of Slavic Polanian and non-Slavic Rus'ian elements
into one Rus'ian land (rus'skaja zemlja) that became the permanent
settlement for the Rus', specifically on the territory of the Kiev,
Cernihiv, and Perejaslav principalities, i.e., on the central Ukrainian
territories.

Up to that time the Rus' were only the foreign ruling class based
on a primitive organization of nomads of the sea and nomads of
rivers who periodically collected taxes (poljud'je) for their prince but
were not connected with any territory. In order to invest Jaroslav's
dynasty with Christian legitimacy, it was necessary to revive the cult
of his half brothers, Boris and Gleb. Although slain in an ordinary
power struggle, these sons of a Bulgarian princess were canonized by
the Kievan Metropolitan Joan, himself a Bulgarian, almost immedi-
ately after their deaths (c. 1020). Jaroslav, the proper founder of the
Rus' dynasty, succeeded in establishing his new image as a good
brother who avenged the death of the saintly innocents (although he
himself was probably involved in their slaying) and in taking over
for himself and his dynasty the charisma of SS. Boris and Gleb.
He decreed that "the new feast of the Rus' land" (prazdnik novyi
Rus'kyja zemlja) in commemoration of Boris and Gleb be celebrated
with extraordinary solemnity six times annually, with July 24 as the
central feast-day. It was on that date in 1072 and 1115, on the
occasion of the transfer of the relics of these saints, that massive "all-
national" manifestations took place. In both cases these manifesta-
tions were used to publish redactions of original analistic collections
created especially for the occasion at the first intellectual center in
Eastern Europe-the Caves Monastery of Kiev. Only now, in their
Kievan stage, with the realization of their own historical conscious-
ness, do the Rus' emerge as a legitimate historical entity.

V. Conclusions
The two-hundred-year-old Normanist versus Anti-Normanist co
troversy has been unable to solve the problem of the origin of Ru
Therefore, it has been replaced here by another theory based sole
on historical criteria and in the broader context of universal develop-
ment.

In the eighth and ninth centuries there emerged a multiethnic,

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Origin of Rus' 273

multilingual, unified social and economic entity (of

type) represented by the maritime and trading socie
Balticum and transplanted by the bearers of the cult
Nostrum. It took more than two centuries for the multiethnic and
multilingual commercial ventures of some trading companies and
nomads of the sea to adapt the political structure and charisma as-
sociated with empires of the steppe and to transform this into a
Christian and linguistically Slavic high culture that became Kievan
Rus'.

This content downloaded from

194.27.153.96 on Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:30:15 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms