While the film “Viking” is in cinemas, the debate “what was it really like?” is raging. Historian Lyudmila Gordeeva presents her vision of the problem specifically for the TV program magazine.
Neither Vladimir the Baptist, nor any of the Rurikovich Russians, the creators of the Russian state, belonged to the bandit tribe of the Scandinavians - the Vikings, who tormented Europe with their raids. The ancestors of the Russians (Rus) were Slavic Varangians who lived for many centuries on the southern and southeastern coast of the Baltic Sea.
Centuries-old dispute
Interest in “where the Russian land came from” goes back to the distant Middle Ages, echoing the centuries-old dispute between supporters of the Norman and anti-Norman (Slavophile) theories. The first, the Normanists, believe that the Russians, led by Rurik, came at the call of the Novgorodians to rule them from Scandinavia-Normandy, most likely from Sweden or Denmark. They say that the Novgorod Slavs who invited Rurik were a backward people, incapable of independent state building. This means that the very emergence of the Russian state is the merit of the Normans, and not even the indigenous Slavs. Therefore, the Russians are, as it were, not a very independent people who are in complete need of external governance.
This theory arose at the beginning of the eighteenth century through the efforts of German historians who worked in the Russian service, G. Bayer and F. Miller. At that time, Russia was fighting with Sweden for access to the Baltic Sea, and, naturally, the question arose about the moral rights of Russians to these territories. The Germans were the first to realize how strengthened the right of a conqueror is if he realizes that he is not just seizing foreign lands, but also returning his own, which originally belonged to his ancestors. They apparently knew well the ancient Frankish sources, which tell with undisguised pride how the Germans conquered the southern and eastern Baltic states, once inhabited by the Slavs, with fire and sword. The Russians at that time did not know these materials; they did not treat their own chronicles with reverence. However, when in 1749 Friedrich Gerhard Miller began to assert in his report on the topic “The Origin of the People and the Russian Name” that it was the Swedes who stood at the origins of Russian statehood, many Russian scientists were indignant.
Academicians, among whom were Vasily Trediakovsky and Mikhail Lomonosov, regarding this report, said that the ungrateful German “in his entire speech did not show a single case to the glory of the Russian people, but only mentioned more that could lead to dishonor.”
The Normanists have no direct evidence, but they have a great desire to put the Russians “in their place” and huge support from German scientists who, as already mentioned, came up with this theory and especially reinforced it under Hitler, who tried to prove that “Deutschland uber alles” - Germany above all, and Russians are an inferior people. And therefore, they say, Russia, as a secondary, dependent state, must submit to the Germans, as it once did to the Normans. Now they have even started making documentaries about the fact that the cities in Rus' were built for us by the Normans, and the culture came from them, and if it weren’t for them, the Russians would probably still be living in dugouts.
The Slavophiles have more solid arguments. All ancient Russian and European chronicles clearly indicate that the Rus-Varangians are Slavs related to the Novgorodians, that they lived on the southern shores of the Baltic, and Rurik, invited by the Novgorodians, was the grandson of their ruler Gostomysl from his daughter Umila. This is mentioned in the Joachim Chronicle, which has come down to us in Tatishchev’s transcription. So, let's look at the most important arguments of the anti-Norman Slavophiles.
Rus' - Varangians from The Tale of Bygone Years
Turning to the oldest Russian source - the chronicle “Tale of Bygone Years” (hereinafter PVL), preserved to this day on parchment from 1377, we must first of all understand for ourselves: whether we believe it or not. And not to act like supporters of the Norman theory: they believe in what confirms their conjectures; they reject what does not correspond. Their whole theory is based on the legend from the PVL about the Novgorodians calling Rurik to reign - they trust this fact. And they neglect the author’s specific indications of the origin of Rurik and the Russians and their place of residence.
Naturally, the copyist of the chronicle, Monk Lawrence, who imprinted his name on the manuscript, did not compose this document himself - he copied it from more ancient sources - and this is his direct indication in the text. And we have no reason to suspect Lavrenty of distorting any facts. In addition, the accuracy of the data that we can verify in our time is impressive. Therefore, it seems to me that we have no reason not to trust the Tale. There is no reason to reject the existence of the Rurik dynasty in our country.
So, the chronicler has no doubt that the Varangians and the Rus are one and the same people. He, as if especially for us, emphasizes that Rus' is not “other” Swedes and not Normans:
“And they went overseas to the Varangians, to Rus'. Those Varangians were called Rus, just as others are called Swedes, and some Normans and Angles, and still others Gotlanders, so are these.” (Translation of all PVL quotes was made by the outstanding scientist D.S. Likhachev).
As if anticipating our future disputes, the chronicler insistently repeats in different places that Rus' is not Swedes, not Normans or Angles, and that the Slavic and Russian people are one: “And the Slavic people and the Russian are one, after all, from the Varangians they were called Russia, and before they were Slavs".
In later years, chroniclers sometimes list the Russians and Varangians separately. This may indicate that these peoples gradually separated. Approximately how the families of the princes Shuisky, Starodubsky, Ryapolovsky, Obolensky, Chernigov were independent from each other, sometimes they were at enmity, but everyone considered themselves descendants of the Rurikovichs. Or, over time, the Dolgorukovs, Repnins, Shcherbatys, Lykovs and others came from the Obolensky family. German medieval chroniclers unanimously confirm that the ancient Prussians also belonged to the Slavic people. And this does not exclude the identity of the Russians and Prussians or their close relationship, which, in turn, gives every reason for the late Rurikovichs to trace their origins to the Prussians. This is captured in some chronicles, in the “Tale of the Princes of Vladimir”, in several messages of Ivan the Terrible.
Here we must keep in mind that by the 12th century, ancient Prussia was conquered by the Germans through brutal wars of extermination, and the surviving Prussians - the Slavs - were assimilated. In the end, the name of the Prussians was appropriated by the invaders. Therefore, later authors call the inhabitants of Prussia Germans. However, at the time we are considering, the Prussians were the masters of their land and still remained Slavs.
“Look at the original about Rurik. In the summer of 6369 (861), a certain governor of Novagorod the Great, named Gostomysl, passed away, and in that year civil strife and blood began to be shed in the city. And he convenes the Ugorodians and speaks to them: “I give you advice, men: send wise men to the Prussian land and call from the existing families of the prince there, so that he can judge us in truth.”
There is a lot of other evidence that the Prussians and Russians are one and the same, or closely related. Some European chroniclers call the Prussians Russians. They, without a doubt, classify both of these peoples as Slavs. Sometimes these two peoples are mentioned as different, and this is natural, given that the documents were created after their separation. A similar version is illustrated by an old Czech legend that once in ancient times three brothers - Lech, Czech and Rus - left the Slavic tribe in different directions and created their own peoples.
Where did our ancestors – the Varangian Russians – live?
To find the answer to this question, we first turn to the author of the PVL, who used both local and European sources (in particular the Byzantine “Chronicle of George Armatol”) and, of course, the family legends of the Rurikids themselves. He defines the origin of all Europeans, including the Slavs and Russians, as the “offspring of Japheth.” Here is what else the author of PVL writes about the place of residence of the Varangians:
“The Poles and Prussians seem to be sitting near the Varangian Sea. The Varangians sit along this sea: from here to the east - to the borders of the Simovs, they sit along the same sea and to the west - to the lands of England and Voloshskaya.
We see that the Varangians (they are also Rus) “sit near the Varangian Sea,” in the same place where the Poles, Prussians and Chuds (the ancestors of today’s Estonians) live, that is, along the southeastern shore of the Baltic Sea. And they occupy such a vast space that it extends its western border “to the land of England.” If we consider that the Danes were then called Angles, it turns out that the lands of the Varangians occupied the territories of the Southern Baltic until present-day Denmark. The fact that the Slavs inhabited the southern coast of the Baltic - up to the Elbe River (in Slavic Laba), which was the border between the Saxons and the Slavs, is confirmed by many European sources.
And in the east, as we see, the lands of the Russian-Varangians extended “to the limits of the Simovs,” that is, almost to the Volga, where the eastern peoples lived. This fact is confirmed by Muslim sources, in particular, the preacher of Islam from Baghdad, Ahmed Ibn Fadlan, in his “Notes on a Journey to the Volga,” where he visited in 922. Next to the ancient Bulgarians, he found and described the Russians, who, unlike the Bulgarians who lived in tents, were already building houses on the banks of the Volga and traveling on ships. Obviously, they controlled the waterways “from the Varangians to the Greeks” along the Dvina River and to the East along the Volga River. The author of PVL even more specifically indicates the habitat of the Varangians in the description of this famous “path”. Here we see a list of names of lakes and seas, rivers and their tributaries, countries and peoples that have survived to this day (almost a thousand years!). The chronicler is accurate in his descriptions, and this only confirms that he can be trusted in what concerns the Varangians:
“When the glades lived separately in these mountains, there was a path from the Varangians to the Greeks and from the Greeks along the Dnieper,<…>. The Dnieper flows from the Okovsky forest and flows to the south, and the Dvina flows from the same forest and heads north, and flows into the Varangian Sea. From the same forest the Volga flows to the east and flows through seventy mouths into the Khvalisskoye Sea (now the Caspian Sea). Therefore, from Rus' you can sail along the Volga to the Bolgars and Khvalis, and go east to the inheritance of Sima, and along the Dvina to the land of the Varangians, from the Varangians to Rome, from Rome to the tribe of Khamov.”
Imagine such an extraordinary miracle that still exists today: from one practical place - the Ochakovsky forest, which is now called the Valdai Hills, four navigable rivers take their source at once. Moreover, they flow in four opposite directions of the world: Lovat - north to Volkhov, and through it to Novgorod, to the Neva River and to the Baltic Sea. The Dvina flows into the same sea, but to the northwest. The Volga moves east to the Caspian Sea, the Dnieper moves south to the Black Sea.
In those distant times, when there were no roads on the Russian Plain, waterways became the main connecting link between many peoples. By portage it was possible to drag ships or plows with goods from one source of the river to another and eventually get to the desired parts of the world. This phenomenon was described by the author of PVL. But the main thing in his description for us is what supporters of the Norman theory do not want to pay attention to: “and the Dvina flows from the same forest, and heads north, and flows into the Varangian Sea.<…>and along the Dvina - to the land of the Varangians, from the Varangians to Rome."
That is, the Dvina and its mouth are the end point of the Baltic coast on the way to the Varangians and, therefore, definitely the land of the Varangians. There is not even a hint that on the way to Rome you need to climb to the north of the Baltic Sea to the Normans. It is not surprising that during excavations in Sweden, including in the ancient city of Birka, where at that time there was a Swedish port, Byzantine coins are a great rarity. It is obvious that the direct route “from the Varangians to the Greeks” went mainly along the Dvina.
It is easy to find out that the chronicle river Dvina is now called the Western Dvina, from here through Belarus it goes to Latvia and there it is renamed Daugavpils. And not far from its mouth stands the city of Riga, founded in 1201 by Latin pilgrims and crusaders. My attempts to find out what was in the lower reaches of the Dvina before the emergence of Riga showed that the Latin preachers of Christianity at the end of the 12th - beginning of the 13th century found here, in addition to the Livonian tribes, which at that time had neither cities nor fortresses, rich Russian city-states in led by kings. An eyewitness and partly participant in those events, Henry of Latvia, talks about this in detail in the Chronicles of Livonia. The author describes with some pride how the crusaders, gathered from all over Europe, rob and destroy local peoples and tribes with rare cruelty, burning their villages and cities.
In particular, the “Chronicles of Livonia” repeatedly mentions the king “Vyachko (Vesceka)” - Vyacheslav from the “Russian castle of Kukenois”, located on the right bank of the Dvina “three miles” from Riga. He also writes about battles with the warriors of “King Vsevolod (rex Wissewaldum) of Herzike,” a Russian military fortress on the Dvina, the center of the principality of the same name, also located in the lower reaches of the Dvina. The fact that the Russians are long-time indigenous residents here is told by the episode of the defeat of the Russian castle of Herzike by the crusaders at the beginning of the 13th century. The author writes about this with pride for the victories of his Latin supporters:
«<…>the Teutons burst through the gates behind them<…>. That day the entire army remained in the city, collected large booty in all its corners, captured clothing, silver and purple, and a lot of cattle; and from the churches, bells, icons (yconias), other decorations, money and a lot of goods, and they took all this with them,<…>and the city was set on fire. Seeing the fire on the other side of the Dvina, the king was in great anguish and exclaimed with groans, sobbing: “Oh Gertsike, dear city! O heritage of my fathers! O unexpected death of my people! Woe is me! Why was I born to see the fire of my city and the destruction of my people!
We see that King Vsevolod, having seen his hometown perish, exclaims that this is “the heritage of my fathers,” that is, the place where many of his ancestors lived, and, therefore, the lower reaches and the mouth of the Western Dvina were the ancient patrimony of the Russian people.
Slavs and Russians in European sources
The first mention of our ancestors - the Russians - is found in the Latin manuscript of the 9th century - the "Annals of Bertin", the original of which is now kept in France. It tells about the life and activities of the Frankish kings and emperors in the period from 830 to 882. In 839, ambassadors from Constantinople (now Istanbul) from the Byzantine emperor Theophilus arrived in the city of Ingelheim on the Rhine River, to the court of the Frankish emperor Ludwig the Pious to conclude a peace treaty. Together with the embassy people, foreigners from the “rhos” people arrived to the Franks, who had to be transported to their homeland.
We should not be confused by the writing of the Russian nation in the form “rhos“. Obviously, the model for this translation was the message of the Byzantine emperor, written, as was customary at that time, in Greek, which had been the state language in Byzantium since the fourth century. The Greeks do not have the letters “u” and “b” in their alphabet and in their speech. They replaced “y” with the only possible letter “w” for them - omega (note that not with the letter “o”), discarding a completely soft sign. So we got the word “rwV”, which the Frankish translator depicted letter by letter. Subsequent Frankish and German authors, more familiar with our people, unanimously called it “Rus” - “Rusci” or “Ruzzi” and even “Rugi”.
The Byzantine ambassadors arrived at Louis's court at a troubling time. His lands were continually subjected to raids by robbers and pogroms from the Scandinavians - the “Normans”, among whom were the Vikings - Danes and Swedes. It is clear that the appearance of uninvited guests among the ambassadors alarmed the emperor, for he was afraid of sending enemy spies. After all, they could find out about affairs in his country, which, due to civil strife, were far from brilliant. Therefore, the emperor treated the guests with great suspicion. As a result of the check, as can be seen from the text, it quickly became clear that his guests were not at all the “Dews” with whom the Franks at that time were obviously in peaceful relations, but precisely those same Swedes “from the Sveonian people” with whom he fought: “Inquiring more carefully into the reason for their arrival, the emperor learned that they were from the people of the Sveons, and decided that they were rather scouts in that country and in ours than supplicants for friendship; he considered it necessary to detain them until he could truly find out whether they came there honestly or not.” Thus, this very first European document about the Russians testifies that they are not Swedes. And the path past the Rhine suggests that the Russians lived somewhere in the nearby region.
The Saxon Einhard, author of the famous book “The Life of Charlemagne,” created between 829 and 836, also confirms that the Slavs in the 9th century, before the start of the Carolingian conquests, occupied the southern coast of the Baltic east of the Elbe River (Laba): “From the western ocean to the East stretches a certain bay<…>. Many peoples live around it: the Danes, as well as the Sweons, whom we call the Normans, own the northern coast and all its islands. The Slavs, Estonians and various other peoples live on the eastern shore.”
Adam of Bremen speaks about this in his book “The Acts of the Hamburg Archbishops,” written in the 1070s: “Beyond the Oder River live first the Pomeranians (Pomerani), then the Poles, whose neighbors on one side are the Prussians (Pruzzi), on the other - Czechs (Behemi), and in the east - Rus' (Ruzzi)." This author also clearly divides its inhabitants into the Swedes, who live in the north, and the Slavs, including the Russians, who inhabit its southern coast: “all the way to Rus' (Ruzzia), where again the end of this bay. So, the shores of this sea from the south are in the power of the Slavs, and from the north - the Swedes (Suedi).”
A popular source on the history of Northern Europe, the Slavic Chronicle by Helmhold of Bossau, covers the period from the eighth century to 1171. The author was a participant in the events of the last part of the Chronicle. He not only repeats the conclusions of Adam of Bremen, but also adds much of what he saw and heard himself:
“Where Polonia ends, we come to the vast country of those Slavs who in ancient times were Vandals, but are now called Vinites or Vinuls. Of these, the first are the Pomeranians, whose settlements extend all the way to the Odra (Oder River). The Odra is “the richest river in the Slavic country”,<…>. “At the mouth of the Odra”, where it flows into the Baltic Sea, “once” there was the famous city of Yumneta<…>. It really was the largest city of all the cities in Europe, inhabited by the Slavs<…>. However, in terms of morals and hospitality, it was impossible to find a single people more worthy of respect and more hospitable [than them].”
Here we are faced with the fact that in two centuries the Slavs have already lost a considerable part of their territories - from the Elbe River to the Oder. Many Slavic cities have already been destroyed and destroyed, but the memory of the ancient city of Yumnet, which formerly bore the Slavic name Wolin, is still preserved, about which the German author reports that it was “the largest city of all the cities in Europe.” Helmgold in his work not only lists in detail the tribes of the Slavs inhabiting the southern part of the Baltic Sea, including the Prussians and Russians, but also their famous cities “Retru”, “Mikilinburg”, “Racisburg” (it is possible that the Slavic name of this city was Ratibor, now Ratzeburg), “Aldenburg” (Slavic Stargard, now Oldenburg) and others.
The preachers of the Norman theory, who tell us that most of the most ancient Russian and Slavic cities were founded by Scandinavians, would do well to familiarize themselves with these ancient European documents. Read that it was the Slavs who created many cities in the Middle Ages, including the largest city in Europe, Wolin - Yumneta, which was famous for its trade connections, buildings, wealth, ships. The largest Slavic city in Europe! So it’s not for the Scandinavians to teach the Slavs how to build cities; in the Middle Ages, the Norman Vikings mostly destroyed them rather than build them.
The fact that the Russians lived precisely on the southern, Slavic coast of the Baltic, and not on the northern, is also indicated by other European documents. For example, in the bull of Pope Clement III (1188-1191) the Bremen archbishop called “Russia” the territory of Livonia. The 13th-century author Roger Bacon in his “Great Work” writes about Leukovia (Lithuania), around which “great Russia is located on both sides” of the Baltic Sea. Russians continued to live in the Baltic later, almost until the 14th century. Thus, in 1304, Pope Benedict IX addressed the princes of Rügen in a letter as “beloved sons, famous men, princes of the Russians.” Russians lived in the territory of not only what is now Latvia, but also Estonia. They, together with the Estonians, defended themselves against hordes of crusaders at the beginning of the 13th century; in 1343-1345, the Russians led an uprising in Estonia (in Rotalia and Vika) against the rule of the Teutonic Order. And even in the 14th century, after many years of domination of the Germans and Swedes in Estonia, a number of documents mention Russian villages, for example, Roussin Dorp near Wenden. It cannot be ruled out that the ancient city of Yuryev (present-day Tartu), founded in 1030 by Prince Yaroslav the Wise, was built on Russian soil.
Where did the Baltic Slavs go?
Where did these flourishing Slavic cities and their population go? Speaking without politeness, they, under the slogan of salvation and introduction to Christian values, were captured by Europeans, primarily the Franks and Germans. The resisting population either fled or was destroyed with unprecedented cruelty, its remnants were assimilated.
First, the Franks captured and enslaved the Saxons, who were neighbors of the Slavs - their lands were separated by the Elbe River (Laba). The Annals of the Kingdom of the Franks eloquently talk about this on many pages. In 758, “King Pepin invaded Saxony with an army.” The Saxons resisted long and courageously, fought and died. But the Franks were persistent, burned, robbed, subjugated, executed. The Saxons were evicted to other lands, and new peoples were brought in their place...
By the end of the 8th century, it was the turn of the Slavs. In 789, the Frankish king and Roman emperor (from 800) Charlemagne, “having prepared a huge army,<…>approached Elbe<…>and, having entered the land of the Wilts, he ordered to devastate everything with fire and sword.” In 806, “he sent his son Charles with an army to the land of the Slavs, who are called Sorbs and who live on the Elbe.” Already by 810, Charles had conceived a project to capture the neighboring Slavic tribes under the guise of Christianizing them, for which he decided to create an archbishopric in Hamburg. This plan was carried out by his son Louis in 831.
The Slavs, like the Saxons, were squeezed out of the Baltic states for a long time and purposefully, all this is recorded in European sources. How the Germans captured the Baltic lands already at the beginning of the 13th century is described in detail and colorfully by Henry of Latvia in his book “Chronicles of Livonia,” written, according to experts, before 1226. The author, a participant in those events, talks about them with undisguised pride: “Having arrived there, we divided our army along all the roads, villages and regions of that land and began to burn and devastate everything; They killed all the males, took women and children captive, and stole a lot of cattle and horses.”
Helmgold of Bossau in his “Slavic Chronicle” not only describes how the Slavic tribes were destroyed and their lands were captured, but also how these lands were populated. For example, one of the German conquerors, Count Adolf of Holstein, who received as a gift from the king for his military exploits the devastated land of the Slavs-Vagrians, located on a vast territory from the Oder River to the Elbe River, called out to his soldiers and to all participants in the crusade:
“Be the first, cross over into the promised land, inhabit it, become partakers of its blessings, for all the best that is in it should belong to you, you who took it from the enemy.” Countless different peoples rose to this call, who, taking with them their families and property, came to the Wagra land to Count Adolf to own the land that he promised them.<…>And the deserted Vagrian land began to be populated and the number of its inhabitants increased.<…>And the Slavs who lived in the surrounding villages left, and the Saxons came and settled here. The Slavs gradually disappeared from this land.<…>And the tithes in the Slavic land increased, because the Teutons flocked here from their lands to populate this land, spacious, rich in grain, convenient for the abundance of pastures, abounding in fish and meat and all the good things.”
The Baltic Slavs, like the Saxons, resisted for a long time and courageously, for several centuries. But the forces were not equal - all of Europe, led by the Roman Emperor and the Pope, who more than once blessed the crusades against the infidels of the Baltic region, fought against their often scattered tribes. Thus the Wends, Prussians, Vagrs and other Slavic tribes and nationalities disappeared. By the mid-13th century, the Germans not only destroyed or renamed the ancient Slavic cities, destroying their peoples, but also tried to erase the memory of them. Some of the Varangian Slavs who fled from their lands went to serve in Byzantium, many went towards Novgorod, where one of the ancient streets of the center still bears the name Prusskaya. The time of the arrival of Rurik and his family in Novgorod coincides with the time when Emperor Charles and his descendants began the famous German “Drang nach Osten”. Only Novgorod and Pskov and the united Russian state managed to stop this invasion.
Arguments of supporters of the Norman theory
Isn’t it strange that in Rus' the word “Vikings” does not appear at all? And in Scandinavia, almost until the 12th century, neither the word Rus' nor the Varangians are found. There were no such tribes and peoples there. No traces. Although they could have been, because the Russians and Normans were neighbors, they fought, traded, and got married. There is not a single reliable document that exists or has been found that would identify the Varangians and Vikings. For the first time, the Varangians as “væringjar” (verings) appear in the Scandinavian sagas recorded in the 12th century, when it practically disappears from Russian chronicles. Moreover, they are mentioned in the stories about how the Normans went to Byzantium and joined the detachment of these “væringjar” there. And these facts only emphasize that for the Normans the Varangians were a foreign phenomenon.
Not a single ancient source writes that the Russians are Normans or Swedes, that they lived in Scadinavia. One Byzantine mention that their Russian warriors were Normans can only indicate that they were northerners, arrived from the north. For the Greeks, everyone located far to the north were Normans.
What are the arguments of the Normanists based on? In general, on little things that would not be worth spending time on. Somewhere in Scandinavia a name was found that was similar to the name of Rurik. Somewhere – a name consonant with the Russian tribe. However, we will still consider some of their arguments, because the work of the German historians Bayer and Miller, as we see, is alive and well. How the desire to put the Russian people “in their place” lives. Although, we note that Bayer himself, after he was removed from academicians to adjuncts and his salary was lowered, hastened to abandon his “Russophobic” theory and preferred to accept the “Roksolansky” one. A good example for patriotic bosses!
Among the main arguments of supporters of the Norman theory is the “Bertinian Annals, where the nation Rus-Ros is first mentioned in Latin sources (we examined this document above), where next to the word “Ros” there were “Sveons” - Swedes. And although in the text itself these tribes are opposed, for some reason the Normans believe the opposite. Maybe they don't read it carefully? Or do they see what they want to see?
They also refer to the names of Russian ambassadors listed in the treaties between Kyiv and Constantinople and copied into Russian chronicles. They say they are more like Swedish, not Slavic. But the agreements were concluded at the beginning of the tenth century (in 907 and 917), when many Russians had not yet been baptized, and we do not know most of the names that our pre-Christian ancestors bore. However, some names of the Slavs were preserved in the Frankish chronicles, for example, Dragovit, Vitsin (Vyshan), Trasko (Drazhko), Milidoch, Godelaib, Milegast, Ceadrag. Let’s compare with the names of the Russians from the treaties with Constantinople from the “Tale of Bygone Years”: Karl, Velmid, Rulav, Faslav, Velimid, Lidulfast, Stemid... There are no identical names, but the huge difference is not noticeable. Both have almost no Slavic roots known to us. The Normanists tried to find names from the treaty in Scandinavia, in Sweden. We didn’t find it, although we managed to find something similar there too. So, after all, for centuries our peoples were neighbors, they got married, became related, their names could be similar. For example, in documents we find the names of the Danish king Rorik and our Russian prince Rurik, who are completely different people.
The most important evidence of the “Norman theorists” is the work of the Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus “On the Administration of the Empire” (949). There he describes “the path from the Varangians to the Greeks” and gives the names of the Dnieper rapids in two languages - Russian and Slavic. These names vary greatly. On this basis the proof is based that the Russians are not Slavs. But even in Swedish, these Russian names for the most part do not mean anything. In addition, we do not know who told the emperor about these rapids and whether he told them correctly. It is impossible to deny the differences in the languages of different Slavic tribes. For example, recently I have completely stopped understanding the speech of Ukrainians, although they are the people closest to us. It is possible that there were Bulgarian words or some other Slavs living in regions adjacent to the Dnieper rapids...
Another argument for this theory is a reference to the chronicle, which says that the Novgorodians “went overseas” for the prince. But from the place where Novgorod is located, Sweden is the same “overseas” as the southern coast of the Baltic. Moreover, the chronicle often describes how, having quarreled with the Novgorodians, the princes run to the Varangians or for the Varangians to call on them for help. For example, the future baptist of Rus', Prince Vladimir, “ran” to the Varangians. Naturally, on horseback, and not on ships, because getting out to the sea from Novgorod is not so easy. And if we look at the map, we will see that getting to Sweden or Norway, where the Vikings ruled, from Novgorod on horseback, and even on ships, would have been very problematic in those days. And the real Varangians - they really were relatively close. And there are no mentions of ships in the Novgorod chronicles of that time.
As for the phrase “we went overseas,” this was the customary way of saying things at that time if the route could be made not only by sea, but also on foot along the coast. “Beyond the sea” was Constantinople for the people of Kiev, although it could also be reached by land. For Russians, “beyond the sea” often meant simply “far away.” When, for example, in 1390, the Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily I Dmitrievich married Sophia, the daughter of the Grand Duke of Lithuania Vytautas, who fled from the turmoil with his family “to the Germans,” the bride was “brought to Moscow from overseas.” (Simeonov Chronicle). Those “Germans” where Vitovt “ran” were located on the territory of present-day Latvia, exactly where the Varangians previously lived and Russian fortresses stood.
The mention of the Germans in the chronicle is another argument of the Normanists. Like, in some later sources they write that Rurik brought it “from the Germans”, and not from the Varangians. And what can a chronicler or copyist of a chronicle in the 14th century and later write about the southern coast of the Baltic, including about the former Slavic Prussia, if the Germans had settled there for more than two hundred years? How can I write to him so that it is clear where Rurik came from? Of course “from the Germans”! Not from the Swedes! And this is another compelling argument for the inconsistency of the Norman theory, for Russian chroniclers from the most ancient times perfectly distinguished the Germans from the Swedes, English and other peoples.
There are also references to excavations, saying that Scandinavian things are often found in excavations, and Scandinavian terms are often found in Russian. But Byzantine products are also found in our lands! And oriental coins. And in our speech there are Greek, Italian, German, Turkic, Arabic and other words. This only means that the Russian-Slavs traded and communicated with all their neighbors. Hence the foreign words, weapons, money and jewelry.
Ancestors of the Russian-Varangians
Where did such a strong and numerous Slavic people come from - the Russians, the Rus, the Russians, who in a historically short time, from a seemingly small tribe, grew so much and populated vast spaces? And this despite the endless wars of extermination that the Europeans from the west and the Turks from the east waged against them!? We have already partially answered this question by turning to Russian and European documents. But there is another important source, which is more accurate than any chronicle or charter. This source is our ancient neighbors. They know much more about us and our past than we think. This also applies to neighboring peoples.
For example, before the Frankish-Germans conquered the once numerous and powerful people of the Saxons in the 9th century, they managed to partially capture and populate the south of Britain and assimilate the Angles even before the 5th century. Thus, the Anglo-Saxons appeared, preserving the name of the aliens for centuries. What do you think the neighbors call the Germans who once conquered Saxony in the 8th - 9th centuries? Estonians call Germany "Saksamaa", and the Germans themselves - "sakslased". The Finns call this country "Saksa" and the inhabitants "saksalaiset". As if more than a thousand years had not passed, during which this country was called Germany, “Deutschland,” and as if those ancient Saxons, and not the Germans, still live there. And Prussia existed in the memory of peoples for almost a thousand years after the ancient Prussians themselves and their Slavic language disappeared. The people's memory is strong.
So what does this strong neighborly memory say about us Russians? Here's what. Our oldest neighbors – the Finns – I call the Russians “Venäläinen”, and Rus', Russia - “Veneman”, “Venäjä”. Other closest neighbors - Estonians call Russians "Venelane", and the country - "Vene", "Venemaa" (Rus, Russia). And even the Korels call us “Veneä” (Rus).
Strange, isn't it? After all, the words russ, russian, Russia and “venelane” or “vene” have nothing in common! Who is this “Vene”, where did he come from?
Looking for the answer to this question, we are forced to admit that the term “Vene” leads us to the name of a powerful and numerous Slavic people who once lived in Central Europe and on the shores of the southern Baltic - the Wends. To the people who were mentioned in their works by ancient historians: Herodotus, Pomponius, Tacitus, Ptolemy and others, placing the Wendish Slavs in the vast expanses of Central Europe and the Baltic states - from the eastern banks of the Vistula River - to the northern Carpathians and the lower reaches of the Danube.
In determining the kinship of the Russian-Slavs with the Wends, all ends meet - both their places of residence, and references from various chronicles, and the thoughts of ancient chroniclers.
The Wends, who are Slavs, are mentioned not only by Byzantine and eastern sources, but also by medieval European ones, calling them not only “Vends”, but also Wends, Vinites, Vinuls and even Vindas.
This is how the Gothic historian of the 6th century Jordanes talks about this people in the book “On the Origin and Deeds of the Getae” (551): “On their left slope [the Alps], descending to the north, starting from the birthplace of the Vistula River, there are a populous tribe of Veneti. Although their names now change according to different clans and localities, they are still predominantly called Sclaveni and Antes. As we see, Jordan marks the process of dividing the Venedian Slavs into various tribes.
All medieval European sources without exception report that the Slavs and Wends are one people. For example, the author of the Chronicle of Fredegard writes that in 623 “a certain man named Samo, a Frank originally from Sens, together with other merchants went to those Slavs who are known as the Wends<…>. 630 g<…>In this year the Slavs (or Wends, as they call themselves) killed and robbed a large number of Frankish merchants in the kingdom of Samo, and so began the enmity between Dagobert and Samo, king of the Slavs."
Six centuries later, after long and bloody wars with the Romans and Germans, the Wends are pushed back to the east and north of Europe. But they continue to occupy almost the entire southern Baltic east of the Elbe. Even in the XII century, the author of the “Slavic Chronicle” of the XII century, Helmgold, records them as inhabitants of a vast country in northern Europe: “Where Polonia ends, we come to the vast country of those Slavs who in ancient times were Vandals, now Vinites, or Vinuls, are called." Talking about the numerous Slavic tribes of the southern Baltic, Helmgold does not forget to note that they all belong to the ancient people of the Vinuls - the Wends: “Such are these tribes of the Vinuls, scattered across the lands, regions and islands of the sea.”
There is extensive literature about the Wends, from the Middle Ages to the latest research. The fact that the indigenous inhabitants of the southern Baltic were precisely the Wends is evidenced by the conquerors of these lands themselves - the Germans, who for many centuries until modern times called the Slavs Wends (Wenden, Winden). And if they wanted to distinguish the old local villages on the conquered lands from the new, German ones, they called them Wendish - “windich or wendich”.
Why do Europeans suppress this information? What does it give us to know that, in addition to other peoples, the Russians and Prussians were also Wends - Slavs? At a minimum, the Germans’ claims to the former Prussian land as their “fatherland” are untenable.
Where did Rurik live?
In 844, Frankish chroniclers reported on the conquest of the Frankish king Louis “across the Elbe against the Wends” and the death of the Vendian king (rex) Gostomysl. Moreover, the “Fulda Annals” call him the king of “the Encouraged Jews who were plotting treason, and subjugated them. The king of this people, Gostomysl, died.” The “Annals of Xanten” call him the king of the Wends, slightly distorting the name: “King Louis marched with an army against the Wends. And there one of their kings, named Gostimusl, died.” The Annals of Hildesheim (Hildesheim) call the goal of the king’s campaign to conquer the Slavs: “<…>came to the land of the Slavs, killed their king Hestimulus and subjugated the rest.”
Despite some differences in the spelling of the name of the deceased king Gostomysl, it is obvious that we are talking about the same leader and his kingdom, which the authors simultaneously call Slavic, Vendian and Obodrite. Here you can clearly see how the huge people of the Wends were divided into different parts, preserving all three of their tribal names in the memory of their neighbors. The Obodrites are a union of Slavic tribes that lived in the lower reaches of the Elbe (Laba) River. Their largest city was Rerik - on the shores of the Baltic Sea.
Why do I pay such close attention to the encouragers? Because many pointers to the origin of Rurik lead exactly here, to the banks of the Elbe, to the west of modern Mecklenburg. After all, the name of the deceased Obodrit king Gostomysl is very rare, and is found in sources only in two cases: in the stories of Frankish authors about his death in 844, and in Russian chronicles. In Joakimovskaya, Rurik was named the grandson of a certain Gostomysl from his daughter Umila. In the Piskarevsky chronicler - the Novgorod governor, who advised the Novgorodians to invite Rurik to reign, “so that he would judge us in truth.” It is possible that we are talking about the same person. Over the years, the Russian chronicler could have mixed up something in the source, transferring the activities of King Gostomysl from the banks of the Elbe River to the Volkhov. But he remembered the main thing - the name and family of Rurik’s ancestor, his advice to his grandson to go to the homeland of Umila’s mother.
King Gostomysl died in 844, but the Obodrites continued to fight not only the Franks, but also the Normans. In 862, according to the Fulden Annals, the Obodrites rebelled, and the Frankish king again “led an army against the Obodrites and forced their Duke Tabomysl, who rebelled, to submit to him.”
This Vendian uprising occurred precisely in the year 862, when Prince Rurik with all his family went to reign with the Novgorodians. We see that the chronicler no longer calls the ruler of the Obodrites a king, but only a duke, as a subordinate and dependent person. Who was Duke Tabomysl to Rurik? Uncle? Father? Big brother? We will never know. It is only clear that in his homeland, where his elder relative ruled as a vassal, due to the endless aggressive wars of his neighbors, Rurik had no prospects for a decent life.
The assumption about the origin of Rurik and his Russian tribe from the banks of the Elbe is confirmed by a study of Mecklenburg genealogical texts conducted at the end of the 16th century by the German scientist and notary J. von Chemnitz. The city of Mecklenburg, as already noted, stands on the lands of the ancient Wendish Obodrites. Some of the descendants of the Vendian nobility survived the harsh battles and remained to live in their domains, taking an oath to the Frankish king and paying him tribute. They even formed the Mecklenburg ducal dynasty, which lasted until the 1917 revolution. These descendants of the Wends not only remembered their roots, but also kept chronicles where they talked about their ancestors. They were studied by the notary I. von Chemnitz. He established the names of most of the Obodrite rulers from the seventh century onwards. And I also found in the documents the name of King Gostomysl, as well as the names of Prince Rurik and his brothers Sivar and Truvor. And although these sources are not considered reliable, they still additionally confirm that the Russian princes Gostomysl and Rurik are not fictitious persons. And we have every reason to believe that the founder of the ruling dynasty in Russia - the Rurikovichs - was a Wend Slav from the southern coast of the Baltic, and more precisely, from the banks of the Elbe. And that the Novgorodians invited their fellow Slav to reign in Novgorod.
Danish King Rorik and Russian Prince Rurik
We cannot ignore another argument brought by supporters of the Norman theory, that in many European chronicles Prince Rurik is mentioned precisely as a Danish king, or king. Indeed, in many annals a similar name appears: Rorik. There is extensive literature about the Danish king (king) Rorik and his fate. More often he is mentioned as a robber who organizes attacks on Frankish and Slavic lands, robs, burns cities and villages, and takes citizens prisoner. And this image does not at all coincide with the image of the Slavic Rurik, who supposedly establishes order in the Novgorod lands and builds cities.
Here is how the “Chronicle of the Achievements of the Normans in Frankia” tells about him: “The Norman King Rorik sends six hundred ships against Louis to Germany along the Elbe River. The Saxons, who hastened to meet them when the battle took place, become victorious with the help of our Lord Jesus Christ. Having left there, they attack and capture a certain city of the Slavs. That same year, returning to the sea along the [previously] traversed bed of the Seine, the Normans plundered, devastated and burned to the ground all the areas bordering the sea.”
King Rorik most often acts as a navigator, moving along the sea or rivers on ships. The Novgorod chronicles are silent about shipping of that time. The fact that Rorik and Rurik are different people is also evidenced by the fact that the former is mentioned quite often in European sources even after 862, when the Russian Rurik already reigned in Novgorod. For example, in 873, Rorik, the “bile of Christianity,” entered the service of the Frankish king Louis: “Louis, the eastern king convened a meeting in Frankfurt<…>. In the same way, Rorik, the gall of Christianity, came to him, and numerous hostages were taken to [his] ship, and he became a subject of the king and swore to serve him faithfully.”
It is difficult to imagine that, having vowed to serve the Frankish king Louis, King Rorik, abandoning his ships, immediately went to work part-time in Veliky Novgorod.
Slavic Rurik died in 876. The Danish Rorik, as already dead, is reported in 882 by the Chronicle of the Achievements of the Normans in Frankia. He probably died shortly before this date at an advanced age (he is believed to have been born around 810). Based on all the facts, it is unlikely that the Dane Rorik ruled simultaneously in the kingdom of the Frisians - Jutland - on the very north-eastern edge of Europe, and, in the minds of the people of that time, on the other side of the world - in Veliky Novgorod. Moreover, in his old age he managed to give birth to and abandon his young son Igor in Novgorod.
We should not be embarrassed that historians of different times indicate different places of residence of the Wendish-Slavs, including the Russians. It is obvious that the Polabian Wends - encouraged, the Russians - were the first of the Baltic Slavs to fall under the roller of the Franco-German machine. For hundreds of years they were either destroyed, assimilated or pushed east. And by the 12th century, historians find the Wendish-Russians only on the eastern coast of the Baltic. But the same Franco-German machine, with an accuracy of one year, for many centuries described all the movements of the Vened Slavs, including the Russians, their names, places of residence, deeds and exploits. And, thanks to this, we can know about our roots and our heroes, rejecting the Russophobic theories of “enlightenment” of the Russian people by aliens - Swedes or someone else.
Lyudmila Gordeeva,
historian, publicist
13 Comment for “Rus-Varangians are not Vikings”
- Valery Lobov
and own the Slavs. This message contributed to the creation of the notorious Norman theory, with the adherents of which there has been a struggle since the time of M.V. Lomonosov.
And this contradiction is finally resolved by a simple clarification that there were peaceful and non-peaceful Varangians. And with this clarification, you can forget about the so-called Norman theory forever. The opinion of scientists of different generations and directions, who have proven that Normanism has no place in our history, now agrees well with the chronicle information about the invitation of the peaceful Varangians (!), that is, the Pomeranian Slavs of the Russians.
Leonid Gubanov
Elena Voronkova
01/02/2017 at 18:27
/I haven’t looked at it myself yet, but I came across this article. Anyone who watched it, please share your impressions.../
THE VIKING FILM IS AN INSULT TO THE FEELINGS OF THINKERS.
I watched the film “Viking” and was confused by the baseness and perversity of the idea of this information product. Andrey Kravchuk, scriptwriter and director, producer Konstantin Ernst. The slogan of the film: “You need to see to believe” – according to the authors’ idea, apparently should reflect the primitive worldview of the Slavs before baptism. Since the advanced consciousness of Christians allows one to believe without checking, without seeing, to simply believe and that’s it, and that’s exactly what’s right – this is one of the messages of the film.
In other words, a call to reduce critical thinking and “turn a blind eye” to the facts. This entire movie is an insult to intelligence!
I want to warn you about the danger that this film poses for adults and, especially, for children.
I ask activists for legal assistance so that the authors of the film are punished according to the law.
Causes:
1. The film does not meet the age limit of 12+.
It begins with the killing of an animal and then the blood does not leave the screen. Only VK
Leonid Gubanov
In the frame of the mass baptism of the Slavs, blood does not flow, but is practically present in every frame.
Further, the film contains two sex scenes. The first, in which Vladimir, stained in the blood of his brother Yaropolk, who has just been killed, responds to the advances of his young wife, who is not at all embarrassed that her husband is covered in blood. Moreover, a few minutes before, she had seen the body of the murdered Yaropolk, but this did not in any way dampen her sexual mood, and perhaps even stimulated it. In mutual affection, Vladimir stains his wife with blood, for whom this is acceptable. The brother’s still warm body lies on the first floor in a pool of blood, and on the second floor, in the same princely mansion, a sexual scene takes place. This is recommended for children aged 12 years and older. At 41 years old, it was terrible for me to watch this. But I grew up watching Soviet films, and maybe that’s why I’m able to distinguish normality from perversion.
The second sex scene was also not without blood. According to the plot, Vladimir’s wife came from the temple, where a Slavic rite was being performed, during which all participants smeared their faces with the blood of, presumably, a sacrificial animal (it was not shown whose blood it was, although there was also a plot in which they tried to sacrifice a person
Leonid Gubanov
century). And so, with her face and hands thickly smeared with blood, the wife returns home from the temple and begins making love with her husband. During this, being pregnant from him, she attempts to kill Vladimir with a knife. The attempt to kill failed, Vladimir fought off the knife and his wife confessed to him that after his murder she planned to kill herself and her unborn child.
Question again, is this for 12+?
On this point, I ask child psychologists to speak out. We ask parents who came to the screening with their children to file claims for moral damages and mental harm.
In my opinion, those who checked the film for age restrictions should be held accountable by law for causing harm and be disqualified without the opportunity to continue working in this profession.
2. Lack of historical truth.
Its deliberate distortion. Why conscious? Yes, because if you wanted to rely on the chronicles, this could be done. But apparently there were certain tasks for this ideological product. This film is ideological; it cannot be called historical.
I ask professionals to check the accuracy of the historical facts shown in the film and give their feedback
Leonid Gubanov
You. I ask lawyers to help formulate claims for insult and humiliation of the honor and dignity of the ancestors of the Slavs.
2.1. The everyday life and neatness of the Slavs are belittled.
When watching the film, you get the impression that the Slavs did not wash and did not wear clean clothes. Faces are dirty, clothes are torn, not a single good household was shown, even the princely mansions are dark and unkempt. The entire life of the Slavs is shown in gray colors. During the course of the film, the Slavs appear pure only when they are baptized en masse in the river. And before that, apparently, the skin was cleansed naturally - the dirt fell off dried. Clean clothes appear in the film only twice: for Christians in Korsun and for Slavs at baptism in Kyiv. These are bright accents that influence consciousness, emphasizing the benefits of Christianity.
2.2. The speech of the Slavs is shown to be primitive.
The characters in the film speak an ultra-modern language of a low cultural level. Communication at the level of the prince and his entourage occurs in the style: “What are you doing? Nothing!"
2.3. The image of a woman, as an indicator of the level of culture, is also discredited.
The girl whom Vladimir is going to woo behaves too impudently, little corresponding to the rules of behavior of a patriarchal girl
Leonid Gubanov
2.7. Accusing the Slavs of committing human sacrifices.
There are no words. But for those who have not seen the film, I will describe: these three weirdos, who are represented by the Magi, deceive a boy, by a strange coincidence, the son of a Christian, into a ritual and are preparing to sacrifice him. Without a word, the entire population of the city finds out about this and comes to the ritual en masse. In a state of ecstasy, in anticipation of fresh blood for God, they await the completion of the ritual. The ritual is wonderful to the point of incredible: there are carol masks on faces at the height of summer and wreaths like on Kupala, although obviously not Kupala. These three cult ministers (I can’t call them magi) have prepared a decoction of fly agaric mushrooms and are going to give it to the boy before his ritual murder. And then his father finds out about this and tries to save his son, running with him to the tower. And the whole crowd is chasing them with a passionate desire to sacrifice the boy. This picture is painfully reminiscent of scenes from films about vampires, ghouls, mutants and other similar evil spirits. I suspect that such images were not inserted by chance. So, the boy and his father die tragically, falling along with the tower, whose foundation pillars were cut down. Before his death, the father manages to inform
Svetlana Li
I was waiting for Leonid Gennadievich Gubanov’s commentary on this article, knowing how deeply he knows the pre-Christian period in the life of the Slavs. I knew that he would completely destroy the idea of the film’s authors. But he decided to criticize Elena Voronkova’s film, which was in tune with his perception of the film. His heart is torn by the futile struggle for primordial Rus', with its Vedas, against Christianity, alien to the essence of the Russian people, even during the wedding, returning dozens of times to Jewish origins. I completely agree with Voronkova’s convictions that “The slogan of the film: “You need to see to believe” - as conceived by the authors, apparently should reflect the primitive worldview of the Slavs before baptism. Since the advanced consciousness of Christians allows one to believe without checking, without seeing, to simply believe and that’s it, and that’s exactly what’s right – this is one of the messages of the film.
In other words, a call to reduce critical thinking and “turn a blind eye” to the facts. This whole movie is an insult to intelligence!” How EXACTLY - an insult to the REASON, the Reason of the Russians, in order to completely downshift them, so that it would be easier to preserve those in power! Ernst is worse than the Nazis in his hatred of the USSR. I remember the opening of the Olympics in Sochi according to his scenario, in which the Russian guest
Who are the Yakhs, Poles, Varangians and why did they fight against the Slavic worldview?
What events lie hidden in the depths of the last millennia and who destroyed the memory of the ancient Slavic states?
Article “Yakhs, Yagis, Poles, Varangians, gentry and the Slavic worldview” -
-http://roksolan.jofo.me/1182611.html
Articles about the ancient state of ROS and its history on the website “Slavic History” -
-http://sviatoiar.livejournal.com/
A. ALEXEEV, historian.
Science and life // Illustrations
Science and life // Illustrations
Science and life // Illustrations
Science and life // Illustrations
More than a thousand years ago, kings ruled throughout Europe. Their kingdoms were small (England, France, Germany, Spain as states had not yet emerged). But the king had the right to judge any resident, and noble people swore allegiance to him. It was believed that all the land in the kingdom belonged to the king, and he only allowed the rest to use it. All kingdoms professed one faith - Catholic, led by the Pope.
Only inhabitants of Denmark and Scandinavia - Normans(“northern people”) lived freely on their land, honoring their ancient gods as in the old days. At general congresses, all issues were resolved, laws were established there and court cases were examined.
The Normans also had kings - they were called kings. They were respected, but did not have much power. When the king traveled around the country, the Normans fed not only him, but also his squad and horses. The people had no other duties to the king.
In addition to farming, the Normans were engaged in trade and military campaigns. In Europe they were considered the best warriors, and they had the best weapons. Year after year, Norman squads on their long ships attacked coastal cities and settlements, plundering, burning and killing the inhabitants. In Western Europe, the participants in these predatory expeditions began to be called Vikings.
In 789, a squad of Vikings, pretending to be merchants, sailed in their boats to the British city of Dorset. When the local ruler came out to them, he was killed. From that moment on, for two centuries the Normans ravaged Britain and Ireland. Local residents resisted as best they could. So, in the middle of the 9th century, a king named Torgsil in Ireland was drowned in a lake, and in the kingdom of Northumbria, in the north of England, King Ragnar Lothbrok was thrown into a pit with snakes.
And yet, the Normans took root in England so well - they started families and households that they traveled to their homeland only occasionally.
People living in France, Holland, and Germany also suffered from the Normans. Almost every year their lands were plundered. In 845, the Danish king Rurik ravaged the Elbe coast and raided Northern France,
other Vikings burned Hamburg. Paris was also robbed many times. So, in 911, he was attacked by King Hrolf, nicknamed the Pedestrian (according to legend, he was so long that he could not ride a horse - his legs dragged on the ground). After several battles, the pagan Hrolf agreed to be baptized, and King Charles the Simpleton gave him his daughter in marriage and allocated him land along the banks of the Lower Seine, which became the Duchy of Normandy. Under the rule of the economic Normans, it soon became the richest and most populous province of the French kingdom. In 1066, the Norman Duke William (he was the great-great-great-grandson of Hrolf) defeated the English at the Battle of Hastings and, having conquered England, became the English king. After this victory he was nicknamed William the Conqueror.
The Swedes “grazed” mainly in the vicinity of the Baltic Sea. In the north-west of Russia they settled with entire families (archaeologists have found much more Scandinavian objects here than in Western Europe). Local Finns called the Norman robbers "ruotsi"(a Finnish word with a Swedish root meaning oarsmen), and the Slavs - "Rus", "Rus". Later the name “Varangians” stuck to them (from the word "waring"- this was the name given to a Norman warrior in the service of some ruler).
Hunting between lakes Chudskoye, Ladoga, Ilmen, Onega and the upper reaches of the Volga, the strongest (in today’s terms, tough) of the Varangian squads imposed tribute not only on the local Slavic and Finnish tribes - Slovenians, Krivichi, Chud, Vse and Meryu - but also on bandit gangs . Another “gang” controlled the middle part of the route “from the Varangians to the Greeks” - the main trade route between the Baltic and Black Seas.
The Varangians-Rus, capturing the Slavs, took them for sale to the Khazars, who roamed the Caspian and Black Seas. Over many years of wandering life in the forests, the Rus themselves became similar to the Khazars. They gave themselves a Khazar hairstyle (shaved head with a forelock hanging over the forehead), and their leader, following the example of the Khazar king, called himself kagan.
The ambassadors of this Swedish kagan later visited Byzantium, and from there went to Germany. And everywhere they said that their people were called “ros”. “Having carefully investigated the reason for their arrival, the emperor learned that they belonged to the Swedish people,” wrote the German monk Prudentius. The newcomers were considered Norman spies and were sent back to Byzantium.
Around 862, the inhabitants of the vicinity of Lake Ilmen, in agreement, refused to pay tribute to the Varangian “mafia”. They got rid of the “roof”, but immediately fought among themselves. It turned out that free life is not so easy and fun.
Tired of constant war, the Slavs, Finns and Rus decided to invite the prince from the outside so that he would judge and protect them. We stopped at Rurik. Whether it was the same Rurik, who, as already mentioned, raided Northern France, or another, is not known for sure. One way or another, some Rurik with a Varangian squad came to Priilmenye and built a new town not far from Ladoga. It was from this that Novgorod later grew.
“And from those Varangians,” our chronicle says, “the Russian land and the Novgorodians began to be called, who are from the Varangian family, but were previously Slovenians.” That is, when the chronicle was written (in the 12th century), the Novgorodians still remembered that their ancestors were both local Slovenians and newcomers - Varangians-Rus.
When Rurik died, his relative Oleg subjugated the southern Slavic tribes - the Polyans, Vyatichi, Radimichi, northerners, who had previously paid tribute to the Khazars. Thus, between the Baltic and Black Seas, the Russian state appeared with its capital in Kyiv.
A small part of the Germanic tribes that descended on Europe during the Great Migration centuries went north and found themselves in the harshest conditions. The infertile soils of Scandinavia, combined with the cold, gave peasants the opportunity to only survive without much prospects for prosperity. Children, fathers and grandfathers lived here together, building themselves a house with one large room, in the middle of which there was a fireplace, which provided warmth and on which they cooked food. They established settlements on the coasts, most often on the shores of fjords. Problems common to the inhabitants of the district were resolved at the Thing, a people's meeting. Christian preachers did not reach them, and they remained pagans with their own set of patron gods.
In Europe they were known as the Normans ( « northern people"). Those who went by sea for booty or a better life in other countries were calledVikings. In Scandinavian languages, this Old Norse word does not have a very respectful connotation, but their very name caused panic in European cities and villages. The secret of their strength was their ships - the most advanced ships of that time. Rowing Drakkars ( « dragons") Vikings could make long sea voyages, could accommodate up to sixty warriors with weapons and food, and had a high draft, which made it possible to enter them even into shallow rivers, and by the 11th century they had a mast with a sail.
They always appeared unexpectedly and landed troops that destroyed everything in their path, carrying away everything more or less valuable to the ships. When armed reinforcements approached the settlement attacked by the Vikings, they rushed to their ships and disappeared without a trace into the sea or around a bend in the river. If the settlement was thoroughly fortified, and they saw armed guards waiting for them, a Viking merchant ship landed on the shore, which accompanied the longships - and sold the loot from a more successful expedition to the locals.
The ease and profitability of such “Viking” made sea and river robbery (and military affairs in general) a real profession for former peasants. Increasingly, under the leadership of proven leaders, the Vikings gathered from all over Scandinavia for massive attacks on the nascent and still weak European kingdoms. The time from the end of the 8th to the beginning of the 11th century was called in Europe"Viking Age". Their campaigns had a huge impact on the formation of European states and peoples.
The main goal of first the Norwegians and then the Danes wasEngland. Under the Romans, the Celts (modern Scots, Welsh) lived here, then they were pushed back by the Germans who came from northern Europe - the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, and then the Scandinavians who occupied their territories on the continent began to penetrate here. Their sporadic raids soon turned into systematic conquest. For two centuries, from the 9th to the 11th centuries, the struggle of the Germanic tribes in Britain continued with varying success. Viking victories in this struggle were accompanied by the settlement of Britain by Scandinavian peasant families. The restored power of the Anglo-Saxon kings was swept away by the Norman invasion from France in 1066. To the winner,William the Conqueror, had to repel another attack by the Norwegians, who, however, decided not to tempt fate in the battle and preferred to receive a ransom. Since then, Scandinavian invasions of the British Isles have ceased.
Cities located on the banks of rivers in modern times were constant targets of Viking attacks.Germany. Over time, the Viking leaders became vassals of the Frankish empire and themselves guarded the waterways from their fellow tribesmen. The Vikings, rising up the Seine, sacked Paris four times. They settled in the northFrance, constantly ravaging neighboring areas. The French king, not having the strength to fight the Scandinavians, gave their leader the possession of the lands they had already captured, subject to the acceptance of Christianity by the newcomers. So in 911 Normandy appeared on the map of future France. The Viking Duke forced his fellow tribesmen to end the raids, settle in the new land like peasants and strictly observe the laws. His descendant William, a century and a half later, won the throne of Britain.
The Vikings attacked Sicily, which belonged to the Arabs. Having defeated the Muslims, they founded the Kingdom of Sicily there, which existed in southern Italy until the 19th century.
The Viking “thunderstorm” did not bypass the Iberian Peninsula, where they constantly ravaged coastal cities. But these were only raids; there were no permanent seizures of territory here.
The Scandinavians, whom we would call Swedes today, chose the east of Europe as the main direction of their campaigns. There wasn’t much to take from the Slavs and Finns who lived here, so the Vikings, having created their bases in the Dnieper region, they began to build waterways to richer countries. When their ships left the mouth of the Dnieper into the Black Sea, two directions of raids opened up - to the Caspian Sea and to Byzantium.
The river outlet to the Caspian Sea was controlled by the Khazars, with whom it was necessary to negotiate passage through the Don to the Volga, and then the “gates” of the Caspian Sea opened before the Vikings. On its coast there were many small Muslim states that, as a rule, did not have navies, so a surprise attack from the sea with subsequent withdrawal seemed safe. Regular expeditions to the Caspian Sea began at the end of the 9th century. At first, sea raids carried out according to the “European” scenario were very successful, but then, when the element of surprise was lost, the attackers began to suffer increasingly serious losses.
The Khazars also became a problem. In one of the campaigns (914), the Vikings agreed that on the way back they would pay the Khazars half of the spoils for passage along the Volga, but when they returned after the brutal devastation of coastal cities, the Muslim royal guard demanded revenge. In a clash with her, almost the entire detachment of Rus (as they were called in eastern Europe) died ( rus- rower, sailor). Almost half a century later, the Russians “sorted out” Khazaria, ruining its capital and eliminating the obstacle to their Volga route.
But the greatest booty was promised by raids on Byzantium. However, here the Rus were faced with the powerful and organized force of the Empire. Therefore, they tried to attack at a time when imperial troops were leaving their capital, Constantinople, for operations in other directions. Unable to overcome the defensive fortifications of the Great City, the Russians did not even try to climb the walls, but ravaged the surrounding area, waiting until the Greeks offered them peace. The Greeks, too, having only a garrison guarding the walls, were unable to defeat the attackers. Therefore, each such raid usually ended with the payment of “compensation” by the Constantinople people so that the Rus would leave, and the conclusion of an agreement on the terms of further trade of Russian merchants in the city.
The Byzantines managed to solve the “Russian problem” only when they convinced their northern neighbors to accept Christianity and sent their teachers of faith to Rus'. The Old Russian state became an ally of Byzantium, and the new Vikings, who continued their campaigns to the south along the path “from the Varangians to the Greeks,” were immediately transported by the Russian princes to the Empire, where they became mercenary soldiers (the Scandinavians formed a permanent selected detachment of bodyguards of the Byzantine emperors).
There were relatively few Scandinavians, and after settling in the occupied lands they very quickly dissolved among the local population - both in Eastern and Western Europe and in the Mediterranean. The difference in beliefs disappeared after their widespread adoption of Christianity. And by the beginning of the 11th century, the flow of Vikings from sparsely populated Scandinavia began to dry up until it completely disappeared.
In France they were called Normans, in Rus' - Varangians. Vikings were the name given to the people who lived in what is now Norway, Denmark and Sweden from about 800 to 1100 AD.
Favorite activities of the Vikings
Wars and feasts are the two favorite pastimes of the Vikings. Swift sea robbers on ships that bore sonorous names, for example, “Bull of the Ocean”, “Raven of the Wind”, raided the coasts of England, Germany, Northern France, Belgium - and took tribute from the conquered. Their desperate berserker warriors fought like mad, even without armor. Before the battle, the berserkers gnashed their teeth and bit the edges of their shields. The cruel gods of the Vikings - the Aesir - were pleased with the warriors who died in battle.
Discoverers of new lands
But it was these ruthless warriors who discovered the islands of Iceland (in the ancient language - “ice land”) and Greenland (“green land”: then the climate there was warmer than now!). And the Viking leader Leif the Happy in the year 1000, sailing from Greenland, landed in North America, on the island of Newfoundland. The Vikings called the open land Vinland - “rich”. Due to clashes with the Indians and among themselves, the Vikings soon left and forgot America, and lost contact with Greenland.
Sagas
And their songs about heroes and travelers - sagas and the Icelandic parliament, the Althing - the first people's assembly in Europe, have survived to this day. The beginning of the Viking Age is considered to be 793. This year there was a famous attack by the Normans on a monastery located on the island of Lindisfarne (north-east of Great Britain). It was then that England, and soon the whole of Europe, learned about the terrible “northern people” and their dragon-headed ships. In 794 they “visited” the nearby island of Wearmus (there was also a monastery there), and in 802-806 they reached the Isles of Man and Iona (west coast of Scotland)
Wars, history of conquests
Twenty years later, the Normans gathered a large army for a campaign against England and France. In 825 the Vikings landed in England, and in 836 London was sacked for the first time. In 845, the Danes captured Hamburg, and the city was so devastated that the episcopate located in Hamburg had to be moved to Bremen. In 851, 350 ships again appeared off the coast of England, this time London and Canterbury were captured (and of course plundered).
In 866, a storm carried several ships to the shores of Scotland, where the Normans had to spend the winter. The following year, 867, the new state of Danelaw was formed. It included Northumbria, East Anglia, part of Essex and Mercia. Danlo existed until 878. At the same time, a large fleet attacked England again, London was captured again, and then the Normans moved on to France. In 885, Rouen was captured, and Paris was under siege (in 845, 857 and 861, Paris was already sacked). Having received the ransom, the Vikings lifted the siege and retreated to the northwestern part of France, which in 911 was transferred to the Norwegian Rollon. The region was named Normandy.
At the beginning of the 10th century, the Danes again tried to capture England, which they succeeded only in 1016. The Anglo-Saxons managed to overthrow their power only forty years later, in 1050. But they did not have time to enjoy freedom. In 1066, a huge fleet under the command of William the Conqueror, a native of Normandy, attacked England. After the Battle of Hastings, the Normans reigned in England. In 861, the Scandinavians learned about Iceland from the Swede Gardar Svafarsson. Soon after, in 872, the unification of Norway by Harald Fairhair began, and many Norwegians fled to Iceland. According to some estimates, between 20,000 and 30,000 Norwegians moved to Iceland before 930. Later they began to call themselves Icelanders, thus distinguishing themselves from the Norwegians and other Scandinavian peoples.
In 983, a man named Eirik Raud (Red) was exiled from Iceland for three years for murder. He went in search of a country rumored to have been seen to the west of Iceland. He managed to find this country, which he named Greenland (“Green Country”), which sounds rather strange in relation to this snowy and cold island. In Greenland, Eirik founded the settlement of Brattalid.
In 986, a certain Bjarni Bardsson sailed from Iceland, intending to get to Greenland. He stumbled upon unknown land three times until he reached the southern coast of Greenland. Having learned about this, Leif Eiriksson, son of Eirik Raud, repeated Bjarni's journey, reaching the Labrador Peninsula. Then he turned south and, walking along the coast, found an area he called “Vinland” (“Grape Country”). Presumably this happened in the year 1000. According to the results of work carried out by scientists, Leif Eiriksson's Vinland was located in the area of modern Boston.
After Leif's return, Thorvald Eiriksson, his brother, went to Vinland. He lived there for two years, but in one of the skirmishes with local Indians he was mortally wounded, and his comrades had to return to their homeland.
Leif's second brother, Thorstein Eiriksson, also tried to reach Vinland, but he was unable to find this land.
There were only about 300 estates in Greenland. The lack of forest created great difficulties for life. The forest grew in Labrador, which was closer than in Iceland, but everything needed had to be brought from Europe, due to the very difficult conditions of navigation to Labrador. Settlements existed in Greenland until the 14th century.
The Varangians are a group within the population of Ancient Rus', of an ethnic, professional, or social nature, which gives rise to numerous discussions.
In Rus', people from Scandinavia and neighboring peoples were called Varangians. And some believe that Varangians are just a Russian designation for Vikings. In fact, there are many significant differences between the Varangians and the Vikings.
Origin of names
The concepts “Viking” and “Varangian” have completely different origins. Most historians believe that "Viking" originates from the word "vík", which is translated from Old Norse as "cove" or "fjord". However, there are other versions. Thus, Doctor of Historical Sciences T. Jackson claims that the name “Viking” comes from the Latin “vicus” - a small settlement of artisans and traders. This word was used back in the Roman Empire. Such settlements were often located on the territory of military camps. The Swedish scientist F. Askerberg stated that the basis for the noun “Viking” was the verb “vikja” - to leave, turn. According to his hypothesis, the Vikings are people who left their native places in order to earn a living. Askerberg’s fellow countryman, researcher B. Daggfeldt, suggested that the word “Viking” has much in common with the Old Scandinavian phrase “vika sjóvar,” which meant “the interval between the changes of oarsmen.” Therefore, in the original version, the term “víking” most likely referred to long journeys across the sea, involving frequent changes of rowers.
The version about the origin of the term “Varangian” was one of the first to be expressed by Sigismund von Herberstein, the Austrian ambassador, historian and writer. He suggested that the name “Varangians” is associated with the city of Vagria, where the Vandals lived. The expression “Varyags” came from the name of the inhabitants of this city “Vagrs”. Much later, the Russian historian S. Gedeonov considered that the word “warang”, meaning sword and discovered by him in Pototsky’s Baltic-Slavic dictionary, is perfectly suited to the role of the primary source of the term. Many historians associate “Varangian” with the ancient Germanic “wara” - oath, vow, oath. And the linguist M. Vasmer considered the Scandinavian concept “váringr” - loyalty, responsibility - to be the progenitor of the “Varangian”.
Miscellaneous activities
The concepts of “Viking” and “Norman”, according to historians, should not be identified, since the Normans are a nationality, while the Vikings are rather just a way of life. In particular, Irish researchers F. Byrne and T. Powell speak about this. Byrne, in his book A New Look at the History of Viking Age Ireland, argues that the only term that can be equated with the term “Viking” is the term “pirate”. Because robberies were the main source of income for the Vikings. The Vikings were not sedentary and did not follow laws.
The Varangians were a unique social layer of society. These were warriors for hire who guarded the borders of Byzantium from the attacks of the same Vikings. The eldest daughter of the Byzantine emperor Alexios Komnenos, Anna, wrote about the Varangians in her work entitled “Alexiad”. The princess argued that the Varangians understood their service in protecting the state and its head as an honorable duty transmitted by inheritance.
Also called Varangians were peaceful merchants who transported goods along the route called at that time “from the Varangians to the Greeks.” This route ran through water from the Baltic Sea to the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Moreover, the Baltic Sea then had a different name - the Varyazh Sea. And, according to the Soviet historian A. Kuzmin, absolutely all inhabitants of the sea coast were previously called Varangians.
Different religions
The Vikings, who no doubt considered themselves warriors, but not pirates, worshiped the god Odin, like all Scandinavians. Odin's eternal companions were ravens - birds that were not favored in Rus' because of their tendency to eat carrion. In addition, since ancient times, Russians considered ravens to be symbols of all kinds of dark forces. But it was the raven that was depicted on the flag that adorned the ship of the famous Viking leader Ragnar Lothbrok.
The sacred bird for the Varangians was the falcon, which honestly hunted for live prey. The falcon was the bird of Perun himself - the pagan Slavic god, in whom the Varangians believed. Since ancient times, the falcon has been revered as an image of courage, dignity and honor.