| Notes |
- -- http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/RUSSIA,%20Rurik.htm#_Toc481496211 --
!! "THE NAME OF RURIK'S WIFE IS NOT KNOWN." !!
The earliest generations of the so-called Rurikid family are reconstructed solely on the basis of the sparse information in the Povest' vremennykh let or 'Tale of the Years of Time', better known as the Primary Chronicle and also sometimes known as Nestor´s Chronicle[1]. As pointed out by Franklin & Shepard[2], the extant manuscripts of the Primary Chronicle which date from the 12th century should not be taken at face value as they must have been compiled from patchy sources of information. It is likely that the compilers exaggerated the role of Rurik's family in the 9th and 10th centuries, in order to establish a lengthy, credible history for the Russian principalities which were flourishing by the 12th century. In particular, the alleged establishment by "Oleg" in 882 of the principality of Kiev should be treated with caution. Nevertheless, the historical existence of Rurik´s supposed son Igor, and Igor´s son Sviatoslav, is corroborated by the De Administrando Imperio of Emperor Konstantinos VII Porphyrogennetos[3], written in the mid-10th century and therefore contemporary with Sviatoslav´s reign.
The arrival of Scandinavian traders in the territories which later developed into "Rus" should be seen in the context of the Khazar and Pecheneg 9th and 10th century occupations of the area, which would appear to have left little opportunity for the establishment of powerful principalities by Scandinavian newcomers, at least in the open plain lands. Archaeological evidence corroborates Scandinavian presence at Gorodishche, Timerëvo and other Upper Volga sites in the late 9th century. This indicates an increasing, although still limited, number of immigrants tempted no doubt by trading opportunities, but Franklin & Shepard point out that it provides little evidence of organised government[4]. Chirovsky discusses the development of two theories concerning the origin of Russia: the "Normanistic" theory, developed by 18th century historians of German descent who supported a literal reading of the Primary Chronicle and emphasised Norse rule over the Slavs who were unable to rule themselves), and the "anti-Normanistic" theory, which posits the rapid assimilation of small groups of Norse immigrants into the local Slav community and is based on a broad interpretation of the Primary Chronicle[5]. Franklon & Shepard state that there is no firm evidence of Scandinavian settlement at the same time, either in the middle Dnieper area around Kiev or on the northern coast of the Black Sea[6]. A Scandinavian-origin trading community at Kiev appears to have been formed during the early 900s as an offshoot of the more northerly settlements, although it is possible that the Khazars still exercised hegemony in this area as late as [930][7]. The Kiev settlement appears to have developed quickly: the De Administrando Imperio describes the Rus way of life[8]. In 941, it was on the point of launching an attack on Constantinople, and in the late 950s it established diplomatic contacts both with the emperor in Constantinople and with the German emperor.
The titles attributed to the rulers of the Rus principalities are a source of confusion, in particular the use of "Grand Prince/Grand Duke" as opposed to "Prince/Duke", especially in relation to the rulers of Kiev and Vladimir. Chirovsky points out that all Kievan princes were theoretically equal (they are all referred to in the Russian chronicles as "Knyaz", female "Knyaginya") and that Vsevolod III Prince of Vladimir was the first prince to start calling himself "Grand Prince/Duke" ("Veliki Knyaz")[9]. The author suggests that Vsevolod adopted this title to strengthen the separation of the principality of Vladimir from Kiev and also to place himself over the lesser princes of the Russian north. Use of the title by Vladimir´s descendants was confirmed when Prince Iaroslav Vsevolodich received the title "Grand Prince of Vladimir" from Khan Batu of the Golden Horde in 1243, in return for swearing allegiance. In the present document, the rulers of Kiev are referred to as "Grand Prince" to indicate their position of supremacy over the other principalities and to reflect the fact that they appointed the rulers of these principalities from among the various members of their own family.
The system of princely appointments from Kiev was first formalised by Grand Prince Iaroslav under his 1054 testament[10], which made it clear that appointments to appanage territories were "temporary", and emphasised the common good of the whole realm in such a system[11]. In practice, the appointments were changed rapidly, giving little opportunity for any principality to develop its own hereditary leadership (except while the 1097 Liubech family accord was being observed). Over time, certain family lines of the dynasty did establish hereditary succession for themselves in particular principalities. However, a further problem arose with the fragmentation of this patrimony into even smaller territories to provide property for junior male members of the family. This fragmentation increased with the expansion of the different families. Family rivalry inevitably intensified: the sources record numerous examples of individual princes being dispossessed by more powerful rivals. The decline was halted temporarily by the 1097 Liubech accord, but the fragmentation and dynastic rivalry soon resumed and was only eliminated when all principalities were annexed by Moscow in the early 16th century.
From the time of Grand Prince Iaroslav I, the genealogy of the dynasty can be considered more reliable. However, there are still many gaps and uncertainties, particularly relating to the female members of the family. Iaroslav I's testament, referred to above, provided the basis for the tradition of succession to the title of Grand Prince of Kiev which, on the death of each grand prince, was inherited by the oldest surviving male member of each generation of the descendants of Iaroslav I's sons, passing from one branch to another before passing to the oldest member of the succeeding generation. A further requirement was that the title of grand prince must previously, at some time, have been held by the successful candidate's father. In this way, various branches of the family were excluded from the succession. For example, the descendants of Iaroslav I's oldest son by his second marriage, Vladimir Iaroslavich, never held the title as their progenitor predeceased his father.
Iaroslav I consolidated the dynasty's contacts with other European ruling families by arranging dynastic marriages. The countries included the Scandinavian kingdoms, reflecting the dynasty's sense of origin, its neighbours Byzantium, Hungary and Poland, and countries further afield such as France and several of the Germanic states. This policy of foreign marriages was pursued by Iaroslav's successors but did not survive long into the 13th century. After that time, the Rus principalities restricted contacts with their western neighbours, and the Russian princes mainly sought brides from among the ever-growing number of collateral branches of their own dynasty.
The Grand Prince of Kiev was recognised as the nominal head of the family and overlord of the other Rus principalities. However, he took no active part in the government of the other territories, except through the appointment of their princes from among members of his family. The principalities of Chernigov, Galich (Galicia), Novgorod, Pereyaslavl, Polotsk, Riazan, Smolensk, Suzdal, Turov and Volynia thus developed separately. Appointments to rule these principalities appear to have followed no particular pattern. Government of the principalities was exchanged and reshuffled with great regularity, all under the direction of the Grand Prince of Kiev, motivated by personal and family considerations, not least the wish to prevent rival princes from consolidating too much power in particular locations.
The principality of Kiev proper was relatively small in area compared to the other Rus principalities, although the city of Kiev was strategically well-placed on the River Dnepr which gave direct access to the Black Sea in the south and indirect access to the Baltic in the north. Kiev was bounded on its southern border by territory controlled by the Kumans. The territorial integrity of the principality was soon fragmented as additional principalities were created for junior members of the ruling family.
As Kiev's central authority declined in the 13th century, the line of the princes of Suzdal-Rostov assumed the role of "superior ruler", the focus of their political power transferring to the city of Vladimir and, in the 15th century, to Moscow.
The main near contemporary sources for the history of the Rurikid dynasty are as follows[12]:
§ the Ipatevskiy Chronicle, consisting of its three components, the so-called "Primary Chronicle" up to 1117, a south Russian compilation made in 1200 at the Vydubetskiy Monastery near Kiev, and the Chronicle of Galicia and Volynia (1200-1292).
§ the Lavrentevskiy Chronicle, the chief source for the history of Suzdalia which was copied in 1377 from a 1305 compilation, and its derivatives (the Chronicle of Pereyaslavl-Suzsalskiy which covers events from 1138 to 1214, and the Moscow Academy manuscript of the Suzdal Chronicle which brings the text up to 1419).
§ the Novgorod First Chronicle, in two versions up to 1330 and 1446/47.
§ the Moscow svod of 1479.
Only the Primary Chronicle and the Novgorod First Chronicle have been studied in the compilation of the present document.
The descent of the Rurikid dynasty from Grand Prince Vladimir I (who died in 1015) has been treated in detail by N. de Baumgarten. Although his works date from 1927[13] and 1934[14], they have the great advantage of citing the primary sources on which the information is based. Nevertheless, his citations are not as helpful as they could be, firstly because the publications include no key to the abbreviations which the author uses and no full list of works cited, and secondly because the absence of exact quotations means it is impossible to judge the weight of their evidence. In any case, many of the works cited are in the Russian language. The outline genealogies in the present document, into which primary source information has been fitted, were compiled mainly from Baumgarten´s works. Few primary sources have been noted for the members of the dynasty set out in chapters 7 to 12.
|
857 - 930 (73 years)
[1] 
