26 December 2024, 10:25
The Primary Chronicle, Povest' vremennykh let (PVL), whose surviving primary sources were created at the end of the 14th century, represents a crucial source for the early history of Rus.
However, from the perspective of critical analysis, it does not so much document reality as it constructs a mythological foundation for the social, political, and religious system required by the ecclesiastical authority, which at that time remained almost the only stable vertical of power.
PVL served as a tool in the hands of the clergy to strengthen its influence, create a sense of national inferiority, and justify historical manipulations that facilitated the consolidation of centralized power. It justifiably became the foundation for the mythology of the “Third Rome,” contributing to the elevation of Moscow not only as a political but also as a new spiritual center.
The Myth of the Varangian Invitation: A Tool for Creating a Sense of National Inferiority
One of the central myths of the PVL is the legend of the invitation of the Varangians: “Our land is vast and abundant, but there is no order in it. Come and rule over us.”
This narrative became the basis for a sense of national inferiority. According to this version, the people of Rus themselves were incapable of self-organization and had to invite an external power to govern them in order to survive.
In other words, not a leader chosen by the people, not a son of the nation, but an invited conqueror was considered the best form of governance for those incapable of producing such a figure on their own.
How this myth functioned:
- It justified the actions of conquerors by legitimizing the idea of inviting external rulers, whether they were Varangians or Mongols.
- This line of reasoning suggested that dependence on occupying forces was not a defeat but a necessary measure aimed at improving the quality of life—a historical inevitability.
The mythologization of the Varangian invitation became a tool to justify any subsequent acts of submission to external conquerors. For example, Mongol rule was now seen as a logical continuation of the established model.
Additionally, this myth underscored the necessity of strong centralized governance, which bolstered the positions of Vladimir and later Moscow as the successors of power and centers of a new order.
The Myth of Ancient Novgorod: A Convenient Retrospective
The PVL also creates the perception of Novgorod as an ancient and significant political center. In reality, Novgorod at that time was an important trade and economic hub that was just beginning to gain strength.
The real purpose of the myth:
- To justify the wealth and importance of Novgorod within the ecclesiastical system. For the church, it was vital to establish control over the wealthy trading region by legitimizing its significance through historical traditions.
- To convince the congregation that the center of ecclesiastical and secular power could shift depending on circumstances, as seen in transitions from Rome to Constantinople, Novgorod to Kyiv, or Kyiv to Vladimir.
This myth also prepared the ground for accepting future shifts in power centers. The logic of relocating centers of authority became ingrained in consciousness, which later played into the hands of Moscow’s rise.
The Myth of Relocating the Sacred Capital: Preparing for the Church Seat’s Move
The transfer of power centers from Novgorod to Kyiv and then to Vladimir, Sarai, or Moscow is presented in the PVL as a historical norm. However, this process was more likely a strategy of ecclesiastical authority than a natural development of events.
It is more plausible that Metropolitan Cyril II (Metropolitan of Kyiv from 1246 to 1281) initially planned to move the capital of Rus not to Vladimir or Moscow but to Sarai-Batu—the capital of the Golden Horde. In 1261, he succeeded in establishing the Tsar’s (Sarai) Diocese there and even traveled to Nicaea for the necessary approval. “The Tsar’s Diocese became the first step toward securing a spiritual presence in the very heart of the Horde,” later chroniclers noted.
The creation of the Sarai (Tsar’s) Diocese rather than a Moscow one directly indicates that the church’s priority was always wealth. It sought to position its center where the greatest flow of wealth converged.
How this myth functioned:
- The church used the idea of shifting capitals to justify moving its seat closer to economically advantageous centers.
- The concept of relocating the center of power allowed the church to remain unbound by earthly limitations.
- The relocations of the ecclesiastical seat were perceived as a necessary measure, justifying greed and the desire to control new financial streams.
This mythology significantly reinforced the later idea of the “Third Rome,” where Moscow was presented as the successor and sacred center of Rus, justifying its political and spiritual dominance.
PVL as a Tool for Justifying the Church’s Greed
Throughout the 13th century, the church actively adapted to new economic and political realities, following the sources of wealth. PVL provided ideological cover for these maneuvers. The legends of the Varangian invitation, ancient Novgorod, and the transfer of power centers created a narrative in which all the church’s actions appeared logical and inevitable.
The Tale of Bygone Years, in the form in which it has come down to us, is not merely a chronicle but a tool for manipulating consciousness, created by the church to strengthen its power. The myths presented in the chronicle were rooted in concrete political and economic goals. PVL did not simply describe the past; it actively reconstructed it to instill ideas of submission, tolerance to oppression, and the necessity of ecclesiastical leadership.
Analyzing its content, it is crucial to understand that behind every myth stood very real material interests—the strengthening of the church’s influence and its control over the wealth of Rus. These myths played a key role in shaping the concept of the “Third Rome” and affirming Moscow as the new center of spiritual and secular power.