A hero with an Eastern accent: how the myth was assembled

6 467 78
A hero with an Eastern accent: how the myth was assembled


The word isn't Russian; the heroes lived in different centuries and never met, and the artist created the familiar appearance. Let's explore the origins of the bogatyrs.



The word "baatar" means "hero." It lives on in the name of the Mongolian capital, Ulaanbaatar, and in the name of Sukhbaatar. It is also a close relative of the Russian word for "bogatyr." This most Russian of all words for national heroes comes from the East, from the world of steppe nomads.

Myth 1: "bogatyr" comes from "rich" or "god"


School etymology is both seductive and incorrect. The word "rich" (bogatyi) cannot be derived from a form with the suffix "-yr" (-yry): there is simply no such method for forming names from adjectives in Russian. If the root came from "bog," we would expect something like "bogodar" or "god-bearer," but not "bogatyr." Max Vasmer pointed this out, and modern etymological dictionaries agree.

The main clue is the lack of a cognate. The word doesn't exist in other Slavic languages. There is the Polish "bohater," but it too is a borrowing: according to a common theory, via the Hungarian "bátor," or, according to another, from East Slavic. So, the word "bogatyr" has practically no cognates in any Slavic language.

But the family is located further east. Old Russian knew two forms: the earlier "bagatur" and the later "bogatyr." A series of similarities emerges: Turkic "bagatur," "bahadur," "batyr," and Mongolian "baatar." And the roots may go even deeper, to Indo-Iranian antiquity: suggestions (the etymologies here are hypothetical and controversial) include Middle Indic bhaga-tur "full of strength" and Sanskrit bhagadhara "lucky." The core meaning is always the same: a warrior endowed with strength and good fortune.

The exact moment the word entered Russian is still debated. According to one version, it was already known in the 11th century. According to another, it is reliably recorded only in the Nikon Chronicle of the 16th century, and was not consistently used until the 15th century, precisely when Rus' had centuries of proximity to and dependence on the Horde. Philologist I. L. Los' noted a subtlety in the Brockhaus and Efron Dictionary: before the Mongols, a valiant warrior in Old Russian was called "khrabr," while in popular speech he was called a "daring man," a "revvec," or a "daring man." The word "bogatyr" (hero) in its current sense did not exist. The foreign title took hold later, after long skirmishes with the steppe.

The steppe as a supplier of a hero


Since their name is a steppe one, it's worth looking at the steppe people themselves. Let's take the Pechenegs for illustration: not because they were the ones who brought the word (unlikely), but because their example clearly illustrates how exchange with the steppe worked. A Turkic-speaking nomadic alliance formed in the 7th and 8th centuries in the Aral Sea region, migrated west, and by the 10th century occupied the steppes on the southern borders of Kievan Rus'. The Pechenegs did not leave behind their written language, and we know them only from other chronicles: the Byzantines called them "Pachinakites," the Arabs "Badzhnaks." The last time Russian sources mention the Pechenegs is in 1169, after which the people dissipated among the Torks, Polovtsians, and neighboring tribes.

In Turkic culture, the "batyr" is a central figure. Turkic heroic epics, from the Kyrgyz "Manas" to the Kazakh dastans (long poetic tales), revolve around the hero: his birth is miraculous, his strength and good fortune are given from above, his heroic deeds protect his clan. On the border between nomads and farmers, there was a constant exchange: not only through raids and trade, but also through words. weapons, with prestigious titles. The khan, the prince, and the batyr traveled across this border along with horses and captives.

Rus' adopted a foreign military ideal and turned it against its source. Having suffered defeats at the hands of the steppe dwellers, it recognized them as a model of valor and appropriated it. The logic of this cultural gesture can be conveyed thus: "Our heroes bear the same name as your batyrs, but they don't yield to you—they beat you."

How the epic glues together the hero


Bogatyrs live primarily in epics. The term itself is new: it was introduced into scholarship by the folklorist I. P. Sakharov in 1839, borrowing the word from "The Tale of Igor's Campaign," where "bylinas" denoted real, past events. The songs themselves took a long time to develop, according to various estimates, between the 10th and 15th centuries, and their earliest dating remains controversial. They were not recorded and published until the 19th century.

And here's what's important about the bylina: it's neither an archive nor a chronicle. Folklorist S. Yu. Neklyudov demonstrated that the epic creates a special quasi-historical time, where events are concentrated around a few key figures. For Ural legends, these markers were Yermak and Pugachev; for the bylinas, it was Prince Vladimir Krasnoe Solnyshko. Real people, however, could live in different centuries and never meet. Tradition unites them by their belonging to the same type, not by the calendar.

Beneath the layer of Kyivan themes lie "senior bogatyrs," far more archaic. Here's Svyatogor—the earth itself can't even support him. Next to him stands Mikula Selyaninovich, a plowman: all his strength comes from his love for Mother Earth. And Volga can even transform into an animal. V. Ya. Propp saw vestiges of paganism in them: Volga's shapeshifting reflects the totemism of hunters, and Mikula, an agricultural deity. Behind these figures lies a reconstructed pantheon, with the thunderer Perun, and the cults of fire, water, trees, and Mother Earth. The word "bogatyr" was later applied to this ancient layer, like a convenient label.


Viktor Mikhailovich Vasnetsov's painting "Bogatyr's Leap," created in 1914

Three who could not meet


Vasnetsov's trinity appears to be a single outpost. In fact, its prototypes are separated by centuries.

Dobrynya Nikitich is based on the chronicle's Dobrynya, Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich's maternal uncle and his military commander. This is the 10th century, the era of baptism and the forced subjugation of pagan communities. In the bylinas, Dobrynya is a dragon-slayer and diplomat, but behind this image lies the memory of a harsh man of princely power, sent where no agreement could be reached.

Ilya Muromets dates back to the 12th century. He is associated with Saint Elijah of the Caves, whose relics are housed in the Kiev Pechersk Lavra. According to a 1988 examination led by anthropologist S. Nikitin (the reliability of its findings, however, is debated), his remains bore traces of severe battle wounds and signs of paralysis of the legs suffered in his youth. This strikingly echoes the epic tale: the hero "sat idle" until the age of thirty-three, and then miraculously rose to his feet.

Alyosha Popovich, according to a popular version, is associated with the Battle of the Kalka River in 1223, where the Russians and Polovtsians were defeated by the Mongols. The connection, however, is very tentative: there is no exact match for the name. But this is normal for oral tradition: a hero's function is more important than his passport.

The calculation is simple. Dobrynya is from the 10th century, Ilya from the 12th, and Alyosha from the 13th. There are about three hundred years between the outermost figures. In the painting, they stand shoulder to shoulder, peers and comrades. Epics are not bound by time: they need not a year, but a complete picture—there they are, the defenders, all together.


Nicholas Roerich's painting "Svyatogor" (1938) depicts a legendary hero merging with giant mountains, symbolizing his connection with the earth and ancient forces.

Svyatogor and Vasnetsov's final touch


Svyatogor stands apart—a giant whom the earth cannot support. He neither serves princes nor defeats enemies. He lies on a mountain, useless in the new world, until Ilya comes to him. In the key scene, Svyatogor transfers his power to the younger man (through his breath or a special pouch) and enters a stone coffin. The scene reads like a change of eras: archaic power, which has no place in the new order, gives way to a hero integrated into the Christian and political world.

It's difficult to say honestly what lies behind this power. Modern mythological reconstructions make Svyatogor the son of the creator god Rod and the guardian of the boundary between the worlds of the living and the dead. Here, it's worth pausing: these are controversial constructs, partly neopagan, and not at all based on the epics. The songs themselves don't mention Rod or the World Tree; they simply feature a giant lying on a mountain.

It's tempting to see in it a memory of real steppe peoples: a giant unsupported by the earth resembles a nomad whose strength doesn't fit into a sedentary society. But the documents provide no direct connection to the Pechenegs or Polovtsians, and it's not worth passing off conjecture as fact. A curious detail in the same vein: stone Polovtsian statues were later reinterpreted by Cossack folklore as frozen "stone heroes." An incomprehensible object easily transforms into a giant.

The image we all remember of the bogatyr wasn't given to us by folklore. It was completed by an artist. Viktor Vasnetsov painted "Bogatyrs" from 1876 to 1898, and today it hangs in the Tretyakov Gallery. Dobrynya is on the left, Ilya is in the center, and Alyosha is on the right, on patrol, facing the steppe. The painting is both brilliant and ideological. It appeared in the era of national romanticism and the neo-Russian style, during the reign of Alexander III, who emphasized autocracy, Orthodoxy, and nationality.

Vasnetsov stripped away all unnecessary elements. Different centuries became a single barrier. The Eastern name, the pagan undertones, the moral ambiguity of the prototypes were left behind. The viewer was given a clear sign: here they are, the Russian bogatyrs. From this frame emerged a school textbook, and later, the animated film "The Three Bogatyrs." At the same time, the plowman Mikula, the werewolf Volga, the merchant-guslar Sadko—all those who didn't fit into the format of a heavy mounted warrior—were forgotten.

So where did they come from?


In short: the word itself came from the East, the hero type is a composite of giants, deities, and real warriors, and the current appearance is the work of Vasnetsov. All of this was gradually brought together by oral tradition, and the artist put the finishing touches.

Knowing this genealogy doesn't impoverish the image. The flat "Russian hero" comes to life and becomes a crossroads of cultures, where the steppe meets the forest, Perun meets Christ, and Elijah of the Caves meets the warriors of the Turkic khans, who bore the same title of "batyr."

And Svyatogor still lies on his mountain, too heavy for the new world. What truly was within him, we will no longer discern. All that remains is the power passed on, and the stone coffin.
78 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    16 June 2026 04: 38
    Thank you, I read it with interest, especially about the chronology of the "emergence" of the bogatyrs. I've read about the connection between the words "batur" and "bogatyr" before, of course. As a fun fact, I'll add that Vasnetsov based Dobrynya's face on himself. 😀
    1. +1
      16 June 2026 08: 38
      Quote from Andy_nsk
      the connection between the words "batur" and "bogatyr"

      The connection is most likely Botyr (Mong) -> Bokhodir (Turk) -> Bogatyr.
      1. +1
        16 June 2026 21: 20
        Quote: Azim77

        :
        Before the Mongols, a valiant warrior in Old Russian was called a "brave," and in popular speech, a "daring man," a "revvec," or a "daring one." The word "bogatyr" in its modern sense did not exist. The foreign title took hold later, after long skirmishes with the steppe.

        Tell me, do these words hint at great physical strength? No. But in our understanding, a bogatyr is precisely the possessor of great physical strength.
        So, were there really no people with great physical strength in ancient Rus'? Most likely, there were. But the author claims there was no word for such people. Is that even possible?
        If this word doesn't appear in the chronicles, does that mean it didn't exist? And who wrote the chronicles? Monks. Were they interested in the folk epic with its pantheon of heroes? I'm not asserting anything. I'm simply asking questions. The word "batyr" in Mongolian chronicles laughing is it found and in what century was it first mentioned?

        In Turkic culture, the "batyr" is a central figure. The Turkic heroic epic, from the Kyrgyz "Manas" to the Kazakh dastans (long poetic tales),

        Could you tell me in what century and in what language these "manas and dastans" were written down?
        You constantly mention - "this and that was first mentioned at such and such a time"
        Damn, if you listen to these "linguists," it's as if we didn't even have a language - all we knew was "ba-ba-ba," "bu-bu-bu," and "by-by-by." All the other words were given to us by the GREAT (!!!) steppe.
        The connection is most likely Botyr (Mong) -> Bokhodir (Turk) -> Bogatyr.
        1. +1
          21 June 2026 03: 29
          Of the more widely known, Subutai's title was bagatur, and he went down in history as Subutai-bagatur. Of the lesser known, the father of Temujin, the future Genghis Khan, was Yesugei-bagatur.
          1. -1
            21 June 2026 09: 53
            Quote: ORINCH
            Of the more widely known, Subutai's title was bagatur, and he went down in history as Subutai-bagatur. Of the lesser known, the father of Temujin, the future Genghis Khan, was Yesugei-bagatur.

            Is this recorded in the Mongolian chronicles? When and in which (or whose) written sources are these "titles" first mentioned?
      2. +1
        20 June 2026 20: 04
        In Mongolian languages, it's baatar, not botyr. But this is the modern Cyrillic spelling, which is close to modern phonetics. Historically, the word in Old Mongolian was written as ᠪᠠᠭᠠᠲᠤᠷ (bagator), reflecting the archaic phonetics of the 13th century. That is, Mongols in the 13th century spoke and wrote "bagatur," which is what has become recorded in Russian.
  2. +3
    16 June 2026 04: 39
    So what will happen next, in the future? After all, there's a "prospect" that in about eight hundred years, a new Vasnetsov will appear and paint a picture where, instead of the heroes Popovich, Muromets, and Dobrynya, there will be heroes Suvorov, Kutuzov, and Zhukov... "out of sync" in years, but over such a long period of time they have become legends in history, and, moreover, saved Russia during their lifetimes, and the artist has placed them in a time space that will even then be called antiquity.
    1. -1
      16 June 2026 05: 03
      Quote: north 2
      There will be the heroes Suvorov, Kutuzov and Zhukov... "not coinciding" in years, but over such a period of time in history they have become simply legends, and moreover, during their lifetime they saved Russia

      Suvorov saved Russia? From what? From Pugachev's rebellion? But it wasn't him; he only escorted Yemelyan.
      1. +5
        16 June 2026 10: 27
        Did Suvorov save Russia?

        A series of Turkish and Polish wars with his participation, isn't enough for Russia? Or are Crimea and Kuban no longer Russia?
        Suvorov's oak in Crimea…
      2. +1
        16 June 2026 21: 26
        Quote: Puncher

        Suvorov saved Russia? From what? From Pugachev's rebellion? But it wasn't him; he only escorted Yemelyan.

        Oh, another "subverter" of heroes. Come on, Zhenya, kill them. He's just a guard, but he's climbed into the pantheon of heroes. There are too many heroes in Rus'. Who's next? Kutuzov? Or Bagration and Barclay?
        1. -1
          17 June 2026 03: 30
          Quote: Krasnoyarsk
          Oh, another hero-destroyer. Come on, Zhenya, kill them.

          God forbid... I simply clarified that A.V. Suvorov didn't save the Russian Empire because there was no need at the time. The only threat to Catherine II's throne was Pugachev's rebellion, but Suvorov was relegated to the role of escort in its suppression.
    2. +1
      16 June 2026 06: 16
      I came across a folk book where Grandfather Suvorov did not allow Tsar Peter to enter the Lithuanian trench.
  3. +3
    16 June 2026 04: 53
    Our Fatherland has been, is, and will be at the crossroads of worlds - religious, ethnic, political, and even economic. Moreover, its own world is seething within it, so it is not surprising that we will borrow from outside and that something will be taken from us.
    An axe, a horse, honey, a hut and even a dog, a dream - came from outside and remained in dreams... this is normal, let the others envy silently.
    I remembered Bulgakov’s lines: “If a cat is a whale, then what would a whale be like in your opinion….!!?”
    Have a nice day, everyone!
    1. 0
      16 June 2026 18: 26
      What do you think of whale….!!?

      Elementary, Holmes is a cat.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  4. +1
    16 June 2026 05: 53
    Debunking myths, tales, and legends, I think, wasn't really the right thing to do. As A.S. Pushkin wrote: "The deeds of days long past, the legends of deep antiquity."
    Millions of kids were raised on them, including me. The sarcasm about Svyatogor—well, it's clear he served his time, lived out his days, and was waiting for a successor. But to write that the land didn't hold him? So what? Maybe the hero existed in multiple dimensions.
    We eagerly await the article about the debunking of various golems, Koshchei the Immortal, and other fairy-tale creatures.
  5. +3
    16 June 2026 06: 26
    If the prototype for the hero Dobrynya is that same Uncle Vladimir, then why is he Nikitich, when it's known that Malusha and Dobrynya's father was supposedly named Mal? And certainly, in those days, he would have had little chance of being named Nikita... And even if he was baptized, a baptismal name was considered sacred, secret. It would hardly have become popular.

    Ilya Muromets – many sources, including Western ones, mention a character named Ilya Morovanin. Or something similar. That is, he was most likely Moravian by origin, from what is now the Czech Republic. After the Hungarians defeated Great Moravia, many nobles fled, including to Rus'. There's also a variant spelling of Murovanin, possibly from Murom. So he could also have been a contemporary of Yasno Solnyshko...

    Popovich—there's a mention of such a warrior in the chronicles, but his name was Alexander. As for the diminutive Alyosha—well, that's true. Of course, Alexander could have been called that, too, who knows. But it's highly unlikely he lived in the 11th century—there weren't many priests then to have earned such a nickname. Although, anything is possible.

    But in my opinion, a heroic epic could not have developed in the post-Vladimir era. A strong state had emerged, enemies had become more numerous, and wars were waged by large military formations, leaving no room for individual heroes. And the Christian tradition didn't help either. The heroic image itself is too ancient, in all its aspects. Evon in Scandinavia—immediately after mass baptism, sagas ceased to be composed. Simply because characters like Sigurd or Beowulf simply had no scope for action.

    As for the term itself, it's possible it's something more Indo-European, later adopted by the Turks who occupied the Great Steppe. It's likely from the Arkaim era, when individual noble warriors at the head of small squads truly represented a significant force. Because the cost of armor and equipment meant there simply couldn't be many of them. Like Homer's Achaean heroes. Once the number of warriors reached hundreds, if not thousands, there was no time to glorify individuals. However, virtually no pre-Christian sources have survived, so all we can do is guess and speculate.
    1. +3
      16 June 2026 13: 31
      Nikitich, since his father's name was Nikita. It was a Greek name, given at baptism. Christian names were public, while pagan ones were secret, hidden.

      Why bogatyrs were called that is obvious. They were rich, rich in the strength they had plundered, that is, gathered around themselves. The equivalent of our bogatyrs is anything from Western knights to the Greek heroes of the Trojan era. Take Achilles, for example. He accomplished many feats. Was it because he was a mighty muscleman? In myths, in the Iliad for example, it is explicitly stated that he had a detachment of heavily armed warriors, certain Myrmidons, personally loyal to him and no one else. And he accomplished many feats because he fought not alone, but at the head of an entire detachment. But glory belongs to him personally, since he is the commander. The same is true of the Russian bogatyrs. Each had his own small detachment, personally loyal to him. Therefore, a bogatyr is rich in the strength he gathered around himself thanks to his charisma and leadership qualities. Therefore, even princes respected bogatyrs, while the latter behaved quite boldly, sometimes downright insolently (this is well reflected in the epics). In short, they were field commanders, leaders of medieval PMCs. And in Europe, there was something similar; noble knights also had personal squads (a platoon, sometimes an entire company).
  6. +2
    16 June 2026 09: 06
    All that remained was the power transmitted further and the stone coffin.

    So this is what "eternal life" is, philosophically speaking... not many manage to "descend into the grave" leaving something real on earth, and not just under it
  7. +4
    16 June 2026 11: 54
    The word "bogaty" (rich) cannot be derived from a form with the suffix "-yr" (-yry): there's simply no such way of forming names from adjectives in Russian. If the root were derived from "bog" (god), we'd expect something like "bogodara" or "bogoderzhets," but not "bogatyr" (bogatyr).

    Yeah, the question is - where did the words "boyarin", "boyarynya", "boyars" come from?
    Essentially, all Slavic research is the work of the devil. As Zadorny puts it, "the bear knows the honey."
    By rejecting the examples of God and the rich, the Author forgets the older form - fight, fighter... and howl) warrior...
    Written sources reflect the realities of the 12th century, supplemented by copyists who "modernized" the texts. Folk tales, epics, and songs reflected the reality that existed at the time they were written.
    The Tale of Igor's Campaign, nothing else is given to us in translation.
    And the icing on the cake: the written and spoken Russian languages ​​were brought to a common denominator after the reforms of Per I.
    1. +2
      16 June 2026 13: 58
      Without disputing the author's explanation of the origin of the word "bogatyr," I want to ask about suffixes—what about words like "lazy," "fisherman," and "publican"? After all, we're not talking about people's names, but about their status and profession. "Bogatyr" isn't a proper name either.
    2. +1
      16 June 2026 18: 16
      According to the most widespread theory, the Russian word "boyarin," originally "bolyarin," came to Rus' from Bulgaria. The Turkic Bulgars used the Turkic word "boyl" (cf. biy, bay) to refer to a nobleman or a dignitary. The plural of this word was formed by adding the suffix -lar, "boylar." This word was later "Slavicized" and became plural in "bolyar" and singular in "bolyarin." Boylar-bolyars are first mentioned in the First Bulgarian Kingdom. This was the name given to members of the military aristocracy who formed the tsar's council and enjoyed special privileges.
      In this form, this word already came to Rus', where, starting in the 13th century, it was finally transformed into “boyar” in sources.
      1. 0
        17 June 2026 08: 42
        Quote: MikMichel
        According to the most widespread version, the Russian word "boyarin", originally "bolyarin", came to Rus' from Bulgaria.


        "Boyarin" and "Bolyarin" are different titles! A Boyar passed on his title, his rank, hereditary; a Boyar did not! In short, they were both aristocrats, but of different kinds. Later, there would be nobles who passed on their titles hereditary (the pillar nobles, those registered) and service nobles (those who received the title for meritorious service and did not pass it on to their children).
        Both have the root "boy." That is, noble warriors, the fighting elite, the top brass of the army.
        1. +1
          17 June 2026 18: 21
          Wow. Who told you such details? I'm not interested in freaks, though. I recommend reading what Anton Anatolyevich Gorsky, a Soviet and Russian historian, Doctor of Historical Sciences (1993), and professor, has written on this topic. He specializes in the history of medieval Rus' (up to the 16th century), source studies, and sociopolitical history.
          He writes quite clearly that the Slavic version of the origin from the stem boi - "battle" (one who participates in battles) is currently not supported by anyone.
          https://runivers.ru/russianhistory/srednevekovaya-rus/srednevekovoe-obshchestvo/boyarin-dr-russk-bolyarin-boyarin/
  8. +1
    16 June 2026 12: 32
    What a rich field of activity!
    How many myths can be debunked!
    Chernomor is a fiction;
    Carlson is a fiction;
    Winnie the Pooh is a fiction;
    Baba Yaga is a fiction;
    Father Frost is a fiction.

    But in reality it was like this:
    1. -2
      16 June 2026 18: 31
      (c) "Do you see the three heroes?
      Ilya Muromets is a Jew"...
      1. 0
        17 June 2026 11: 27
        See that bumblebee?
        He is in the service of the Kremlin!
  9. +3
    16 June 2026 12: 43
    Quote: Pechorsky
    exposing all kinds of golems, Kashchei the Immortal

    But I would like to read about Koschei’s origins...
    Author plus!
    1. +3
      16 June 2026 15: 43
      Quote: Senior Sailor
      But I would like to read about Koschei’s origins...
      I read somewhere that linguists seem to have figured out that Koshchei, the woman-stealing figure, is actually a Khazar. This dates back to the period when the Eastern Slavs paid tribute to the Khazars...
      1. 0
        17 June 2026 08: 51
        So why steal from tributaries? You just go to them and demand: give me this and that. In short, that theory doesn't work.
        Koshchei comes from the word "koshchun" (that is, a priest who performed "blasphemy," that is, magic, spells, etc.).
        Originally, "Kashchei" was a positive character in folklore. He's neither a villain nor a thief, but a protector! This warrior-priest (possibly skilled in combat hypnosis) became a villain later, after the adoption of Christianity, when priests began to combat such "Kashcheis" (since they remained faithful to the old pagan gods) and their combat techniques (the Russian equivalent of martial arts and yoga), declaring them "demonic dances," which negatively impacted the combat effectiveness of Russian warriors. The idea was, who cares, God and the angels will help us, and all these pagan trainings can go to hell. Nowadays, enthusiasts are trying to restore some of the remains, but so far without much success.
        1. +2
          17 June 2026 11: 32
          Another witness of the ancient Slavic combat hopak.
          It didn't exist; that's just how it worked out historically. And there was no Book of Veles.
          And martial arts and yoga are not needed in military affairs.

          But we can count it as a plus that we are now taking first place in karate, sanda, and taekwondo in their Far Eastern homelands.
          1. -2
            17 June 2026 12: 46
            This is just your opinion.
            Both martial arts and yoga are very useful when wars are fought with bladed weapons. Combat hypnosis and hand-to-hand combat techniques are still used by special forces today.
            1. +1
              17 June 2026 14: 44
              They compared a buoy to a steamboat's funnel!
              The key word is special forces, not regular army!
              For noobs, hypnosis is when you're one on one.
              To hypnotize an army across a field is an impossible task.

              And in the modern army, ARBs are more for show.
              On the battlefield, it's discipline and teamwork that wins, not the color of the belt.
        2. -1
          17 June 2026 11: 36
          Yes, Christianity is a hundred times better than the homespun Magi.

          It reads:
          According to the Tale of Bygone Years, a famine and crop failure occurred in 1071. During the famine, two sorcerers from Yaroslavl appeared, declaring, "We are the ones who hold abundance." They traveled along the Volga and Sheksna rivers, and in each churchyard they called for the "best wives" (noble women), claiming they hid rye, honey, fish, or furs. The sorcerers magically extracted from these women's bodies "any rye, any fish, or any other valuables." After dispatching the "best wives," the sorcerers took their property for themselves.

          "The Russia We Lost" (c)
          1. +1
            17 June 2026 12: 50
            This is nonsense from Christian monks and a typical example of black PR. The "PVL" is a paid manual, after all, the author was a monk, an employee of the then Central Institute for Social and Political Studies (CIPSS). And after the adoption of Christianity, Russia's history wasn't exactly prosperous, which is typical. Wars, civil strife, riots, epidemics, serfdom, which lingered for so long... "The Russia We Lost." laughing
            1. 0
              17 June 2026 14: 33
              A familiar song, though.

              Anything that doesn't go with the grain: "badmouthing and the machinations of enemies"
              Only if this was targeted propaganda, it would not have been limited to one case - the Magi would have been branded and vilified by all available means.

              And so we see that the Magi were real bloodsuckers.
              Agree - no matter how much they persecuted the Old Believers, they still exist (the Lykovs and others); they fled, hid, but survived.

              The Magi didn't survive for some reason—there was no popular support. No one wanted to suffer and flee (to Pomorye, Siberia, etc.) to preserve the pagan faith.
              1. +1
                18 June 2026 09: 16
                And they didn't stop there. In fact, it was a full-blown civil war that lasted for decades. The real ones who had to fight were the adherents of the new faith, including Dobrynya in Novgorod. The Novgorodians put up stubborn resistance to this hero and were forced to capitulate only after Dobrynya ordered Novgorod to be set ablaze. A difficult choice: fight or save their homes and families.
                And later, some Christian priests died at the hands of pagans and acquired the status of martyrs for the faith from the Russian Orthodox Church.

                I have to disappoint you: among the Old Believers, there are many who retain pagan traits and are quite tolerant of such "relics of the past." Search for "dual faith" to learn more.
                Traces of pagan beliefs still survive in the form of holidays, rituals, superstitions, folklore, and the like. As for the Magi, they were professional cult workers, paid by the authorities and princes. Deprived of their state funding and the opportunity to earn money, they vanished. And so, today's priests also rely on state support. The Russian Orthodox Church enjoys many privileges and perks from the authorities, and the hierarchs want even more of them; priests clearly love money.
                They'll preach about selflessness, non-acquisitiveness, and the sanctity of poverty, and then they'll hop into an expensive limousine of a not-quite-Orthodox make and drive off, throwing dust in the eyes of ordinary citizens...

                Wolves in cassocks, yeah
                https://vkvideo.ru/video-230577026_456239061
                1. 0
                  18 June 2026 09: 43
                  Thank you for opening my eyes to the fact that Christianity has pagan elements.

                  But the fact remains that the Old Believers survived, and the pagans disappeared as a class (although the same "wild" pagans from whom they took yasak lived quite well and no one tortured them - unlike in Mesoamerica)

                  Quote: Illanatol
                  Wolves in cassocks, yeah

                  What fucking logic. You probably wear rags yourself?

                  Quote: Illanatol
                  As for the Magi, they were professional cult workers, paid by the authorities and princes.


                  What about "The Magi are not afraid of mighty rulers, and they do not need a princely gift"?
                  Did the Poet really lie?!
              2. +1
                21 June 2026 10: 13
                Quote: Ishi

                The Magi didn't survive for some reason—there was no popular support. No one wanted to suffer and flee (to Pomorye, Siberia, etc.) to preserve the pagan faith.

                Maybe because there were few of them?
                Do you know how many years it took Christianity to completely (?) eradicate polytheism? Don't forget—it wasn't Christianity itself that achieved this victory, but the authorities. Without a leading authority in this struggle, Christians had little chance. Christians weren't so much engaged in missionary work as in the destruction of written and other monuments of pre-Christian Rus'.
                1. 0
                  22 June 2026 12: 44
                  Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                  Maybe because there were few of them?

                  What kind of folk religion is this?

                  Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                  How many years did it take?

                  The Old Believers were persecuted since 1650, for at least 270 years—by both the Tsarist and Soviet authorities (at least until 1920). The Old Believers are still alive. Do they have any special priests? Did the Lykovs have their own personal priest?

                  Farther.

                  Chuvashia became part of the Russian state in 1551.
                  The Chuvash still worship Keremeti.

                  Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                  It was not Christianity itself that achieved victory in this matter, but the authorities

                  Read: the Magi were on the receiving end of power. When they were no longer needed, the Magi were sold downriver. But the common people didn't find the Magi helpful.

                  Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                  how much destruction of written

                  Well, how much? HOW MUCH? They still can't find it with flashlights.
                  There was no written language in Rus' before Christianity, let's accept this as a fact.
                  1. 0
                    22 June 2026 17: 03
                    Quote: Ishi

                    Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                    Maybe because there were few of them?
                    What kind of folk religion is this?

                    Don't confuse the Magi with religion. It's like trying to define Orthodoxy by the number of Orthodox saints.
                    Quote: Ishi
                    Read - the Magi were on the receiving end of power.

                    Evidence, come on in!
                    Quote: Ishi
                    There was no written language in Rus' before Christianity, let's accept this as a fact.

                    This shows that you know nothing about the history of Rus'.
            2. +1
              17 June 2026 14: 39
              Quote: Illanatol
              Wars, civil strife,


              Well, well, well. And under the Magi, there were no civil strife. Olga, on the other hand, steamed the Drevlyans in a bathhouse. With all her pagan soul, so to speak.
              1. +1
                18 June 2026 09: 01
                Quote: Ishi
                Well, well, well. And under the Magi, there were no civil strife. Olga, on the other hand, steamed the Drevlyans in a bathhouse. With all her pagan soul, so to speak.


                There were, of course, but where weren't there? But, characteristically, they acquired a systemic character precisely after the adoption of Christianity.
                There is no need to talk about the positive things that Christian priests brought to Rus'.
                We, after all, experienced the "rebirth of the Russian Orthodox Church" ourselves in the 90s. I remember that time well, when priests became a constant presence on television. Temples and churches began to be built, revived, so to speak... of course, this also led to a strengthening of morality, ethics, high spirituality, and culture in our society across the board. A golden era dawned in our Fatherland, complete prosperity... "...and good will toward men." What happiness came for our "dear Russians." laughing
                No, there was definitely a positive side to the story. The dream of owning my own candle factory in Samara became a reality. A real holiday had arrived for the religious workers... "St. Jorgen's Day." lol
                1. 0
                  18 June 2026 09: 36
                  So, the priests sold out the USSR in Belovezhskaya Pushcha?
                  Didn't pay salaries to state employees?
                  Sold the production complex?

                  And to keep them from leaving the TV, it’s enough to not watch TV.

                  And by the way, it wasn't just priests who popped up on TV in the 90s. It was the neo-pagans and Zadornov with them who popped up. They had a hand in it too, the bastards.

                  As for paganism, the only thing left from Slavic paganism is the Zbruch idol, which no one really knows about.
                  The Book of Veles is a modern replica and no one takes it seriously.

                  So all paganism is escapism, born in the wild 90s.
                2. 0
                  18 June 2026 14: 34
                  acquired a systemic character

                  That is the whole point.
                  Illanatol, do you know what the formation of statehood and centralization of power are?
                  Not a bunch of all sorts of glades-Drevlyans-Krivichi, but the state of Rus'?
              2. 0
                22 June 2026 17: 05
                Quote: Ishi
                Well, well, well. And under the Magi, there were no civil strife. Olga, on the other hand, steamed the Drevlyans in a bathhouse. With all her pagan soul, so to speak.

                This was not a feud, but revenge for the murder of her husband.
                1. 0
                  22 June 2026 17: 23
                  Yeah? What's the difference?
                  This was of little help to the residents of the city of Korosten.
                  1. 0
                    22 June 2026 17: 34
                    Quote: Ishi
                    Yeah? What's the difference?
                    This was of little help to the residents of the city of Korosten.

                    Well, if there is no difference, then we have nothing to talk about. hi
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
  10. +2
    16 June 2026 13: 48
    "How does the Prophetic Oleg gather now,
    Nail the shields to the gates,
    Suddenly a man runs up to him
    And well, he lisps something,
    The prince says, for no apparent reason,
    You will accept death from your horse..."
    V.S. Vysotsky
    1. +2
      16 June 2026 14: 01
      Quote: Senior Sailor
      But I would like to read about Koschei’s origins...


      "But what kind of Koschei is this?" said Zhikhar. "Koschei must be ancient, decrepit... sickly, in a word."

      The cat looked at the pupil with regret.

      "You're the one who's puny," he said. "What do you think the word 'Koschei' means?"

      - Well... - the hero was at a loss. - Well, a slave... a prisoner...

      "Zhihar-bagatur is telling the truth," Sochinyai nodded. "Koshchi is a captive, for sale... A young captive, just a boy - who will buy an old one?"
  11. +1
    16 June 2026 15: 02
    Why are you beating around the bush? Well, it's plain to see, batyr (in Tatar) - bogatyr (in Russian).
    1. 0
      17 June 2026 12: 56
      However, the word "bogatyr" appeared in Rus' long before the time of Batu Khan.
      One of the most famous bogatyrs is Dobrynya. He is not a fictional character; he was a real person, a contemporary of Prince Vladimir, the one who baptized Rus'. It is well known how Dobrynya, at the behest of his prince, baptized Novgorod with fire and sword.
      And one more thing... one of the most famous epics about bogatyrs tells how these bogatyrs died in battles with the Horde. It would be rather odd if, on the eve of the batyr-invaders, the Russian heroes adopted their name. This theory goes far and wide. It's more likely that the batyr-bogatyrs descended from the Russian bogatyrs.
      1. 0
        20 June 2026 20: 08
        The word "bogatyr" (hero) emerged in Russian after the Mongol invasion. This is a historical and linguistic fact.
        1. 0
          21 June 2026 10: 18
          Quote: ORINCH
          The word "bogatyr" (hero) emerged in Russian after the Mongol invasion. This is a historical and linguistic fact.

          Evidence in the studio!
  12. 0
    16 June 2026 15: 33
    The author's treatment of the currently fashionable Eurasianism is defended. Softly, unobtrusively, so as not to provoke premature rejection.
    1. 0
      16 June 2026 21: 56
      Quote from Solingist
      The author's treatment of the currently fashionable Eurasianism is defended. Softly, unobtrusively, so as not to provoke premature rejection.

      They took the words right out of my mouth. But we'll earn the full downsides. laughing
  13. 0
    16 June 2026 15: 45
    Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
    Yeah, the question is - where did the words "boyarin", "boyarynya", "boyars" come from?
    Essentially, all Slavic research is the work of the devil. As Zadorny puts it, "the bear knows the honey."
    By rejecting the examples of God and the rich, the Author forgets the older form - fight, fighter... and howl) warrior...

    I agree that the etymology is somewhat of a scam. But "boyars" is a significantly older word in Russian sources, and its origin is less clear... )))
    The situation with "bogatyr" is different. It appears in texts much later, and in its earliest uses, it is closely associated with the Mongols.
    Incidentally, there are still some who support Zimin's position, who believed that the SPI was a forgery based on "Zadonshchina." One of the indirect counterarguments to the antiquity of the "Tale" is that it doesn't contain the word "bogatyr." But "Zadonshchina" does.
    1. 0
      16 June 2026 22: 00
      Quote: Bookeer
      One of the indirect counterarguments to the antiquity of the "Tale" is that it doesn't contain the word "bogatyr." But "Zadonshchina" does.

      Was the word "bogatyr" appropriate in the text? Or do you think the word "bogatyr" should be used literally everywhere?
  14. 0
    16 June 2026 15: 50
    Quote from cpls22
    Without disputing the author's explanation of the origin of the word "bogatyr," I want to ask about suffixes—what about words like "lazy," "fisherman," and "publican"? After all, we're not talking about people's names, but about their status and profession. "Bogatyr" isn't a proper name either.

    Fisherman, tax collector, and plowman are verbal nouns. "Lazybones" has a different origin, supposedly related to the surname of a fashionable physician in the capital, Loder; I believe Uspensky wrote about this.
    1. 0
      17 June 2026 14: 28
      Quote: Bookeer

      Fisherman, tax collector, and plowman are verbal nouns. "Lazybones" has a different origin, supposedly related to the surname of a fashionable physician in the capital, Loder; I believe Uspensky wrote about this.

      It's somehow unconvincing to hear about a doctor who managed to worm his way into the language for so long, especially in the vernacular, not among the patients of a fashionable doctor. And what's the verb that sticks out in the word "рыбарь" (fisherman)? "Рыбарить" (to fish)? lol
  15. +1
    16 June 2026 16: 24
    "Lukomorye is no more,
    Oak is suitable for parquet, but no,
    They left the hut,
    Big fat bastards,
    They chopped down all the oak trees for coffins..."
  16. +1
    16 June 2026 18: 36
    The MiG-27 in Indian production was called "Bahadur." Philologists, what do you think?
    1. +1
      20 June 2026 20: 10
      The word "bahadur" came to India during the Turkic sultanates (Delhi or Timurid). It is an Iranianized form of the Mongolian word "bagatur."
      1. 0
        23 June 2026 11: 05
        THANK YOU! The long-awaited "brother" of our heroes))).
  17. 0
    16 June 2026 22: 25
    Thank you for this interesting variation on word formation in Russian!

    The capital - hundreds of faces, a big city?
    Is the county a territory where you will have to travel a lot?
    A juror is someone who is attached to his own carriage or horse, constantly moving from place to place, but performing the same type of work?
    Is there a word "tyr" in our past dialects?
    1. 0
      17 June 2026 08: 58
      Capital - from the word "stol" (meaning "table"). A capital city, in short. A table, a throne...
      County... that's where trusted persons from the capital go, at the behest of the prince/tsar, to govern the region, the entrusted territory.
      A juror is someone who has taken an oath to judge fairly and impartially.

      Shepherd. He pastures (the flock) which he owns (stole).
  18. 0
    16 June 2026 22: 29
    Quote from Solingist
    The author's treatment of the currently fashionable Eurasianism is defended. Softly, unobtrusively, so as not to provoke premature rejection.


    Is it really necessary for the author to write not only his personal opinion, but also to make money?
    In fact, some people even believe in the kind and fair Father Frost.
    Why immediately classify the author as a member of the Santa Claus cult?
  19. 0
    16 June 2026 22: 58
    Quote: Krasnoyarsk
    Was the word "bogatyr" appropriate in the text?

    Well, heroic deeds (without the use of the word "bogatyr") are constantly mentioned in the SPI. The epithets "brave," "buy tur," "yar tur," "udaloy," warriors whose tread makes the earth tremble ("the earth will crack") and whose swords make entire countries bow—all of this is found in the "golden word of Svyatoslav."
    In general, there are reasons to characterize any of the characters with such a word, but it seems there is no word.
    Here, for example, is a passage from the SPI:
    Behold, Rome cries out under the Polovtsian sabers, and Vladimir under his wounds.
    (Here in Rimov they are shouting under the Polovtsian sabers, and Vladimir is wounded.)
    Here is a parallel in "Zadonshchina":
    And already the Wonder cries out under the Tatar sabers, and that Russian hero under the wounds.
    (And already Div is calling out under the Tatar sabers, and the Russian heroes should be wounded).
    1. 0
      17 June 2026 13: 00
      Quote: Bookeer
      Well, heroic feats (without using the word "hero") are constantly mentioned in the SPI.


      First of all, bogatyrs, along with their exploits, are mentioned in bylinas (epic tales). This is oral, purely folklore. In official documents, chronicles, and annals, the term may simply not have been used initially, that's all. Ilya Muromets, Alyosha Popovich, and Dobrynya all had real-life counterparts who lived before the 13th century.
  20. 0
    16 June 2026 23: 11
    Quote: Quzmi4
    The MiG-27 in Indian production was called "Bahadur." Philologists, what do you think?

    I don't know what it's called in Hindi, but the English translation is "Valiant," "Valiant," or "Courageous"—it seems similar to a hero. But the Hindus had Mughal shahs with that name, so it might have been borrowed. Like our Igors and Olegs.
  21. 0
    17 June 2026 02: 26
    And Svyatogor still lies on his mountain, too heavy for the new world. What was truly inside him, we will no longer discern.

    Anyone who has traveled to the Altai Mountains, entering the Republic, saw Mount Babyrgan on the right side of the vehicle across the Katun River.
    The Altai people have legends that this is the sleeping or turned into stone batyr Babyrgan.
    The steppe dwellers often have legends and tales dedicated to significant and large-scale creations of nature: hills, mountains, stone pillars, etc., in which they see batyrs and legendary khans.
  22. 0
    17 June 2026 16: 27
    Quote: Illanatol
    First of all, bogatyrs and their exploits are mentioned in bylinas (epic tales). This is oral, purely folklore. In official documents, annals, and chronicles, the term may simply not have been used initially, that's all.

    The first recordings of bylinas were made by Kirsha Danilov in the mid-18th century. His Kyiv cycle of bylinas contains obvious anachronisms, which directly indicate that if the bylinas were sung in pre-Mongol times, the vocabulary was clearly different. The language of the recorded bylinas is Russian, not Old Russian. Words such as "customs," "fleet," "camisole," and the like did not exist in Old Russian (pre-Mongol) vocabulary.
    1. 0
      18 June 2026 08: 51
      The telephone effect. Anachronisms arose from inaccurate transmission to descendants. Oh, and the word "suitcase" also appears in bylinas. It's just that Russian descendants didn't quite understand the "Old Russian" terms, so they arbitrarily replaced them with more understandable and modern terms.
      Yes, the vocabulary has changed over time. And similar things have been observed in Western literary sources as well. Heroes of Homer and other, perhaps classical, authors were sometimes depicted in medieval armor. laughing
      1. 0
        18 June 2026 22: 19
        Here's another example that might convince you. ))
        The Tale of the Destruction of Ryazan by Batu Khan describes the events of 1237, but is known only in copies no earlier than the 15th century.
        The text uses the word "bogatyr" and its derivatives only in reference to the Mongols. Evpatiy Kolovrat is characterized as a "giant." The warriors of his squad are "daring and frisky."

        Quote:
        Khostovrul boasted before the Tsar, intending to bring Eupatius before the Tsar alive. And the mighty Tatar regiments gave way, although Eupatius was captured alive. Khostovrul then charged Eupatius. Eupatius, a giant of strength, cut Khostovrul to pieces up to the saddle. And they began to slaughter the Tatar forces, and there they slew many of Batu's distinguished warriors, cutting some to pieces, and cutting others down to the saddle.

        The Tatars were afraid, seeing Eupatius, a mighty giant. And they unleashed a multitude of vices upon him, and began to beat him with countless vices, and barely killed him. And they brought his body before King Batu. King Batu sent the murzas, and the princes, and the sanchakbes, and began to marvel at the bravery, strength, and courage of the Ryazan rulers. And they said to the king: "We have been with many kings, in many lands, in many battles, but we have never seen such brave men and frisky men, nor did our fathers tell us. For these men are winged and have no death. So, riding strong and courageously, one has fought against a thousand, and two against ten thousand. Not a single one of them can escape alive from the massacre!

        King Batu looked at Eupatius's body and said: "O Kolovrat Eupatius! You have greatly strengthened me with your small army! You have slain many heroes of the mighty horde, and many regiments have fallen. If such a one had served with me, I would hold him in my stead."
        1. 0
          21 June 2026 10: 35
          Quote: Bookeer
          The text uses the word "bogatyr" and its derivatives only in relation to the Mongols.

          Well, yes, since the word "bogatyr" is used only in relation to the Mongols, then such a word, in the pre-Mongol period, Rus' did not have in its lexicon. Convincing logic laughing
          By the way, who is a giant? It's not a bogatyr—a man of unusual strength—but a man of unusually tall stature and powerful build.
  23. +1
    17 June 2026 17: 21
    Viktor Vasnetsov painted a lot, both on legendary and folkloric themes, and on religious ones (approximately 50/50), including painting a cathedral in Kyiv.
    But even he didn’t imagine that he was drawing a cigarette box.
  24. 0
    18 June 2026 10: 48
    Quote: Illanatol
    The telephone effect. Anachronisms arose from inaccurate transmission to descendants. Oh, and the word "suitcase" also appears in bylinas. It's just that Russian descendants didn't quite understand the "Old Russian" terms, so they arbitrarily replaced them with more understandable and modern terms.
    Yes, the vocabulary has changed over time. And similar things have been observed in Western literary sources as well. Heroes of Homer and other, perhaps classical, authors were sometimes depicted in medieval armor. laughing

    I completely agree with you. That's exactly how the word "bogatyr" appeared in the bylinas. Just as it gradually appeared in chronicles and literary works like "Zadonshchina," starting around the 15th century.
  25. 0
    22 June 2026 15: 11
    Quote: Krasnoyarsk
    Well, yes, since the word "bogatyr" is used only in relation to the Mongols, then such a word, in the pre-Mongol period, Rus' did not have in its lexicon. Convincing logic

    It is very easy to prove that the word Rus had in its lexicon before the Mongols.
    It is necessary to present the corresponding written text.
    But such things don't exist.
    At the same time, the Ipatiev Chronicle for 1240:
    ...but his first governor was Sebeda, a rich man and Bourounda and a hero like him who took over the Bulgarian land and Souzhdal...
  26. +1
    24 June 2026 07: 17
    The word "bogatyr" (bogatyr) does indeed have Turkic roots. However, it doesn't mean "hero" but rather "bull." In Turkic languages, bull is denoted by names such as "buga," "buka," "bukha," "bokha," and so on. For example, in Tuvan, the word "buga dyr" translates as "like a bull." Among nomads, the strongest animal is naturally the bull. For this reason, among nomads, the strongest wrestlers, strongmen, heroes, and warriors are compared to bulls. As I understand it, there is a city called Yelabuga in Tatarstan, but it should be properly called Alabuga, which translates as "motley bull."