Soviet renowned Academician Borys Rybakov in his groundbreaking monograph the Handicrafts of Ancient Rus (1948), demonstrated the economic superiority of Kyiv Rus to contemporary Western Europe. This and multiple other works made him one of the main proponents of the anti-Normanist vision of Rus’ history.
Below is a translation of some excerpts from his monograph:
“The necessity is caused by the Normanistic views that are firmly rooted in historical literature, which belittle ancient Slavic and, in particular, Ancient Rus culture. Nowhere was the scope of Normanistic falsifications so arbitrarily pervaded as in the field of Slavic antiquities of the 4th-9th centuries. The entire culture of the Eastern Slavs was attributed to the creative role of the Goths or Varangians, all the striking archaeological material was declared Gothic, and the Slavs were relegated to the role of passive savages—”forced amphibians.”
According to this theory, in the 9th century, the Goths were replaced by the Varangians, whom Normanists consider the creators of the culture of Kievan Rus and the conductors of Iranian-Arab and Byzantine influence in Eastern Europe.
The gradual development of the culture of Kyiv Rus’ saw periods of contact with the highly developed cultures of major world powers (Rome, the Caliphate, Byzantium). One such period occurred in the 8th century, when in the handicraft products of the Dnieper region, one can feel the flow of artistic and general cultural influence coming from the southeast after Sassanid Iran, which was conquered at that time by the Arabs. Unfortunately, the limited historiography on this interesting issue takes a Normanistic position, believing that the appearance of eastern artifacts in Kyiv Rus’ regions dates back to the 9th century and is associated exclusively with the campaigns of the Scandinavian Vikings.
It was not the Normans, who appeared here only in the 9th century, who were the creators of the culture of Kyiv Rus, but, on the contrary, the flourishing of the Dnieper region in the 7th-8th centuries, its connections with Byzantium, Iran and the Arabs, its own high culture determined the center of attraction for the Varangian campaigns from the second half of the 9th century.
Thus, gradually, through Kyiv and the Seversk land (7th century) to Smolensk (8th century), from Smolensk to Novgorod (8th-9th centuries), and from Novgorod further to the northwest to the Varangian overseas lands (mid-9th century), legends about the fabulous riches of the East reached the Varangian overseas region (mid-9th century), and the general flow of brave warrior-conquerors who sailed south and southeast for silk pavoloks and golden ornaments merged with the squads of Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl, Smolensk, Rostov, Novgorod, Gotland and Birka.
The gathering place and political center of these militias could only be one of the cities of the old Polyanian Dnieper region, long associated with Byzantium, the Bosporus, and the Sassanid southeast. Kyiv, near the mouth of the Desna River, became such a center. The preceding position leads us to the conclusion that, among all the Slavic lands, it was the Middle Dnieper region that was most prepared by the course of historical development for a leading and dominant role.
There was no breakdown in the development of culture (and, in particular, crafts) in connection with the appearance of Varangian troops in the Dnieper region. A profound difference in the completeness of the sources (the appearance of burial mounds in the 9th century, providing rich archaeological material, and the development of writing in the 10th century) creates a seeming distinction between the Kyiv period and the pre-Kyiv period. This distinction has often been attributed to the beneficial influence of the “Scandinavian origins.”
The appearance of burial mounds is in no way connected with the Normans, since the burial mound ritual appeared almost simultaneously among all Slavic tribes, including those who had never seen the Normans (for example, the Czechs, Morovans, etc.).
The lack of Varangian cultural influence in the field of writing is also undeniable. Besides the fact that Greek majuscule, not runes, served as the model, a comparison of the number of runic inscriptions in Scandinavia and our own is curious. In Sweden, approximately 2,000 runic inscriptions from the 9th to 11th centuries have been recorded. In the USSR, only one runic inscription was found, on Berezan Island. The number of Varangian burials proper was equally negligible.
The arms industry requires special consideration because, in this area, more than anywhere else, the Normanistic tendency to belittle Kyiv Rus’ culture prevailed. All Rus’ weapons found in princely and military burial mounds were often viewed as imports from Scandinavia to the East. Swords were considered a sign of Varangian trade, while helmets and chainmail, absent from Scandinavians, were considered to be purely nomadic.
Despite the long-standing attention of historical science to issues of foreign trade of Kyiv Rus, two major gaps can be identified in the history of Kyiv’s foreign economic relations in the 9th–12th centuries:
Firstly, the Normanists’ belittlement of the active and progressive role of Kyiv in the 9th-10th centuries in relation to a number of Western European countries (the Czech Republic, Moravia, Poland, Slavic Pomerania).
Secondly, the denial of the possibility for Kyiv Rus to trade in anything other than “servants, honey, and livestock.” All transit trade between Asia and Europe, which passed through Kyiv, Smolensk, and Novgorod, was considered to be in the hands of the Normans alone. Meanwhile, in Western Europe in the 10th-12th centuries (especially in distant regions), there was even an exaggerated idea of the trading and production role of Rus. For example, in France, up until the 12th century, all silk fabrics were called “Rus’ [textile],” although in fact they were Eastern or Byzantine fabrics, only brought to the West by Rus merchants.
The flourishing of Kyiv Rus’ crafts in the 9th and 10th centuries was paved by the entire preceding development of the Middle Dnieper region. Kyiv’s historical role was not created by bands of Varangian adventurers, but by the entire course of development of the economic and social forces of the Dnieper region, hidden from us partly… by the Normanistic fog, which allowed us to discern only the exaggerated shadows of the Goths and Varangians.”
Kyiv Rus was Slavic, not Scandinavian by Origin: Anti-Normanists’ arguments >
How Kyiv was perceived in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark can be seen in the Scandinavian Sagas. The book “Kyiv Rus in Heimskringla Sagas and Byzantine Texts” quotes those passages. The book also tells the story of how and why some Scandinavian Kings found refuge in Kyiv.
