GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2001-02 > 0981142935


From: Sergei Chechnev <>
Subject: Re: Monomakh and Glebovitj
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 22:42:15 +0300
References: <BE9CF8DEAB7ED311B05E0008C7FA708701B1F62A@v003138e.crsrehab.gov.au>, <Nloe6.24$G%5.4947@vic.nntp.telstra.net>, <ibre6.37$G%5.5871@vic.nntp.telstra.net>


1. I don't think it is correct to say that Vladimir had any surname at all. In
early medieval Russia surnames as we know them were non-existent. Princes were
called by their first name (secular name, that is, for each had a Christian name
as well, which was given to him at baptism) and the patronimic which referred
him to his father (thus, Vladimir son of Vsevolod was Vladimir Vsevolodovich).
Commoners didn't even have the luxury of the patronimic, and commoners' names
were expressly distinct from those of Princes and boyars (again, boyars' and
Princes' names had a clear-cut distinction; the inventory of Princes' names was
meagre, hence we get such a mix-up of Mstislavs, Svyatoslavs, Rostislavs and
Yaroslavs, all of them named alike).

Now, Princes had nicknames, too. Most of the nicknames we know had been given
them posthumosly by 19th century historians. However, some were given them by
their contemporaries (as an example, the author of "The Lay of Igor's Host"
nicknamed Prince Oleg 'Gorislavich' ('The Son of Woe'), and I believe he might
as well have been called this by his contemporaries).

Finally, the family lines descending from this or that Prince were known
collectively by their patronimic (for instance, the Princes of Chernigov were
very often referred to as the Olgoviches, for they descended from Oleg). Thus
this generic use of the patronimic is as close as we can get to the similarity
of a surname in medieval Russia.

As far as Grand Prince Vladimir is concerned, I believe he himself referred to
himself as one having dynastic ties with the Byzantine Emperors, and for this
end the use of the name Monomachos was certainly necessary. As a political
gesture, this had paramount importance. However, this does not mean he actually
'assumed the surname of Monomachos', for, as I said, no one had surnames back
then.

Here's how he referrs to himself in the Russian Chronicle ("The Tale of the
Bygone Years") :

<quote>
I, humble as I am, by my grandfather, the blessed and glorious Yaroslav, in
baptism called Basil, in the Russian tongue called Vladimir, by my dearly
beloved father and my mother who descends from the family of the Monomachoi...
<end quote>

'Monomachoi' is the plural for 'Monomachos'. That is how it appears in the
Chronicle (Rus.: 'materiyu svoeyu iz roda Monomakhov' where -ov is the plural
suffix).


2. A very good point has been made in the thread about the correct English
version of Vladimir's nickname being Monomachos rather than Monomakh. Monomakh
is the 'russianized' version of the Greek name, and when rendered back into a
foreign language it must be spelled according to its original rules. Same as the
names of royalty and clergy must be spelled according to the same rules.

Thus, Patriarch Alexius II is the correct form (rather than Alexiy), and
Metropolitan Cyril is the proper way to refer to the Head of the External
Relations Department of the Moscow Patriarchate (rather than Kirill), and the
martyr Patriarch is to be called Tychon instead of Tikhon, and Patriarch Poemen
is what the proper rendition of the name Tikhon must be, etc.

3. Also, attaching numbers to namesake Grand Princes is something which is
purely artificial. First of all, this is a very late invention. Second, the
basis upon which it is done is very arbitrary. For instance, Vsevolod the Big
Nest, Prince of Vladimir and Suzdal, is referred to as Vsevolod III. This is
based on the assumption that Andrew of Bogolyubi (otherwise called Andrei
Bogolyubski) 'transferred' the capital from Kiev to Vladimir, thus the numbers
of the Kievan princes continue onto the Princes of Vladimir (Monomachos's father
was Vsevolod I, Oleg's son was Vsevolod II). However, Andrew did nothing of the
sort. He himself wanted to believe that he did this, yet, after his falling out
with the Rostislaviches he lost all power in Russia and his troops hadn't had a
single successful campaign against the Southern Princes ever since. The line of
Kievan Princes continued well after Andrew. They were still considered the
nominal suzerains of Russia, and they looked upon Vladimir and Suzdal as one of
the many vassals of Kiev (Grand Prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich addressed
Vsevolod "III" as 'cousin and son', which in feudal terms meant he considered
Vsevolod subordinate to himself).

Cheers,
Sergei

This thread: