When it comes to antinormanskoy theory, then, of course, it is impossible not to mention Norman, from which, in fact, pushed first.Both of them are considering the history of the Russian state.On the basis of its ever being all sorts of political speculations.Anyway, this issue constantly faced numerous representatives of various sciences, such as history, linguistics, archeology, geography and so on.
Home Norman theory put in 30-60 years of the XVIII century, scientists from Germany GFMiller and IGBayer, who at the time worked at the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg.They have published a lot of scientific papers, some of which are dedicated to the Norman theory, and they are first settled argued that the Old Russian state created the Vikings.At the same time he worked in the Russian ALSchlötzer, a German historian who has studied ancient Russian sources and, in particular, Nestor the Chronicler.Perhaps Schlötzer be the most ardent fan of Norman theory.
But a famous scientist MVLomonosov, who wrote the history of Russia on behalf of the Empress Elizabeth I, along with another prominent historian VT atischevym strongly contested this view.Antinormanskaya theory is based on research of these scientists.They spent a lot of searches in various sources and the archaeological site, in order to get to the truth.Antinormanskaya theory was also the subject of proceedings C. Gedeonov who wrote "Vikings and Russia."Conservative historians D. and M. Moroshkin Ilovajskij also investigated this topic and made it its share of indisputable facts.Thus, there are two directions: Norman and antinormanskoe (Slavic), which relied on two chronicles, respectively, and Lavrentian Hypatian.
Normanists believe that in due time the Norman tribes began to dominate the eastern Slavs, taking them as a result of the raids or by peaceful means, and convinced that the word "Russia" has Norman origins.In turn antinormanskaya theory arguments are in favor of the fact that the term was first introduced in it long before that, in very ancient times.Their beliefs are based on the "Tale of Bygone Years", which gives the facts contradict the theory of Norman.Any recording made in 1852, which tells us that when in Byzantium reigned Mikhail, the Russian land already had a name.Hypation and Laurentian chronicles say that all the northern Slavic tribes invited the Normans to reign, and Russia was no exception.But researchers DSLikhachev and Tikhomirov deny that record as the original and include its occurrence in the annals of a later time.They explain this by political motives, they say, to oppose each other Byzantium and Kievan Rus.To this end, the author chronicles have foreign origin of the dynasty of princes.
course, is not always completely Normans adequately interpret historical facts, but antinormanskaya theory also has its very noticeable error.It is impossible to deny that the Normans were present in Russia and were active, have left their mark in history.Some altogether deny the existence of Rurik.Of course, this could be possible, but highly unlikely, because it depicts the history of a great pedigree.Especially since the dynasty of princes and later kings originating from Igor, had the surname "Rurikovich" until the end of the XVI century.
For more than two centuries and antinormanskaya Norman theory of the origin of the Old Russian state caused disputes between their followers.But who is right, no one is safe can claim.During the years of their existence historians tips the scales in favor of one, then the other side.
