Международная научная конференция

- à Bernay abbaye fondée par l’épouse de Richard II, Judith : à une date inconnue (avant 1027) il est aidé ou remplacé par un custos ou gardien, Thierry, ancien moine de Dijon et prieur de Fécamp venu en Normandie avec Guillaume de Volpiano.

- au Mont Saint-Michel : le même Thierry succède à l’Italien Suppo en 1023.

Avant 1030/1031, Guillaume de Volpiano orchestre la réforme en Normandie. Seule l’abbaye de Fontenelle/Saint-Wandrille et Saint-Ouen de Rouen échappent à la main mise de Fécamp.

Après 1030, les ducs ne seront plus les seuls à favoriser le monachisme dans la principauté. L’aristocratie restaure ou fonde une quinzaine de monastères dispersés dans la Normandie. Il est impossible de parler de hiérarchie pour l’Eglise régulière car par définition ce concept n’a aucune raison d’être. Toutefois les abbés de Fécamp demeurent très prestigieux ; ils seront les seuls abbés en Normandie au XIIe siècle à recevoir des papes les insignes pontificaux ; il est à noter que certaines figures abbatiales jouissent d’une autorité plus forte que d’autres : ainsi aux côtés de Jean de Fécamp, on peut citer Gradulphe de Saint-Wandrille qui gravite continuellement dans l’entourage des ducs.

Вторая часть доклада резюмирует ранее изложенные соображения, развивающие гипотезу А.А. Молчанова, согласно которой новгородский боярский род Гюрятиничей-Роговичей, представленный в XII-XIII вв. пятью поколениями посадников (Гюрята Рогович – Мирослав Гюрятинич – Якун Мирославич – Дмитр Якунич – Иванко Дмитрович) восходит к знатному выходцу из Скандинавии Рёгнвальду (др.-р. Рогъволодъ) Ульвссону, родичу жены Ярослава Мудрого Ингигерд, прибывшему вместе с ней на Русь и получившему в управление Ладогу. Наше дополнение к этой гипотезе заключается в возведении к тому же корню рода Михалковичей, давшего наибольшее за всю историю Новгорода количество высших городских магистратов. (Cм.: Гиппиус А. А. Скандинавский след в истории новгородского боярства // The Slavicization of the Russian North. Ed. By Juhani Nuorluoto. Helsinki, 2006. P. 93-109 // www.slav.helsinki.fi/nwrussia/eng/Conference/pdf/Gippius.pdf).

A. Gippius (Moscow)

“Novgorod people of Varangian origin”
The account of the Russian Primary Chronicle (PVL) known as the “Calling of the Varangians” ends up with the following statement: “And the Novgorod people are of Varangian origin, though aforetime they were Slovene”. The oddity of this phrase when taken literally makes scholars speculate about its indirect meaning. “Slovene” of this passage should probably be understood not as the local Novgorodian tribe of Slovenians but rather as Slavs in general; cf. the record under 906 where the same words refer to the entire East Slavic population of Rus′: “It is owing to the Varangians that they became known as Rus′, though originally they were Slavs”. What the compiler of the PVL most probably had in mind was the transition from the “Slavic” identity to the “Rus′ian” one, postulated in regard to the Novgorod population in the first case and in regard to the whole Russian land (in the broad sense) – in the second. However, while in the latter case the phrase looks quite organic, in the former it is not so: the “Varangian origin” does not seem to be a proper designation for the “acquired” Rus'ian identity of the Novgorod population. The unevenness of the context can be explained as a result of the PVL compiler’s misinterpretation of his original source – Kievan “Initial Compilation” of the 1090s. In the First Novgorod Chronicle preserving the text of this compilation, the words “but aforetime they were Slovene” are lacking, while the previous phrase contains a chronological remark: “to this day”. In this form the passage finds a clear parallel in the final clause of the account of the foundation of Kiev by the brothers Polyanians:

*И бѣша мужи мудрии и съмысльнии, нарицахуся поляне, отъ нихъ же суть Кыевѣ поляне и до сего дьне These men were wise and prudent; they were called Polyanians, and there are Polyanians descending from them living in Kiev to this day

*И отъ тѣхъ варягъ находьникъ тѣхъ прозъвашася Русь и от тѣхъ словеть Русьская земля; и суть новъгородьстии людие до дьнешьняго дьне отъ рода варяжьска And from those Varangians the Rus′ became known as such and from those the Rus′ian land bears its name, and to this day there are Novgorod people descending from Varangians.

The meaning of the first context is quite clear: the Polyanians descending from the brothers who founded Kiev still constitute part of the city’s population. This pattern seems to be applicable to the second context as well: one only need to treat суть (‘are’) as an existential verb, but not as a copula. If so, then the Initial Compilation spoke of the presence of the descendants of “those” Varangians among the present population of Novgorod, not of the “Varangian” identity of the whole of this population.

The second part of the paper sums up the already published considerations in support of Arkadiy Molchanov’s hypothesis, according to which the Novgorod boyar family of Gyuryatinichi-Rogovichi represented in the 12^th-13^th centuries by five generations of posadniks (governors: Gyuryata Rogovich – Miroslav Gyuryatinich – Yakun Miroslavich – Dmitr Yakunich – Ivanko Dmitrovich) descended from the noble Scandinavian native Ragnvald (Old Russian Рогъволодъ) Ulvsson, a relative of Ingegerd, wife of Yaroslav the Wise, who arrived with her to Rus and was appointed to govern Ladoga. Our emendation to this hypothesis is in tracing to the same root the family of Mikhalkovichi, which in the course of the 12^th-15^th centuries produced the greatest number of city governors (See: Gippius А. А. Skandinavskiy sled v istorii novgorodskogo boyarstva (A Scandinavian trace in the history of the Novgorodian boyars, in Russian) // The Slavicization of the Russian North. Ed. J.Nuorluoto. Helsinki, 2006. P.93-109 (www.slav.helsinki.fi/nwrussia/eng/Conference/pdf/Gippius.pdf).