19. Stages of development of Slavic mythology
Ivanov and Toporov also schematically periodised various stages of development of Slavic mythology:
• The first subsequent development occurred after the Proto-Slavs had split into East, West, and South Slavs. Each branch of the Slavic family devised various feminine deities of household, and deities associated with crafts, agriculture, and fertility .
Baba Yaga, by Ivan Bilibin.
• At the level of abstract personification of divine functions, we have such concepts as Pravda/Krivda (Right/Wrong), Dobra Kob/Zla Kob (Good Fortune/Evil Fortune). These concepts, found in many Slavic fairy tales, are presumed to have originated at a time when old myths were already being downgraded to the level of legends and stories. Loius Leger pointed out that various Slavic words describing success, destiny, or fortune are all connected with the ancient Slavic word for God — "bog".
• The next level of development is a mythologisation of historical traditions. Beginning in pagan times, it continued well after the advent of Сhristianity. It is characterised by tales and songs of legendary heroes, ranging from purely legendary founders of certain tribes,.Various elements will still reveal elements of old myths (such as a hero slaying a dragon, a faint echo of an ancient concept of a cosmic battle between Perun the Thunderer and the serpentine Veles).
• On an even lower level, certain mythical archetypes evolved into fairy-tale characters. These include Baba Yaga, Koschei the Immortal, Nightingale the Robber, Vodyanoy, Zmey Gorynych, and so on. At this point of development, one can hardly speak of mythology anymore. Rather, these are legends and stories which contain some fragments of old myths, but their structure and meaning are not so clear.
• The lowest level of development of Slavic mythology includes various groups of home or nature spirits and magical creatures, which vary greatly amongst different Slavic nations. Mythic structure on this level is practically incomprehensible, but some of the beliefs nevertheless have a great antiquity.
20. General characteristics of Kyivan Rus’ culture
The first state to arise among the Eastern Slavs. It took its name from the city of Kyiv, the seat of the grand prince from about 880 until the beginning of the 13th century. At its zenith, it covered a territory stretching from the Carpathian Mountains to the Volga River, and from the Black Sea to the Baltic Sea. The state's rapid rise and development was based on its advantageous location at the intersection of major north-south and east-west land and water trade routes with access to two major seas, and favorable local conditions for the development of agriculture. In the end, however, the state's great size led to the development of centrifugal tendencies and local interests that limited its political and social cohesion. This, and its proximity to the Asian steppes, which left it vulnerable to invasions of nomadic hordes, eventually contributed to the decline of Kyivan Rus’.
In the 8th century, the territory of Kyivan Rus’ was inhabited by a number of tribes who shared a common proto-Slavic language, pagan beliefs, and life-style. The ancestors of the Ukrainians included the Polianians, Siverianians, Derevlianians, Dulibians, White Croatians, Ulychians, and Tivertsians. The proto-Russian Krivichians, Viatichians, and Radimichians and the proto-Belorussian Drehovichians also lived on the lands that eventually constituted Kyivan Rus’. The Polianians were the largest and most developed of the tribes; according to the Rus’ Primary Chronicle, their prince Kyi founded the city of Kyiv in the 6th century. None of the tribes, however, was able to create a viable state, and in the 9th century the Varangians from Scandinavia conquered the tribes and laid the groundwork for the Kyivan Rus’ state.
21. Origins of Kyivan Rus’
The question of the origins of Kyivan Rus’ still produces controversy among historians. The oldest, or Normanist theory rests mainly on a literal interpretation of the Primary Chronicle and stresses the role of the Varangians as the first leaders and organizers of the state. Ukrainian historians, beginning with Mykhailo Maksymovych and followed by Mykola Kostomarov, Volodymyr Antonovych, Mykhailo Hrushevsky, Dmytro Bahalii, Dmytro Doroshenko, Mykola Chubaty, and others, have generally downplayed the Varangian influence on the formation of Rus’. The Soviet historiography categorically rejected the Normanist theory, considering it bourgeois.
The issue of the nationality of the inhabitants of the Kyivan state is also a matter of continuing controversy. The discussion was initiated by the Russian historian Mikhail Pogodin, who claimed that the original inhabitants of contemporary Ukraine fled north under pressure from the Mongols, and that they later became the modern Russian nation. The Ukrainians, meanwhile, arrived much later from somewhere in the Carpathian Mountains. Pogodin's views were expanded on by the philologist Aleksei Sobolevsky. This theory was disputed by Ukrainian historians such as Mykhailo Maksymovych, Mykola Dashkevych, Pavlo Zhytetsky, and Ahatanhel Krymsky. Mykhailo Hrushevsky sought to demonstrate that Ukrainians were autochthonous in their territories, and that the Principality of Galicia-Volhynia was the successor to the Kyivan state. Hrushevsky's theories were for the most part adopted by Ukrainian historians and by some others. Because these theories did not correspond to the political objectives of the Soviet leadership, a panel of historians was commissioned in the 1930s by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to draw up a new historical schema of Eastern Europe; its basic premise was that Kyivan Rus’ had been founded by a single old-Rus’ nationality, out of which Ukrainians, Russians, and Belarusians developed in the 14th and 15th centuries. This theory was given official approbation with the publication of Tezy pro 300-richchia vozz'iednannia Ukraïny z Rosiieiu, 1654–1954 (Theses about the 300th Anniversary of the Reunification of Ukraine with Russia, 1954.
22. Christian influence on cultural development of Kyivan Rus’
In 1037 Yaroslav routed an army of Pechenegs that had attacked Kyiv, and initiated construction of the Saint Sophia Cathedral to commemorate his victory. Over 400 churches were built in Kyiv alone, which was turned thereby into an architectural rival of Constantinople. Yaroslav's walled inner city in Kyiv covered an area of nearly 60 ha. It was entered through the Golden Gate, Polish Gate, and Jewish Gate, and the Saint Sophia Cathedral stood in the center, encircled by large palaces.
During his rule Christianity spread and grew stronger in Rus’ (he actively suppressed paganism), and the organizational and hierarchical structure of the Rus’ church was established. In 1039 the existence of the Kyiv metropoly was confirmed in writing as being under the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Yaroslav issued a statute defining the rights of the church and clergy. Apart from Constantinople's right to confirm the appointment of the metropolitan, the Rus’ church was autonomous, and in 1051 Yaroslav initiated the sobor of bishops that chose Ilarion as metropolitan of Kyiv. The first monasteries in Rus’ were formally established during Yaroslav's reign. He founded a primary school and library at the Saint Sophia Cathedral and sponsored the translation of Greek and other texts into Church Slavonic, the copying of many books, and the compilation of a chronicle (1037–9).