Almost everywhere possible to find enough people or older political formation, the origin of which would be uniquely recognized by the public and historians.On the one hand, the reason for it is the scarcity of historical and archaeological sources of the medieval era, on the other hand - and this is much more important - the desire, often not fully conscious, glorify their country, to ascribe to him the heroic history.One of the fundamental themes of the Russian historiography is just the Norman theory of the origin of the Old Russian state.The first years of the Kievan Rus', and more importantly, the driving force of its development, have become perhaps the most important subject of the dispute Russian historians for hundreds of years.
Norman theory of the origin of the ancient Russian state
Kievan Rus as the central political formation as confirmed by all authoritative sources, came in the second half of the IX century.Ever since the birth of the historical science in Russia there were a variety of theories on the origin of the Old Russian state.Other researchers have tried to find the origins of Russian statehood and Iranian elements (talking about living here once tribes Scythian and Sarmatian), and Celtic and Baltic (this group of people in the early Middle Ages was still closely related to the Slavs).However, the most popular and the most reasonable were always only two very opposing views on this question: Norman theory of the origin of the Old Russian state and antinormanskaya her antagonist.Norman theory was first formulated for a long time, even in the middle of the XIII century, the king's court historian Gottlieb Bayer.
Somewhat later, his ideas have been developed by other Germans - Gerard Miller and August Schletzer.The foundation for the construction of the Norman theory has been a string of famous chronicle "The Tale of Bygone Years".Nestor described the origins of the ancient Russian state as the merit of King Norman Rurik and his army, which became the first palace and the military elite in Russia.According to the document, the Slavic tribes were fighting with some tiers and managed to expel them from their lands.But then followed a period of unrest and bloody strife in the Slavic lands.This forced them to revert to rusam and encourage them across the sea to rule: "Our land is rich, but there is no order in it ...."In this story, the German historians have identified the mysterious Rus with Scandinavian kings.This is confirmed by archaeological finds, and then later.Vikings were actually present in these lands in the IX-X centuries.And the names of the first Kievan princes and their suites were almost entirely Scandinavian origin.Some Arab travelers are also identified in the records of the Rus and Scandinavia.Based on all these facts was born Norman theory of the origin of the Old Russian state.She really had enough solid foundation and for many years was considered unshakable.
version Antinormanists
But the fact of calling on reigning kings overseas meant that the Slavs themselves were simply unable to form in the Middle Ages on their own state of their own, as it managed to make other European nations.Such an idea could not cause disturbances in the environment of patriotic intellectuals.The first who was able to convincingly enough to resist the German scientist and point out the flaws in their theories, was the famous Russian scientist Mikhail Lomonosov.According to him, Russ should identify not with foreigners, and with local communities.He pointed to the naming of local rivers Ros tires.Vikings also referred to in the ancient chronicles, were (according to University) are not Scandinavians, and Slavs, who are now known to historians as the Wagram.Eventually antinormanskaya story is gaining momentum.However Normanists for centuries defended its position.In the first decades of the Soviet state was declared a Norman theory harmful and unpatriotic, which literally means a veto on its further development.However, the development of the methodology of history and archaeological features have given a lot of Antinormanists.It has been found that a number of foreign travelers of the IX century it was called Russ Slavs.In addition, the emergence of the state structures were still in dokievskoe time.An important argument is the fact that the Scandinavians at the time did not create a state, even at home.
Conclusions
Since 1950 both theories are developing quite freely again.Pile of new knowledge and facts, especially archaeological, demonstrated that definitively abandon all ideas of Norman theory does not.Perhaps the last significant point in this controversy was the book Leo Klein "The dispute over the Varyag".It describes the genesis of the whole of the discussions between the parties, a detailed analysis of the arguments and sources.The truth was, as always, is somewhere in between.Vikings, being skilled warriors and traders, often appeared in the Slavic lands and had very close contacts with the local community.They had an important and undeniable influence on the formation of state structures here, bringing innovative ideas from all over the continent.However, the emergence of Kievan Rus is not possible without internal readiness of the Slavic community.Thus, it is likely that the first Russian princes were Scandinavians (the Middle Ages it was not a surprising fact), but their role should not be overestimated.
