ABOUT THE SPECIFICITY OF MEDIEVAL ETHNICITY (BASED ON THE EXAMPLE OF KYIVAN RUS-UKRAINE)

Abstract

While ethnicity has been inherent to humanity since the dawn of history, its forms have varied across eras. Based on the principles of neo-evolutionism (M. Sahlins, S. Arutyunov) and studies on the division between «ours» and «strangers», we analyse the ethnic situation in Ancient Rus’. At that time, due to the rudimentary nature of communication methods, ethnic identity among «locals» was extremely underdeveloped, where «ours» referred only to the inhabitants of one’s own settlement or a few neighbouring ones. All others were considered «strangers». On this primitive basis, ethnic communities emerged within the individual «lands» into which Rus’ was divided. In Southern Rus’, these included: Rus' (Kyivans and Pereyaslavites), Galicians, Volhynians, Chernihivites, and Turovites. In Northern Rus’, they included: Smolnyans, Suzdalites (Rostovites), Novgorodians, Pskovians, and other regional communities. Indicators of these as distinct ethnicities included hostility and conflicts among them.

Keywords: identity, ethnicity, «ours», «strangers», local (territorial) communities.

Although ethnicity has been inherent to humanity since the beginning of its history, its manifestations and forms have varied across historical eras. Based on the principles of neo-evolutionism and studies on ethnocentrism and the division into «ours» and «strangers», we analyse the ethnic situation in Ancient Rus. It was characterised by the ethnic fragmentation of local or so-called «territorial» communities, corresponding to the division into «lands», which are considered equivalent to the modern concept of «countries». For example, the Rus' Land (Kyiv and Pereiaslav principalities) was inhabited by the Rus' (a collective plural form, singular «Rusyn»), the Volyn Land by the Volhynians, the Halych Land by the Galicians, the Chernihiv Land by the Chernihivites, the Turov Land by the Turovites; in the northern «lands» of Ancient Rus’ lived the Polochans, Smolnyans, Novgorodians, Suzdalites, and others. They possessed their own identities and waged fierce wars among themselves. In other emerging European countries, the situation was similar: in France, there were Gascons, Normans, Languedocians, Burgundians, and others; in Germany, Saxons, Hessians, Swabians, Thuringians, and others; in Italy, Tuscans, Romans, Lombards, Venetians, and others. At the root of this situation, according to the informational concept of ethno-national communities, there was the state of development of information communications. In the pre-modern era, when ethnically significant information was transmitted synchronously and diachronically primarily orally (with writing merely supplementing this mode of information transmission), this led to underdeveloped expressions and forms of ethnicity and small-scale ethnic communities. The so-called «local» ethnicity, opposed to all surrounding groups, predominated. The decisive factor in the formation of local ethnic groups was the state. Therefore, during the era of political («feudal») fragmentation, ethnic communities emerged within small state entities – duchies, counties, and principalities – whose authorities established networks of informational communication within their domains.  «Local» groups should be classified as those whose members had an extremely underdeveloped sense of self-awareness, only vaguely understanding that they formed a distinct group. Local identities, such as those of a village, district, or county, held far greater significance than the self-awareness of the entire community. Besides local (in Kyivan Rus – «lands») ethnonyms, the clearest indication that these were distinct ethnic groups was the hostility and constant wars among them: Galicians against Kyivans-Rus', Suzdalites against Novgorodians, Smolnyans against Novgorodians, and so on. These wars escalated into prolonged feuds, an integral aspect of which, as was common throughout the Middle Ages, involved plundering. Regularly looting, taking captives, and killing «others» was considered entirely acceptable within the prevailing ethnocentric stereotypes. This situation persisted particularly long in the Upper Oka region (the Upper Principalities), where small communities of Mtsenyans, Lyubuchans, Vorotyntsians, Novosilites, and others lived. The disappearance of local («lands») communities was tied to the end of political fragmentation, beginning in the High and Late Middle Ages.