13. Ancient Rus and the Great Steppe, Gumilev
XII. The Power of Things (986-1036), political changes due to Russian conversion to Orthodox in Kiev. Yaroslav against Svyatopolk, Orthodox against Pagan.
72. THE BAPTISM OF THE PRINCE AND THE BAPTISM OF THE PEOPLE
Let us recall that after the liberation of Russia from Judeo-Khazar tributary, two parties arose in Kiev: The Orthodox, headed by Olga and her grandson Yaropolk, and the neo-Pagan, whose leader was Svyatoslav. While the victorious wars on the Volga and on the Danube were going on, these parties got along with each other, but the defeat in Bulgaria caused excesses, the death of the prince and an internecine war, where Vladimir acted as the head of a pagan party that was not popular.
The cult of Perun (pagan god), was planted in Russia only by some Kievan princes who focused on Baltic paganism. An analogy to the idol of Perun, with a silver head and golden mustache, was found among the Western Slavs of the Baltic Pomerania - the Vagrans and the Obodrites. There, roosters were also sacrificed to Perun, as well as pieces of bread and meat [1]. German and Danish prisoners were stabbed in front of his idol. Vladimir, with the passion of a neophyte, went even further and ordered to kill even his fellow citizens as a sacrifice to Perun.
That is why the prince's conversion to Orthodoxy was important for all Kievans. The threat of senseless death hanging over each of them has disappeared. Vladimir committed an act that turned into an "act", and the church and the people thanked him for it. The significance of the step taken was so great that in the light of it the personal qualities of the prince, the sins for which he had to answer at the Last Judgment as a man, but not as a ruler, faded. Having been baptized in 987[2], Vladimir reconciled his warriors with him and with their help saved Vasily II from death, baptized the people of Kiev in the Dnieper in 988. and Novgorodians in Volkhov in 989, and the overthrown Perun allegedly screamed: "Oh, woe! Oh, me! These merciless hands will get it"[3].
The circumstances of Vladimir's baptism are extremely confusing, because the authors of the sources pursued not the goals of truth, but their own party interests. This is how the "Korsun legend" arose, according to which Vladimir accepted Orthodoxy in exchange for the hand of the Byzantine princess Anna, giving her brothers the newly taken Korsun as a veno. The inconsistency of this version of reality was established by A.A.Shakhmatov[4], which once again proves the advantage of obtaining information for empirical generalization not from primary sources, but from monographs, where the information of the chronicles passed the crucible of strict historical criticism.
And the second problem, no less important, concerns ethnic psychology. According to his personal actions, Vladimir could not claim holiness, nor respect. He publicly raped the captive Princess Rogneda, treacherously killed his brother Yaropolk, luring him to negotiate in a tent where the Varangian murderers were hiding, established a rite of human sacrifice to Perun in Kiev, kept hundreds of Slavic and foreign girls in country palaces to satisfy his lust, and his punitive campaigns against Slavic tribes that had fallen away from Kiev during the time of troubles is described in the chronicle so succinctly that, apparently, even to the chronicler, these memories were unpleasant. So why did not only the church, but also the people honor the memory of the prince in the epics? Without sufficient grounds, posthumous love for the ruler does not arise. And the baptism of the Slavs outside the city walls of Kiev was extremely slow.
The overthrow of the idol of Perun was not unpleasant to the Novgorod Slovenes, because Perun was a stranger god, but the Novgorodians were not ready for the perception of Christianity, as we will see in the description and analysis of subsequent events. As for other cities, even large ones, the adoption of the new faith was even slower there. Chernigov, close to Kiev, was baptized only in 992[5], and Smolensk, lying on the way "from the Varangians to the Greeks", in 1013 [6]. Other Slavic tribes, both subordinated to the Kiev prince (Krivichi, Radimichi), and those who retained independence (Vyatichi), retained their habitual worldview.
But for the victorious, albeit slow, advance of Orthodoxy, the resistance of ancient cults was not terrible. Ancient beliefs are stable, but passive, they can only defend themselves, which condemns them to extinction. But the ideological system with the swelling passionarity of the ethnic group is always aggressive, as a result of which it is dangerous for neighbors. Therefore, the victory over Perun became a turning point that decided the fate of Orthodoxy in Russia. But the time of the indisputable predominance of Christianity over pagan cults came only in the XII century, as a result of which our story is not over. So far, we can only note the next political victory of Kiev and the people of Kiev over the Slavic and Baltic tribes and the fact that it was accomplished thanks to the continuation of the line of St. Olga and the alliance with the mighty Byzantium.
It would seem that there was a change of milestones, but it turned out to be a brief episode. In 989 Vladimir, already being a Christian, returned to his father's political line and made a campaign to Chersonesos (Korsun). The city, besieged from the sea and land, fell after it lost the water that entered it through underground pipes.[7] The location of the water pipe was indicated to Vladimir by a traitor, named in some sources as Priest Anastas, in others - Varangian Zhdbern [8], who fired an arrow from the fortress with a note. However, the Russ left the city, and it returned to Byzantium. Why? Is it really only as payment for a royal bride?
No, it was much more serious. Since 990 Byzantium went from defense to counteroffensive, subjugating Georgia, part of Armenia and resuming the war against the Bulgarian tsar Samuel. Vladimir's raid on Korsun provoked a retaliatory remark in the form of an attack on Russia by the allies of Byzantium - the Pechenegs. The war lasted from 989 to 997, and then Russia lost the Black Sea steppes, and the border of the forest-steppe had to be strengthened with ramparts and a palisade, (stockade). The Korsun escapade cost Russia dearly.
When returning to the political course of the past, it would seem that there was a natural rejection of the accepted confession, but here again the similarity of the historical destinies of Byzantium and Ancient Russia manifested itself: the process initiated by Konstantin and Vladimir turned out to be irreversible and went avalanche-like. City after city accepted Orthodoxy as the state religion, which gave comfort and hope for eternal life. This fascinated people who, along with religion, received the benefits of culture through writing and fine art. And if the authorities have changed their minds there, are fighting with the pagan Pechenegs, quarreling with overseas emperors, then this is his business that has nothing to do with the salvation of the soul. Orthodoxy in Russia seized the initiative from paganism and went from victory to victory.
The decisive component of the complex process of changing faith was the position of the city of Kiev, which was considered the third in Europe in terms of wealth and importance, after Constantinople [9] and Cordoba. An expressive and concise description of Kiev was made by historian Norik Titmar from the words of Poles who visited Kiev in 1117: "In the big city, which was the capital of this state, there were more than 400 churches, 8 shopping areas and an unusual crowd of people, which, like the whole area, consists of runaway slaves who flocked here from everywhere, and very agile Danes (Danes. - L.G.). Kiev constantly resisted the Pechenegs, who brought a lot of harm, and subjugated others"[10].
Here is the solution to the power of Kiev, its advantages over other cities of Russia! In order to escape from captivity, one must have extraordinary courage, physical endurance and a charge of biochemical energy of living matter, the manifestation of which we called passionarity. Kiev, like a sponge, absorbed the passionarity of the entire vast country, just as Paris did the same in France a few centuries later. And there was no disorder in Kiev, or the "Brownian movement of passionaries", since Orthodoxy was the ethnic dominant of Kievans long before Vladimir. Every Slavic or Varangian who came to Kiev and wanted to live there could do this by adopting Orthodoxy and thereby establishing ties with local Christians, whose ancestors survived the capture of their city by Oleg in 882 and saved themselves from the repression of Svyatoslav in 972.
From their midst, Vladimir received the most loyal and brave warriors, enterprising merchants and hardworking farmers. The fact that he quickly managed to figure it out and use it really puts him on a par with Constantine the Equal-to-the-Apostles. In such a case as the conversion of an entire country, the personal qualities of the ruler are so small that they are not subject to accounting. Vladimir's smart advisers understood this and did not interfere with the processes going on against their will. But they held the reins of foreign policy in their hands and found a way out here. Instead of an alliance with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, Russia established relations with the Bulgarian Patriarchate in Ohrid. Since 976 Western Bulgaria was engulfed by the anti-Greek uprising, which was led by the komitopouls - the sons of the Nikola Committee: David, Moses, Aaron and Samuel, then books, icons and enlightened priests - teachers could be obtained from there. The presence of Bulgarian-Russian contact was noted by M.D. Priselkov in the book quoted above. And, apparently, dualistic motives in ancient Russian literature are connected with this contact. But these plots lie outside our topic.
At the beginning of the XI century, Vladimir established allied relations "with Boleslav Lyadsky, and with Stefan Ugorsky, and with Andrich of the Czechs"[11], i.e. with new Christians who accepted the faith from Rome. Of course, there had not yet been an official separation of the churches, but the difference between Rome and Constantinople was already felt acutely. Vladimir's diplomacy shows that he was looking for an opportunity to break with the traditions of both Svyatoslav and Olga. And the third possibility in those conditions was contact with the West, because the Muslim East was at war with Russia. In 997 Vladimir was forced to march on the Kama Bulgarians [12] and thereby withdraw part of the troops from the southern border, which was immediately taken advantage of by the Pechenegs, among whom there was already propaganda of Islam.[13]
73. LOST BET
One mistake sometimes entails a long series of consequences. The quarrel with Byzantium over the predatory campaign against Korsun in 989 led, in addition to the heavy war with the Pechenegs, to the contact with Bulgaria already mentioned above, since the young Russian Church had to receive books, icons, teachings and explanations from qualified theologians. There were no such learned theologians in the tenth century, not only in Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary, but also not in Germany and Italy, because the Roman Church was going through another crisis. And in Bulgaria the clergy were very learned, even too learned.
The Manichaean and Marcionite propaganda could not but offend those who were close to it. In order to argue with the Manichaeans, it was necessary to know their teaching, and it attracted with its impeccable logic. And after all, not every theologian is so brilliant as to find a refutation of a very talented argument. Therefore, contact with Bulgaria was fraught with considerable danger for Russia.
On the other hand, Tsar Samuel brutally devastated Greece and Thrace, and Emperor Basil, recovering from the first setbacks, then earned the nickname of the “Bulgarian Fighter” by his ruthlessness. In 1001, he launched a systematic offensive, blinding the captured Bulgarians. It is curious that the Orthodox clergy of Bulgaria during the siege of the fortress of Vidin helped not Samuel, but Basil. Finally, the Bulgarians suffered a heavy defeat. King Samuel died of nervous shock on October 6, 1014. His son Gabriel-Radomir died at the hands of the conspirators, and the new ruler was killed in 1018, after which Bulgaria capitulated.
The death of an ally could not but affect the situation of Russia. For the people of Kiev, it became obvious that the alliance with Byzantium, i.e. Olga's tradition, is much more promising than the search for friends in the West. Disillusionment with the government was growing in the capital.
Even more difficult were the problems of governing a pagan country with the help of a Christian administrative apparatus. In the Rostov-Suzdal land, the magi agitated, who, unlike the priests of Perun, were popular among the people. In Novgorod, Prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich, the son of Rogneda, quarreled with the townspeople, defending his Varangian (mercenary) squad from the rage of the Novgorodians, irritated by the rampage of the Varangians. Blood flowed.[14]
However, Prince Yaroslav, even in these straitened circumstances, broke with his father, because, being obliged to send 2/3 of the collected tribute to Kiev, he left all of it to himself. This caused a conflict. Vladimir in 1015 gathered an army for a campaign against Novgorod.
Vladimir's eldest son is Svyatopolk,[15] the son of a Greek nun captured by Svyatoslav. He was unloved by his father and sought solace in friendship with Bishop Reinburn of Koloberezhsky[16], who came from Poland with the sister of King Boleslav I, the bride, and then the wife of Svyatopolk. Although the time of the church schism has not yet come, but Vladimir put his son under arrest, and the bishop in prison, where he died [17].
Vladimir's favorite son was Boris, the older brother of Gleb, a young man who was sitting in the border Murom. The old prince entrusted Boris with the command of the army assembled in 1015 against the Pechenegs. In total, Vladimir had 12 sons, but we will not describe the rest [18], with the exception of Mstislav Tymutarakansky, who will be discussed in particular.
The three princes named here were the exponents of three trends that had developed in Russia: pagan reaction - Yaroslav, Westernism - Svyatopolk and Bulgarophilism - Boris. Apparently, there was also a Grecophile trend - the former supporters of the devoted Yaropolk, whose leader ran away to the Pechenegs. These kept quiet, for the prince was formidable. But on June 15, 1015 Vladimir died suddenly. And everything that was clutched in his firm hand began to move.
It turned out that for a quarter of a century of quiet life (because the Pecheneg war was reduced to a number of border skirmishes and did not affect the economy of the country), the cities gained such strength that the princes-rulers were entirely dependent on their support, and therefore had to fulfill the will of their subjects. And secondly, the regime of Prince Vladimir has lost popularity among the people of Kiev. These two observations explain the details of the further course of events.
[NOTE, I have a list of Kiev princes, I’ll add it to the very end, within the notes. You can follow it by opening this essay on two tabs or browser pages. I’ll put a map of Kievan Rus 1054 - 1132 just now.]
M.D. Priselkov proved that the sympathies of the Kiev prince, who was baptized from Tsargrad, passed to Ohrid, the Bulgarian metropolis controlled by Tsar Samuel. Samuel's Orthodoxy was doubtful even among Bulgarian clerics, but Vladimir was not at all interested in the Red Sun. He used to treat the Greeks negatively, as evidenced by Mikhail Psellus (see below), but the Pecheneg barrier deprived the Prince of Kiev of the opportunity to move to an offensive war. Voivode Varyazhko, faithful to the memory of his friend and Prince Yaropolk, managed to push Vladimir's defensive line from the Black Sea coast to the forest-steppe and thereby prevent direct contact between Russia and Bulgaria. The Pechenegs isolated Bulgaria, which doomed it to defeat, and Vladimir had to spend his strength suppressing the discontent of his subjects, who did not know how to navigate the eclectic politics of their ruler.
It would seem that Vladimir, dying, could be calm for the fate of his business. He provided his beloved son Boris with the command of the army and thereby the golden table of Kiev, and his unloved stepson Svyatopolk [19] with prison and, possibly, execution. But everything went the other way around: Svyatopolk was immediately released and put on the throne, and Boris's army fled, leaving their leader [20]. Then Svyatopolk sent assassins to Boris and his brother Gleb, and the third brother, Svyatoslav, who ruled the Drevlyans, fled, but was overtaken and also killed. And no one stood up for the unfortunate young men, innocent of any crimes.
But Yaroslav in Novgorod stained himself with the murder of delegates from the townspeople who arrived at the prince's court to settle the conflict of the Novgorodians with the Varangians. But the Novgorodians wanted to fight with Kiev. They forgave the prince's betrayal, gathered 3 thousand soldiers, paid 1 thousand Varangians and moved against Svyatopolk with the slogan of revenge on the fratricide. After all, you can come up with any slogan when you want to fight.
So, Vladimir's political line ended with his death and took his beloved sons to the grave. But politics is an earthly matter, connected with the calculation of profit, and religion affects the formation of the conscience of both one person and an entire ethnic group. Therefore, the inertia of the baptism of Rus turned out to be irresistible, despite the mistakes of the Grand Duke, just as it was in Rome under Constantine and his successor, Constant, the patron of Arius.
74. IMPULSES AND SYMBOLS OF INTERNECINE WAR
The subsequent war between Yaroslav and Svyatopolk has been described repeatedly and in detail, which will give us the right to focus on its psychological aspect, which no one paid attention to. Let us recall that the expert on civil wars Farinata degli Uberti claimed that in these wars every fighter knows why he goes to kill his fellow countrymen and sacrifice his own life, whereas in wars with foreigners everything is decided by the feeling of his own and someone else's, which does not require the participation of consciousness and will. Augustin Thierry, who studied the wars of the Merovingians and Carolingians, concluded that the soldiers of Charles the Bald and Lothair did not mindlessly obey the will of the kings, but put their own, understandable content in their names, personifying, according to the customs of that time, the principle that was really dear to them. The combination of principle and persona turned into a symbol, for which it was worth risking your life if there was a sufficient passionate impulse. Only with this combination did the army become combat-ready, because if there was a conversation about benefits, then it was more profitable for everyone, for example, a Novgorodian, to sleep on his stove, having eaten fish soup from ryapushka and smelt and washed it down with drunk honey. If a Novgorodian left the comfort of home and went on a hike, it was not out of selfish interests, but because it meant something more to him.
And certainly not the persons of Yaroslav or Svyatopolk carried away the fighters to battle. After all, no one stood up for Boris and Gleb. This means that Svyatopolk and Yaroslav have become symbols of programs that form souls melting from the passion glow. That Svyatopolk was a Westerner, we already know; that there were many pagans in Yaroslav's army, both Scandinavian and Slavic, we guess, but we have to check ourselves; and that the city of Kiev was already Orthodox - it is clear and without proof. And then the public opinion of the capital decided the fate of the golden table of Kiev: only the one whom the people and the boyars wanted could sit on it. Let's note this and proceed to the analysis of events.
Svyatopolk, having replaced Vladimir, turned the political course 180∞ degrees. He not only reconciled with the Pechenegs, but also entered into an alliance with them. This event was too late, because Muslim mullahs were already preaching among the Pechenegs, and friendship with them did not mean peace with Byzantium for the Kievans. But the Pechenegs sent a detachment to help Svyatopolk, on which he had high hopes. However, in the battle of Lyubech, the Pechenegs, separated from Svyatopolk's army by the lake, could not support him, and the Novgorodians won, and Svyatopolk fled to Poland to Boleslav I.
The Novgorodians entered Kiev... "and the church was destroyed"[21]. Yes, yes, not houses and merchants' shops, but churches. This does not speak about the position of Prince Yaroslav (yes, he hardly had any position then), but about the mood of the Novgorod army. The Kievans could not like such brusqueness, but the Pecheneg raid in 1017 distracted their attention, since the city had to be defended. The Pechenegs were repulsed, but when in the next 1018 Yaroslav was defeated by the Polish king Boleslav on the Bug, then Kiev did not support him, and the prince fled to Novgorod "with 4 men"[22].
Boleslav and Svyatopolk captured Kiev, but the people of Kiev did not want to see the Poles. Polish soldiers, divorced for a stay, were killed by the owners of the houses during sleep. Boleslav considered it good to take the rest of the army home, and Svyatopolk resumed friendship with the Pechenegs.
If Svyatopolk does not arouse sympathy in this epic, then the attitude towards Boleslav I the Brave should be the opposite. This was the last paladin, (champion) of the ancient Slavic unity, destroyed by the Avars at the end of the VI century. Since 1002, Boleslav I tried to unite the Western Slavs and oppose the Slavic power to the German Empire. He drove the Germans beyond the Elbe and even took their stronghold - the fortress of Meissen (on the Elbe, below Dresden), expelled Boleslav III the Red from Prague (the monster who mutilated his brother Jaromir and sought to kill another brother, Udalrik), and annexed the Czech Republic to Poland.
It would seem that success has been achieved, but the Czechs and even the pagan Luthiers offered their help to Emperor Henry II against the Poles. In 1005, the combined forces of the Germans, Czechs and Luthiers pushed back the Polish troops, and according to the treaty in Poznan, Boleslav renounced his conquests. In 1007, the war resumed, and it was initiated by the Czechs and Luthiers, who encouraged the Germans to march. The Poles won and reached the Elbe by 1012. The Germans asked for peace. and Henry II gave in flax (i.e. conceded) Boleslav conquered his lands.[23]
The third phase of the war in 1013-1018 also ended in glory, but... the fruitless victory of the Poles. Neither the Russians, nor the Luthiers, nor the Czechs wanted unification with Poland. Just as Lothair in 840 yielded to the natural law of ethnogenesis and abandoned the idea of preserving the empire, so Boleslav's son Mieczyslaw, having been defeated by the Germans in 1032, became the heir of the empire. Poland fell apart and ceased to be dangerous for its neighbors. Neither a person nor an ethnic group can exist without sincere friends.
Map 9. Kievan Rus in the X-XII centuries (124 KB)
http://gumilevica.kulichki.net/maps/args09.html
But in 1018, no one could have foreseen such a turn of events. Svyatopolk the Accursed triumphed in Kiev. Yaroslav was in a panic. He wanted to give up everything and flee to Sweden, but the posadnik Konstantin Dobrynich, (Novgorod opposition), ordered to chop up Yaroslav's rooks (boats) and organized a new campaign to Kiev. In 1019, in the Battle of Alta, the Novgorodians defeated the Pechenegs, the last allies of Svyatopolk, because he had to flee from the Kievans. Svyatopolk fled to Poland, but died on the way, according to the chronicler, from remorse, which caused him a mental illness. Yaroslav sat down on the golden table of Kiev, and this time the churches did not burn.
The fratricidal war was over, and although the victory was won by the forces of pagan reaction, it led to the triumph of Orthodoxy. The mechanism of the process is simple. In pagan Novgorod there was an initiative, i.e. passionate, group of opponents of Christianity. It was them who rushed to Kiev and died under the swords of the Polish knights on the Bug and from the Pecheneg arrows on the Alta. The survivors received a monetary reward for themselves and a charter guaranteeing their rights for the city. They were satisfied with this and returned home to heal the wounds inflicted by the war. And their children were brought up under the domination of Orthodox culture, since Slavic paganism was isolated after the Christianization of Scandinavia.
Of course, we cannot assume that such an end was a foregone conclusion. Prince Yaroslav himself did not think so, having gladly replaced exuberant Novgorod with cultured Kiev. But he took measures by eliminating the posadnik, who actually gave him the throne) of his cousin Konstantin Dobrynich: "... the Great Prince Yaroslav was angry with him and went to Rostov and for the 3rd summer led him to be killed in Murom on the retse on the Oce (Oke)"[24]. Thus, the Novgorod opposition lost its leader and the "north-western" problem was solved in favor of the hegemony of Kiev, and thereby the Orthodox Church.
But the south-eastern border remained. There was actually an independent principality of Temutarakan, with which the remnants of the Judeo-Khazars were connected, and the Pecheneg union, which converted to Islam, i.e. to another superethnos. This problem was no less formidable than the northern and western ones, since Kiev was open from the Steppe. Let's see what has changed in the steppe during the internecine war described here.
75. USED CHANCE
The role of personality in history is a problem that has already been solved. There is no need to be wise about this, but it is necessary to use the obtained results. The character of Prince Mstislav Vladimirovich in other conditions would not have had any significance for the destinies of peoples, but in the current situation, some features of this prince contributed to the development of a chain of events in a certain direction; and the fact that this chain was quickly broken, it is already a matter of chance.
The chronicler characterizes Mstislav as follows: he was fat, ruddy, with big eyes, brave in battle, loved the squad and did not spare any gifts or treats for it. That is, he was completely in the circle of thoughts and aspirations of his surroundings.
And how could it be otherwise? Brought to Darkness as a child, Mstislav was brought up among his peers - residents of a cheerful trading city with an extremely mixed population. The companions of his childhood games and youthful amusements were not small Slavs, but local residents, among whom the majority were Khazar Jews, who called themselves simply Khazars. The original Khazars lived outside the Dark-Balkan principality - in the lower reaches of the Volga, Terek and Don. The latter were called Brodniki and, despite the fact that they already spoke the generally accepted Slavic language and professed Orthodoxy, they were not confused with either Russians or Jews.[25] The Tymutarakan principality was an island among the surrounding steppe peoples. The normal state between those and the others were small border wars.
So, in complete obscurity, although without boredom, in a mixed Russian-Jewish society, the simple-minded, hospitable, brave and trusting Prince Mstislav lived up to forty years, until fate gave him a reason to become famous. The main opponents of his Jewish friends were the Kasogi, a Circassian tribe of the foothills of the Caucasian Ridge. Apparently, improvised fortifications were built against them, capable of sheltering herds and withstanding a siege.[26] But for active actions, the Khazar Jews attracted a Russian prince, who was their sincere friend and was looking for heroic glory.
Mstislav in 1022 killed the Circassian Prince Rededya in a duel, but treated the defeated mercifully: he married Rededi's son to his daughter and attracted Kasogs (Circassians) to his squad, which until then consisted of a few Russian immigrants and Khazar Jews. Thus, on the shore of the Sea of Azov there was a minimal semblance of a defeated Khazar state, with only one, but very important exception: the ruler was a devout Christian.
Having defeated Rededya, Mstislav erected the Church of the Virgin in Darkness, on the eve of his death he laid a temple in Chernigov, his son was baptized. In short, the neighborhood with the Judeo-Khazars did not lead to the mixing of Russians with Jews. Both ethnic groups lived amicably, but separately. However, in the next fatal moment in 1023, came the deciding fate of the Dark-Balkan principality.
The brutal fratricidal war in Russia, which broke out in 1015, after the death of Vladimir, between Svyatopolk the Accursed and Yaroslav the Wise, weakened Russia. After the victory over Svyatopolk, Yaroslav was forced to conquer the fallen suburbs anew. Yaroslav's nephew Prince Bryachislav of Polotsk took and robbed Novgorod in 1021. Yaroslav overtook him and recaptured the prisoners, but the war did not abate. Near Suzdal, the magi rose up: "There was a great rebellion," pacified only in 1024. The Vyatichi, again conquered only by Vladimir Monomakh, and the northerners, Russified descendants of the militant savirs, were postponed. And then it was time for Mstislav to act.
In 1023, "Mstislav went to Yaroslav, with the Khazars and Kasogs." According to the chronicle manner of presentation, the initiative is always attributed to the prince, and the influence of advisers and the pressure of public opinion are lowered. However, in the light of the described situation, it is more correct to assume that the Khazars and Kasogs went to Russia, and in order to attract some Russians to their side, they brought Mstislav Vladimirovich with them.
Yaroslav was in Novgorod at that time, and Mstislav in 1024 occupied Chernigov, a city that stood on the border of the "Russian" and "Seversk" lands [27], but the Kievans refused to accept [28] the prince with a Jewish retinue. Yaroslav returned from Novgorod with a hired Varangian squad. On an autumn stormy night near the town of Larch, the Scandinavians met with the steppe people and killed each other by the light of lightning .[29]
Mstislav put the Northerners in the front line, and left his squad in reserve. When the combatants were tired, Mstislav's cavalry struck at the Varangians and drove them away, cutting down the fleeing. Yaroslav fled to Novgorod.
It would seem that after such a victory, Kiev and the whole Russian land should have gone to Mstislav, but the opposite happened: Mstislav asked for peace. Why?
The chronicler put into Mstislav's mouth the words allegedly uttered in the morning after the battle: "Who won't be happy about this? Here lies a Northerner, here is a Varangian, and his squad is intact." This outrageous cynicism showed the Northerners that they were not freed, but used. In the X-XI centuries. this manner of dealing with allies was well known. So, the Itil kings threw Khorezmian mercenaries at the Rus and Hungarians, and the Rus - at the Dalemites and Greeks, not sparing the dead. The surviving northerners could not help but feel insulted, and without their active help Mstislav could not even think about capturing Kiev.
But maybe it was just the tactlessness of a naïve prince, and the Judeo-Khazars are not to blame for it? Perhaps, but even so, this tactlessness is the fruit of education in a foreign environment, and there the adoption of other people's views is inevitable. And there would be no need to include an accidental reservation in the chronicle. Obviously, it sounded quite loud at the time, as a political program.
So, the winner Mstislav asked for peace from the defeated Yaroslav, arguing that Yaroslav is the elder brother [30]. Recognizing oneself as a "younger brother" meant submission on the rights of autonomy. And so, it really was.
But where did Mstislav's victorious squad go? The Kasogs (Circassians) left it, returned to Temutarakan, and with the help of the Ossetians (Yasov) captured the city.[31] Yaroslav in 1029 sent an army against the Yasov and returned the darkness of Tarakan.[32] Mstislav remained loyal to the Grand Duke until his death in 1036, after which Chernigov and Seversk land were reunited with Russia. And what were the Judeo-Khazars doing at that time?
76. HOPELESSNESS
No, the attempt to create a second Khazaria in place of Russia failed not because of accidental bad luck. Personal relations with the brave and trusting prince could not make up for the unpopularity, even dislike, caused by the Judeo-Khazars in Kiev, who still remembered the campaign of the venerable Pesach. And Mstislav himself, once in Chernigov, became interested in temple building and cooled down to the Jewish comrades of his youth.
The alleged reconstruction of the events would only be speculation if a document of the XI century - "The Word about Law and Grace" by Metropolitan Hilarion - had not been preserved. The meaning of this short essay is in opposition to the Jewish "law" given for the people alone, the Christian teaching about grace flooding all countries, including Russia. And then the author notices: "Judea is silent."
This work is apparently inspired by the situation. When the Jewish troops with the Russian prince at their head stood in Chernigov, the people of Kiev hardly felt at ease. The absence of war is not always peace. Direct anti-Jewish agitation could cause a backlash directed against a talented Christian author. One can think that this is why the "Word about Law and Grace" was published after 1037, i.e. after the death of Prince Mstislav.
Then the topic was no longer so relevant, but the danger for the author also passed, because Mstislav's Jewish companions had to return to their native Darkness. And yet the word of Hilarion, then a simple Kiev priest, played its role. It gave the people of Kiev a direction of patriotic thought, a dominant that forms public consciousness. And this is a formidable force. It was not before the swords of hired Varangians that the champions of Judaism retreated, but before the public opinion of the Kievans and the surrounding Slavs, who made a choice in favor of Byzantine Orthodoxy, which became the cultural dominant for subsequent generations of Russians. There is no place left for the Jewish jet in this culture. True, the Jewish colony in Kiev existed until 1113 and even had a stone synagogue, but this colony did not belong to Khazar Jewish soldiers, but to Westerners, immigrants from Germany, usurers.
It has been suggested that the aggravation of Russian-Jewish relations was caused by an attempt to promote Judaism in Kievan Rus.[33] This is hardly correct, rather the opposite: "The Jews were extremely disgusted with proselytism, and... the influence of Judaism was everywhere reflected in addition to their direct activities in this regard"[34]. The only way to spread Judaism was the one that was used in Khazaria - mixed marriages.
Pagans, tolerant of non-Believers, were willing to do this, but Orthodox priests categorically forbade marriages with non-believers. But the Jews had another, roundabout way, already tried in Spain and Languedoc: to spread skepticism and indifferentism, and thereby eliminate the ethno-cultural dominant. This was the principle of the "babel of Babel". In Babylon, according to legend, there was a "mixture of languages", and everyone continued to speak Aramaic, but attached different meanings to the words. There were differences in nuances, but mutual understanding disappeared, and the ethnic group "crumbled rosily."
But in Kievan Rus, the preachers of Judaism met with powerful resistance from a developed and thoughtful Orthodox theology. Their attacks against Christian dogmatics have long been known to the Greeks, who have found sensible and exhaustive refutations of them. The Russian priests of the XI century knew Greek and Byzantine theology, and the laity, far from being stupid and lazy, understood it.
In his "Word" Hilarion assigns a special place to Jewish ingratitude. He writes that Christ came not only to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel", whose law he was not going to break, but also to all nations. However, the Jews declared him a deceiver, the son of a harlot, performing miracles by the power of Beelzebub... and they tortured him on the cross, as if he were a villain [35].
Let us recall the massacres of the Khazar tsars against the Russian allies, when after heavy fighting on the southern shores of the Caspian, they returned to the Volga, hoping to find rest and support there. Ingratitude was perceived by the Slavs as something unnatural and therefore disgusting. Their ethnic stereotypes did not coincide with either Jewish or Norman ones.
Developing the thought expressed, Hilarion talks about how the Jews in ancient times killed their prophets, which makes it clear that the death of Jesus Christ is not an accident, but an ordinary massacre of the righteous, "because their deeds are dark byahu," since the Jews "do not love the light." And he not without pleasure states that the "stoning prophets" were smashed "to the ground" by the Romans. At the same time, he clearly separates the most ancient period - the era of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob - from the era of Moses and the kings of Judea. He treats the former quite positively, and the latter more than skeptically. This logically implies the opposition of the "law", given only to the Jews, to the "grace" that shone upon all the peoples of the Earth. This is a completely and extremely clear concept. Obviously, it was understandable to the Kievans of the XI century, otherwise the "Word" would not have been worth writing.
But Judaism had a chance to win. Orthodoxy has not yet been established on Russian soil. Even where local cults were broken, a double faith prevailed, which did not disappear until the XX century. But, having been given the opportunity to choose between faith and disbelief, the Russians, from princes to Smerds, chose the Greek faith, so that Jewish propaganda apparently played the role of a catalyst in the conversion of Slavs and Finno-Ugrians to Orthodoxy. This by no means reduces the significance of the feat of Metropolitan Hilarion, who opposed his positive worldview to the negative one, i.e. the absence of any faith.
His merit is no less than that of the kagans glorified by him: Vladimir the Holy and Yaroslav the Wise. But something else is important for us: the statistical process of ethnogenesis in an inertial phase, when an ethnic group recovered from an age-related illness discards a culture alien to it, resists turning itself into a chimera and thereby avoids the formation of an anti-system on its land. This was the will of the people to which Hilarion belonged. His fiery lines played the same role for Ancient Russia as one phrase of a Lorraine shepherdess - (Joan of Arc) "La Belle France!" for medieval France. But because of this simple slogan, England lost the Hundred Years' War.
Unambiguous public opinion is more significant than the likes or dislikes of individual princes. It excluded not only the preaching of Judaism, but also mixed marriages, which played a decisive role in pagan Khazaria. Therefore, the attempts of Western European Jews to establish themselves in Kiev were unsuccessful, and the Khazars had to confine themselves to Dark-Tarakan, where they were under the rule of Russian princes. But the Jews here tried to find a way out. They knew how to wait. And indeed, new immigrants from Asia intervened in the events - Cumans, who in Russia were called Polovtsians. Their appearance proved fatal for the Pechenegs, tragic for the Guzs and very significant for the Russian-Jewish conflict.
notes
[1] See: Kuzmin A. G.//Questions of history. l970. No. 10 p.53
[2] See: Presnyakov L.E. Lectures on Russian History M., 1938, p.103
[3] The Novgorod Fourth Chronicle "in the summer of 6497" (989); cit. according to PVL. Ch. II. p. 344. O. Rapov disagrees with Nestor in the dating of baptism; see: Introduction of Christianity in Russia. p. 107, note. 52.
[4] See: Shakhmatov L.L. Searches ... pp.133-161; PVL. Ch. II. P.56.
[5] See: PSRL. T.IX. P.15; cf.: Shevchenko Yu.Yu. Decree.soc. P.52
[6] See: Vinogradov I.P. Historical sketch of the city of Vyazma from ancient times to the XVII century. M., 1890, p. 6. Note 4.
[7] See: Shakhmatov A.L. Search... pp.140-141.
[8] See: PVL. Ch.II. p.337.
[9] 1.0-0.8 million people lived in Constantinople in the XI-XII centuries. (see: Urdanis B.Ts. Population growth in Europe. pp.77-78).
[10] Cit. according to: History of the USSR.M., 1966. p.518.
[11] In the "Tale of Bygone Years" this text goes under 997, from which it is clear how unreliable the chronology of the chronicle is. But when describing the XI century. such gross inaccuracies do not occur.
[12] The Nikon Chronicle "in the summer of 650-5"; see: PVL. Ch.11. p. 350
[13] Kunik L., Rosen V. Izvestiya al-Bekri and other authors about Russia and the Slavs. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg, 1878. pp. 58-60.
[14] These and subsequent events are described in detail by many authors of the history of Ancient Russia, and there is no need to repeat their presentation here. For us, only the aspect of the struggle of confessions is important, reflected in the sequence of events and viewed with a large generalization.
[15] Strictly speaking, Vladimir's first son was Vysheslav. But there is no mention of him in history.
[16] See: Priselkov M.D. Decree.op. pp.55-56.
[17] See: PVL. Ch. II. p. 364.
[18] The list of Vladimir's sons is not the same in all chronicles (see: PVL Part II. p. 325), and there are unresolved problems of genealogy that are not important for our research. Let us confine ourselves to the list from article 988. From Rogneda: Izyaslav - the ancestor of the Polotsk princes, Mstislav (died in 1036), Yaroslav the Wise (died in 1054), Vsevolod (about him below). From the Greek nun, the widow of Yaropolk, - Svyatopolk the Accursed, "the son of two fathers" (died in 1019). from the Czech - Vysheslav, and from the other - Svyatoslav Drevlyansky (died in 1015) and Mstislav. From the Bulgarian -Boris and Gleb. To them are added: the unfortunate Sudislav, captured by Yaroslav in Pskov in 1036 and held in a log cabin (prison) until 1059, and Zvizd, who, according to false information, lived in Volhynia (see: PVL. Ch. II. p. 343). Vsevolod, the first emigrant in Russian history, fled to Sweden in the 90s of the tenth century and died there in 995. In addition, Vladimir had two daughters from Rogneda - Predslav and Maria Dobrogneva (wife of the Polish king Casimir). But of all such numerous offspring, only the children of Izyaslav of Polotsk and Yaroslav the Wise survived.
Oleg (882–912) Igor (912–945) Olga (Regent) for young Sviatoslav (945–962) Sviatoslav I (962–972) Yaropolk (972–980) Vladimir I (980–1015) Sviatopolk I (1015–1019) Yaroslav the wise (1019–1054) started as a brutal pagan, ended as a brutal Christian Iziaslav (1054–1073), (1076–1078) Vseslav (1068–1069) Sviatoslav II (1073–1076) Vsevolod (1078–1093) Sviatopolk II (1093–1113) Vladimir Monomakh (1113–1125) Mstislav (1125–1132) Yaropolk II (1132–1139) Vyacheslav (1139, 1151–1154). Vsevolod II (1139–1146) Igor II (1146) Iziaslav II (1146–1154, with intervals) Yuri Dolgoruky (1149–1151, 1155–1157) Rostislav (1154–1167, with intervals) Iziaslav III (1155–1162, with intervals) Mstislav II (1167–1169) Gleb (1169, 1170–1171) Vladimir II (1171) Mikhailo (1171) Roman (1171–1173, 1175–1177) Vsevolod III (1173) Volyamir II (1172–1211, with intervals) Yaroslav II, (1174–1175, 1180) Sviatoslav III (1173, 1176–1180, 1181–1194) Igor III (1202, 1214)* Roman the Great (1203-1205) Rostislav II (1204–1206) Vsevolod IV (1206–1212, with intervals) Mstislav III (1214–1223) Vladimir III (1223–1235) Iziaslav IV (1235–1236) Yaroslav III (1236–1238, 1246) Mikhailo II (1238–1239, 1241–1246) Rostislav III (1239) Danylo (1239–1240)
[19] Vladimir, having killed Yaropolk, "watered his wife," already pregnant. Therefore, Svyatopolk was considered the son of two fathers. Vladimir didn't like him.
[20] See: Priselkov M.D. Decree. op. p. 59.
[21] PVL. Ch. I. P. 96.
[22] Ibid. p. 97.
[23] Weber G. Universal history. Т.VI . pp.132-151.
[24] The Sofia First Chronicle; cit. by: PVL. Ch. II. P. 368.
[25] See: Gumilev L.N. Discovery of Khazaria. P. 176.
[26] See: Bijiyev X. X., Gadlo A.V. Decree. op. p. 12-13.
[27] See: Ancient Russian principalities of the X-XIII centuries. pp. 9 and 63-64.
[28] See: PVL. Ch. I. p. 99.
[29] See: PVL. Ch. II. p. 371.
[30] D.S. Likhachev drew attention to the inconsistency of the chronicle texts (see: PVL. Ch. II. p. 325). The difficulties noted by him do not exclude our proposed explanation of the contradictions of the chronicle texts.
[31] See: Lopatinsky A.G. Decree. op. p.23-26.
[32] See: Mavrodin V.V. Formation of the Old Russian state.L., 1945.P. 361.
[33] See: Malishevsky I. Jews in Southern Russia and Kiev in the X-XII centuries.//Proceedings of the Kiev Theological Academy. Vol. III. 1878. pp. 436-439.
[34] Berlin I. Decree op. p. 153.
[35] See: Rozov N.N. Synodal list of works by Hilarion, a Russian writer of the XI century.//Slavia, No. 32. Prague, 1963. pp. 159-160.
.