When did the term Kievan Rus appear? Old Russian state (Kievan Rus). Formation of the name "Rus"

Chronicle collection " The Tale of Bygone Years"is the only written source confirming the existence of the so-called Kievan Rus. Appearing to the world at the moment of formation " official version"of our ancient history, it is every now and then subject to fair criticism from specialists and cannot be considered as a reliable historical document.

But even if we take seriously this purely literary work and the events described in it, then this is at least not enough to confirm the existence of such a medieval association as Kievan Rus. Well, such an “outstanding” state in Eastern Europe could not have left behind only one written historical source! But first things first…

Could Kyiv be the capital of Rus'?

To begin with, I would like to consider the very possibility of the emergence of such a Dnieper association as Kievan Rus, and in particular its center - Kyiv. Even for a person far from historical science, it is clear that the likelihood that Kyiv, located somewhere on the outskirts, could become the center of the state is not only negligible, but also absurd. Firstly, regardless of the initial size of the state, they always try to locate its capital as close to the center as possible - away from the external borders and their potential enemy. Thus, the center of the country will be reliably protected from external invasion, which we do not see at all in the case of Kiev, which was located on the outskirts of the medieval state.

Secondly, another, the most favorable place for the location of the capital is the point of intersection of transport routes. In this case, you can always easily get from the center to any, even the most remote corner of the state. Otherwise, it is simply impossible to manage such a gigantic association as Kievan Rus without the availability of modern means of communication (telephone, radio, television, telegraph, Internet). But in the case of Kiev, we see the exact opposite picture - it is not only located on the outskirts, but also does not have convenient transport links with most significant cities - Moscow, Novgorod, Vladimir, Yaroslavl, Polotsk and others.

Third, most medieval capitals were not only administrative, but also commercial centers of their states. For the convenience of maintaining trade, they could be located on the shore of the sea or a large river. And in the case of Kiev, at first glance, everything is fine - it is located on the Dnieper. But this is only at first glance! Since the prospects for the development of international trade along the Dnieper River are very doubtful. Its tributaries allow access to such “partisan” territories as Pripyat, Polesie or Pinsk, the development of which was not completed even by the beginning of the 20th century. What can we say about the earlier period and prospects for the development of transit trade through these lands. And here supporters of the Varangian path - “from the Varangians to the Greeks” - come to the aid of Kyiv’s dubious position. According to some historians, it was this route that connected the northern Baltic lands, Novgorod, Kyiv and the Black Sea. Absolutely irrational, and sometimes absurd, it involves the passage of an intricate, winding route " Baltic - Volkhov - Lovat - Western Dvina - Dnieper"and crossing two watersheds by portage. But the Varangians are the real heroes of their time, they don’t care about anything! They can drag their ships overland and do not look for direct routes!

But seriously, the distance along the route “Baltica - Volkhov - Lovat - Western Dvina - Dnieper” is 5 times greater than the distance along the route “Baltic - Western Dvina - Dnepr”, which involves only one portage and goes straight into the Black Sea . Not to mention the fact that it was possible to “go to the Greeks” along the route “Baltic - Vistula - Bug - Pripyat - Dnieper”. But, no matter how the Varangians “walked” there, the existence of an economically profitable trade route connecting the north, Kyiv and south is subject to very great doubt. This is very unlikely due to the natural geographical features of the Dnieper itself - below Kyiv it is riddled with rather dangerous rapids, which exclude the possibility of passage of merchant ships. Thus, the famous French engineer and cartographer Guillaume Beauplan in his work " Description of Ukraine" writes:

The fertility of the soil provides the inhabitants with grain in such abundance that they often do not know what to do with it, especially since they have no navigable rivers flowing into the sea, with the exception of the Dnieper, which, 50 miles below Kiev, is blocked by thirteen rapids, the last of which is distant from the first by a good seven miles, which is a whole day's journey, as can be seen on the map. This obstacle prevents them from sending their grain to Constantinople.

Interesting fact! How is it in the 17th century? suddenly the river along which the largest trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks” passed just a few centuries ago ceased to be navigable? Well, let’s say that the selfless merchants of that time were not afraid of any obstacles. Consumed by a thirst for profit, they were ready to meander along an absurd route, drag their ships dozens of miles, break them on the dangerous Dnieper rapids, and all in order to get from the Baltic to the Black Sea through Kyiv. Then a completely logical question arises: where, in fact, does the existence of a seaport or at least a run-down fortress located at the mouth of the river exist? Dnieper? After all, only with their help could the Kyiv princes control trade and order on this route. But they simply don’t exist!

And only in the future will representatives of the Ottoman Empire build a geographically and strategically important fortress Achi-Kale, which blocked the exit to the Black Sea from the Dnieper. It is for Achi-Kale that the prince will fight for almost a year and a half Potemkin. In 1788 it will be conquered, and from 1792 it will bear the Russian name - Ochakov. A little earlier (in 1778) at the mouth of the river. Dnieper will have another large city - Kherson. But it was also founded as a Russian fortress and has nothing to do with the existence of Kievan Rus. As well as the fortress founded in 1784 in the Dnieper-Bug estuary, from which the city traces its history. Nikolaev.

But this time too the precarious position of Kievan Rus " saved by cunning historians" In particular, they literally imagine the existence of an ancient Russian port at the mouth of the river. Dnieper. They say that previously on the site of the small town of Aleshki, which was founded in 1784 and since 1854 has been called Tsyurupinsk, a fairly rich trading city-port was built Oleshye(XI century), which appeared during the existence of the Cossack Sich. At the same time, there is a complete lack of direct historical evidence of this “ wonderful metamorphosis" And all the real archaeological finds only prove that at the beginning of the 18th century. There was actually a Cossack fortification located here, which arose at the end of the 17th century. However, this settlement was called Dneprovsk, and only after a while it was renamed in honor of the fictional ancient Russian city of Oleshye. After all, changing toponymy, especially if the need arises, is not difficult for historians!

But let’s return to our “great trade route,” which, by all definitions, was supposed to be a tasty morsel of profit for dashing robbers. To protect themselves from them, the princes and their subjects were simply obliged to build well-fortified settlements on the banks of the Dnieper. Having inns for merchants to relax and the necessary infrastructure, over time they had to expand and gradually turn into fairly large cities. And now the question is: how many such ancient Russian cities are there on the banks of the river? Do you know Dnepr? Small Kanev with a population of only 28,000 people, a village Lyubech, district town Rogachev, Orsha And Smolensk? But this is an insignificant number in terms of its geographical and strategic scale! Especially considering the fact that the Scandinavians called the territory of Ancient Rus' nothing more than Gardarika- a country of cities. Where are these cities? And this is not to mention the particularly dangerous sections of the “Great Trade Route” - the Dnieper rapids, overcoming which implied reliable protection from external attacks by robbers. Such protection could only be guaranteed by fortifications built along the route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.” But where are these fortifications?

Kyiv archeology: few finds, many tales

Now let’s try to look at the problem of the existence of Kievan Rus from an economic point of view. According to its postulates, any more or less large trading city is a place where transactions are made and customs duties exist, i.e. washed And in this case, historians are trying to convince us that Kyiv was just such a place. He " gave the go-ahead"actively trading merchants following the route "from the Varangians to the Greeks", and here all the merchants are still with " Dokievsky» times were obliged to pay myt. At the same time, one of the most influential figures in Soviet history, professor and academician Boris Rybakov, in his study " Kiya city" writes the following:

The assumption of “customs duties” in the vicinity of the future Kyiv is supported by a large number of finds of beautiful bronze objects decorated with multi-color champlevé enamel. Brooches, decorative chains, and parts of drinking horns are found in a compact mass in the space from the mouth of the Desna to Russia.

What is this academician telling us? It turns out that customs everywhere demanded payment of customs in money, and the “Dokiev” and Kyiv customs officers were painfully greedy for works of applied art and, out of their kindness, took duties from merchants not in money, but in various utensils? However, thanks to Academician Rybakov for this too! Indeed, unlike modern “luminaries” of Ukrainian historical science, at least he did not lie and honestly, albeit in a veiled form, stated: no coin was found near Kyiv. But household utensils made of bronze are found in abundance. By the way! Scandinavian researchers came to a similar conclusion, who also refute “ the greatness of the trade route from the Varangians to the Greeks" According to them, Byzantine coins account for less than 1% of all finds discovered on the territory of archaeological complexes. At the same time, the large number of silver dirhams discovered indicates fairly developed trade relations with the Russians living in the Volga region.

Summarizing all of the above, the conclusion suggests itself. In essence, Kyiv is more of a regional trade center. It is far from being a “world” center of trade relations, and even more so it could not play a significant role in the political life of ancient Rus'. If it were truly the capital, then fortifications would undoubtedly form around its center, eventually forming satellite cities that would protect its approaches on all sides. For example, around the same Moscow the Golden Ring with well-fortified cities and monasteries was formed. The approaches to St. Petersburg are protected by a large number of forts and an extensive network of suburbs, etc.

Unlike Moscow and St. Petersburg, Kyiv was very, very weakly protected, which is why, at the slightest threat from a potential enemy, it easily passed “from hand to hand” and could not withstand the onslaught. At the same time, on the territory of the city itself we do not find even a faint semblance of an impregnable citadel, which befits the status of a capital. There is not even a hint of the Moscow Kremlin or even the smaller Pskov or Novgorod buildings. And all the known fortification structures were erected on the territory of Kyiv much later, at the end of the 17th - beginning of the 18th centuries. All this once again emphasizes a certain insolvency of Kyiv in political, trade and economic terms. In response to these facts, historians never cease to repeat one thing: they say that at one time Kyiv suffered greatly from the Tatar-Mongol invasion, it was plundered, burned, destroyed, etc. Then a completely logical question: why was such a “large capital” of Kievan Rus not restored and did not shine in its greatness in spite of its enemies? Why was Moscow, which was burned in 1812 and several times in an earlier period, always quickly rebuilt? While “poor, unfortunate” Kyiv was broken, depressed and vegetated in the shadows almost until the onset of the Soviet era.

Just for reference, some statistics, so to speak, an opportunity to look at the problem from a different perspective. At the turn of the XVIII - XIX centuries. Kyiv's population is 188 000 Human. The population of the then very young Odessa was more than 193 000 Human. In Kharkov at this moment there are about 198 000 residents. By the end of the 19th century. already lives in Moscow about 800 000 people, and St. Petersburg, together with its suburbs, has more than 1 350 000 residents. At the same time, the population of Kyiv practically does not increase, and it itself is an insignificant provincial, practically provincial city in Russia and simply a railway junction. And the point here is far from being a matter of “historical injustice”! And the geographical and strategic position of Kyiv. Located far from large commercial and economically significant centers, it is unattractive for settlement and continues to remain just a province. And along with its vegetation, the southern region and Novorossiya are being actively developed. Even with the advent of Soviet power, the capital of Ukraine becomes not Kyiv, but Kharkov, where almost no one speaks Ukrainian. And only in the post-war period, when in 1947-1954. The architectural ensemble of Khreshchatyk was built, Kyiv takes on a more attractive, solemn appearance, becomes a more “metropolitan” and beautiful city.

In general, even in the past, Kyiv was never considered as a single settlement. So, at the end of the 18th century. on the future territory of the modern city, three separated settlements were located: the Kiev-Pechersk fortress with its suburbs, two versts from it was Upper Kyiv and three versts from them lay Podol. According to the “Geographical description of the city of Kyiv, composed by the Kiev garrison by Lieutenant Vasily Ivanovich Novgorodtsov”

...The Old or Upper City of Kyiv consists of four sections, which are surrounded by an earthen rampart with deliberately deep ditches and are called Andreevsky, Sofia, Mikhailovsky And Pechersky departments... There were 682 private wooden courtyards there.

At that time, in the Kiev-Pechersk fortress, of which the Lavra and the suburb were an integral part, Novgorodtsev recorded 2 monasteries, 8 stone and 3 wooden churches. And the arriving auditor counted 9 state-owned stone and 27 wooden buildings along with the suburb and 1095 particular (civil) courtyards.

The most populated part of Kyiv was Podol. Namely:

In the city of Kiev-Podil there are buildings: monasteries: stone - 7, wooden - 2, women's stone - 7; churches: stone - 9, wooden - 77; magistrate's building: stone - 4, wooden - 7; philistine courtyards: stone - 3, wooden - 1926.

Thus, in all three scattered settlements of Kyiv there were less than 4,000 households(houses), three of which were stone. And the total number of inhabitants, according to the census at the time of the reign of Catherine II, did not exceed 20,000 people! In other words, an average regional center. The trade opportunities of Kyiv at that time can be judged by the phrase of the same lieutenant:

There are no merchants from among the Kyiv townspeople who had large capital, except for three or four, and others have mediocre, or better yet, small capital.

In other words, the nature of the trade was very, very mediocre. He goes on to say:

Along the Dnieper River in the spring and at low water, also in the fall from Great Russian cities: from Bryansk, Trubchevsk, and from Little Russian cities: Novgorod-Seversky and from other places to Kyiv and to the Little Russian cities of Pereyaslav, Gorodishche, Kremenchug and Perevolochna with bread, with bread wine , with strip and cast iron, with hemp oil, diogtem, with ropes, matting, with honey, with ham lard and wooden utensils, barges, or so-called canoes, go, and from Poland, timber and firewood, and other forest supplies are floated in rafts... There is a pier for ships near the city of Podol.

In a word, the lieutenant does not report anything interesting or particularly outstanding about the life of the provincial city of Kyiv in his report. The big picture " sad provincial chronicle“Archaeological excavations also confirm this. Designed to discover the material values of the past, they have been actively conducted on the territory of Kyiv since the mid-50s. XX century During this time, a decent amount of various unimportant little things were discovered, thanks to which many scientific works were written. What's the end result? - In the end, nothing! Treasures that are of particular value to archaeologists are discovered with cherished regularity on the territory of Kyiv, especially in Podol. But the problem is that the Byzantine coins found in this case have nothing to do with the period of the birth of the “statehood” of Kievan Rus and the formation of its “capital”. And based on the official dating of the discovered coins, only one conclusion can be drawn: silver and gold were buried in the Dnieper expanses by ordinary robbers.

Well, what about the ancient Russian coins? No way either! Period XII-XIII centuries. was officially declared “coinless” by “historians”. They say that there was no money in that era and, accordingly, there was no point in looking for it. At the same time, some pundits offer their own version of commodity-money relations - the existence of the so-called hryvnia, which were essentially silver ingots.

Silver bars (hryvnia) are, of course, much better than a generally “coinless” period. But then a completely natural question arises: how did ordinary people pay for their purchases at the market? Agree, it’s hard to imagine any average person who came “to skimp on little things” and “cut off” a small piece of silver from his bullion to each of the sellers. Any coin is a simple and at the same time ingenious invention of mankind. After all, all coins are identical to each other - they are equal in weight and composition, which means they have absolutely the same purchasing value. As for bullion, determining by eye how much silver needs to be “cut off”, for example, for a chicken, is something neither the seller nor the buyer can do with pinpoint accuracy. Therefore, even ordinary common sense suggests that if coins have come into circulation at least once in the history of a people, then they will not go anywhere - this is convenient and greatly simplifies commodity-money relations.

But the problem is that silver and gold coins gradually wear out during their daily use. For example, there was a coin weighing 12 g, and a year later, you see, it no longer weighs 12 g, but 11 g. What to do in this situation? Man came up with a way out - over time, paper bills were invented, which did not lose their weight, and, consequently, their purchasing power in a year or two. But this happened over time, and in the meantime, hryvnias were invented - a kind of 200-gram silver bills.

Thus, silver hryvnia bars are not consumable coins! These are large denomination bills intended for payment for wholesale purchases. And most likely they were in circulation not instead of small coins, but along with them. Moreover, they were used to pay only for large transactions, for example, merchants for their wholesale. But ordinary people still went to the store or to the market with small coins. In this case, a new question arises: why do historians stubbornly date the hryvnia precisely to the 12th-13th centuries? After all, even according to the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron, they were in circulation until the 16th century, and there is no visible reason to link their existence specifically to the period of Kievan Rus. The answer to this question is not as simple as it might seem at first glance.

Hryvnia is a specific measure of silver. At the same time, completely different coins could have been in circulation - dinars, efimki, thalers. They could be silver or gold. The main thing is that they were all converted into a single silver hryvnia weighing 200 g. At the same time, their flow should have flowed into a single princely mint, which, according to the “stories” of historians, could only be located in Kyiv, as the capital of Kievan Rus. This means that it was here that archaeologists must have discovered a large number of treasures with hryvnias every now and then. But where are they, these treasures!? For the answer, let's turn to official historical sources! Yes, Book Ivan Spassky « Russian coin system" indicates the following:

Only one coin was found in Kyiv [in 1792], and even then not in the ground, but as a pendant to an icon, while all the others gravitate to the northwestern edge of the ancient Russian state: one was found in the ground near ancient Yuryev (Tartu) , the other is on the island of Saarema; There are also indications of a find in the St. Petersburg province. Several imitative coins are known to originate from Scandinavia. “Yaroslavl silver” is therefore attributed to the period of Yaroslav’s reign in Novgorod - under the hand of Vladimir, who occupied the Russian table. Just as the image of Christ was placed on the coins of the early Kyiv type described above, here the other side is occupied by the image of the Christian patron of Yaroslav - St. George.

...At the end of the 20s. XIX century Several more coins appeared: two silver coins of Vladimir were found in Boryspil in Ukraine, and one each - at the Tsimlyansk settlement (ancient Sarkel - White Vezha) and in Poland - as part of the Lenchitsky treasure.<…>In 1852, the famous Nezhinsky treasure was found - about 200 silver coins.

Thus, these coins can hardly be called “truly Kievan” - they are found anywhere, but not in coin warehouses in the capital of Kievan Rus. For example, one of the largest treasures was discovered in 1906 on the territory of Tver. Many coins of the Kyiv type were discovered during excavations of the Gotlandic treasure in Sweden. At the same time, historians do not provide any evidence that these “treasures” were minted in Kyiv. Conclusion: their connection specifically to Kyiv is nothing more than another speculative move by the “woeful historians.” And only one find on the territory of the St. Michael’s Monastery could speak in favor of minting truly Kyiv coins in Kyiv. But, unfortunately, it was made in 1997, i.e. already during the period Svidomo independence”, and could well have simply been falsified. And the proof of this is all the latest “sensational” finds of modern Ukrainian archaeologists. Then they discovered a mass grave of victims " Baturin massacre", then miraculously the world was revealed " Ukrainian-language"a variant of the Orlik constitution, although the "languages" in the 18th century. didn't exist yet. In a word, if for propaganda or political purposes it is necessary to discover the sunken Atlantis in the middle of the Kyiv Reservoir, then Ukrainian archaeologists will easily dig it up there.

But it is known for certain that the so-called Kyiv silver coins should be understood as about 340 types of coins with different silver content. Most likely, their minting began as the princely treasury emptied, and after that they were forcibly put into circulation at the required rate, which directly indicates the economic weakness of the principality. But still! What are the Kyiv treasures and what does their presence indicate? In most cases, these are modest stashes of ordinary people. Essentially, these are silver or gold jewelry put aside for a “rainy day”: rings, earrings, crosses. As a rule, they are hidden in pots and simply buried in the ground. As for larger treasures, for example, those belonging to the same merchants, in this case not everything is so transparent and simple. Let us give just one recent example. " Treasure from the ruins of the Church of the Tithes» S.I. Klimovsky, employee of the Institute of Archeology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, published in the Eastern European Archaeological Journal (No. 5(6), 2000). This article begins quite promisingly:

Among ancient Russian cities, Kyiv ranks first in the number of treasures found...

However, after this there is a description of some mythical finds made back in the 11th century, and which are known only from the chronicles of subsequent centuries. Of the reliably made discoveries, the author is the first to mention the treasure discovered “ in the choirs of the Assumption Cathedral of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra, which was the secret monastic treasury of the 17th-18th centuries. and numbering 6184 gold coins..." Undoubtedly! This treasure is a real treasure for archaeologists and historians, but, unfortunately, it has nothing to do with ancient Kievan Rus. Finally, S.I. Klimovsky provides truly reliable information:

In 1955, during excavations along the street. Vladimirskaya, 7-9 in a dwelling of the 13th century. Near the stove, a clay pot was found containing gold coins, earrings, silver twisted and plate bracelets, and rings. This treasure, hidden during the siege of 1240, became for many years the last ancient Russian treasure discovered in this part of Kyiv. And so, 43 years later, on the opposite side of the street, a new treasure was found, sharply different from those known in the area, but closely connected, like most of them, with the events of December 1240.

Based on this, it is not difficult to predict the rhetoric of interested historians: all the ancient treasures have long been plundered, and we are hearing “reliable” rumors about their early existence. At the same time, any sane person can draw a completely logical conclusion: all the coin treasures discovered on the territory of Kyiv indicate that this ancient city has never been and could not be the capital of the Russian state.

Kyiv was not the administrative, commercial or economic center of Kievan Rus. Otherwise, he would continually delight archaeologists with valuable finds proving his power and the economic prosperity of the ancient state. Why isn't this happening? Here the answer is already extremely simple! Because Kievan Rus with its capital Kyiv is nothing more than an invention of historians interested in it.

———————————————-

Based on materials from the book Alexey Kungurov
« There was no Kievan Rus, or what historians are hiding»

The very first official historical document confirming the existence of Ancient Rus' is considered to be the “Annals of Bertin” - the chronicle of the Saint-Bertin Monastery. It contains a record dated 839 about the ambassadors of the people of Ros, who, as part of the Byzantine delegation, arrived at the headquarters of the Frankish emperor Louis the Pious.

Louis, becoming interested in the representatives of a hitherto unknown people, found out that they belonged to the Svei tribe, one of the ancestors of modern Swedes. But the Svei embassy visited Louis’s headquarters back in 829; this circumstance confirmed the emperor’s suspicions that the arrivals were ambassadors of an unknown people.

The “Annals of Bertin” are considered among historians to be an official reliable written source, which was compiled almost in the wake of current events. Therefore, this evidence looks much more convincing than later sources about the state of Rurik, which were written from oral traditions 200 years after the events.

In addition, in the list of peoples and tribes called “Bavarian,” which, according to recent research, was compiled in the first quarter of the 11th century, long before the emergence of the state of Rurik, Rus' is mentioned as the northern neighbor of the Khazars. All this evidence suggests that in addition to the State of Rurik and Kievan Rus, there was another, more ancient Russian state that had a ruler who sent ambassadors.

The Tale of Bygone Years

According to other official historical sources, such as, for example, the most ancient Russian code “The Tale of Bygone Years,” the year 862 is considered to be the year of formation of Ancient Rus'. According to this code, in this year the union of northern peoples, which included Finno-Ugric and Slavic tribes, invited the Varangians from overseas to reign. This was done in order to stop internal internecine wars and strife. Rurik came to reign, who first settled in Ladoga, and after the death of his brothers, he cut down the city of Novgorod and founded the Novgorod principality.

In modern historiography, there is an opinion that what is described in the “Tale of Bygone Years” about the calling of the Varangians is not completely reliable. Many historians believe that power was most likely seized by Rurik as a result of the overthrow of the Novgorod prince, and the chronicler Nestor, despite this, decided to present the Varangians as the mystical founders of Novgorod, like Kiy, Shchek and Horeb for Kyiv. Nevertheless, the year 862 is considered to be the practically generally accepted date for the formation of Ancient Rus' as a state.

Kievan Rus is an exceptional phenomenon of European medieval history. Occupying a geographically intermediate position between the civilizations of the East and West, it became a zone of the most important historical and cultural contacts and was formed not only on a self-sufficient internal basis, but also under the significant influence of neighboring peoples.

Formation of tribal alliances

The formation of the state of Kievan Rus and the origins of the formation of modern Slavic peoples lie in the times when the Great Migration of the Slavs began in the vast territories of Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, which lasted until the end of the 7th century. The previously unified Slavic community gradually disintegrated into eastern, western, southern and northern Slavic tribal unions.

In the middle of the 1st millennium, the Ant and Sklavin unions of Slavic tribes already existed on the territory of modern Ukraine. After the defeat in the 5th century AD. the Huns tribe and the final disappearance of the Western Roman Empire, the alliance of Antes began to play a prominent role in Eastern Europe. The invasion of the Avar tribes did not allow this union to form into a state, but the process of forming a state was not stopped. colonized new lands and, uniting, created new alliances of tribes.

At first, temporary, random associations of tribes arose - for military campaigns or defense from unfriendly neighbors and nomads. Gradually, associations of neighboring tribes close in culture and way of life arose. Finally, territorial associations of a proto-state type were formed - lands and principalities, which later became the cause of such a process as the formation of the state of Kievan Rus.

Briefly: composition of Slavic tribes

Most modern historical schools connect the beginnings of self-awareness of the Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples with the collapse of the great Slavic ethnically unified society and the emergence of a new social formation - a tribal union. The gradual rapprochement of the Slavic tribes gave rise to the state of Kievan Rus. The formation of the state accelerated at the end of the 8th century. On the territory of the future power, seven political unions were formed: the Dulibs, the Drevlyans, the Croats, the Polyans, the Ulichs, the Tiverts, and the Siverians. One of the first to emerge was the Dulib Union, uniting the tribes inhabiting the territories from the river. Goryn in the east to the West. Buga. The most advantageous geographical position was enjoyed by the Polyan tribe, which occupied the territory of the middle Dnieper region from the river. Grouse in the north to the river. Irpin and Ros in the south. The formation of the ancient state of Kievan Rus took place on the lands of these tribes.

The emergence of the rudiments of government

In the conditions of the formation of tribal unions, their military-political significance grew. Most of the loot captured during military campaigns was appropriated by tribal leaders and warriors - armed professional warriors who served the leaders for a reward. A significant role was played by meetings of free male warriors or public gatherings (veche), at which the most important administrative and civil issues were resolved. There was a separation into a layer of the tribal elite, in whose hands power was concentrated. This layer included boyars - advisers and close associates of the prince, the princes themselves and their warriors.

Separation of the Polyan Union

The process of state formation took place especially intensively on the lands of the Polyansky tribal principality. The importance of Kyiv, its capital, grew. The supreme power in the principality belonged to the descendants of the Polyansky

Between the VIII and IX centuries. In the principality, real political preconditions arose for the emergence on its basis of the first, which later received the name Kievan Rus.

Formation of the name "Rus"

The question “where did the Russian land come from” asked has not found a clear answer to this day. Today, several scientific theories about the origin of the name “Rus” and “Kievan Rus” are widespread among historians. The formation of this phrase goes back to the deep past. In a broad sense, these terms were used to describe all East Slavic territories; in a narrow sense, only the Kyiv, Chernigov and Pereyaslav lands were taken into account. Among the Slavic tribes, these names became widespread and were later entrenched in various toponyms. For example, the names of the rivers are Rosava. Ros, etc. Those Slavic tribes that occupied a privileged position in the lands of the Middle Dnieper region also began to be called. According to scientists, the name of one of the tribes that was part of the Polyansky Union was Dew or Rus, and later the social elite of the entire Polyansky Union began to call themselves Rus. In the 9th century, the formation of ancient Russian statehood was completed. Kievan Rus began its existence.

Territories of the Eastern Slavs

Geographically, all tribes lived in the forest or forest-steppe. These natural zones turned out to be favorable for economic development and safe for life. It was in the middle latitudes, in forests and forest-steppes, that the formation of the state of Kievan Rus began.

The general location of the southern group of Slavic tribes significantly influenced the nature of their relations with neighboring peoples and countries. The territory of residence of the ancient Rus was on the border between East and West. These lands are located at the crossroads of ancient roads and trade routes. But unfortunately, these territories were open and unprotected by natural barriers, making them vulnerable to invasion and raids.

Relationships with neighbors

Throughout the VII-VIII centuries. The main threat to the local population was the newcomers of the East and South. Of particular importance for the glades was the formation of the Khazar Khaganate - a strong state located in the steppes of the Northern Black Sea region and in the Crimea. The Khazars took an aggressive position towards the Slavs. First they imposed tribute on the Vyatichi and Siverians, and later on the Polyans. The fight against the Khazars contributed to the unification of the tribes of the Polyansky tribal union, which both traded and fought with the Khazars. Perhaps it was from Khazaria that the title of ruler, Kagan, passed to the Slavs.

The relations of the Slavic tribes with Byzantium were important. Repeatedly, the Slavic princes fought and traded with the powerful empire, and sometimes even entered into military alliances with it. In the west, relations between the East Slavic peoples were maintained with the Slovaks, Poles and Czechs.

Formation of the state of Kievan Rus

The political development of the Polyansky reign led to the emergence of a state formation at the turn of the 8th-9th centuries, which was later assigned the name “Rus”. Since Kyiv became the capital of the new power, historians of the 19th-20th centuries. they began to call it “Kievan Rus”. The formation of the country began in the Middle Dnieper region, where the Drevlyans, Siverians and Polyans lived.

He had the title Kagan (Khakan), equivalent to the Russian Grand Duke. It is clear that such a title could only be worn by a ruler who, in his social status, stood above the prince of the tribal union. The strengthening of the new state was evidenced by its active military activities. At the end of the 8th century. The Rus, led by the Polyansky prince Bravlin, attacked the Crimean coast and captured Korchev, Surozh and Korsun. In 838 the Rus arrived in Byzantium. This is how diplomatic relations with the Eastern Empire were formalized. The formation of the East Slavic state of Kievan Rus was a great event. It was recognized as one of the most powerful powers of the time.

The first princes of Kievan Rus

Representatives of the Kievich dynasty, which includes the brothers, reigned in Rus'. According to some historians, they were co-rulers, although, perhaps, Dir reigned first, and then Askold. In those days, squads of Normans appeared on the Dnieper - Swedes, Danes, Norwegians. They were used to guard trade routes and as mercenaries during raids. In 860, Askold, leading an army of 6-8 thousand people, carried out a sea campaign against Constantinople. While in Byzantium, Askold became acquainted with a new religion - Christianity, was baptized and tried to bring a new faith that Kievan Rus could accept. Education and the history of the new country began to be influenced by Byzantine philosophers and thinkers. Priests and architects were invited from the empire to Russian soil. But these activities of Askold did not bring great success - the influence of paganism was still strong among the nobility and commoners. Therefore, Christianity came later to Kievan Rus.

The formation of a new state determined the beginning of a new era in the history of the Eastern Slavs - an era of full-fledged state and political life.

Annual direct line with Russian President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin scheduled for Thursday June 20, 2019.

Live, the Head of State will answer questions from citizens of the country received using various communication channels (by telephone, in the form of text SMS and MMS messages, by e-mail, using the social networks VKontakte and Odnoklassniki), as well as asked during online inclusions from various Russian cities.

Direct line start time - 12:00 Moscow time.

What time does the direct line to V.V. start? Putin June 20, 2019:
* At 12:00 Moscow time.

This will be Vladimir Putin’s seventeenth interview taking place in this format.

Where can you watch the Direct Line 2019 broadcast (channels, online resources):

A live broadcast of the speech of the President of the Russian Federation will be available for viewing on five federal television channels starting at 12:00 Moscow time.

Live broadcast channels with Vladimir Putin on June 20, 2019:
"First", "Russia 1", "Russia 24", "NTV", "OTR".

The online broadcast will be available on the Internet:
In official direct line communities "VKontakte" and "Odnoklassniki" .

The direct line with Vladimir Putin on June 20, 2019 can not only be watched, but also listened to on the following radio stations:
"Mayak", "Radio Russia", "Vesti FM" .

In both Orthodoxy and Catholicism, Easter always falls on Sunday.

Easter 2020 is preceded by Lent, which begins 48 days before the Holy Day. And after 50 days they celebrate Trinity.

Popular pre-Christian customs that have survived to this day include dyeing eggs, making Easter cakes and curd Easter cakes.

Easter treats are blessed in the church on Saturday, the eve of Easter 2020, or after the service on the day of the Holiday itself.

We should greet each other on Easter with the words “Christ is Risen,” and respond with “Truly He is Risen.”

This will be the fourth game for the Russian team in this qualifying tournament. Let us remind you that in the previous three meetings, Russia “at the start” lost to Belgium with a score of 1:3, and then won two dry victories - over Kazakhstan (4:0) and over San Marino (9:0). The last victory was the largest in the entire existence of the Russian football team.

As for the upcoming meeting, according to bookmakers, the Russian team is the favorite in it. The Cypriots are objectively weaker than the Russians, and the islanders cannot expect anything good from the upcoming match. However, we must take into account that the teams have never met before, and therefore unpleasant surprises may await us.

The Russia-Cyprus meeting will take place on June 11, 2019 In Nizhniy Novgorod at the stadium of the same name, built for the 2018 FIFA World Cup. Start of the match - 21:45 Moscow time.

Where and what time do the national teams of Russia and Cyprus play:
* Venue of the match - Russia, Nizhny Novgorod.
* Game start time is 21:45 Moscow time.

Where to watch the live broadcast Russia - Cyprus on June 11, 2019:

Channels will show the meeting between the national teams of Russia and Cyprus live "First" and "Match Premier" . The start time of the live broadcast from Nizhny Novgorod is 21:35 Moscow time.

When will the Day of the Russian River and Marine Fleet Worker be in 2019 (River Day 2019):

Every year in Russia they celebrate the professional holiday of workers of the sea and river fleets, in short - Riverman's Day.

in 2019 falls on July 7, 2019.

Water transport is one of the most important sectors of the economy of our country.

All workers of water transport: passenger, cargo, icebreaking, special transport should be congratulated on this professional holiday. Let us remind you that special water transport includes ferries, floating workshops, tugs, dredging vessels, floating shops, etc.

The professional holiday of river and sea fleet workers was established back in 1980, under Soviet rule. Despite the fact that the Soviet Union has long since collapsed, Riverman Day in Russia continues to be celebrated annually on the first Sunday of July.

Venue event instead of the traditional "Olympic", closed for reconstruction, will become Capital Sports Palace "Megasport" with a capacity of 14 thousand spectators.

What time and on what channel can I watch the live broadcast of the MUZ-TV Awards 2019:

The live pre-show of the musical event called “Star Track” and the Award Ceremony itself will be shown by TV channels that are part of the UTV holding - "Yu" and "Muz-TV".

Live broadcast will begin at 17:00 Moscow time with the pre-show of the MUZ-TV Awards 2019, during which we will see how the stars arrive at the event and parade along the Carpet with dignity.

The live broadcast will continue at 19:40 Moscow time , when the hosts move from meeting the guests to the Award Ceremony itself.

Show hosts:

In 2019, for the first time, the MUZ-TV Awards will be hosted by five leading.

This: Maxim Galkin, Alexander Revva, Mikhail Galustyan, Ksenia Sobchak and Lera Kudryavtseva .

Denial of the greatness of Russia is a terrible robbery of humanity.
Berdyaev Nikolay Alexandrovich

The origin of the ancient Russian state of Kievan Rus is one of the biggest mysteries in history. Of course, there is an official version that gives many answers, but it has one drawback - it completely rejects everything that happened to the Slavs before 862. Are things really as bad as they write in Western books, when the Slavs are compared to semi-wild people who are not able to govern themselves and for this they were forced to turn to an outsider, a Varangian, so that he could teach them reason? Of course, this is an exaggeration, since such a people cannot take Byzantium by storm twice before this time, but our ancestors did it!

In this material we will adhere to the basic policy of our site - presentation of facts that are known for certain. Also on these pages we will point out the main points that historians use under various pretexts, but in our opinion they can shed light on what happened on our lands in that distant time.

Formation of the state of Kievan Rus

Modern history puts forward two main versions according to which the formation of the state of Kievan Rus occurred:

Norman. This theory is based on a rather dubious historical document - “The Tale of Bygone Years”. Also, supporters of the Norman version talk about various records from European scientists. This version is basic and accepted by history. According to it, the ancient tribes of the eastern communities could not govern themselves and called upon three Varangians - the brothers Rurik, Sineus and Truvor.
anti-Norman (Russian). The Norman theory, despite its general acceptance, looks quite controversial. After all, it does not answer even a simple question: who are the Varangians? Anti-Norman statements were first formulated by the great scientist Mikhail Lomonosov. This man was distinguished by the fact that he actively defended the interests of his Motherland and publicly declared that the history of the ancient Russian state was written by the Germans and had no basis in logic. The Germans in this case are not a nation as such, but a collective image that was used to call all foreigners who did not speak Russian. They were called dumb, hence the Germans.

In fact, until the end of the 9th century, not a single mention of the Slavs remained in the chronicles. This is quite strange, since quite civilized people lived here. This question is discussed in great detail in the material about the Huns, who, according to numerous versions, were none other than Russians. Now I would like to note that when Rurik came to the ancient Russian state, there were cities, ships, their own culture, their own language, their own traditions and customs. And the cities were quite well fortified from a military point of view. This somehow loosely connects with the generally accepted version that our ancestors at that time ran around with a digging stick.

The ancient Russian state of Kievan Rus was formed in 862, when the Varangian Rurik came to rule in Novgorod. An interesting point is that this prince carried out his rule of the country from Ladoga. In 864, the associates of the Novgorod prince Askold and Dir went down the Dnieper and discovered the city of Kyiv, in which they began to rule. After the death of Rurik, Oleg took custody of his young son, who went on a campaign against Kyiv, killed Askold and Dir and took possession of the future capital of the country. This happened in 882. Therefore, the formation of Kievan Rus can be attributed to this date. During Oleg's reign, the country's possessions expanded through the conquest of new cities, and international power also strengthened as a result of wars with external enemies, such as Byzantium. There were good relations between the Novgorod and Kyiv princes, and their minor conflicts did not lead to major wars. Reliable information on this matter has not survived, but many historians say that these people were brothers and only blood ties restrained bloodshed.

Formation of statehood

Kievan Russia was a truly powerful state, respected in other countries. Its political center was Kyiv. It was a capital that had no equal in its beauty and wealth. The impregnable fortress city of Kyiv on the banks of the Dnieper has long been a stronghold of Rus'. This order was disrupted as a result of the first fragmentations, which damaged the power of the state. It all ended with the invasion of the Tatar-Mongol troops, who literally razed the “mother of Russian cities” to the ground. According to the surviving records of contemporaries of that terrible event, Kyiv was destroyed to the ground and lost forever its beauty, significance and wealth. Since then, the status of the first city did not belong to it.

An interesting expression is “mother of Russian cities,” which is still actively used by people from different countries. Here we are faced with another attempt to falsify history, since at the moment when Oleg captured Kyiv, Rus' already existed, and its capital was Novgorod. And the princes got to the capital city of Kyiv itself, descending along the Dnieper from Novgorod.

Internecine wars and the reasons for the collapse of the ancient Russian state

Internecine war is that terrible nightmare that tormented the Russian lands for many decades. The reason for these events was the lack of a clear system of succession to the throne. In the ancient Russian state, a situation arose when after one ruler there remained a huge number of contenders for the throne - sons, brothers, nephews, etc. And each of them sought to realize their right to rule Russia. This inevitably led to wars, when supreme power was asserted with weapons.

In the struggle for power, individual contenders did not shy away from anything, even fratricide. The story of Svyatopolk the Accursed, who killed his brothers, is widely known, for which he received this nickname. Despite the contradictions that reigned within the Rurikovichs, Kievan Rus was ruled by the Grand Duke.

In many ways, it was the internecine wars that led the ancient Russian state to a state close to collapse. This happened in 1237, when the ancient Russian lands first heard about the Tatar-Mongols. They brought terrible troubles to our ancestors, but internal problems, disunity and the unwillingness of princes to defend the interests of other lands led to a great tragedy, and for 2 long centuries Rus' became completely dependent on the Golden Horde.

All these events led to a completely predictable result - the ancient Russian lands began to disintegrate. The date of the beginning of this process is considered to be 1132, which was marked by the death of Prince Mstislav, popularly nicknamed the Great. This led to the fact that the two cities of Polotsk and Novgorod refused to recognize the authority of his successor.

All these events led to the collapse of the state into small fiefs, which were controlled by individual rulers. Of course, the leading role of the Grand Duke remained, but this title was more like a crown, which was used only by the strongest as a result of regular civil strife.

Key events

Kievan Rus is the first form of Russian statehood, which had many great pages in its history. The main events of the era of Kyiv's rise include the following:

862 - the arrival of the Varangian Rurik in Novgorod to reign
882 – Prophetic Oleg captured Kyiv
907 – campaign against Constantinople
988 – Baptism of Rus'
1097 – Lyubech Congress of Princes
1125-1132 - reign of Mstislav the Great