The war of the children of Vladimir the Holy by the eyes of the authors of the Scandinavian sagas

77
The legend of the first Russian saints, the princes Boris and Gleb, is widely known and very popular in our country. And few people know that the real circumstances of the death of these princes have nothing to do with their description in the canonical "Tale of the Saints and Right-Wing Princes Boris and Gleb." The fact is that the mentioned "Legend ..." is not historical the source, and a literary work, which is a retelling of a XNUMXth-century legend about the martyrdom of the Czech prince Wenceslas, almost literally in places.

The war of the children of Vladimir the Holy by the eyes of the authors of the Scandinavian sagas

Wenceslas, a Czech prince from the Přemyslice family, a saint who was revered by both Catholics and Orthodox, years of life: 907 – 935 (936)




It was written under the son of Yaroslav the Wise Izyaslav around 1072, and was a reaction to a very specific historical situation: at that time the brothers were trying to drive (and driven away) Izyaslav from the Kiev throne. The canonization of the brother-loving Boris and Gleb was supposed to temper (but did not temper) the claims of the younger brothers Izyaslav. The unfortunate Svyatopolk turned out to be the most suitable candidate for the role of a villain, since he left no offspring that could protect his honor and dignity. An indirect proof that contemporaries did not consider Boris and Gleb as saints is the fact that during 30 years after their murder (until the second half of 1040), not a single Russian prince was called by these names (either Roman or David baptismal names of these princes). Only the sons of Chernigov Prince Svyatoslav (grandchildren of Yaroslav) appear the names of Gleb, David and Roman. The next novel is the son of Vladimir Monomakh (the great-grandson of Yaroslav). But the name Svyatopolk appears in the princely family during the life of Yaroslav: he was given the firstborn of the eldest son of the prince, Izyaslav.

In this situation, the interests of Izyaslav closed with the interests of the local Orthodox clergy, who, having received the first Russian saints, could not allow other sources to compete (and even more so - different interpretations) with the "Legend ...". And since the chronicles were compiled in monasteries, all the old texts were brought into line with the official version. By the way, the absolutely neutral Greek metropolitan expressed great doubts about the "holiness" of Boris and Gleb, even the "Legend ..." does not deny this, but in the end, he was forced to give up. Currently, this legend has been archived by serious historians and is mainly promoted by the Orthodox Church.

"In the historiography of the twentieth century, the opinion was firmly established that princes Boris and Gleb could not be regarded as martyrs for the sake of Christ, or for the sake of faith, because they became holy for reasons not related to their religion"

Professor of the University of Warsaw Andrzej Poppé confidently states in his work.

He is not alone in his opinion. Any impartial historian who studies the events of those years inevitably comes to the conclusion that the “blessed” Boris was not of this world could not have become the favorite of belligerent Prince Vladimir, whose character, judging by the facts of the chronicles, and not the inserts of later scribes, did not change a bit after the adoption of Christianity.

What happened on the territory of Kievan Rus in those early years? By the time of Vladimir Svyatoslav's death, his son Boris was in Kiev in fact in the role of co-ruler of a huge country, which, of course, could not please his brothers. As a result, the eldest son of Vladimir - Svyatopolk - was accused of treason and thrown into prison. German chronicler Titmar Merseburg (Thietmar von Merseburg; 25 July 975 g. - 1 December 1018 g.) Reports:

"He (Vladimir) had three sons: he married one of them the daughter of our persecutor, Prince Boleslav, with whom the Poles sent the Bishop of Kołobrzeg Reinburn ... The said king (Vladimir Svyatoslavich), having learned that his son, under the secret instigation of Boleslav, was going to fight with him, seized him with his wife and bishop and imprisoned him in a separate dungeon. "



Titmar of Merseburg


Yaroslav, according to S. Solovyov, “did not want to be Boris’s bearer in Novgorod and therefore was in a hurry to declare himself independent”, refusing to pay 1014 to pay annual hryvnia to 2 000 hryvnia. The old prince began preparations for war with him, but, in the words of the chronicler, "God does not give the devil joy": in 1015, Vladimir suddenly fell ill and died. Sviatopolk, taking advantage of the confusion in the city, fled to his father-in-law, the Polish king Boleslaw the Brave (and appeared in Russia only after three years — together with Boleslav).


Boleslaw the Brave


In Kiev, remained the favorite son of Vladimir Boris, who collected troops to continue the work of his father and punish the rebellious brothers. As a result, a brutal war broke out between the talented and ambitious sons of Prince Vladimir. Each of them had its own foreign policy priorities, its allies and its own view on the further development of the country. Ruling in Novgorod Yaroslav focused on the countries of Scandinavia. Boris, who remained in Kiev, was against the Byzantine Empire, Bulgaria, and he never disdained an alliance with the Pechenegs. The unloved father (or rather, his stepfather - Vladimir took the pregnant wife of his murdered brother) Svyatopolk - to Poland. Mstislav, who was sitting in reign in the distant Tmutorokani, also had his own interests, and, moreover, very far from the all-Russian ones. The fact is that the Slavs among his subjects were a minority, and he depended on the mixed population of this seaside principality no less than Yaroslav from the willful inhabitants of Novgorod. Bryachislav, the father of the famous Vseslav, was “for himself” and for his Polotsk, pursuing a cautious policy on the principle “better a bird in the hand than a crane in the sky”. The remaining sons of Vladimir quickly died, or, like Sudislav, were imprisoned in a dungeon, and did not play an important role in the events of those years. Yaroslav, the builder of cities and cathedrals, the scribe and enlightener who did so much later to spread and consolidate Christianity in Russia, was at that time at the head of the pagan party ironically. In the civil war, he could only rely on the Vikings, many of whom turned out to be in a foreign land because they preferred Thor and Odin to Christ, and to Novgorodians, who could not forgive Vladimir and the Kievans who came with him with the recent "baptism with fire and sword." Having won the internecine war, Yaroslav managed to unite all the above-mentioned tendencies in his foreign policy, for which he was later called the Wise. He himself was married to a Swedish princess, one of his sons married the daughter of a Byzantine emperor, the other to a German countess, and married his daughters to the kings of France, Hungary and Norway.


Yaroslav the Wise, sculptural reconstruction Gerasimov


But back in 1015, in which Yaroslav, who loved to surround himself with the Scandinavians, nearly lost the favor of his Novgorod subjects:

"He (Yaroslav) had a lot of Varangians, and they were abusing the people of Novgorod and their wives. The people of Novgorod revolted and killed the Varyags in the courtyard of Pomonimi."


The prince, in response, "called upon himself the best husbands who killed the Varangians, and, having deceived them, he interrupted also." However, the hatred of Novgorodians to the people of Kiev at that time was so great that for the sake of the opportunity to take revenge on them they accepted Yaroslav’s apology and reconciled with him:

"Although, prince, and our brothers are excised, we can fight for you!"


Everything would be fine, but as a result of these events on the eve of a decisive clash, when every professional warrior was counted, the Varangian squad of Yaroslav thinned out. However, news of the imminent war in Gardariki has already reached Eymund Khringson - the leader of the Vikings, who at that time quarreled with the local authorities:

“I heard about the death of Valdimara-king from the East, from Gardariki (“ Country of Cities ”- Russia), and now these possessions are held by his three sons, most glorious men. He endowed them not quite equally ... and Buritslav is the one who received a large share of the father's legacy. The other is Yaritsleyv (Yaroslav), and the third is Vartilav (Bryachislav). Buritslav holds Kenugard ("Ship City" - Kiev), and this is the best principality in all of Gardariki. Holzgard holds (Holzgard ( - Novgorod), and the third - Palteskyu (Polotsk). Now they have a rift over possessions, and all x is more dissatisfied with the one whose share in the section is bigger and better: he sees the loss of his power in the fact that his domain is less than his father's, and believes that because he is lower than his ancestors "(" Spin about Eymund "- genre:" royal saga " ).


Pay attention to what precise information and what a brilliant analysis of the situation!

Now let's talk a little about this extraordinary man. Eimund is the hero of two sagas, the first of which (The Strand of Eimund) is preserved in the Saga of the Holy Father in the Book from the Flat Island.


Book from the Flat Island, an Icelandic manuscript containing many Old Norse sagas


This saga states that Ejmund was the son of a small Norwegian king, who ruled the Khringarik county. In his youth, he became the sister of Olav - the future King of Norway, the baptist of this country, as well as the patron saint of the city of Vyborg.


Olav the Holy


Together they made many Viking trips. The friendship ended after Olav came to power. The future saint's hand was hard, among the nine petty kings who lost their lands, and some - and their lives, turned out to be the father of Eymund and his two brothers. Eymund himself at the time was not in Norway.

“Nothing personal, such work,” Olav explained to his returning twin.

After that, he probably transparently hinted to him that the sea kings (which Eymund had now lost in the ancestral land) were marching into the bright future of Norway and without need. However, Aymund, being a clever man, himself guessed everything: the fate of his brother, Hryorik (Rurik), whom Olav ordered to blind, he did not want.

The author of the other, the Swedish saga (The Ingvar Traveler Saga), decided that there was nothing of such a hero as Eymund to give to his neighbors and declared him the son of the Swedish king Eirik's son. This source refers to the sagas of ancient times and is filled with stories about dragons and giants. But, as a prologue, an alien fragment is inserted into it - an excerpt from some historical "royal" saga, which in many ways echoes the "Strand about Eimund". According to this fragment, Eymund's father (Aki) was just a hovding who, in order to marry the king's daughter, killed a more suitable candidate. Somehow he managed to come to terms with the king, but the "sediment" apparently remained, because it ended up killing Aki and confiscating his lands. Eimund was brought up at court, here he became friends with his niece - the daughter of the new King Olav Shetkonung:

"She and Eymund loved each other as relatives, because she was gifted in all respects,"

says the saga.

This gifted girl was called Ingigerd, later she will become the wife of Yaroslav the Wise.


Alexey Trankovsky, "Yaroslav the Wise and the Swedish Princess Ingigerd"


“She was wiser than all women and beautiful in herself,” says Ingigerd in the royal saga Morkinskinna (literally “Moldy Skin”, but in Russia it is more known as “Rotten Skin”). From myself, perhaps, I would add that the only thing that cheered Ingigerd the Norns - a good character. If you believe the sagas, and the father suffered with her, while not married, and Yaroslav then got.

But thoughts of injustice did not leave Eimund ("it seemed to him that ... it was better to seek death than live in shame"), so one day he and his friends killed 12 warriors of the king, who went to collect tribute to the land that previously belonged to his father. Wounded in this fight, Eymund was outlawed, but Ingigerd sheltered him, and then - "secretly brought the ship to him, he went on a Viking campaign, and he became a lot of good and people."

Who was Eimund after all - a Norwegian or a Swede? I like the Norwegian version more, because The Saga of Saint Olav is a much more substantial and trustworthy source. Here is the Swedish jarl Ryngwald for Ingigerd, of course, was his man. She commissioned him to manage Aldeygüborg (Ladoga) and the adjacent area, which she received personally from Yaroslav as a vein. And the Norwegian Aymund was clearly a stranger to her. The information, which is then reported in "Strands ...", does not correspond to the stories about the tender child-like friendship of Eymund and Ingigerd. The relationship between the princess and the "condottiere" is the relationship of opponents respecting each other. Eymund says to her relative and comrade Ragnar that "she doesn’t trust the lords because she is smarter than King." When Aymund decided to leave Yaroslav in Polotsk, Ingigerd asked for a meeting, where, in her sign, people who had come with her tried to grab the Viking (she believed that the Norwegian would be dangerous in the Polotsk service). Eimund, in turn, later, already being in the service of Bryachislav, captures the princess in captivity (or rather, kidnaps during the night transition). Nothing terrible happened to Ingigerd, and even her honor was worried: the captivity was presented as a voluntary visit to countrymen with a diplomatic mission. At the suggestion of Eimund, she acted as an arbitrator and drafted the terms of the peace treaty of Yaroslav and Bryachislav, who satisfied both sides and put an end to the war (the girl, apparently, was really sensible). Interestingly, in this contract (according to the author of the saga), Novgorod is called the main and best city of Russia (Kiev - the second, Polotsk - the third). But no matter what nationality Eimund was, the very fact of his existence and participation in the war of Vladimir’s children is beyond doubt.

Both sagas unanimously report that in 1015, the earth (even in Norway, even in Sweden) literally burned under Eymund's feet. However, the sea hospitably spread the waves under the keels of its ships. A squad from 600 personally experienced warriors devoted to him waited for an order to sail even to England, even to Ireland, even to Friesland, but the situation was set to go east - to Gardariki. Eymund didn’t care against whom to fight, but Novgorod was much closer to Kiev, and Yaroslav was also very well known and very popular in Scandinavia.

“I have a team of men with swords and axes,” Aymund told Yaroslav confidentially. “The guys who know what dane gold knows firsthand. It requires all inclusive, airy silver (216 grams) to every warrior and another half to airy every helmsman, and a share in the prey, of course. Do you think it’s better for us to be accommodated: you or your brother? "

“Of course I have,” Jaroslav smiled gently, “What is all inclusive in Kiev? So, the name is one. Only I have completely finished silver. Yesterday I gave the last one” (the king was good, but very greedy — all Scandinavians talked about it that way) .

"Oh, well," said Eimund, "take the beavers and sables."

The number of Varyags in the army of Yaroslav, of course, was much more than 600 people. Around this time, two more large Norman detachments acted in Russia: the Swedish jarl Ryognvald Ulvsson and the Norwegian jarl Svein Hakonarson (who, like Aymund, decided to spend some time away from the "holy" Olav). But there was no person who would write his saga about them.

Meanwhile, Eimund was not in vain and very on time, because soon Buritslav and the Kiev army approached. Now let's try to figure out which of the Russian princes is hiding under this name. The second in a row translator of "Strands ..." OI Senkovsky suggested that this is a synthetic image of Svyatopolk the Accursed and his father-in-law Boleslav the Brave. And what of this? There were some polkans in Russia - people with heads of heads, and why should there not be a "Bolepolk" (or "Svyatobolyu")? Let him stand next to Sineus (sine hus - "his kind") and Truvor (thru varing - "faithful retinue"). Even NN Ilyin, who in the middle of the 20th century, first suggested that Boris was killed by order of Yaroslav the Wise, continued to consider Buritslav as a collective image of Svyatopolk and Boleslav. Since childhood, the alien legend implanted in the consciousness has not been let go, literally shackling hand and foot. And only in 1969, academician VL Yanin "called the cat a cat", declaring that Buritslav could not be anyone else except Boris. At heart, the researchers of this problem have long suspected it, but the power of tradition was still strong, so the "storm in a glass of water" was a great success. When the waves in the glass have subsided a bit, all more or less adequate researchers realized that, whether someone likes it or not, it’s now simply indecent and impossible to call Boris Svyatopolk. Therefore, we will consider him exactly Boris. In any case, with Svyatopolkom Yaroslav, who was in Poland at that time in 1015, he could not have fought on the bank of the Dnieper even with a very strong desire. This battle is described in both Russian and Scandinavian sources. Both The Tale of Bygone Years and The Strand of Eimund report that the opponents did not dare to start the battle for a long time. The initiators of the battle, according to the Russian version, were Novgorod:

“Having heard this (the ridicule of the people of Kiev), the Novgorodians told Yaroslav:“ Tomorrow we will be sent to them, if no one else goes with us, we will strike them ”(“ The Tale of Bygone Years ”).


"Strand ..." also claims that Yaroslav entered into battle on the advice of Eymund, who declared to the prince:

"When we came here, at first it seemed to me that there were few warriors in each tent (in Buritslav), and the camp was large only for the sight, and now it’s not that - they have to put up tents or live outside ... sitting here, we missed the victory ... ".


And here is how sources tell about the course of the battle.

"STORY OF TEMPORARY YEARS":

“Having landed on the shore, they pushed the rooks (warriors of Yaroslav) off the coast, and went on the offensive, and both sides came together. There was a fierce battle, and they could not come to the aid of the Pechenegs (the people of Kiev) ... the ice broke under them and began to overcome Yaroslav. "


Note that the Russian chronicler in this passage contradicts himself: on the one hand, the soldiers of Yaroslav are sent to the other side of the Dnieper in boats and the Pechenegs cannot come to the aid of the people of Kiev because of the unfrozen lake, and on the other - under the opponents of Novgorod "the ice breaks ".

"STRAIGHT ABOUT EYMUND":

“Eimund-konung responds (to Yaroslav): we, the Normans, did their job: we took all our ships with combat equipment up the river. We will go away with our team and go to the rear, and let the tents be empty; Prepare for battle as soon as possible by your retinue ... The regiments came together, and the fiercest battle began, and many people soon fell. Eymund and Ragnar launched a strong onslaught on Buritslav and attacked him in an open shield (i.e., without shields “to the fierce warriors” - berserks) ... and after that the system of Buritslav was broken through and his people ran. "


After that, Yaroslav entered Kiev, and the people of Novgorod there repaid in full for the humiliation of their city: acting with the methods of the well-known Dobrynia (uncle Vladimir "Saint"), they burned all the churches. Naturally, they did not ask Yaroslav for permission, and the prince was too wise to openly hinder the “innocent” games of his only allies. And where, if you believe the Scandinavian sources, the army of Boris retreated, what do you think? In Bjarmland! If you have already read the article here “Travels to Biarmia. Mysterious country of the Scandinavian sagas ", you understand that in the far Biarmia, to the north, closed by the army of Yaroslav, Boris could not get through, even if he very much wanted to ride "on fast-moving deer". Biarmia remains close - Livonian. From there, a year later, Boris will come to once again fight with Yaroslav, and in his army there will be a lot of biarmy. If you believe "Strands about Eymund," during the siege of an unnamed city in the saga, Yaroslav, protecting one of the gates, will be wounded in the leg, after which he will limp for the rest of his life. The anatomical study of his remains by D. G. Rokhlin and V. V. Ginzburg seems to confirm this testimony: at about the age of 40, Yaroslav had a fracture of the leg, which complicated the congenital claudication, which his opponents always reproached. And then Boris will come again - with the Pechenegs. Eimundu such obtrusiveness, apparently, began to bother, and, after the victory, he asked Yaroslav:

“But how can it be, sir, if we get to King (Boris) - to kill him or not? After all, there will never be an end to discord while both of you are alive” (“Spin about Eymund”).


According to the same source, Yaroslav then said to the Varyag:

"I will not force people to fight with my brother, but I will not blame the person who will kill him."


Having received this answer, Eymund, his cousin Ragnar, the Icelanders Björn, Ketil and another 8 man disguised as merchants infiltrated Boris’s camp. At night, the Vikings simultaneously stormed into the princely tent from different sides, Eimund himself cut off Boris's head (the author of "Strands ..." presents this episode in very great detail - the narrator is clearly proud of this operation, which is undoubtedly brilliant in execution). The turmoil in the Kiev camp allowed the Varangians to leave the forest without a loss and return to Yaroslav, who reproached them with excessive haste and arbitrariness and ordered them to solemnly bury their "beloved brother." Nobody saw the murderers and the people of Yaroslav, as representatives of the closest relative of the deceased Boris, quietly came for the body:

"They dressed him and put their heads to the body and took him home. Many people knew about his burial. All the people in the country went to Yaritsleiva-king's arm ... and he became king over the principality that they used to hold together" ( Eimund ").


The death of Boris did not solve all the problems of Yaroslav. The prince-warrior Mstislav Tmutorokansky was still waiting for the right moment. Ahead was the unsuccessful war with the Prince of Polotsk Bryachislav (during which Ingigerd unexpectedly had to act as an arbitrator and arbitrator). The cause of the wars with Bryachislav and Mstislav most likely was the injustice of capturing the heritage of the murdered brothers by Yaroslav alone: ​​according to the traditions of that time, put the deceased on should be divided among all living relatives. Therefore, Yaroslav easily agreed to transfer part of Kenugard to Bryachislav - not the city of Kiev, and not a great reign, but part of the territory of the principality of Kenugard. Eimund, according to the saga, received from Bryachyslau rar ríki er þar liggr til - some kind of "near (Polotsk) lying area" (and not Polotsk, as they often say) - in exchange for the obligation to protect the frontiers from the raids of other Vikings. In the same way, Yaroslav will easily make concessions to Mstislav after being defeated in the Battle of Deciduous in 1024 (in turn, the victorious Mstislav will not claim to be "superfluous" and will not enter Kiev, although there was no one to stop him). And Svyatopolk still, thanks to the help of his father-in-law Boleslav the Brave, will smash Yaroslav’s army on the Bug. The saga does not report on this military campaign - they assume that it came during the quarrel between Yaroslav and Eimund: both sides tried to change the terms of the contract all the time, Yaroslav delayed with the payment of his salary, and Aymund, in any case convenient for him (but very uncomfortable for the prince) He demanded that silver be replaced with gold. However, it is possible that the saga author simply did not want to talk about defeat. Yaroslav then found himself in the most desperate situation. He did not receive help from the Kiev offended by him and returned to Novgorod with only four soldiers. To prevent his flight "beyond the sea", the Novgorod posadnik Kosnyatin (Dobrynia's son) will order to chop all the ships. And the townspeople who entered Kiev, Svyatopolk, organized a solemn meeting with the participation of nine daughters Vladimir and Metropolitan, accompanied by the clergy with the relics of saints, crosses and icons. But "in the desert between Lyakhy and the Czechs," Svyatopolk, who could not resist in Kiev, would soon die (this, by the way, is not a description of the area, but a phraseologism, meaning "God knows where"). And in 1036, Yaroslav will nevertheless become the one-man ruler of Kievan Rus, will rule until 1054, and will make his country one of the largest, strongest, richest and most cultured states in Europe.
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    24 July 2018 06: 38
    "In the historiography of the twentieth century, the opinion that princes Boris and Gleb cannot be regarded as martyrs for Christ"
    Clarification:
    The holy princes Boris and Gleb were glorified not as martyrs, but as martyrs.
    1. Cat
      +4
      24 July 2018 20: 16
      In principle, Nicholas II and the family are also martyrs, only this does not prevent the modern Russian Orthodox Church from “dancing round the clock" around the royal couple. By the way, my opinion for faith affected children and especially the servant. Perhaps not even in God, but rather for loyalty. But somehow they recall this in the tenth turn.
      1. +7
        24 July 2018 20: 56
        I do not agree. Nikolai and Alice got what they deserved. Children, yes, yes, the sufferers agree. Servants are victims of circumstances, but who choose their path. ROC is a holding company worse than Rosneft. Well, this is my opinion ...
      2. +5
        24 July 2018 21: 43
        Quote: Kotischa
        By the way, my opinion for faith affected children and especially the servant. Perhaps not even in God, but rather for loyalty. But somehow they remember this in the tenth turn

        There was only one child there, in fact. Tsesarevich Alexey Nikolaevich, 14 years old, from birth. The rest of the children — they were quite themselves adult girls (which does not negate the fact of the senselessness and crime of their execution).
        And the servant ... The servant on the martyrs did not come out with a snout!
        The Martyrs is the “most Russian” face of saints. In it, the Church is revered predominantly Notable the righteous, who suffered not for faith, but as a result of revelry of human passions - a conspiracy, civil war, and who at the same time showed personal sacrifice and malice
        https://pravoslavie.fm/articles/liki-svyatosti-v-
        pravoslavnoy-tserkvi /

        So, here ... From the point of view of the Russian Orthodox Church: All animals are equal, but some are much more equal, simply, upon the fact of birth. (((
        1. Cat
          +5
          24 July 2018 22: 06
          Now about the legends of Sverdlovsk!
          Eyewitnesses said that when the royal family was shot, they sang and gave a recho. The girls were dying hard and finished off with bayonets. It turned out that diamonds were sewn into the carriages of the queen and daughters, which played the role of body armor. So everything is thought out to paradise not empty-handed.
          1. +4
            24 July 2018 22: 33
            Let's close the topic? And then someone will come to the thread, to the smell of incense and decay, the Grail will not dismiss.
            1. +5
              24 July 2018 22: 44
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              Let's close the topic? And then someone will come to the thread, to the smell of incense and decay, the Grail will not dismiss.

              You are right.
  2. +4
    24 July 2018 06: 48
    “I have a team of men with swords and axes,” Eymund confidentially informed Yaroslav. “The guys are proven ...” Modern language is, of course, good. But somehow in the text of the ancient sagas it sounds "not very." It remains only to write: "And Yaroslav said, but Nitsche, break through the bros!"
    1. +8
      24 July 2018 07: 09
      Vyacheslav Olegovich, you are biased. Why Matyugin can be called Arabs 8c. Islamists, and Ryzhov appeal to the series "Brigade" (solely for the sake of liveliness), is it impossible ??? Meanwhile, the events described are painfully reminiscent of 90gg.
      1. +5
        24 July 2018 11: 18
        Quote: 3x3zsave
        Why Matyugin can be called Arabs 8v. Islamists, and Ryzhov appeal to the series "Brigade"

        Uv.Anton, simply because the Arabs (of which there were hardly 20% in the army of Tariq) were precisely the Islamists and jihadists who went to the "holy war" - "jihad of the sword" (ghazavat). THEY ARE NOT ANYTHING ELSE, understand ?! Ordinary Muslims sat at home in Arabia and other countries. It was the jihadists who fought.

        But to state the events of the period of Ancient Russia in the terminology of the "Brigade" is at least strange ...
        1. +2
          24 July 2018 21: 53
          Dear Mikhail, we discussed the issue of terminology a couple of days ago. Somewhere, I agreed with you, somewhere - no. But! Do you really think that these people spoke the language of chronicles and sagas? Meanwhile, in addition to sagas, there were still visas and nids. For a well-built Nida, it was possible to get bloodsuckers up to the fifth knee. And I don’t think that people there were embarrassed in expressions, in spite of the culture of the könnigs (for, it was they who added “grease” to the text).
      2. +2
        24 July 2018 19: 23
        I am generally a biased person, admitted already. And besides, Mikhail already made such comments. And by the way, I wrote to him that some terms and phrases could be “painted”, explained in a more understandable way. It was. I do not see the point in repeating. A smart person will draw conclusions.
        1. +1
          24 July 2018 20: 59
          "I'm generally a biased person."
          "Which in itself is not new."
    2. VLR
      +5
      24 July 2018 07: 42
      I imagined how this meeting could take place, smiled and wanted to share my mood. But he immediately corrected himself and did not allow more such liberties.
      1. +4
        24 July 2018 09: 16
        I think it turned out well! And to the place, and the text unloaded.
      2. +3
        24 July 2018 11: 14
        Quote: VlR
        But he immediately corrected himself and did not allow more such liberties.

        And I thought, take an example from Bushkov (see just below my answer to Vyacheslav Olegovich from 10-46) - in general, a justified approach: the thinking of “specific boys” is purely medieval!
    3. +2
      24 July 2018 10: 46
      Quote: kalibr
      Modern language is, of course, good. But somehow in the text of the ancient sagas it sounds "not very."

      This is he taking an example from Bushkov. Bushkov writes that in all these “dashing 90s” brigades, the mentality most closely matches the medieval one, therefore, in order to better understand the essence of medieval squabbles, purposefully applies modern terminology: “specific Stroganov boys hired the right Ermak brigade against Kuchum’s chaos”
      1. Cat
        +3
        24 July 2018 20: 19
        The most interesting thing is that the "right team" of the Stroganov merchants threw and followed the zipuns to Siberia.
        Although you have to be honest, "retirement" in the honorable Yermakov fifty at the Tabolsky monastery, read the almshouse they earned.
        The RPF should start tearing hair, counting the "retirement points" from the remaining seven hundred Cossacks Ermak, a handful of pioneers who have lived to this very honorable fifty and almshouse!

        1. +2
          24 July 2018 22: 40
          Quote: Kotischa
          The most interesting thing is that the "right team" of the Stroganov merchants threw and followed the zipuns to Siberia.

          why? The purpose of the campaign was originally pure punitive - an answer to Kuchum’s raids on the Perm Territory. In the course of the course it turned out that Kuchum got everyone there, and they simply threw him off! So Yermak honestly worked out the loot: the raids on the Stroganovs definitely stopped!
          1. +1
            24 July 2018 23: 30
            Well, here we are, and we switched to a normal bazaar market. Uff, it's relieved from my heart !!!
            "And the thieves are legal - people are very nice,
            All of my friends, and many of my favorites,
            They remember youth, but toil at night.
            Their faith breaks. "
            A. Rosenbaum
            wassat
  3. +2
    24 July 2018 06: 51
    Excellent material, debunking one of the academic myths (such as: miracle ice, wounded Birger ...)!
    1. +1
      24 July 2018 19: 26
      But I do not mind this!
      1. +1
        24 July 2018 20: 39
        Well, at least from your side everything is “thank God”! The rest apparently have a different opinion. Alas and ah ....
      2. Cat
        +3
        24 July 2018 21: 04
        Quote: 3x3zsave
        Excellent material, debunking one of the academic myths (such as: miracle ice, wounded Birger ...)!

        Quote: kalibr
        But I do not mind this!

        Baba Yaga is against, however her cat too!
        Now essentially:
        1. How are Icelandic sagas more reliable than our lives of saints? Tales about the integrity of the skalds, the construction of the verse does not offer. These songs were recorded two centuries after the events described. Something of Plutarch's Comparative Description, a complete compilation of truth and fiction. I was especially pleased with the debate about who our brave hero was: a) Norwegian, b) Swede, or c) Icelander?
        2. The lives of Saints Boris and Gleb, were riveted in haste and contrary to the metropolitan. The argument that the Greek metro supposedly doubted and rested on the communion of the brothers to the faces of the saints. Not even funny, look from the other side. The Greek was smart and perfectly understood that the appearance of local saints creates the prerequisites for the independence of the Old Russian state from Byzantium. An example of a split with Rome lay before my eyes.
        3. The version with the names amused. God forbid me the memory of her first voiced Kostomarov. In order to understand its insignificance, open the first volumes of Karamzin. Perhaps Valery, you did not notice that the names of the Russian princes were double for a long time. One was given by a priest (real), and the other was given by a priest (spiritual). So the spiritual father gave the name of the child at baptism according to the holy calendar. Therefore, Svyatopolk the Cursed could have been Boris, but might not have been. And Boris could be Svyatopolk. So it makes sense to pull the cat by the tail, if the mustache is on the head. By the way, what if the little wife wants to, and that was with the grandson of Yaroslav?
        4. Valery, doesn’t it seem to you that with Livy and Biramia your neighbor it’s not so simple. Was it not until the "horseradish" that the Principality of Polotsk was wobbling the people, moreover, the principality itself fell through the saga to the hero? Your arguments that not there and there also cast a shadow on the wattle fence. And in the saga, the Prince of Polotsk reigns and the hero still manages to plow him, is this about the abduction of his beloved little wife Yaroslav?
        You can continue, but they drive their own out of the bath!
        Conclusion, an unambiguous bold plus for the article and many thanks.
        But not everything is so simple and simple ........
        Regards Kotische!
        1. +2
          25 July 2018 07: 48
          Quote: Kotischa
          The lives of Saints Boris and Gleb were riveted in haste and contrary to the metropolitan. The argument that they say the Greek metropolitan

          Dear Kotische, you have a rather competent speech in the comments, and you are able to correctly express your thoughts, and the grammar is at a good level. But, a small (friendly) remark still I want to make.
          Your comments on "divine" questions simply do not stand up to criticism. This is noticed. And how it is possible to make such mistakes in the word Metropolitan, and this is not an accident, and not illiteracy (as I have already noted) is the usual ignorance of the topic.
  4. +2
    24 July 2018 07: 38
    And in 1036, Yaroslav will nevertheless become the sovereign ruler of Kievan Rus, will rule to 1154 Mr.
    Remove one. Until 1054. hi
    1. VLR
      +1
      24 July 2018 07: 40
      Wow, a typo slipped! I'll try to remove.
    2. VLR
      +1
      24 July 2018 09: 54
      All fixed
  5. +2
    24 July 2018 07: 52
    Today is the day of memory of the holy noble princes, martyrs Boris and Gleb, according to the old style. And when the author declares immediately .......... The fact is that the mentioned "Legend" ...... is not a historical source, but a literary work .... , then, in my opinion, the author got confused in legends, scriptures, traditions and literary sources.
    1. VLR
      +3
      24 July 2018 08: 22
      Editing and processing of a Czech legend in order to bring it in line with local (Old Russian) realities, clearly carried out on request, and clearly performed by one person - unless the result can not be called a literary work? In any case, it is not a legend. Hardly a legend. Scripture yes. But writing is definitely not a historical source. Here is the Czech original source - this is a tradition that has preserved in people's memory, which became the basis of life.
      1. +1
        24 July 2018 08: 30
        To be honest, I didn’t understand anything from what was said, you can get confused, you know better. We are in different dimensions and spaces.
        1. Cat
          +2
          24 July 2018 21: 10
          Beaver if I tell you "Meow" this is an argument, for or against, although it is possible to "let the owner eat"! That's how Valery takes away my bread "tryndet a lot of space and the main thing about what!"
          And most importantly, the Author accompanies his article and participates in the discussion, for which special thanks!
  6. +2
    24 July 2018 09: 04
    the tale of Boris and Gleb was carried both in the 11th century and now the main thing is the sinfulness and inadmissibility of a fratricidal war, calling the princes to humility in the struggle for power .. and in this sense fulfilled its role. Of course, crimes in the struggle for tables were also enough in Russian grand prince’s houses, but it was a sin unambiguously condemned by the church ... well, and the fact that the legend strikingly obscured the truth — well, who needs it, did this truth need Yaroslav, who united the country at the cost of fratricidal wars? No. His heirs are also gone. The annals are corrected, the legend about Boris and Gleb .. but for our happiness in the far north, the skalds composed sagas ..
    1. +1
      24 July 2018 11: 11
      Quote: besleney59
      ..but for our happiness in the far north, the skalds composed sagas ..

      Only now the sheer number of versions even about the origin of Eymund makes one relate to their reliability with a fair amount of skepticism!
  7. +2
    24 July 2018 10: 58
    It is doubtful all.
    Yaroslav slammed Boris and himself (or his children) contributed to the canonization? What for?
    The reason expressed by the author is rather strange and shaky, in my opinion. At the same time, it does not take into account that all the characters involved were purely religious people, and not Jacob Sverdlovs. Of course, they could soak their brother, but it is unlikely to arrange an obvious profanation of faith.
    Numerous researchers believe that the time of canonization falls in the range from 1020 to 1072. So it is possible that they were made saints even under Yaroslav, and popular worship was definitely already with him.
    It reminds a new chronology - bad rulers perverted history, replaced chronicles, deceived people, hid the truth, etc.
    In short, the bullshit came out.
    1. VLR
      +2
      24 July 2018 11: 12
      The canonization of Boris and Gleb is clearly fixed - 1072 year. Yaroslav died in 1054. During Yaroslav’s life, one of his grandchildren was named Svyatopolk, and no one was named Boris, Gleb or Roman, David (their baptismal names). And no new chronologists: the first to put forward this hypothesis was Yanin V.L. - Doctor of Historical Sciences, Academician of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR and the Russian Academy of Sciences. Head of the Department of Archeology, Moscow State University. The first to use the birch bark letters, as a historical source. How much more traditional and academic?
      1. +2
        24 July 2018 11: 20
        Who fixed?
        Here are the opinions of historians:

        According to A.A. Shakhmatov, the reckoning of Boris and Gleb as a saint is connected with the act of transferring the body of Gleb from the banks of the Smyadyn River to Vyshgorod and his burial in the church of St. Basil.
        Another pre-revolutionary researcher, V. Vasiliev, also regarded this event as evidence of the canonization of the princes, but did not limit the process to 1020 alone and expanded its chronological framework until 1039, linking it with the pastoral activities of Metropolitan John (1020-1039).
        The historian of the Russian Church, Macarius, believed that the celebration of the memory of Boris and Gleb on July 24 began shortly after the construction of the first church in the name of Boris and Gleb in Vyshgorod in 1021.

        The point of view of G. Fedotov is close to these views. [19] MD Priselkov suggested the canonization of Boris and Gleb in 1026, when Prince. Yaroslav built a new church specially for the tombs of saints instead of the burnt church of Vasily, in which the bodies of the princes rested before the fire.
        ...
        D.S. Likhachev, starting not from a specific date, but based on an assessment of the political situation during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, suggested that the canonization of the first Russian saints occurred shortly after 1037.
        ...
        During the excavations of 1999 in Novgorod, a birch bark letter was found (No. 906), relating to the 1050-1070th years. In it, along with other saints, Boris and Gleb are named (currently this is the earliest mention of brothers-princes as saints)
        1. VLR
          0
          24 July 2018 11: 58
          Versions of dating, as always a lot. But there is a firm reference to the Greek Metropolitan George, who with all his might prevented the canonization of the “doubtful” saints. He was the Metropolitan in 1066-1077. The most authentic is the canonization of Boris and Gleb, which occurred during the transfer (or immediately after) of their relics to a new stone church. This solemn ceremony, according to the chronicle information, was performed on 2 in May 1072, with the participation of the children of Yaroslav the Wise, princes Izyaslav, Svyatoslav and Vsevolod, Metropolitan George of Kiev, a number of other hierarchs and Kiev monasticism. This point of view is supported by: E.E. Golubinsky, M.K. Karger, N.N. Il'in, M.H. Aleshkovsky, A.S. Khoroshev, A. Poppe. There is a version of the later canonization of Boris and Gleb - 2 of May 1115, when their relics were transferred to the temple built by Prince Izyaslav Yaroslavich. A. Poppe (professor of the University of Warsaw, has no relation to chronology) asserts that “... the most ancient monument to Boris and Gleb is an anonymous“ Legend of passion and miracles of Sts. Boris and Gleb ", consisting of two independent parts: 1. "Legends of Passion ...", compiled in connection with the solemn celebration of Sts. 20 brothers in May 1072 in Vyshgorod, and 2. "The Tale of Miracles", created even later. In 1115, they were supplemented. Moreover, the naming of Boris and Gleb as saints belong to the same editor-book, who processed the chronicle text shortly after 2 in May 1115. Under 1086, Boris and Gleb are mentioned, but they are not named as saints. And only in the article 1093, they are called saints; at the same time, the 24 festival of July, dedicated to them, is called NEW.
          1. +2
            24 July 2018 14: 00
            Quote: VlR
            Moreover, the names of Boris and Gleb as saints belong to the same scribe-editor, who processed the annalistic text shortly after May 2, 1115. Under 1086, Boris and Gleb were mentioned, but not named as saints.

            He cited above, in my opinion, a very powerful argument
            During the excavations of 1999 in Novgorod, a birch bark letter was found (No. 906), relating to the 1050-1070th years. In it, along with other saints, Boris and Gleb are named (currently this is the earliest mention of brothers-princes as saints)
            In connection with this objective evidence, I consider baseless to say that they began to be venerated as saints after the 70s.
            An indirect proof of the reverence of the brothers under Yaroslav is the fact that he specially built a new church for them. If he banged them, then the direct benefit would be for him not to make advertisements for the brothers and wear their bodies back and forth, but ends in the water, so that everyone would quickly forget about Boris and Gleb.
            So that does not fit the new original plot. The attempt to spoil the Church is understandable, but unsuccessful smile
            1. VLR
              +2
              24 July 2018 14: 28
              No, "spoil for the Church" - that would be primitive. Moreover, there are much more acute topics than the question of the canonization of Boris and Gleb. The accusation of the hierarchs in the clear desire to have "their own" saints doesn’t attract an attempt to discredit them. Sooner or later these "native" saints were to appear. Not less and no more doubtful or indisputable than the Catholic. And, in general, is it possible to compare Boris and Gleb with Dominic Guzmán (St. Dominic)? About which Voltaire wrote:
              "... Eternal torment
              I deservedly brought upon myself.
              I built persecution on the Albigensians,
              And the world was not sent to destroy,
              And here I am burning for burning them myself. "
              It is better to canonize them than such a ghoul.
              1. +1
                24 July 2018 14: 38
                Quote: VlR
                Is it possible to compare Boris and Gleb with Dominic Gusman (St. Dominic)? About which Voltaire wrote:
                "... Eternal torment
                I deservedly brought upon myself.
                I built persecution on the Albigensians,


                Remind what abominations Voltaire is am Wrote about Joan of Arc If you take a closer look at the teachings of the Albigensians, you may agree that St. Dominic hi was not so wrong!
            2. +3
              24 July 2018 14: 34
              Quote: Flavius
              If he banged them, then the direct benefit would be for him not to make advertisements for the brothers and wear their bodies back and forth, but ends in the water, so that everyone would quickly forget about Boris and Gleb.

              Is not a fact. If it was possible to blame the murder on another, then there was a direct reason for their "PR" precisely in order to create himself image of a passionately loving brother!
              1. +2
                24 July 2018 14: 53
                Quote: Weyland
                to create an image of a passionately loving brother!

                Why is it for a man who did not consider it shameful to rebel against his own father? To stinks loved him more?
                Well then the sources did not clean up the disagreements with the father - they would have written right away that he had been Vladimir's beloved son and that he would have wanted to immediately write off the great reign.
                But they didn’t write it. Why then invent a crap about Boris?
                1. +2
                  24 July 2018 15: 21
                  Quote: Flavius
                  who did not consider it shameful to rebel against his own father? To stinks loved him more?

                  Precisely for this - he rebelled so that Novgorod would not send taxes to Kiev, "not for profit, but only by the will of the Novgorodians who sent me" laughing !
                  And most importantly: Rebellion is one thing, and kill - quite, completely different!
            3. 0
              25 July 2018 09: 45
              Quote: Flavius
              An indirect proof of the reverence of the brothers under Yaroslav is the fact that he specially built a new church for them. If he banged them, then the direct benefit would be for him not to make advertisements for the brothers and wear their bodies back and forth, but ends in the water, so that everyone would quickly forget about Boris and Gleb.

              Dear Alexander, there is still a version that Yaroslav simply really repented, and to make amends, he took certain actions worthy of a Christian, not a fratricide. Well, like Alexander I, indirectly guilty of the death of his father or something ...
    2. +4
      24 July 2018 11: 21
      Quote: Flavius
      At the same time, it does not take into account that all the characters involved were purely religious people, and not Jacob Sverdlovs.

      Well, how can I tell you, in some ways, Yakov Sverdlov also acted as a religious person, but let’s say so, he chose the path of a specific ministry for himself.
  8. +2
    24 July 2018 10: 58
    Bryachislav, the father of the famous Vseslav, was "for himself" and for his Polotsk, pursuing a cautious policy on the principle "a bird in the hands is better than a crane in the sky."
    Everything was much more complicated there: if you remember, Vladimir’s marriage with Rogneda began with the fact that he publicly raped her, and killed her parents and brothers. Rogneda once tried to kill him (which is not surprising), and Vladimir wanted to kill him, but his son from Rogneda Izyaslav, who opposed his father with a sword in his hands (probably in his hands, and not in one hand), prevented him. Fight with 4-year-old Vladimir, essno, did not become a son and pardoned Rogned - but Izyaslav deprived him of his inheritance as a punishment, leaving him only the estate of Rogneda - the Principality of Polotsk. Therefore, the descendants of Izyaslav (starting from Bryachislav) did not usually participate in feuds of other princes (only Vseslav Bryachislavich tried - but unsuccessfully ...)
  9. +1
    24 July 2018 11: 09
    And only in 1969, academician VL Yanin “called a cat a cat”, announcing that Buritslav could not be anyone other than Boris.
    Only this version is entirely based on the assumption that the name “Boris” is a truncated “Borislav”. But it’s called St. Boris in honor of the baptist of Bulgaria - Bulgarian Khan Boris (never a Slav), whom Byzantine sources often refer to as “Bogoris” (Βόγορ -) - but never “Borislav”! So all the same, it is more likely that Buritslav = Boleslav!
    1. VLR
      +1
      24 July 2018 12: 02
      "Love" or "Leiv" is the traditional ending of names for Scandinavians. Yaroslav is also named Yaritsleyv, ​​and not only in "Strands ...", but also in other sagas.
      1. +1
        24 July 2018 14: 48
        Quote: VlR
        Yaroslav is also called Yaritslev, and not only in "Strands ...", but also in other sagas.

        And Svyatoslav - Sfendisleyvom, etc. But there’s a clear transition - head to-pave - and if it is not there, then there is no end to "-lave", and sometimes the name could be shortened generally! Remember what was the name of the Kid who was friends with Carlson? Svante Swanteson, the name is not so rare. So, Svante is a truncated Svantepolk = Svyatopolk! Interestingly, the name of the Swedes has become a calendar, name days are celebrated on June 10 on the same day as another borrowed name - Boris (It’s Boris, not Buritslave - for example, the recently died rock singer. Karl Boris Lennart Lindqvist)
        1. VLR
          +1
          24 July 2018 15: 14
          There, in general, the point is not the similarity of names, but the contradictions of the official version and the logic of events, which stubbornly reaches for the Scandinavian version. Svyatopolk really was not until 1015 year in the territory of Russia. And with whom did Yaroslav fight all this time? When Svyatopolk came to Kiev, Boris was already killed. Who killed him? Yaroslav was not a humanist at all, like all his brothers. Boris, Svyatopolk or Sudislav (whom Yaroslav kept 23 of the year in prison) more lucky - we would read another version of the story.
  10. +4
    24 July 2018 11: 10
    Not a bad article, the author plus karma. smile
    The question arises: What is more historic about “The Strand of Eimund” than the “Legend of Boris and Glebe”? Or more broadly: than the Scandinavian sagas are more historical than Orthodox hagiographic literature? I do not mean that the author is mistaken in his interpretation of the death of Boris, personally it seems to me that Boris and Gleb are the same full participants in the strife, like the others, so personally I am inclined to agree with the author in this matter. I mean that one should approach the sagas, in any case, with no less skepticism than with Legends and Lives and with far more than with the chronicles. Both sagas and “Lives” were created for specific purposes, if taken broadly - to glorify their heroes, proof of the significance and importance of their actions, so both of these “genres” are characterized by bias and, as a result, distortion of reality in order to achieve their goals.
    Regarding the “translation” into the modern language of the dialogue of Yaroslav and Eymund, it seems to me personally that the real text of the saga is much more visual and interesting.
    We have learned, sir, that your property may decrease because of your brothers, and we are shamefully expelled from the country, and came here east to Gardariki, to you, three brothers. We are going to serve the one of you who will give us more honor and respect, because we want to gain wealth and fame and get honor from you. It occurred to us that you might want to have brave husbands, if your relatives, the very ones that have become your enemies, threaten your honor. We now propose to become the defenders of this principality and go to your service, and receive from you gold and silver and good clothes. If you don’t like it and you don’t solve it soon, then we will do the same with the other kings if you send us away
    .
    Honestly and frankly, even somewhat naive. Some Byzantine emperor would suggest a feast and a bathhouse to the soldiers, and while they were having fun, I would seriously think about whether they shouldn’t just cut the sleeping ones just in case, so that they don’t pay the money themselves and they don’t leave. smile
    1. +2
      24 July 2018 13: 51
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      If you don’t like it and you don’t decide this matter soon, then we will do the same with other kings, if you send us away

      Yes, after such impudent blackmail they could even fix it. When Vladimir began to get such guys excited about the increase, he solved the problem elegantly (fortunately, he had no dangerous competitors at that moment) - he suggested they go to Byzantium to go to Varanga - like, I'm just a poor prince, but I’ve got a Vasileus the dough is unmeasured. Only separately I wrote a letter to Vasilevs: they say that the guys who are sailing to hire you are cool, but really awesome greyhounds - so if you hire them, scatter them better in small groups in different garrisons, to avoid .. laughing
  11. +3
    24 July 2018 12: 49
    Let him stand next to Sineus (sine hus - “his kind”) and Truvor (thru varing - “faithful squad”).
    It is surprising why Truvor and Sineus have existed for so many years in the history of Russia. Really, none of the historians knew the Swedish language. Why didn’t anyone have a question where did those once mentioned in the "Tale of Bygone Years" go, why didn’t they leave offspring? In his memoirs, General Ignatyev wrote that while studying Swedish as a military attache, he immediately understood that Sine Hus is "My Home, Yard", and Tru Waring is "Druzhina".
    Thanks to the author for the article!
    1. +2
      24 July 2018 13: 14
      Quote: AK1972
      General Ignatiev wrote in his memoirs that studying Swedish as a military attaché immediately understood that Cine Hus is “His house, yard”, and Tru waring is “Druzhina”.

      As part of this hypothesis, it is difficult to explain why Rurik, after being settled in Ladoga (or Novgorod), sent his “yard” to Beloozero, and the “squad” to Izborsk, left to reign alone, and how then it happened that “the yard” and "squad" overnight died there in full force.
      1. VLR
        +4
        24 July 2018 13: 43
        For example, this can be explained: part of the squad sent for feeding in Izborsk, or put a garrison there, sent someone from the relatives with a jarl to Beloozero. The person who wrote all this, knew the "northern language", and his readers - too. And the scribes and subsequent readers - no longer. And they tried to somehow explain the incomprehensible words and facts. Sineus and Truvor some? Brothers Rurik, I guess. Sent to other cities? Prince, of course, put: a familiar case, and Vladimir children in cities sent, and Yaroslav, and their heirs. Why is there no offspring of Sineus and Truvor? And why do they not take any part in the battles or in government? Yes, they died, I guess.
        1. +1
          24 July 2018 14: 55
          Quote: VlR
          For example, this can be explained: part of the squad sent for feeding in Izborsk, or put a garrison there, sent someone from the relatives with a jarl to Beloozero.

          If we take the chronicle text seriously (and we don’t have another one), then it is impossible to interpret Sineus and Truvor as historical figures.
          And three brothers were elected with their families, and they took the whole of Russia with them, and they came and sat down, the eldest, Rurik, in Novgorod, and the other, Sineus, on Beloozer, and the third, Truvor, in Izborsk. And from those Varyags nickname Russian land. Novgorodians are the people from the Varangian family, but before that they were Slovenes. Two years later, Sineus and his brother Truvor died. And one Rurik took all the power, and began to distribute the cities to his men - to that of Polotsk, to this Rostov, to another Beloozero.

          You can, of course, put forward various hypotheses that contradict the text of the “tale of bygone years,” accusing its author or copyist of incompetence or, worse, of malicious intent, but all this is nothing more than a stretch. The text of the chronicle says clearly - the brothers, settled in the cities (by the way, the tribal centers of Slovenia, Krivichi and Vesi), two died, the third inherited from them. Why look for this trick about the production of extra essence? What is bad what is written? smile
    2. +2
      24 July 2018 13: 53
      Quote: AK1972
      General Ignatiev wrote in his memoirs that studying Swedish as a military attaché immediately understood that Cine Hus is “His house, yard”, and Tru waring is “Druzhina”.

      Similarly, Ivan Solonevich hi , married a Swede, wrote that his wife, having familiarized herself with Russian history, immediately offered him the same version - “her home” and “faithful squad”
      1. Cat
        +1
        24 July 2018 22: 25
        Quote: Michael
        Why look in this trick about producing extra entities? What is bad about what is written?

        Well Michal, how naive you are "having dug up dirt at your ancestors", we must refute our story, sprinkle our heads with ashes and repent. It is advisable to give something to someone else!
        I noticed an interesting trend, many Authors are ready to retell the Scandinavian sagas in their own words, but try not to bring them even in the Russian translation.
        The same Tale of Bygone Years has many interpretations (translations) from Old Slavic and Russian. There are canonical ones like Likhachev’s work. There are with which science does not agree.
        The origin of verses is much more complicated than the narrative of prose. For example, many translations about Prince Igor’s regiment.
        So why destroy the Toin with what are we?
    3. 0
      25 July 2018 09: 48
      Quote: AK1972
      Let him stand next to Sineus (sine hus - “his kind”) and Truvor (thru varing - “faithful squad”).

      Yes, dear Alexei, sometimes it becomes ridiculous from some commonplace facts ... lol
    4. -2
      25 July 2018 19: 52
      And when I started learning German at school, I also immediately realized that German könig is just our groom. Those. German kings served as serfs under our great Slavic ancestors ... And many more of the same thoughts can be drawn from the work of Zadornov.
  12. VLR
    0
    24 July 2018 13: 28
    Quote: Trilobite Master
    And what is more historic about “The Mere of Eimund” than the “Legend of Boris and Glebe”? Or more broadly: than the Scandinavian sagas are more historical than Orthodox hagiographic literature?

    Sagas are different, of course. There are, which are directly called "false". But the Snorri Sturlson saga is certainly a historical source. Very conscientious and respected author, who constantly checks himself and argues his conclusions. In particular, referring to the vises of the skalds - and these are verses in which not only a line, even a word, cannot be replaced. "The indestructible chain of verse" is about the visas. One of the rules of northern poetry was alliteration: in two adjacent verses there should have been three words beginning with one letter (consonant), which was called rhyming. These letters were arranged so that the first two (side) took place at the beginning of the first verse, and the third (main) - at the beginning of the second. If vowels were rhymed letters, then they all had to be different.
    All the rhyming letters should have been in words with stress. For this reason, it is almost impossible to throw out or replace a word in a skald poem. Therefore, even laws in Scandinavia of that time were drafted in the form of short poetic sentences, which allowed them to know their rights well even to illiterate people.
    It should also be mentioned that in skaldic poetry, only two verses connected by alliteration rhyme, and not the first with the third and the second with the fourth. In general, it is terribly difficult. Even to understand the principle of writing skaldic poems is difficult. And to fix the skald - so that no one noticed ... It is impossible.
    And the Scandinavians treated the recorded visas with reverence, because believed in the magical power of the poetic lines, therefore, it is impossible to lie in verse without danger to the author. Writing abusive poems was prosecuted by law, and a fine was levied for learning them. In addition, Icelandic laws forbid the writing of poems about women - because poetic lines act like a love potion. Therefore, hanging a skald, if she reached the descendants, and it is not reported at the same time that the skald who composed her was killed for her - this is 100% evidence.
    1. +1
      24 July 2018 14: 10
      Quote: VlR
      There are those who are directly called "deceitful." But the Snorri Sturlson sagas are, of course, a historical source.

      Snorri - the author is unconditionally conscientious, but he lived a couple of centuries later than the events described, and by no means in Russia, but already in Iceland, so he could completely consider the lying "strand about Eymund" historically reliable!
      Quote: VlR
      And the Scandinavians were kind to the recorded visas, because believed in the magical power of poetic lines, therefore it is impossible to lie in poetry without danger to the author.

      Because to attribute to the king that which he did not commit is also a grave insult. But the thing is: "false sagas "- in fact, historical novelswhere the main character is fictional a character (acting, essno, in the "frame" of very real historical persons) who, by the way, will not be offended by the skald! laughing So if Eymund is a fictional facethen the author could write the same nonsense about his adventures as Dumas (recall, in the “Countess de Monsoro” he depicts the “duel of the minions” as purely political, for which he “exchanges sides” with Schomberg and Livaro, and the “gizars” of D'Antrag and Ribeiraka makes the "Anjou")
      1. VLR
        0
        24 July 2018 14: 46
        No: "Emunde Strand" is part of the "Saga of the Holy Olav" from the "Circle of the Earth" by Snorri Sturson. The historical "royal" saga. Recognized (like all the saga "Circle") as a historical source. The Ingvar Traveler Saga is another thing; there, about Eimund, who is called Ingvar's father, there is at the very beginning a passage in the form of a prologue very similar to a historical saga. But the author of this fragment is unknown, and it seems that Eymund simply wants to consider the Swede very much. I gave the data from this saga so that there was a complete picture - that there is also such data about the hero. But, of course, I believe Sturlson, and not the anonymous compiler of the Ingvar saga. As for the information, then, as I wrote, he checked them by the visas of famous skalds (known - not in the popular sense, but of those who were reliably aware of who they were, where and when they lived, when and on what occasion those of them said these verses). If there was a Visa confirming these sagas, Sturlson considered her information to be reliable. If not, unreliable. And to fake Visa, as I already wrote, is impossible.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  13. +1
    24 July 2018 15: 14
    Quote: Trilobite Master
    Quote: VlR
    Therefore, hanging a skald, if she reached the descendants, and it is not reported at the same time that the skald who composed her was killed for her - this is 100% evidence.

    Evidence that contemporaries considered what was written was true, believed that this was true, nothing more. smile After three generations, the connection is lost, so the authors of some sagas knew much less about their heroes than we, for example, about Chapaev or Kotovsky.
    In addition, if the hero of the saga could not be attributed to what he did not do, then it is not only possible, but necessary, to describe what was done in all colors. To turn an ordinary clash into a grandiose battle - easily, and then write, for example, that
    Eimund king went through his army and killed so many people that it would take a long time to write all their names.
    smile
    I do not mean that the sagas are fairy tales, they certainly contain valuable information, but treat them as absolute -
    Quote: VlR
    100% certificate
    giving them priority over other sources, in my opinion somewhat frivolously.
    1. +2
      24 July 2018 15: 32
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      To turn an ordinary mistake into a grand battle is easy, and then write, for example, that


      The Danes were marching,
      There were twelve thousand
      And rabble escaped from the battlefield,
      There were forty-five of them.

      This, essno, if the Swedes write about the Danes. And the Danes, if anything, will write:

      Grumbling Swerter grunted:
      "We have a hundred left.
      We will not overcome the Danes
      Neither tomorrow nor today. "
      (...)
      Sixteen Thousand Riding
      Forever become dust.
      Seventy living fled
      Gonymy mortal fear.
      1. VLR
        +1
        24 July 2018 17: 59
        Weyland, a very good example, yes, it is always a big problem: there was something, but what exactly. Even in recent history - who won at Borodino, for example. Or an estimate of tank battle at Prokhorovka. But the scale is generally a misfortune: did the men at the disputed bridge have wall to wall or two great troops fought to the death for three days? Therefore, of course, you should always be critical of any source. The question is that very many are ready to be critical of foreign testimonies, and not ready to be critical of their own. Not only here, everywhere.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. VLR
      +2
      24 July 2018 17: 48
      The owner of the trilobite, you know, according to the last comment, I almost completely agree with you, I don’t want to object, a very good judgment. I would have answered something else in a different way. I especially liked the remark that truth often is what is considered true and what is believed.
      1. +2
        24 July 2018 18: 26
        Quote: VlR
        I myself would have answered so differently.

        Thank you, so we understand each other, which in itself is already a lot. smile
  14. +2
    24 July 2018 23: 56
    In his Teaching, Yaroslav wrote for his children: remember that you are the children of one mother. And Boris and Gleb were sons another mother. Perhaps this is the reason to look for the cause of the conflict.
    1. Cat
      +1
      25 July 2018 05: 01
      Children of St. Vladimir - the second generation of Christians! In Russia in a grand-ducal house, except for Princess Olga.
      I do not think that Christian dogma prevailed in the family of St. Vladimir. For example, when raising children.
      Vladimir Monomakh is definitely a different upbringing and environment.
    2. 0
      25 July 2018 10: 02
      Quote: M. Michelson
      And Boris and Gleb were sons of another mother. Perhaps this is the reason to look for the cause of the conflict.

      That is yes. And this is everywhere - with siblings they usually found a common language, but with half-souls they slaughtered from the heart. Take the Bible: Gideon had 70 children from a bunch of wives and one son from a concubine Abimelech. Abimelech arranged with his mother’s relatives to unfasten the dough for him to hire a brigade of killers, who repaired all his brothers (only one managed to escape). Interestingly, the relatives gave him exactly 70 shekels, i.e. the killer was paid only a shekel for the killed (shekel - 14 g of silver, price of 1 sheep; Judah 30 shekel - the standard price of a healthy but unskilled slave)
  15. +1
    25 July 2018 11: 57
    Some miracles. An article on the history of Ancient Russia hangs on the site for more than a day, and in the comments of not a single cronolager or apologist of the conspiracy of reptilians and gidomassons)))) Did the holidays contribute?
  16. 0
    25 July 2018 20: 23
    An amazing argument - contemporaries did not consider Boris and Gleb saints. Even if they didn’t think, then what? Fyodor Ushakov was also not considered, and many others. Sometimes they canonize later centuries, as the French Jeanne DARC.
    And why do we need the opinion of some Polish Jesuit Andrzej Poppe? Why, then, for the sake of completeness, should the author not go to the nearest synagogue and ask for the opinion of the rabbis? And then to the mosque to the mullah? But you can still make a request to the cell to God Kuz, now serving a sentence ...
    1. VLR
      0
      27 July 2018 12: 25
      Quote: fuxila
      A surprising argument - contemporaries did not consider Boris and Gleb as saints. Even if they didn’t think, what’s next? Fedor Ushakov also did not consider

      And you, therefore, seriously consider the martial admiral a Christian saint? On what basis? He probably would have laughed for a very long time if he knew. As for the "contemporaries were not considered" holy - this is very important. Francis of Assisi was considered holy during his lifetime, regardless of the opinion of the official Rome. And the canonization of those whom they did not consider, and then suddenly they thought it was always someone’s political games. It is always beneficial to someone.
      1. -1
        27 July 2018 15: 21
        Well, you can’t be so dark. Where did you read that the admiral cannot be a saint? In Orthodoxy, almost half of the saints were soldiers, ranging from George the Victorious to modern Evgeny Rodionov, and it is natural that they themselves did not consider themselves saints, and if some seer told Ushakov that he would be canonized later, he would certainly didn’t laugh, because was a very religious person. And in general, in what canon
        And about Comrade Poppe, the way it is already understood: Catholics do not recognize Orthodox saints, and Orthodox Catholics, and to butter opinions here is completely pointless. This debate has been going on since 1054 (and actually even earlier) and there is no end or end to this. You ask Poppe, he considers the Pope to be infallible and the governor of God on the earth, and after he answers in the affirmative, also pass this to the mountain, as the opinion of a famous scientist.
        1. VLR
          0
          28 July 2018 09: 13
          Alexey, you, apparently, are a believer, therefore there is no special reason to argue with you about the saints. Tertullian very truly said: "I believe because it is absurd." And for believers there is no need for rational arguments and evidence. Do not think that I am trying to offend or insult you - this is a statement of fact, I respect this point of view. But, just to illustrate my attitude to all kinds of saints, let me quote a little from my book “The Three Worlds of Solitude (this is on behalf of the hero — not on my behalf, of course, says):
          "My experience with the gods says that their thoughts and deeds are incomprehensible to people. And even the good intentions of the gods do not guarantee the calm and happy life of mortals. But the old gods have long understood the futility of working with humanity, which always twists, distorts and adapts to its nature, any teachings and commandments. After all, people wonderfully and incomprehensibly image level and lead to a common denominator all religions, so after a couple of generations the preachers of nonresistance to evil suddenly begin to bless murder and the war, and the worshipers of cruel and merciless gods, designate their patrons as patrons of virtue and fine arts. Having appropriated a monopoly on communion with some god, the priests immediately begin to trade the sky and do not ask anyone for permission to sell tickets to heaven. they ask any of the gods if they need saints whom they designate according to their own will and understanding, and ministers of all religions without exception with extraordinary reverence and unconcealed servility belong to earthly rulers and state power . Therefore, the old gods do not even look at the Earth. "
  17. VLR
    0
    27 July 2018 12: 27
    Quote: fuxila
    And why do we need the opinion of some Polish Jesuit Andrzej Poppé?

    You, apparently, to anything. And to any normal researcher and historian - very much why, believe me. The more opinions, even the most polar, he studies, the higher the probability of the objectivity of his work.