<

My opposition to the Western View of the Origins of Kievan Rus

I have taken issue in the fact the the whole Historical Science of the Western World seems content with the version of Kievan Rus' history, which begins with a savage prince of Scandinavian blood, Ryurik. It seems that the only two pieces of evidence the proponents of such a theory have been able to present are the pice from "Povest' o Vremennikh Let",a Russian monk's chronological work, where Ryurik seems to have been extended an invitation to rule Novhorod, and the find of Swedish coins and jewelry in Moscow. The latter seems to ve ridiculous as Moscow is not a contemporary of Ryurik. In fact, the first note of Moscow comes from about 1147, which is exactly 287 years after the aforementioned invitation. Nevermind the even more significant finds of Persian and Judean artifacts! So, could Ryurik be of Iranian blood then??? The former is more interesting. It may not be very far from certain similar event in Novgorod's history. But the significance of this event has definitely been of a lesser kind. Personally, I think it describes a case of ancient racquet, where the citizens of Novgorod decide to choose the lesser evil by inviting Ryurik, an advanturer, a bandit and a racqueteer to defend the city against other such predators. You see, it is cheeper to feed your own fiend than to defend against a multitude of such bandits. With time, Ryurik and his kin russify and become Rus. Note: unlike the Western opinion that Ryurik's band (which they mistakenly call a people) brought the name "Rus" to the Eastern Slavs, I believe that Rus is a much older term of slavic origin and has been in common use several hundred years before Ryurik.

A couple of facts may be the best evidence that the word "Rus" has nothing to do with Ryurik:

  1. The Eastern Slavs never used word "Rus" to describe the vikings (including Ryurik's band). They had used a word "varyagi" or Varangians.
  2. The word "Rus" has been used by Greeks in their chronicles as long ago as II century A.D.
  3. Arabs in mid-8th century were very specific in defining the location of Rus as a Kingdom on middle Dnieper around Kiev, in the lands of an Eastern Slav Polyane tribal Union. Interestingly, Varyags do not appear in Kiev until 860 AD, in fact, their first arrival in Russia is dated at around 750 AD in Staraya Ladoga.
  4. River Ros' flows through the lands populated by a Slav Polyane tribal Union at the centre of the future Kievan Rus, in the area directly adjacent to Kiev (Kyiv)
  5. When Andriy, the prince (knyaz') of Vladimir planned an attack on Kyiv, he said that he was "going against the Rus". This and other evidence supports the opinion that even in Kievan Rus, the word "Rus" implied the Southern Rus lands, namely the principalities of Kiev, Chernihov, and Pereyaslavl' (possibly, even Galich and Volhyn). Question then is why would one not use the word Rus for Novgorod, where Ryurik had taken up power initially

My Homepage
Back to My HomePage

Last updated by Eugene Berkovich on