Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

Its past history lay there also. Russia conquered the Black Sea in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries after long and bloody wars and many reverses. It then expanded without encountering opposition, from the Carpathians to the Ural range and the Caspian, from the North Cape to the Caucasus.

The East European plain is connected on the west with the Germanic lowlands by the Polish territory, and on the southeast with the plain of Turania and Siberia by a gap in the southern Ural. At that point the Russo-Polish world was forced into contact with the Germanic nations on the one side, and with the Asiatic on the other. Mongolian hordes came to Europe through the Asiatic door, and Russia was conquered by the Asiatics, while Poland was subjugated by the Germanic people. But when Russia was strong enough to crush the Tartars, nature laid no obstacles in the path of her advance toward Asia. Even in the sixteenth century the Russians crossed the Ural Mountains, and gradually poured over the northern Asiatic plain as far as the Pacific. Europe had begun to colonise Asia.

The main requisite for progress in civilization is tradition. But the suitable material for the creation as well as the continuance of a lasting civilization, the stone for buildings and for inscriptions, was wanting in the north. Ancient Babylonia had indeed contrived entirely to compensate for the deficiency of stone and timber by putting its clay to a use which is found throughout Nearer Asia; its brick buildings and clay cylinders have survived in quite considerable remains. In the countries bordering the Mediterranean the hardest granite, the finest marble, porphyry, and other rare stones were found in abundance. The creations of man's genius in that material lasted for centuries. That which had once been produced could be transmitted to the latest generations. On the broad plain of East Europe, however, but little stone is found, and that only on its extreme limits; nor is it easy to obtain, since the surface is level. One particular part of the country is destitute of wood; but on the whole the soil is wooded and well watered. Man, therefore, employed wood to satisfy his creative desires. He lived in hollow treetrunks or in lakes and swamps. He created his objects of art out of wood: never very numerous, they decayed with the timber. The culture had therefore continually to be recreated, for there was no tradition. While in the north whole localities disappeared without a trace, in the south even solitary houses survived, since they were built of stone. The stone culture, to which any and every aspiration and generalisation was possible, conquered the wood culture. Culture only took real hold on the country later, when even in the north stone was used in preference to wood. It was still possible to have intellectual intercourse with the past, and progress with it.

The climatic conditions of Eastern Europe were not at this time favourable to any development of culture. The differences of climate which prevail there and far into Central Siberia are so great that only an organised agricultural system can be carried out. Eastern Europe suffers as a whole from drought. The Mediterranean and the Black Sea are of little importance in this matter; the only rain-bringing winds are the west, and they lose their moisture on the way and reach, in fact, only to the Ob. Russia therefore suffers not infrequently from bad harvests, and these bring typhus, plague, and other diseases in their train. But only in the past was man greatly dependent on nature; now, when he has learnt to rule nature, conditions often are reversed. That very illimitable plain, where man was solitary but for the wild beasts, will actually promote intercourse as his control of natural forces and

materials increases. In fact, from a more complete system of agriculture and carefully planned irrigation, the arid soil can be transformed into a paradise. In that boundless steppe, which men once entered with a shudder, medical establishments have been founded, since the air of the steppe is said to be as excellent as sea-air. Railways, telegraphic systems, wireless and others, and the telephone have greatly changed all the conditions of life, and made man more independent of nature. But even if the differences are still more equalised and the contrasts between people and people, country and country, are softened, they will never disappear. Only the stream of civilization will flow more evenly. The peoples of the world, never completely separated even under the simplest conditions, will no longer be able to stand aloof from each other. Intercourse is the parent of all culture.

In the age, indeed, when man was more or less a brute beast, he was entirely dependent on nature. Gradually he shook off her chains and learnt actually to rule her, until in the end he rises superior to any obstacles which she may put in his way. From the moment when he threw a skin over his body as a protection against the cold, he was no longer a mere animal; he counteracted the climatic differences, and thus was able to conquer and inhabit a wider expanse.

Many other influences besides the soil affect the development of man; and the special qualities of each nation play a very important part in this, although it is a difficult matter accurately to determine the racial peculiarities of past generations. Every nation has its own particular ideas and aims, and brings with it some fragment of civilization. How, then, has this dowry been enlarged under new conditions of life? This is an almost unanswerable question. Besides this, the development of one nation depends on its intercourse with another. Its history is, therefore, the product of many agencies.

2. THE PEOPLES OF EASTERN EUROPE IN THE EARLY
SLAVONIC AGE

A. THE EARLIEST INDICATIONS OF RUSSIANS AND POLES

NUMEROUS tribes have inhabited the regions where later the empires of Poland and Russia arose. The "Geographus Bawarus" (Bavarian Geographer) in the ninth century, the "Russian Chronicle" of the so-called Nestor († 1115) at the beginning of the twelfth century, and others cite the names of many tribes. The following are named: Nortabtrezi, Vilci, Bethenici, Morizani, Hehfeldi, Surbi, Talaminci, Marharii, Vulgarii, Osterabtrezi (= Abodrites in Braničewo; cf. p. 325), Miloxi, Phesnuzi, Thadesi, Glopeani, Zvireani, Busani, Sittici, Stadici, Sebbirozi, Unlizi (in the angle between the Dniester, the Danube, and the Pontus), Nerivani (on the Narev), Attorozi (on the Dniester), Willerozi, Zabrozi, Zuetalici, Aturezani, Chozirozi, Lendici, Thasnezi, Zerivani (Sěverane, between Desna and Sem), Prissani, Velunzani, Bruzi, Vizunbeire, Cazari, Ruzzi, Forsderes, Liudi, Fresiti, Seravici, Lucolanes, Ungares, Vislanes, Sleenzanes, Lunsici, Dadosesani, Milzani, Besunzani, Verizanes, Fraganso, Lupiglaa, Opolini, Golensizi. Partly these names, partly others, are mentioned by Nestor; for example, Dulěbi (on the Bug), Sloveni (near Novgorod), Drěvlani, Tiverci (on the Dniester), Dregowici (between Pripet and

Dwina), Radimiči, Vjatiči, Polani, Kriwiči (round Smolensk). At the present day we are not in a position either to give the homes of all these tribes, or to determine whether they were really Slavs. The names prove little. They are derived partly from the rivers on which these tribes dwelt, partly from their chief towns; and only a small number are formed after the names of tribal leaders or ancestors, as Radimiči, from Radim; the latter only can we confidently assert to have been Slavonic tribes.

Legends were later formed among the Slavs, which told of three brothers, Lech, Rus, and Čech, said to have been the founders of three great nations, the Russians, Lechs (Laches, Lechites = Poles), and Cechs. In reality, however, the matter stood otherwise. The Slavonic tribes lived independently of each other. In the course of time one tribe (as happened once in the case of the Romans) succeeded in extending its dominion over others, which then adopted its name. The tribe which gave its name to the others need not have been entirely Slavonic; thus the Bulgarians, although of Turkish stock, have become Slavonicised, and have now given their name to the subjugated Slavs (p. 329). The same thing may in the end have been the case with Rus, Lech, and Čech. P. J. šafařík (Shafarik) assumes from the name of the Čechs that it originally belonged only to a head tribe which had surpassed and eclipsed by its numbers and valour all the other tribes of Bohemia (thus the Sedličanians, Lučanians, Dasena, Lutomerici, and Pšov, the Dudlěbians and others). What, then, is the origin of the names Rus and Lach (Pole)? The point has been much discussed among Slavonic and German scholars. The "Russian Chronicle" relates that about the year 859 Varagians (in Old Russian Varjag, plural Varjazi; Byzantine Bápayyor) ruled the north Russian Slavs, but had been subsequently driven out. When quarrels broke out between the Russians, they sent an embassy over the sea to the Varagians and asked them to rule over them once more. Three brothers, R(j)urik, Sineus (Old Norse Signiutr), and Truvor, of the Varagian tribe of the Ruotsi (Rōtsi; Finnish name for Sweden), came to the Slavs, and took up their abode in Old Ladoga, Isborsk, and Bje(ě)losersk. From Rurik, the eldest, was descended the Russian princely house of the Rurikovitch, which is said to have ruled Russia until the end of the sixteenth century. The same chronicle also asserts that the whole of Novgorod was called Rosland, or Russia, from the family of those Rotses. This "Norman " or " Varagian" view has found ardent champions among modern writers (E. Kunik, W. Thomsen, among others). As a matter of fact the old Russian princes were allied with the Varagians, and Varagian soldiers served in the Russian Empire. More than a hundred Scandinavian names are found in very early records; in fact the names of the rapids in the Dnieper, the old Varagian way to Byzantium, have been declared to be Scandinavian. The opinion is, however, hardly tenable in all its points. It will be preferable, in answering this question, to treat some portions of it separately, such as, for instance, the rule of the Norman dynasty and the name Rus.

Some intimate relations between the Novgorodians, who formed the germ of the Russian State, and the Scandinavians (Sweden)-possibly also the summoning of Rurik - cannot be denied; but it is questionable whether also the name "Rus is derived from them. The Slavonic tribes round Kiev and the south of Russia, where later the real centre of Russia lay, bore from time immemorial the name of "Russians." Finally, and this would be the best argument against the theory, the

kingdom, which admittedly must have existed there before the Northmen were summoned, must have also borne a name, and a kingdom, except through conquest, seldom changes its name. The south was known to the Arabs as 66 Russia," and the Black Sea was simply termed the Russian Sea (as, for instance, in Nestor and Mas'udi), at a time when the Varagian princes were hardly yet familiar with the people of Kiev. We ought at all events not to forget that " Rōs" may have been known in Byzantium as merchants even before 840, as is clear from a report of Bishop Prudentius of Troyes and from contemporary Arab accounts. The name probably had been transferred to the whole of Russia by Byzantines (Georgios Monachos, surnamed Hamartolos, among others), who called the tribes in the south of Russia "Rōs." J. Marquart recalls the Caucasian Hrōs, who appear in the "Ecclesiastical History" of Zacharias Rhetor, though certainly in a somewhat legendary setting, and connects these (Gautes from East Gotland?), with the Herulians, who were once settled on the northern coast of the Black Sea, that is to say, with the Rosomones, who were subjugated once by the East-Goth Ermanarik. As a matter of fact, after the defeat of 512 inflicted by the Lombards a part of the Herulians went back to Sweden and settled there near the Gautes, so that the otherwise astonishing familiarity of the northern Vikings with South Russia and the waterway of the Volga is no longer surprising. Marquart assumes, therefore, that the form "Rōs" (Pws, Syrian Hrōs) had been retained for centuries in the vicinity of the Mootis, and at the opening of the ninth century was transferred to the Swedish merchants and pirates, who came from the north and were certainly closely akin to the Herulians.

The meaning of the names "Pole" and "Lach" is equally obscure. While the name "Polani" may be Slavonic, the name “Lach or "Lech" seems to be of foreign origin. Some persons have, as in the case of the name " Rus," looked for a. Scandinavian etymology and understood northern conquerors by the Lechs. But in this connection they have overlooked the fact that Great Poland, the real mother country, has never been called "Lachia" or " Lechia," but only the Cracow district, and from it North Poland. The name "Lach," "Lech," "Lechi" is connected with the names "Walch," " Wlach," " Walach," " Wälsch," and is indisputably of southern origin. Even at the present day the Slavs call the Italians Wlochy (Polish) or Lachy (Slavonic), and the Roumanians Walachy, Wolosza (cf. p. 353). To this group also belongs the name "Lach," which the Poles have received from the Russians. If we consider that Bulgarians and Croatians were equally called Wlachs, and that the southern races in the East Roman Empire were designated even by Teutons as Wlachs, Lachs, or Welsch, we may conclude that the Lachs brought the name "Lachy" with them from the south. The Polish are still at the present day called lengyel even by the Magyars. The Russian Chronicle also states that the Poles came thither from the Danube-of course only the people of Little Poland are to be understood by this. Blach (Middle High German) means black; according to this the fair northerners had given their southern neighbours the name of "black." The Russian tribes, which were close neighbours to the district of Southern or Little Poland (Cracow), called only the Little Poles " Lachy"; the designation was only gradually transferred to Northern or Great Poland. Even in official documents the country of Cracow " right up to the fourteenth century never bears the name of Poland. On the other hand, Posen and Gnesen, the Polish mother-country, was always called Polonia, which title was then extended to South Poland, that is to

66

say, the subsequently conquered Cracow. Since this name was used officially, it superseded all others, and throughout Europe the kingdom was finally called Poland.

B. THE NON-SLAVS OF OLD RUSSIA

WHILE in Poland, with the possible exception of the Yatvings, there were nothing but Slavonic tribes, the territory of Russia was originally inhabited by several peoples of a different race; in the north close to the Baltic Sea the Lithuanians, and further to the northeast the Fins, on the Volga the Bulgarians, and in the south the Khazars, without taking into account the smaller tribes and the later immigrants. Of the above-mentioned the Lithuanians and the Fins alone have in some degree preserved their individuality.

(a) The Lithuanians. History finds the Lithuanian tribes settled on the shore of the Baltic between the Vistula and Dwina, and southwards as far as the middle stream of the Bug. In one place only their frontier touches the Finnish Livonians, otherwise they are wedged between Slavonic peoples. They divided into the following tribes in the tenth century. The Wends were settled at the mouth of the Dwina, the Letts (Letigala) on the right bank of the Dwina, bordering on the Livonians; on the left bank of the Dwina were the tribes of the Semgala (Semgallans) and the Zelones (Selones); the Kurland peninsula was occupied by the Korses or Kur(on)es. The Smudinians (Smud) and the Lithuanians dwelt on the Niemen; west of these, between Niemen and Vistula, were settled the eleven. Prussian tribes; in the southwest the Yatvings. Since the duty of the Smudinians and Lithuanians who dwelt in the centre of the whole system was to fight for the national freedom, and first of all to found a larger kingdom ("Lithuania"), all these tribes were finally called Lithuanians. Here again was an instance of the name of a part being transferred to the whole.

These tribes, however, formed one nation only in the ethnographical sense; in other respects they lived as separate clans. As early as the thirteenth century Lithuanian leaders or tribal elders are mentioned; they exercised authority only over small districts, and were styled "Rikys" (Rex) by the Prussians, and "Kunigas" by the Lithuanians. It was not until the danger of foreign subjugation threatened them all that they united more or less voluntarily into one state.

The Lithuanians were the last of all the Europeans to adopt Christianity; temporarily converted in 1387, they relapsed, and were again converted in the fifteenth century. Owing to this we have full accounts of their pagan customs. We find among them three chief deities, similar to the Indian Trimurti (Vol. II, p. 367) and the later Greek Tritheism. The place of Zeus was taken in their creed by Perkunas (Slavonic, perun, thunder; cf. p. 76), represented as a strong man holding a stone hammer or arrow in his hand; Atrimpos, who was conceived in the shape of a sea-serpent twined into a circle, corresponded to Poseidon, while Poklav (Slavonic, peklo), a grey-bearded, pale-faced old man, with his head swathed in linen, was regarded as the god of the Lower World. Besides these, the sun, moon, stars, animals, birds, snakes, and even frogs were worshipped. The sun-god had various names, for example, Sotwaros (Slavonic, Swaroh); the moon goddess 1 Jadzwingi; see the small map in the left-hand top corner of "the maps illustrating the history of Poland."

« PredošláPokračovať »