Search

Objective: to determine the origin and content of the term «danshiki» in the text of the jarlyk of Mengu-Timur. Research materials: charters issued to Russian Metropolitans by the rulers of the Golden Horde, jarlyks of Tokhtamysh and Timur-Khutlug, jarlyks of Ilkhans and Yuan emperors, chartered and contractual charters of Russian princes, Russian chronicles. Results and novelty of the research: the article considers the term «danshiki» (tax collectors), recorded in the earliest document of the Short Collection of charters issued by the rulers of the Golden Horde to Russian metropolitans. This term is not found in other well-known documents, both Golden Horde and originating from other regions of the Mongolian Empire. An analysis of the totality of Mongolian and Russian sources showed the insertion of the term «danshiki» in the jarlyk of Mengu-Timur. It seems that this word was introduced into the text of the document by the Russian translator of jarlyks. In the jarlyk of Mengu-Timur, the term «danshiki» replaces the words «tamojniki» and «poberejniki» of other Khan’s jarlyks issued to Russian metropolitans.

Copyright of Stratum Plus Journal is the property of P.P. Stratum plus and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Research objectives: This study aims to determine the nature of payments made to the Golden Horde, as documented in the texts of the Short Collection of Khan’s jarlyks issued to Rus’ Metropolitans. Research materials: The research draws from various sources, including charters prepared by the orders of the Golden Horde and Yuan Empire rulers, charters of a spiritual and contractual nature from Rus’ princes, as well as Rus’ chronicles. Results and novelty of the research: This study proposes characteristics of the tax items found in Khan’s jarlyks and uncovers potential insertions within the label texts. It is demonstrated that the extensive list of duties present in the Khan’s charters was not originally a part of these documents. Many tax terms were intentionally added to the texts of the jarlyks during their translation into Russian. Some of these terms represented the Horde taxes that were actually collected from Russian lands, while others denoted payments recognized in Rus’, but not directed to the benefit of the Golden Horde. Furthermore, certain terms appear to be artificial tax designations.

The Russian Primary Chronicle has plenty of reports on the Pechenegs between the years 915 and 1116. There are two different classings concerning the genealogy of the Pechenegs: in the introductory part of the chronicle they belong to the peoples of the Eastern European steppe, but at the end of the chronicle they are descendants of (biblical) Ismaels, that is they are Muslims, together with the Polovtsians (Cumans), Torks (Oghuzes) and Torkmans (Saljuqs). This is a negative valuation. The difference fairly demonstrates the double view of the chroniclers around 1116: the first genealogy belongs to the past, to the history of the Pechenegs, the second belongs to the “present”, to the enemies of the Rus’ (at this time the rest of the Pechenegs were under Cuman rule). The mentions of the Pechenegs in the reign of the prince Sviatoslav usually are in connection with the Rus’– Byzantine relationship. In this reports the Pechenegs are non-essential participants of the history of the Rus’. In generally, this reports reflect peaceful Rus’–Pecheneg relationship. The situation changed under the reign of prince Vladimir. The Pechenegs became enemies of the Rus’. The case of the turn is unclear (the development and prosperity of Kiev or the internal struggle in the Rus’). There are a few reports on the fight against the Pechenegs. These events preserved in the memory (first of all in the memory of the escort/druzhina and the family of the Kievan princes, e. g. the building of the so-called ‘Serpent ramparts’ in the Kiev region, the battle near Vasiliev). The chroniclers connected the oral tradition with folk tale motifs (foundation of Pereiaslav, siege of Belgorod). The main message of the chronicle is clear: the (pagan) Pechenegs were defeated and the (Christian) Rus’ survived them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 1970s, four Cyrillic inscriptions were discovered on the walls of St. Martin Cathedral in Lucca. They are etched on a marble block reused as an architrave in the 13th century. Two texts, including one deeply embedded and noticeable inscription, were first identified as Old Russian, while another was attributed to a speaker of a dialect of Serbo-Croatian. This article gives a new edition of the inscriptions on the architrave, with a revised reading. In particular, the inscription that had been considered Serbo-Croatian was ascertained to be an autograph of a pilgrim from Briansk. The presence on the architrave of three graffiti indicating the travelers’ cities of origin, namely Murom, Briansk, and Polotsk, testifies to this group of inscriptions having been left by pilgrims travelling as an organized group. Three other brief Cyrillic graffiti were discovered recently on a marble block of the portico of the same cathedral. The photographic images of these three graffiti are also published in this article. The paleography, orthography, language and location of the inscriptions indicate that they were left by pilgrims who came from Rus in the 12th or early 13th century.

The influence of chivalric culture on the life of Rus'ian (Old Ukrainian) society in the 13th-14th centuries still remains an unexplored problem. Over a long period of time Ukrainian historians were dependent in their judgments on their Russian colleagues. Only after gaining independence in 1991 it became possible to pay attention to this issue. The purpose of the article is to analyze the specificities of the perception of chivalric traditions in the Galicia-Volynian state of the XIII-XIV centuries (in medieval texts it was also noted as Rus'), to supplement theories on the influence of European chivalric culture on the rus'ian military elite. The main historical sources for the study were the Galician-Volynian Chronicle (the third part of the Hypatian codex) and separate medieval documents. In the article, the connections of the Galicia-Volynian rulers with the Teutonic Order, and a powerful knightly congregation of the Baltic region are investigated. This made it possible to establish the duration of alliance relations and demonstrate the familiarity of the Rus'ian elite with the diplomatic practice of European "bellatores". The Hungarian kingdom and the Polish principalities, as other ways of familiarization with the knightly "world" in the state of the Romanids (Galician-Volynian dynasty) are characterized. Using the excerpts from Rus'ian's chronicles the familiarity of Galician and Volynian medieval elites with the tournament culture and certain practices of the chivalric etiquette are shown. In the conclusion, the authors emphasize the importance of further research aimed at the discovery of new historical sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Stratum Plus Journal is the property of P.P. Stratum plus and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Stratum Plus Journal is the property of P.P. Stratum plus and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Research Objectives: To examine Mark Batunskii’s theory, articulated in Volume 1 of his history of Russia and Islam, that by calling the Tatars “Pechenegs” and “Polovtsy” the Rus’/Russian sources “Islamized” both the Tatars and their Kyivan predecessors. Research Materials: This article is based upon narrative sources, including chronicles, tales, epics, and saints’ lives, which refer to the Tatars from the thirteenth to the sixteenth centuries. Novelty of the Research: No specialists have engaged Batunskii’s theory by analyzing the terminology applied to the Tatars, either Muslim or not, in the medieval sources. Nor has anyone compared the Rus’ application of other terms also applied to Muslims such as “pagan,” “Ishmaelite,” “Hagarene” and “Saracen” to their appearance in Western European sources. Results: Extensive examination of the sources reveals that Rus’/Russian sources carefully identified who was a Muslim (besermen) and who was not. The Pechenegs, Polovtsy and Tatars who invaded Rus’ in the thirteenth century were not. Only sources from the late fourteenth century and later associated Tatars, now Muslims, with Pechenegs and Polovtsy not as adherents of Islam but as nomads who were not Orthodox Christians. This historicist identification had the effect of minimizing Tatar adherence to Islam. Fifteenth and sixteenth-century sources do put more emphasis on the Islamic identity of the Tatars, probably because of the increasing weight placed upon Russian Orthodox Christianity as the hallmark of Muscovy.

This article concerns the edition, dating, historical interpretation and contextualisation of a remarkable metrical inscription of a seal (ca. last third of the 12th - beginning of the 13th century). The owner of this seal, Leo, who bore the no longer prestigious title of sebastos, aims to highlight his elevated social standing by emphasizing his noble descent. He stresses that he is a descendant of the “ruler Monomachos”. This does not refer to the former Byzantine emperor Constantine IX (1042-1055), but probably to Vladimir II Monomakh (1113-1125), the ruler of Kievan Rus᾿, who adapted his Byzantine mother’s surname, thus placing the Monomachoi dynasty at the top of the social pyramid of the Rus᾿. The owner of the seal could have been a grandchild or a great-grandchild of Leo Diogenesevich († 1116) and Maria († 1146), a daughter of Vladimir II; Leo the sebastos probably emigrated to the Byzantine territory or established contacts and relationships with Byzantium.

In the 1970s, four Cyrillic inscriptions were discovered on the walls of St. Martin Cathedral in Lucca. They are etched on a marble block reused as an architrave in the 13th century. Two texts, including one deeply embedded and noticeable inscription, were first identified as Old Russian, while another was attributed to a speaker of a dialect of Serbo-Croatian. This article gives a new edition of the inscriptions on the architrave, with a revised reading. In particular, the inscription that had been considered Serbo-Croatian was ascertained to be an autograph of a pilgrim from Briansk. The presence on the architrave of three graffiti indicating the travelers' cities of origin, namely Murom, Briansk, and Polotsk, testifies to this group of inscriptions having been left by pilgrims travelling as an organized group. Three other brief Cyrillic graffiti were discovered recently on a marble block of the portico of the same cathedral. The photographic images of these three graffiti are also published in this article. The paleography, orthography, language and location of the inscriptions indicate that they were left by pilgrims who came from Rus in the 12th or early 13th century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Chronicon Bruxellense does not simply provide useful information on the date of the date (year, month, and day) of the Rus’ attack on the Constantinople (18 June 860), but is crucial for a deeper understanding of nature of this chronicle and his sources. The article reveals important details about the date and structure of the Chronicon Bruxellense. It also offers his sources of description of Rus’ raid and identifies George Monachus Continuatus’s chronicle as the principal model. By seeking to construction the victory over the Rus’, his anonymous author presents as a skilled compiler. This paper engages with recent discussion on the first attack of Rus’ on the Constantinople, while also contributing to the renewed interest in the reception of the Chronicon Bruxellense in the late Byzantine literature.

The Review deals with Concept of Rurikid’s Polity of the 10th c., proposed by Aleksei Shchavelev, Senior Researcher at the Center for Eastern Europe in the Ancient and Medieval World, Department of the History of Byzantium and Eastern Europe, Institute of General History, Russian Academy of Sciences, parses its Chronology and spatial Structure, the Genealogy of the early Rurikids and the Dynamics of their territorial Power. The Concept of “Polity” replaces the previous irrelevant for pre-Christian Times Notions “Ancient Russia”, “Kievan Rus”, and “Ancient Russian State”. As a Basis for Reconstruction of Rurikid Polity in 10th c. served not so much “Primary Chronicle”, which Chronology Causes all increasing Criticism, as “Tactics” by the Byzantium Emperor Leo VI the Wise, a Treatise “De administrando Imperio” by the Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, letters of Adviser of Cordoba Caliphate’s Grandee Hasdai ibn Shaprut and others. This Polity emerged as a Result of stochastic Fluctuations in ethno-social, event and personal History.

Recent historical and biological research on the Black Death in the Middle Ages has yielded new finds and spurred new questions. This article investigates how information about the plague in Rus' lands fits with these emerging paradigms. Building on foundational research by Lawrence N. Langer from the 1970s, the article investigates the origin of the plague in Rus' lands and its characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Research objectives: The article aims to reveal the time, circumstances and consequences of the first demands of Mongol conquerors to the main Russian princes to visit the residence of Batu. Research materials: The texts of Old Russian chronicles – Hypatian, Laurentian, First Novgorod and others, Vita of Mikhail Chernigovskiy, “History of the Mongols” by John of Plano Carpini. Results and novelty of the research: It is established that at the end of 1242 – the beginning of 1243 the demands to visit the residence of Batu (who just returned from the campaign in Central Europe) were received by all three of the strongest Russian Princes – Yaroslav Vsevolodich, Mikhail Vsevolodich and Daniil Romanovich. The decision to leave the Russian princes in their possessions at that moment was not accepted yet, and the possibility of the earlier employed Mongol regime of direct control remained. Mikhail and Daniil shied away from the visit, while Yaroslav came to Batu and received an all-Russian ‘seniority’. These events predetermined the establishment of a model of rule in Rus’ through local rulers.

Copyright of Zbornik Radova Vizantološkog Instituta is the property of Institute for Byzantine Studies of the Serbian Academy of Sciences & Arts and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In 2019, the Swedish government officially switched terminology from using the traditional endogenous term Vitryssland to the exogenous Belarus. Vitryssland (lit: White Russia) had been in use in the Swedish language since the 17th century, and the decision was neither easy nor swift. There was no consensus about the utility of the change, and significant opposition from linguists and editors against abandoning a term which had emerged and become established over centuries of contact. The debate preceding the switch was often shrill, led by activists and steeped in identity politics. In fact, controversies regarding what to call the country were nothing new, highlighting diverging visions of its geopolitical and cultural position between East and West. Discussions mirrored the far more emotional and polarized discussions among Belarusian nationalists in the 20th century, which at times became violent. Kryvia, Byelorussia, Greatlitva were but some of contenders. This article is an attempt to place discussions about the Swedish terminology in the larger context of history, memory, geopolitics and identity politics.

The author examines temporal decoration of the female head gear, revealed in the burial sites and on the settlements of the Upper Volga region of the 13th – 15th centuries. Throughout the 13th century the cast "imitation" jewelry was used, imitating pre-Mongolian precious attire with colts and temporal rings with grain and filigree beads. The most common decorations were the temporal rings with smooth beads, preserved in the attire until the end of the 14th century, and simple temporal rings of small and medium-diameter with entering ends and bent ends. The cast lunar false-woven rings were also revealed. In the 13th century the new forms of jewelry appeared. These are the temporal rings with a shaped blade, modifications of which used during the 13th –1th centuries. Probably the temporal rings were used in a combination with a rigid headgear and earrings, which became a part of the costume in the 14th century.

1066 is a staple of narratives of medieval Europe. Less often discussed are the horizontal ties connecting its famous participants into a wider medieval Europe. This article will examine the runaway royals, male and female, from Anglo-Saxon England (and elsewhere), and how they sought support and alliances with Rus’ and Ireland. Dynastic marriages were a staple of medieval European political interactions because they allowed rulers to give aid to other runaway rulers and to enhance their own political positions. Iaroslav the Wise of Rus’ was well known for marrying his children to royals from throughout medieval Europe. His example demonstrates the guiding principle that marriages were often made by ruling families with perhaps little more than the hope that the subjects of the marriage, typically exiled royalty, would return to their home kingdoms and take the throne or some similar position of power. In Ireland, we see less a focus on marital relationships and more on martial ones, as Diarmait mac Máel na mBó of Dublin lent military aid and ships to the runaway Anglo-Saxons and others in a bid to help them, while also potentially enhancing his own position—much like the guiding principle seen in dynastic marriages. This article serves as a way to nuance and enrich the stories that we tell about medieval Europe; stories that demonstrate not just the traditional master narrative but the breadth of the web of medieval Europe.

Weapons, according to the Northern Germans, could directly influence the world. Many researchers interpret it as evidence that the Normans identified their weapons with living beings. This article shows that the Northern Germans’ beliefs in actor weapons can be better understood through the lens of their deep conviction that any weapon has its “biography”, whereas trying to understand their views based on the idea of “partially animate” weapons is unhelpful. Provided that various material items accumulate their “biography”, one can potentially explain the grounds for the belief in such forms of the activity of weapons that are not related to the features of a living being. For example, an enchanted weapon affects the world by means similar to computer algorithms. The magical properties of a weapon could have been determined by the person who made it. Having been considered as special items, weapons were used to cast spells during the conclusion of international treaties. The historical sources focused on the idea of “weapons coming to life” only reveal that some mythological creatures (gods or magicians) have the power to invisibly control weapons. Therefore, these sources fail to confirm that the Normans and Rus’ believed in “animate” weapons.

The article is devoted to the history of the discovery of and research into medieval monuments of sacred architecture and their complexes from the princely Halych and Volhynian territory, carried out during the 19th and early 20th centuries. It reflects the circumstances and conditions for researching the territory, which, due to historical events, were part of different empires (namely, the Russian and Habsburg). It is noted which scientists and institutions were engaged in the study of antiquities and under whose control such study took place. The article presents the main results of archaeological and architectural studies of sacred architecture, the complex of remains of wooden and brick temples held in Volhynia and Podillia, namely in Lutsk, Volodymyr and the surrounding area, Bakota on the Dniester, as well as in Eastern Galicia and Bukovyna, namely Halych and its environs, and Vasyliv. In this context, the discovery of burials within or outside churches and in church cemeteries was noted. Emphasis was made on the discoveries of the remains of the princes in the Assumption Cathedral in Volodymyr.

This contribution attempts to analyze these arguments versus authenticity of document of 971 and presents a survey of the different kind of hypotheses encountered within the recent historiography. The article reveals important details about the some readings of the manuscripts, form and structure of the Rus’-Byzantine treaty of 971. Thus, the issue that arises is the following: (1) identification of the synkellos Theophilos, (2) identification of the Sveneld, (3) the ‘construction’ of the treaty. The attention is paid to the sources of two Byzantine narratives (the History of Leo the Diacon and a Synopsis of John Skylitzes) about the role of synkellos Philotheos / Theophilos in the Byzantine diplomacy, including the agreement with the Rus’. A thorough analysis of the evidence found in the History of Leo the Diacon and a Synopsis of John Skylitzes leads us to conclude that the synkellos Theophilos mentioned in PVL is not identical to synkellos Philotheos / Theophilos. Rejecting the identity of Theophilus from the agreement with the Rus’ in PVL with Philoteus/Theophilus it makes unnecessary to search for a ‘common source’ between PVL and a Synopsis of John Skylitzes or that the chronicler read a certain Byzantine chronicle where he found the archbishop Theophilus. Our rejection of the identity of synkellos Theophilos with Philoteus/Theophilus has methodological advantages, because it allows us not to create unnecessary superstructures or purely hypothetical entities. It also identifies that George Monachus Continuatus’s chronicle with addition to 1130 was not a source for the PVL. There is no reason to assume that the author of PVL could use thus ‘common source’. Thus, all proposed arguments in favor of the inauthenticity of the treaty 971 in PVL have significant flaws. They create redundant entities such as ‘common sources’ or a completely imaginary Byzantine chronicle. However, it is not possible to prove the reality of these hypothetical constructions as sources of the PVL. Summarizing presented counterarguments author concludes that the idea surrounding the inauthenticity of the 971 agreement does not find its confirmation. This paper engages with recent discussion on the Rus’-Byzantine treaty of 971 while also contributing to the renewed interest in the reception of the Byzantine documents in the Rus’.

This contribution attempts to analyze these arguments versus authenticity of document of 971 and presents a survey of the different kind of hypotheses encountered within the recent historiography. The article reveals important details about the some readings of the manuscripts, form and structure of the Rus’-Byzantine treaty of 971. Thus, the issue that arises is the following: (1) identification of the synkellos Theophilos, (2) identification of the Sveneld, (3) the ‘construction’ of the treaty. The attention is paid to the sources of two Byzantine narratives (the History of Leo the Diacon and a Synopsis of John Skylitzes) about the role of synkellos Philotheos / Theophilos in the Byzantine diplomacy, including the agreement with the Rus’. A thorough analysis of the evidence found in the History of Leo the Diacon and a Synopsis of John Skylitzes leads us to conclude that the synkellos Theophilos mentioned in PVL is not identical to synkellos Philotheos / Theophilos. Rejecting the identity of Theophilus from the agreement with the Rus’ in PVL with Philoteus/Theophilus it makes unnecessary to search for a ‘common source’ between PVL and a Synopsis of John Skylitzes or that the chronicler read a certain Byzantine chronicle where he found the archbishop Theophilus. Our rejection of the identity of synkellos Theophilos with Philoteus/Theophilus has methodological advantages, because it allows us not to create unnecessary superstructures or purely hypothetical entities. It also identifies that George Monachus Continuatus’s chronicle with addition to 1130 was not a source for the PVL. There is no reason to assume that the author of PVL could use thus ‘common source’. Thus, all proposed arguments in favor of the inauthenticity of the treaty 971 in PVL have significant flaws. They create redundant entities such as ‘common sources’ or a completely imaginary Byzantine chronicle. However, it is not possible to prove the reality of these hypothetical constructions as sources of the PVL. Summarizing presented counterarguments author concludes that the idea surrounding the inauthenticity of the 971 agreement does not find its confirmation. This paper engages with recent discussion on the Rus’-Byzantine treaty of 971 while also contributing to the renewed interest in the reception of the Byzantine documents in the Rus’.

Copyright of Stratum Plus Journal is the property of P.P. Stratum plus and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: A consideration of the problem of imagining the Mongol-Tatar invasion of Europe (1237–1242) led by Batu Khan in the works of French medieval authors from the thirteenth to the sixteenth centuries. Research materials: Edited sources in Latin, French, and Russian, including works by Giovanni di Pian di Carpine, Alberic de Trois-Fontaines, Matthaeus Parisiensis (Matthew Paris), André Thevet, Benoit Rigaud, and Blaise de Vigenère. Results and novelty of the research: The author considers the evolution of the views of French medieval authors on the problem of the Mongol-Tatar invasion of Europe from the appearance of the first information about the conquerors (Alberic de Trois-Fontaines, Matthaeus Parisiensis) to the formation of a scholarly approach to the study of this issue in the research of historians of the sixteenth century. In particular, the author deals with the ways that information about the Mongol-Tatar invasion of the countries of Eastern Europe penetrated into medieval France. Special attention has been paid to the diplomatic mission of Giovanni di Pian di Carpine (1245–1247) to the Mongol Empire and the participation of the archbishop of Rus’, Petro Akerovich, in the First Council of Lyon (1245). The importance of the Mongol issue for the policy of the French Kingdom in the middle of the thirteenth century is noted too. The attempts of the government of Louis IX to establish contacts with the Mongol Khans are analyzed as well. It is concluded that in subsequent times, a significant influx of slaves from Rus’ into the port cities of Southern France, noted in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, might be seen as evidence of the destructive nature of Mongol domination on the Rus’ian lands. Particular attention has been paid to the formation of a scholarly approach in French historical thought of the sixteenth century, when researchers such as André Thevet, Benoit Rigaud, and Blaise de Vigenère tried to recreate the picture of the Mongol-Tatar invasion of Europe in the middle of the thirteenth century based on a critical analysis of the sources, thereby laying the basis for the development of this topic’s historiography in France.

Christianization of the Rus’ is a subject of many existing articles and monographs. This article however deals it again from a somewhat untraditional perspective. It stresses the possible influence not only the center of Eastern Christianity, the Byzantine Empire, but also the centers representing the Western Christianity, that is, the Roman Empire and the Papacy had on this process. At the same time, a certain parallel between the events surrounding the Cyril and Methodius’s mission, the acceptance of Christianity in Bulgary and the Christianization of the Rus’ is pointed out.

Research objectives: The goal of this article is to examine recent English-language publications about Rus’ relations with the Tatars of the Jochid ulus in order to correct factual errors and analyze dubious conclusions. Research materials: The primary materials utilized in this study are three books. The first is Timothy May’s new monograph synthesizing the history of the Mongol Empire. The second two are collective works by an international group of recognized specialists. The Golden Horde in World History. A Multi-Authored Monograph is a translation of an anthology originally published in Russian. The Cambridge History of Inner Asia. Volume 2: The Chinggisid Age continues a multi-volume series. Results and novelty of the research: Recent English-language studies of Rus’–Tatar relations sometimes idealize Rus’–Tatar cooperation. The Rus’–Tatar relationship rested upon destructive conquest and often destructive rule. Much Russian-language scholarship on Rus’–Tatar relations exaggerated the importance of Rus’ in the Jochid ulus. In fact the Kipchaks played a far more important role than the Rus’. Some conclusions in recent English-language studies rely upon propagandistic Russian sources, often of later provenance. English-language authors do not always agree with each other, for example, on the level of medieval Rus’ culture or the extent of Russian efforts to convert conquered Tatars. Discussions of Noghay’s status and offices are very confused. Only a Chinggisid could have issued coinage, so Noghay must have been a Chinggisid. If he was a Chinggisid, he could not have been an emir or ulus beg, offices held by “black bone” commoners.

Nationality Problems of Transcarpathia The article discusses ethnic diversity and the changes which took place in Transcarpathia in the 20th century. First, the author presents the historical background for a statistical-demographic analysis. He points to the peripheral location of the region and the fact that it often changed its political affiliation. Thus, for a period of almost a thousand years the province was included within the borders of Hungary; between 1919 and 1939 it became part of Czechoslovakia, and after a four-day long period of independence (14–18 March 1939) it was again incorporated into Hungary between 1939 and 1945. After World War II it was part of a Soviet republic, and since 1991 it has been included in the independent state of Ukraine. Each of these periods brought far-reaching demographic and ethnic consequences. The population of Transcarpathia consisted of Slavic people of Ruthenian origin, mostly Greek Catholics. The inhabitants of the province were subjected to Hungarian, Ukrainian, and Russian influences and believed in different options, such as pro-Ukrainian, pro-Russian, or separatist, i.e. Ruthenian. These issues are discussed in detail in the article and thoroughly interpreted by the author. He also points to the fact that the territory of Transcarpathia was inhabited by numerous ethnic minorities. The Hungarian minority has always been the most important, both in the past and in the present; today it is concentrated in the south of the province. In the past, Jews and Germans also constituted sizeable minorities, while Romanians and Slovaks were always of marginal significance there. The final part of the article presents the scale of the separatist tendencies which may have dangerous political consequences in the future.

The Chronicon Bruxellense does not simply provide useful information on the date of the date (year, month, and day) of the Rus' attack on the Constantinople (18 June 860), but is crucial for a deeper understanding of nature of this chronicle and his sources. The article reveals important details about the date and structure of the Chronicon Bruxellense. It also offers his sources of description of Rus' raid and identifies George Monachus Continuatus's chronicle as the principal model. By seeking to construction the victory over the Rus', his anonymous author presents as a skilled compiler. This paper engages with recent discussion on the first attack of Rus' on the Constantinople, while also contributing to the renewed interest in the reception of the Chronicon Bruxellense in the late Byzantine literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Proceedings in Archeology & History of Ancient & Medieval Black Sea Region is the property of Cimmeria Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

A fragmentarily preserved Byzantine icon made of steatite was discovered in 2015 during regular excavations in Chełm, eastern Poland. Identified as the left wing of a diptych illustrating the Twelve Great Feasts and created at the close of the 12th century, the find is one of the most important and beautiful Byzantine artefacts to have been found in Poland. The icon was uncovered within the confines of the palace complex which was created by Daniel (Danylo) Romanovych († 1264) in Chełm in the second quarter of 13th century. The icon, even though it was found within the borders of what is now Poland, is material evidence of contact between Byzantium and the social elite of the Galicia-Volhynia lands, rather than with the Polish Piasts.In this paper we concentrated on the presentation of the archaeological context of the find, which made it possible to establish that the icon arrived Chełm before the middle of the 13th century (terminus ante quem 1253), and especially on petrographic and traceological analyses of the icon.Assuming that greenish plaques were indeed the most characteristic steatite icon type, a decision was made to examine, apart from the Chełm artefact made from white rock, a greenish icon from the National Museum in Krakow as well.Petrographic analyses were based on optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive spectrometry (SEM-EDS) and X-ray powder diffraction (XRPD). Both icons were carved in steatite i. e. talc rich rock but their chemical compositions indicate the presence of other components. Artifact from Chełm is white. Porous, enriched in potassium (K) and locally blistering outer rim of the icon from Chełm was formed probably during the fire event. Presence of forsterite and subordinate amount of leucite also indicate high temperature influence. Local enrichment in calcium (Ca) is related to exchange reactions with ground compounds. Accumulation of different components on the surface of the icon's surface was noted. The icon from the National Museum in Krakow is greenish probably because of the presence of chlorite.The results of the traceological analysis (icon from National Museum in Krakow was not analysed) indicate that the icon found in Chełm was created most likely by a skilled and experienced carver with access to the high-quality magnifying glass and specialist tools required for rendering minuscule objects and their details. The production of the icon also involved the use of a "mechanical" tool, probably a kind of a miller with a rotating polishing head, which also seems to point to a specialist workshop. The use-wear traces observed on artefact are limited to polish resulting from prolonged contact with human hands or storing the icon in a leather case.Most of the extant Byzantine icons are unprovenanced objects held in museum collections or church treasuries. Therefore, as the icon presented in this paper was discovered during archaeological excavations, it ranks among the few Byzantine artefacts to have been found outside of this realm. The petrographic and traceological analyses conducted are the first published natural science contributions to the study of Byzantine steatite icons and we hope they will provide the impetus for undertaking such research on other Byzantine finds, helping to develop Byzantine archaeology further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the function of memory of saint Theodore Stratelates as a protector on the battlefield in the Rus’-Byzantine wars. A thorough analysis of the evidence found in the Life of Saint Basil the Younger, History of Leo the Diacon, Synopsis of John Skylitzes and the Rus’ian Primary Chronicle leads us to conclude that Theodore Stratelates’ memory was created after the attack of Rus’ on the Constantinople in 941 and the campaign of John Tzimisces against the Rus’ in 971. The comparison of sources (the Life of Saint Basil the Younger and the Rus’ian Primary Chronicle) carried out by the author enables to think that the strategos Theodore in the narrative of the Life of Saint Basil the Younger was a saint. The study of both cases shows that the war of emperor John Tzimisces with the Rus’ of Svjatoslav the Glorious changed the geography of the cult of Theodore Stratelates. The attention is paid to the sources of two Byzantine narratives (the History of Leo the Diacon and a Synopsis of John Skylitzes) about the role of Theodore Stratelates in the battlefield at Dorostolon. As such the renaming of Dorostolon to Theodoropol became part of the military ideology of emperor John Tzimisces, being its apology of the cult of Theodore Stratelates in this land. This gives some grounds for assuming that this change of the geography of the cult in Dorostolon greatly influenced later chroniclers such as author of the Rus’ian Primary Chronicle.

The article discusses the function of memory of saint Theodore Stratelates as a protector on the battlefield in the Rus’-Byzantine wars. A thorough analysis of the evidence found in the Life of Saint Basil the Younger, History of Leo the Diacon, Synopsis of John Skylitzes and the Rus’ian Primary Chronicle leads us to conclude that Theodore Stratelates’ memory was created after the attack of Rus’ on the Constantinople in 941 and the campaign of John Tzimisces against the Rus’ in 971. The comparison of sources (the Life of Saint Basil the Younger and the Rus’ian Primary Chronicle) carried out by the author enables to think that the strategos Theodore in the narrative of the Life of Saint Basil the Younger was a saint. The study of both cases shows that the war of emperor John Tzimisces with the Rus’ of Svjatoslav the Glorious changed the geography of the cult of Theodore Stratelates. The attention is paid to the sources of two Byzantine narratives (the History of Leo the Diacon and a Synopsis of John Skylitzes) about the role of Theodore Stratelates in the battlefield at Dorostolon. As such the renaming of Dorostolon to Theodoropol became part of the military ideology of emperor John Tzimisces, being its apology of the cult of Theodore Stratelates in this land. This gives some grounds for assuming that this change of the geography of the cult in Dorostolon greatly influenced later chroniclers such as author of the Rus’ian Primary Chronicle.

Historical Galician land (земля Галичкая) during the 10th – 14th centuriesremained the permanent intersection of civilizational influences that determined the ethnic background of the region, political orientations of the elites and local identity. For a long time since the end of the 11th century the local thrones were occupied by various branches of the Rurikids (the Rostislavovids and the Romanids), the bearers (with an official Orthodox Church support) of the concepts of “Rus’” and the “Rusyns” in the politics and language. The presence of the Ruthenian princes in Galich (Halych) consolidated the perception of the region at the inter-dynasty level as a part of the “Ruthenian world”. However, the local definition of the inhabitants as the Galicians (it is known as a separate term terminus post quem 1138) and their homeland as Galicia (Galician land), which had been known since 1152, allowed to coexist, periodically to conflict and systematically to “fight” with “Ruthenian” definition in the ideological and often military-political spheres. Only before the final inclusion of Galicia to the possessions of the Romanids dynasty, “Russification” (“Ruthenization”) of this region (included to the uninstitutionalizated Kingdom of Rus’ – Regnum Russiae) began after 1253. Hence, the Ruthenian identifications became stronger than Galician, influencing the perception of the Galician past and historical research during the 19th – beginning of the 20th century [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article deals with the issue of the Lithuanian conversion to Christianity in the 14th century by focusing on the art of politics of the Lithuanian rulers Gediminas (1316–1341), Algirdas (1345–1377) and Kęstutis (1381–1382) with regard to their Christian neighbours. The topic of intentional deception has been contextualised and given special attention in an attempt to highlight that the accession to Christendom was not a self-evident priority for Lithuanian rulers as long as they were beholden to a pagan-warrior lifestyle and were content with the inherited political situation vis-à-vis their Christian and Tatar neighbours.

The article analyses the statistical indicators of the Ruthenian-Hungarian marriages during the 10th–14th centuries, in the context of the matrimonial policy of the Rurik dynasty. The long tradition of the marriages of Ruthenian princesses with Hungarian Kings, Princes and some representatives of the Hungarian nobility, due to close political and economic interests, is presented. The author emphasizes that most of the brides arrived in Hungary from Rus’. The imbalance in the marriages reached its peak in the 13th – early 14th centuries, despite of the rise in 1253 of the Kingdom of Rus’, headed by Daniel Romanovich and his descendants. In this respect, is important to mention that the status of Kingdom of Rus’ was equal to of the Hungarian Kingdom on the political map of Europe. In our view, such dissonance in the matrimonial relations is due not to the lack of the long royal traditions in the Orthodox Rus’, not to the Papacy jurisdiction in the Catholic Hungary, but rather to a certain (sometimes, systemic) crisis of confidence of the Western rulers concerning Rurikids. This could be measurable especially by the example of a considerable number of the Ruthenian seekers of political asylum in Hungary, in comparison with a very small number of Hungarian princes settled in Rus’.

This article explores the role of translation of medieval and religious literature in Fedor Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov. In the chapters "Rebellion" and "The Grand Inquisitor", Ivan Karamazov weaves two hagiographies, an apocryphal legend, and a passage from the Psalms used in the liturgy into the fabric of his argumentation with his brother Alesha. Ivan would have read most of these works in Church Slavonic, yet he quotes them in his own, contemporary Russian language. This study shows that, whereas Ivan's references to Rus'ian literature are permeated by inaccurate assumptions current at his time, many of his misrepresentations are deliberate. Rather than leaning on careful readings of his sources, Ivan's transpositions are an exercise in creative freedom that reveals the tension between his intellectual and religious convictions, and challenges the limits of text-centred definitions of translation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The new book of Aleksei Tolochko is devoted to the problem of the formation of Rus as a kind of special socium — the corporation of slave-traders on the Dnieper waterway. The history of Rus in Eastern Europe is considered in the context of the source-study questions about the early stages of the chronicle writing and the circumstances of the creation of the first chronicle narrative — Tale of Bygone Years. The author focuses attention on the unreliability of the general scheme of history in the PVL, as well as the information of the alternative source — “Memory and Eulogy” by Jacob the Monk. The structure of Rus’ society is investigated according to the treaties with Byzantium, as well as the treatises of Constantine Porphyrogenitus. The formation of statehood established only in the era of Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich.

In recent years, the influence of Muslims and Islam on developments in medieval Europe has captured the attention of scholars and the general public alike. Nevertheless, ‘conversion’ to Islam remains a challenging subject for historical research and demands more transdisciplinary collaborations. This article examines early medieval interactions between Muslim Arabs and Northern and Eastern Europeans as a case study for whether some individuals in Northern Eurasia ‘converted’ to Islam. More importantly, we address some key examples and lines of evidence that demonstrate why the process of ‘conversion’ to Islam is not more visible in the historical and archaeological records of Northern Eurasia. We find that, despite the well-established evidence for economic exchanges between the Islamic World and Northern Eurasia, the historical and material records are much more complex, but not entirely silent, on the issue of religious change. We also conclude that religious connectivity and exchanges, including with Islam, were common in early medieval Northern Eurasia, even if it is difficult in most cases to identify conclusive instances of ‘conversion’ to Islam.

This paper examines the difficulties experienced in bringing Christianity to the peoples of eastern Europe in the early Middle Ages and beyond. In focus are the problems and processes of converting the Eurasian nomads who appeared in the steppes of eastern Europe. The research reveals that the success of missionary activity from various Christian denominations (often associated with trade activities) depended upon the receptiveness of the leaders of nomadic communities. A number of examples from various communities are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper is a part of a doctoral thesis on the history of the Cumans in medieval Hungary. The introduction of the dissertation is an outline of the history of the Cumans in South Russian and Ukrainian steppes from the middle of the 11th century to the Mongol invasion (1236-1240). The author focuses on the relationship between the Cumans and the Rus'. The paper consists of three parts. The first is a historiography, the second is a political history of the Rus'-Cuman relations, and the third is a summary of the dynastic marriages between the Cuman clans and the Rurikid princes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Archeologia Polski is the property of Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Year-Book of Lithuanian History / Lietuvos Istorijos Metraštis is the property of Lithuanian Institute of History and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Studia Historica Brunensia is the property of Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The purpose of the research is to analyze the written and the archaeological sources, which contain the information on the Ancient Rus' ramparts of the Pechersk monastery and to underline the importance of the correct reading of the epistle from the 12th century, that helps to find out the date of the excavated archaeological complex of the ramparts. The methodology of research is based on the principles of historicism and interdisciplinary approach. The following general-historical methods are used: historiographical analysis, historical-genetic, terminological analysis, comparative, typological. Methods of dating archaeological complexes are used also (stratigraphic, typological and dating method by analogy). The authors adhere to the civilizational approach and principles of cultural and intellectual history. Academic novelty. The analysis of archaeological sources for the excavation of the fortified walls of the Pechersk Monastery from 1951 to 2018 is presented for the first time. An analysis of the correspondence of the recipient of the epistol Cyril of Turov is presented. Conclusions. V.Bohusevych fixed the location of the ramparts for the first time in 1951. The next steps were made by V.Kharlamov in 1991-1992 and by S.Balakin in 2007. But these excavations had rescue character or were made on small area. So, the results of these researches need to be checked and itemized. One of the things to be checked is the date of the starting point of the ramparts' construction. Archaeological materials allow to date the time of the ramparts' building widely - eve of the 12th - early 13th centuries. The right commenting of the only mention of the ramparts in the written source of the 12th century ("The letter of one old man to archimandrite Vasylii") may help to make this time more specific. Today we have the currently accepted author and addressee of this letter. They show that the ramparts could be built during the dignity of a hegumen Vasylii. But also, the point of view that the construction could be held during the dignity of a hegumen Polikarp exists. The correct interpretation of the letter's addressee could provide rather narrow period of the walls' building, which can not be done by archaeological methods. Such perspective opens new possibilities for more accurate dating of some categories of excavation findings, plinth form bricks, first of all. It may become more sustainable tool for determination of time of construction of other Ancient Rus' monumental complexes, which could not be dated basing only on the written sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is a response to four responses to my book Europe, Byzantium, and the "Intellectual Silence" of Rus'. That book in turn responded to the question posed by Francis Thompson, "Where was the Russian Peter Abelard?" It began with two premises − that theology was "the crown jewel of disciplined thought" in both the Eastern and Western Churches during the medieval period and that medieval Christian theology represented an amalgamation of prior Christian thought with Neoplatonism. The literature of early Rus' was little more than what would have been contained in a large Byzantine monastic library, because those in charge of educating the newly baptized pagan Rus' on the basic principles of Christianity felt compelled to provide them only necessary information to save their souls. But why did the package not include the seven liberal arts (including dialectic), which were the basis of the Western Church curriculum? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The critique of Francis Thomson constitutes only part of Ostrowski's book. The other part, completely unrelated to the first one, is dedicated to a comparison of the intellectual development of the two halves of the Christian world in the Middle Ages. Ostrowski's assertion that the Byzantines did not include logic in their school curriculum is untrue. What seems to him to be the main difference between East and West does not take root until the end of the 12th century. The West was drifting away from the common patterns of ancient Mediterranean civilization. The East largely remained the same. The Byzantines did not feel any special inclination toward the practical application of theoretical ideas. The people of Old Rus', on the contrary, were quick at learning and innovating. Respect for tradition inevitably played a smaller role in a nascent culture than in a culture that had been born old. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

В статье рассмотрены дискуссионные вопросы истории и археологии византийского города Херсона втор. пол. Х — перв. пол. XI в. Автор полемизирует с рецензией А. А. Роменского на монографию «Византийский Херсон на рубеже тысячелетий». Сделан вывод о необходимости продолжения дискуссии по следующим вопросам. 1) Трактовка сведений древнерусских письменных источников об истории Херсона. 2) Время и обстоятельства предоставления императору Константину VII документов «Херсонского досье». 3) Точная датировка разрушения Херсона в нач. XI в. 4) Возможность контактов кн. Владимира и мятежного византийского полководца Варды Склира. 5) Численность войска Владимира во время русско-византийской войны 987—988 гг. 6) Историческая трактовка событий так называемого Восстания Георгия Цулы 1016 г. / Debatable questions of the Byzantine Cherson city history and archaeology in the second half of Х — first half of ХI century studied in the article. The author argues with the A. A. Romensky review on the study “Byzantine Cherson at the turn of the Millennium”. The author comes to conclusion about the need to continue discussions on the following issues. 1) Interpretation of the Ancient Russian written sources data of about the history of Cherson. 2) The time and circumstances of giving to the Emperor Constantine VII “Cherson dossier” documents. 3) Precise Dating of Cherson destruction at the beginning of the XI century. 4) Contacts between Prince Vladimir and the rebellious Byzantine General Bardas Skleros. 5) Number Vladimir troops of during the Russo-Byzantine war 987—988. 6) Historical interpretation of the so-called Georgios Tzula rebel events in 1016.