An essay by Andrei for Russian History.
What
was the Russians' view of themselves and others?
It
is all too common to demonize those of the outside group, and elevate
those in the in-group to sainthood – literally, in some cases –
in human psychology. (Cherry) Older histories, in particular, seem to
be subject to this. Through examining the stories in the Novgorodian
Chronicle, it is clear that Russians too had a tendency for
demonizing the opponents and praising the in-group's heroes. Russians
viewed their princes as archetypal embodiments of their societies,
with those who performed particular feats coming to be regarded as
saints. Contrasting this were the godless, evil, pagan infidels who
were their enemies – and the Christians that did not share the same
beliefs were foolish. It is also important to view the modern
historical record compared with the Novgorodian Chronicle to examine
the bias in the Russian writing. ("Novgorodian Chronicle")
The
provided excerpt of the article begins by accusing the devil of
brewing distrust and turning the princes against one another. It is
clear their interpretation of Satan is not based as a tempter of
human fate, but truly evil – basking in the death of Christians.
This seems to be an attempt to absolve the princes of their
responsibility; instead of human error, it is a supernatural act. The
attribution seems to ask, “What else could turn the Great Russians
against one another?” In describing the quarreling, it is not
simply “the Kievans”, but their prince – in the case of Kiev,
Vladimir Rurikovich – and “the men of” the stated city. The
prince is the most important, the only individual out of the city
seemingly worth mentioning. The prince represents all of the Russians
of a particular city-state. As the Tatars begin their attacks, the
princes are outmatched and unable to strike back. ("Novgorodian
Chronicle") They have better success with the Swedes, with
Novgorod defended by Prince Alexander – later, Alexander Nevsky –
against the opposing Catholic forces. This would not be his last
encounter with the Swedes, later fighting them in the attempted
“Northern Crusades”, the forces of which were most likely
Livonian Knights of the Teutonic Order. (“Aleksander Nevsky”)
Here, the prince is not merely the embodiment of the people, but the
champion of God – empowered by prayers and saints. Indeed, the
chronicle goes into great detail on Alexander's successes, in both
warfare with the Livonians and diplomacy with the Tartar-Mongol
“Golden Horde”. ("Novgorodian Chronicle") Indeed, later
Russians consider him incredibly important in maintaining Russia's
independence from Catholicism, and from the Mongol yoke. While
Novgorod would have to pay tribute, they were not occupied. (“Mongol
Invasion”) He was canonized as a saint in the 16th century, and
awards in his honor have been a military staple in Russia and the
Soviet Union. (“Aleksandr Nevsky”) Through saying that God is on
Nevsky's side, then God is on the side of the Russian people as well.
Even the pagans can apparently recognize the strength of the greater
princes, with Batu Khan supposedly having said “I was told the
truth, that there is no other prince like Alexander.”
The
pagans and the Catholics do not hold this favor with God. Whereas the
pagans are “set upon” Russia, supposedly for the latter's sins,
the Catholics are simply unguided Christians. Either seem to hold ear
to the devil's tongue. As aforementioned, when Russians war against
other Russians, it is considered to be due to acts of Satan.
("Novgorodian Chronicle") The Novgorodian Chronicle speaks
of Swedish invaders; these invaders were not merely Swedish, but
Germans and other nationalities as well. The text seems to lack a
breaking point between the Swedish-Norvgorodian War and the Northern
Crusades, perhaps showing that they were unaware of such an act.
Later “Swede” forces would encompass the Livonian Knights of the
Teutonic Order – often, less specifically to this conflict, called
the Teutonic Knights. (“Aleksander Nevsky”) They are considered
Christian, but without God's guidance – foolish and naïve,
compared to the Orthodox Russians. The vitriol against them is far
less than that against the pagans. The brutal “Golden Horde” is
seen as being godless and evil. They are described as locusts –
like a great plague. They practice war with great cruelty, slaying
the leaders of a town, along with countless innocents. However, they
are not necessarily seen as opponents of God, for this would weaken
the power of such a divinity. Instead, according to the Russian
rationalization, God merely lets the pagans conquer Russian lands
that have not been faithful and true enough to His word.
("Novgorodian Chronicle")
The
Novgorodian Chronicle is mostly accurate. Minor errors abound, such
as the “Swedish” attacks on Novgorod when in fact the campaign
was soon to be expanded into a larger “Northern Crusade”.
(“Northern Crusades”) It should come as no surprise that there is
nevertheless a bias against the enemies of the Russians. As earlier
stated, this is not merely unique to Russian culture. In as much as
the Russians saw the Catholics as misguided Christians, the Catholics
must have viewed such East Orthodox ways with disdain as well. The
bias was worse with the pagans. The Golden Horde is represented as
completely unmerciful, barbaric, and downright evil. ("Novgorodian
Chronicle") In reality, while they had a notorious reputation
for brutality, they were not by any means micromanagers. Those who
yielded and paid forth tribute via a sort of taxation were treated
fairly well; it was only those princes and cities that resisted that
found eradication. (“Mongol Invasion”) Nevertheless, it is a
reflection on how embarrassing and humiliating the Russians found it
to be under the “yoke” of the Mongols, and how they remember
their history reflects this.
Who
can blame the Russians for their views, given their humanity? In many
cases, the statuses of Russian heroes and villains were well earned.
Most modern historians credit Nevsky's victories with keeping the
whole of Russia as East Orthodox, though some dissent. (“Aleksandr
Nevsky”) It is difficult to make excuses for the incredible
brutality of the Golden Horde, even if the Novgorodian Chronicle is
not accurate in every single regard. Regardless of how such views may
have been exaggerated, a critical eye reveals the bias. There is a
saying that history is written by the victor. Bias is human nature,
and not merely an artifact of ancient histories. The religious
connotations in their elevation and demonization of figures and
civilizations in their history is a testament to how much their faith
played a role in their society. Even the hero Nevsky was celebrated
in atheistic Soviet Russia, and Stalin commissioned a film in his
honor. (“Aleksandr Nevsky”) This is a testament to culture's
powerful influence.
Sources cited:
“Alexander
Nevsky.” Russiapedia,
by RT.
[http://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-russians/history-and-mythology/aleksandr-nevsky/],
accessed September
6th, 2012.
Cherry,
Kendra. “What is Prejudice?” About.com.
[http://psychology.about.com/od/pindex/g/prejudice.htm],
accessed September 6th, 2012.
“The
Novgorodian Chronicle.”
[https://www2.stetson.edu/secure/history/hy308C01/alexandernevskychronicle.html],
accessed September 6th, 2012.
“Northern
Crusades.” Crusades
Encyclopedia.
[http://www.crusades-encyclopedia.com/thenortherncrusades.html],
accessed September 6th, 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment