Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
Збережено в:
| Дата: | 2009 |
|---|---|
| Автор: | |
| Формат: | Стаття |
| Мова: | English |
| Опубліковано: |
Інститут історії України НАН України
2009
|
| Назва видання: | Ruthenica |
| Онлайн доступ: | http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/190662 |
| Теги: |
Додати тег
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
| Назва журналу: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Цитувати: | Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi / M. Dimnik // Ruthenica. — 2009. — Т. 8. — С. 31-65. — Бібліогр.: 150 назв. — англ. |
Репозитарії
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| id |
irk-123456789-190662 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
irk-123456789-1906622023-06-18T19:12:44Z Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi Dimnik, M. 2009 Article Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi / M. Dimnik // Ruthenica. — 2009. — Т. 8. — С. 31-65. — Бібліогр.: 150 назв. — англ. 1995-0276 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/190662 en Ruthenica Інститут історії України НАН України |
| institution |
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| collection |
DSpace DC |
| language |
English |
| format |
Article |
| author |
Dimnik, M. |
| spellingShingle |
Dimnik, M. Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi Ruthenica |
| author_facet |
Dimnik, M. |
| author_sort |
Dimnik, M. |
| title |
Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi |
| title_short |
Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi |
| title_full |
Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi |
| title_fullStr |
Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi |
| title_sort |
ryurik rostislavich (d. 1208?): the unsung champion of the rostislavichi |
| publisher |
Інститут історії України НАН України |
| publishDate |
2009 |
| url |
http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/190662 |
| citation_txt |
Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi / M. Dimnik // Ruthenica. — 2009. — Т. 8. — С. 31-65. — Бібліогр.: 150 назв. — англ. |
| series |
Ruthenica |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT dimnikm ryurikrostislavichd1208theunsungchampionoftherostislavichi |
| first_indexed |
2025-07-16T13:41:13Z |
| last_indexed |
2025-07-16T13:41:13Z |
| _version_ |
1837811140811292672 |
| fulltext |
Martin Dimnik
Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?):
the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi*
Introduction
During the second half of the twelfth century, the Rostislavichi of Smol-
ensk, descended from Vladimir Monomakh’s grandson Rostislav Mstislavich
(d. 1167), became one of the most powerful dynasties in Rus’. They emerged as
successful contenders for the throne of Kiev against their cousins the Yur’evichi
of Suzdalia descended from Yury Dolgorukiy, against their cousins the Izyaslav-
ichi of Volyn’ descended from Izyaslav Mstislavich, and rivals of the Ol’govichi
of Chernigov descended from Oleg Svyatoslavich.1 One of the most active
cham pions of the Rostislavichi fortunes, whose political career the chroniclers
record for some fifty years, was Rostislav’s son Ryurik. His career, however,
was one of political turmoil.
In the light of his successes and failures he was a controversial figure for both
chroniclers and historians who have conflicting views concerning his political impor-
tance. They disagree as to just how successful a ruler he was. According to Tatishchev
who cites an unidentified chronicler
…he ruled for 37 years. Four times he was driven out [of Kiev], and he was tonsured,
suffering much at the hands of his son-in-law [Roman Mstislavich]. He had no peace
from any direction, for he himself was much addicted to drink and was manipulated
by women (zhenami vodim be); he paid little attention to the ruling of the land, and
his administrators (tiuny) did much evil. For this reason the Kievans had little love
for him.2
* I wish to acknowledge that I have drawn upon material from Martin Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov
1146–1246, 2003, published by Cambridge University Press, and reproduced with permission. I have
expanded and modified a number of the observations and conclusions concerning Ryurik Rostislavich’s
career expressed in that work.
1 For the various dynasties, see N. de Baumgarten, Généalogies des branches régnantes des Rurikides
du XIIIe au XVIe siècle, Orientalia Christiana, vol. 35, nr. 94 (Rome, 1934), V, 27, 16, 23; and IV, 4.
2 V. N. Tatishchev, Istoriya Rossiyskaya, (abbreviated Tat.) 7 vols. (Moscow [abbreviated M.] —
Leningrad [abbreviated L.], 1962–68), Tat. 4, 341; Tat. 3, 184–185; J. Fennell, The Crisis of Medieval
Russia 1200–1304 (London and New York, 1983), 34.
Ruthenica VIII (2009), 31–65
32 Martin Dimnik
It has been pointed out that this description was composed by a Galician-Volynian
or Kievan chronicler who was sympathetic to Roman Mstislavich.3
Under the year 1199 the Ipat’evskaya letopis gives us a different description of
Ryurik. Igumen Moisey of the Vidubitskiy monastery, most likely writing in the
chronicle that Ryurik himself had commissioned, records with great enthusiasm an
encomium (pokhvala) to Ryurik on the occasion of the completion of the supporting
wall below the church of St. Michael in the monastery. Moisey explains that since
the church was built by Vsevolod Yaroslavich (d. 1093), four generations of princes
ruled Kiev, but not one of them had as much love for the church as Ryurik in the fifth
generation. Only Christ loving Ryurik with the goodwill of God completed the wall.
Ryurik demonstrated goodwill towards monasteries and to all the churches, and love
for their buildings.4 Igumen Moisey also calls Ryurik ‘tsar’ and dignifies his princi-
pality by calling it an autocratic state known not only in the lands of Rus’ but also in
distant lands beyond the sea, and to the ends of the universe.5
Historians also have favourable appraisals of Ryurik’s career. According to one,
Rostislav’s sons, David, Ryurik and Mstislav “distinguished themselves with ambi-
tion and bravery.”6 Others observe that Roman Mstislavich and Ryurik Rostislavich
were the last outstanding figures in the list of twelfth-thirteenth century princes in
Rus’.7 Finally, another historian claims that with his success in Kiev Ryurik set the
foundation for Rostislavichi dominance in Rus’.8 Surprisingly, despite these positive
appraisals of Ryurik’s career, he has been largely ignored by historians in that no com-
prehensive examination of his political career has been written.
Just as Tatishchev’s chronicle source is biased in favour of Roman, so Igumen
Moisey is biased in favour of Ryurik. Therefore, neither can be taken at face value.
Which view is closer to the truth? Let us first point out that there is no chronicle evi-
dence that will help us to determine if Ryurik was much addicted to drink, if he was
manipulated by women, and if his administrators did much evil. The purpose of this
investigation is to examine the available chronicle information concerning his politi-
cal career and to determine insofar as it is possible his goals, his achievements, and
his failures.
Ryurik’s Early Years
The chroniclers fail to record the date of Ryurik’s birth. According to the first
chronicle reference made to him under the year 1157, however, we are told that in
that year he participated on a campaign.9 To be old enough to take part on a military
3 B. A. Rybakov, Kievskaya Rus’ i russkie knyazhestva XII–XIII vv. (M., 1982), 496.
4 PSRL 2: 708–711; P. P. Tolochko, Russkie letopisi i letopistsy X–XIII vv. (Sankt–Peterburg, 2003), 140.
5 PSRL 2: 713; Rybakov, Kievskaya Rus’, 494; P. P. Tolochko, Drevnyaya Rus’ (Kiev, 1987),149–150.
6 D. Ilovayskiy, Istoriya Rossii, chast’ pervaya, Kievskiy period (M., 1876), 249.
7 Rybakov, Kievskaya Rus’, 496; A. V. Emmausskiy, Mstislav Udaloy (Kirov, 1998), p, 142.
8 Fennell, The Crisis, 22.
9 See under the year 1158: PSRL 2: 491; “Gustinskaya letopis’,” (abbreviated Gust.) PSRL 2 (SPb.,
1843), 305; “Moskovskiy letopisnyy svod kontsa XV veka,” PSRL 25 (M.– L., 1949), 63; for the
correct date, see N. G. Berezhkov, Khronologiya russkogo letopisaniya (M., 1963), 168–170.
33Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
expedition he must have been at least a teenager. Consequently, he would have been
born around 1140 at the latest. He was one of Rostislav Mstislavich’s five sons.10
Since the chroniclers do not report the births of any of the sons, the silence of the
sources has created controversy among historians concerning Ryurik’s place in the
genealogical order of Rostislav’s sons. In the light of future political rivalries for
Kiev, however, it is important that his genealogical status in the family be accurately
established.
There is no doubt that Roman was the eldest of Rostislav’s sons. A number of
historians claim that Svyatoslav was the next in seniority,11 others consider him to be
the second youngest,12 while others omit him from the family tree altogether.13 Since
he died in 1170,14 that is, before Ryurik became involved in the rivalries for Kiev,
Svyatoslav’s rank in the family tree is not important to our investigation. It is gener-
ally agreed that the youngest of Rostislav’s sons was Mstislav. The most important
genealogical relationship for our investigation is the one that existed between Ryurik
and David. Many historians claim that David was the senior of the two.15 A smaller
number holds that Ryurik was the elder brother.16 During the course of our investiga-
tion circumstantial evidence will show that Ryurik was older than David and this is
the genealogical order that we will adopt.
In 1162, according to the chronicles, Rostislav Mstislavich brought the Polovtsian
princess Belukovna as wife for Ryurik.17 The couple evidently had no children and,
to judge from the silence of the sources, she seemingly died not long after from un-
explained causes, perhaps in childbirth. To judge from the information that at a later
date two princes of Turov are called Ryurik’s brothers-in-law,18 he married a princess
of Turov, named Anna, at an undisclosed date.19 Anna gave birth to two sons and four
daughters. The order of seniority of the girls is not reported but concerning the sons
we know that Rostislav was older than Vladimir. The former was born in 1072 and
the latter in 1187, fifteen years later.20 From the date of Rostislav’s birth we know that
Ryurik married Anna before 1072.
10 Baumgarten, Généalogies, IX, 6. As we shall see, Ryurik was most likely older than David. According
to Berezhkov David was probably born in 1141/2 (Khronologiya, 208.) If this date is correct, Ryurik
would have been born in 1140 at the latest.
11 See, for example, Baumgarten, Généalogies, IX, 3.
12 See P. V. Golubovskiy, Istoriya Smolenskoy zemli (Kiev, 1895), 203.
13 See, for example, Fennell, The Crisis, 177.
14 See under the year 1172: PSRL 2: 550; O. M. Rapov, Knyazheskie vladenyia na Rusi v X-pervoy
polovine XIII v. (M., 1977), 161; M. Hrushevs’kyi, Istoriia Ukrainy-Rusy, vol. 2, XI–XIII vik (Kyiv,
1992), 594, Table 7; for the correct date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 159.
15 Baumgarten, Généalogies, IX, 4; Fennell, The Crisis, 177; Rapov, Knyazheskie vladenyia, 159–160;
M. Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246 (Cambridge, 2003), 396.
16 Tat. 4, 271; Tat. 3, 83; Golubovskiy, Istoriya Smolenskoy zemli, 203; Hrushevs’kyi, Istoriia Ukrainy-
Rusy, vol. 2, 594, Table 7.
17 PSRL 2: 521–522; Gust, 307; PSRL 25: 72. For the correct date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 157–158.
18 In 1190 Ryurik’s brother-in-law (shurin) Svyatopolk Yur’evich of Turov died (PSRL 2: 665; Gust.,
322), and five years later his brother Gleb Yur’evich of Turov died. (PSRL 2: 694).
19 Concerning her name, see under the year 1199: PSRL 2: 710; Baumgarten, Généalogies, IX 6.
20 For Rostislav, see PSRL 2: 567; for Vladimir, see PSRL 2: 657–658. Baumgarten, Généalogies, IX, 18–23.
According to one view Ryurik had a third son named Svyatoslav (Emmausskiy, Mstislav Udaloy, p, 143).
34 Martin Dimnik
The chronicles tell us little about Ryurik’s career before the early 1170s when he
became involved in the rivalry for Kiev. Up until then he is mentioned a number of
times as a participant in military campaigns. Nevertheless, even though he is referred
to only in passing, we learn useful details about his career and genealogy.
As already noted, the chronicles refer to him for the first time under 1157 when
Izyaslav Davidovich campaigned against Yury Yaroslavich of Turov. We are told that
Ryurik with Smolensk troops accompanied Izyaslav’s attacking force.21 The news
that Rostislav of Smolensk assigned his son Ryurik to command his troops implies
that Ryurik held a position of genealogical seniority among the Rostislavichi brothers
even though, as we have seen, he was probably still a teenager. His seniority is sup-
ported by news the chronicler gives two years later. In 1159, Rostislav sent Roman
and Ryurik to help Rogvolod Borisovich of Polotsk wage war against Minsk.22 The
information that Ryurik accompanied his eldest brother Roman suggests that Ryurik
was next in genealogical seniority and that their remaining brothers were still too
young to participate in military encounters.
In a number of instances Ryurik is the only son who is reported assisting his father
or his father’s allies in their battles. Rostislav’s choice of Ryurik as his companion or
representative on campaigns speaks in support of Ryurik’s military prowess. Thus un-
der the same year (1159) a number of chronicles report that Ryurik helped Svyatoslav
of Chernigov fight against Izyaslav Davidovich and the Polovtsy.23 In the following
year, after Rostislav became prince of Kiev, we learn that Ryurik came to help his
father fight against Izyaslav Davidovich.24
In 1162, Rostislav faced insubordination from his younger brother Vladimir Ms-
tislavich who seized the town of Sluchesk. Rostislav called upon Ryurik’s leadership
talents once again to command an alliance of princes from Turov, Chernigov, and Po-
lotsk to evict Vladimir Mstislavich from the town. On seeing the large size of the at-
tacking force Vladimir sued for peace and withdrew to his brother in Kiev.25 Ryurik’s
leadership qualities are emphasized again under the same year when he, evidently
commanding the troops of the Kievan towns and friendly tribesmen, joined Mstislav
Izyaslavich of Volodimir against Izyaslav Davidovich.26 Thus his reputation as a mili-
tary commander was evidently well established despite the fact that in 1162 he was
still a young prince, perhaps some twenty years of age. We also learn that, in 1160 and
1162, when Ryurik campaigned against Izyaslav Davidovich, he came from Torchesk,
a southern outpost of Kiev, which was his domain at that time.
In 1167 Rostislav summoned all his allies to take up positions at Kanev to preempt
Polovtsian attacks. The chronicles give the names of either three or two Rostislavichi
who answered their father’s summons. These were either ‘Ryurik, David, and Msti-
21 PSRL 25: 63; under the year 1158: PSRL 2: 491; Gust., 305.
22 PSRL 2: 496; Gust, 305.
23 PSRL 25: 67–68; “Lavrent’evskaya letopis’,” PSRL 1, 2nd ed. (L., 1926), cols. 349–350; under the year
1160: PSRL 2: 505–507, 509; Gust., 306 and others.
24 PSRL 25: 70; “Ermolinskaya letopis’,” PSRL 23 (SPb., 1910), 44; and others.
25 PSRL 2: 521; Gust., 307; PSRL 25: 72.
26 PSRL 2: 517–518.
35Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
slav’ or ‘Ryurik and David’.27 As was the chroniclers’ practice, the princes are listed in
their genealogical order of seniority. Thus Ryurik was the eldest of the princes named.
At that time their eldest brother Roman was prince of the more distant Smolensk and
was not expected to participate in the campaign.
At the beginning of 1168 Mstislav Izyaslavich of Kiev summoned the princes of
Rus’ to join him on a campaign against the Polovtsy. We are told that the Rostislavichi
were represented by Ryurik who came from his domain of Vruchiy.28 According to
this information, in 1168, the year after Rostislav’s death, the chronicles report for
the first time that Ryurik was the prince of Vruchiy. Although the sources refer to
Vruchiy as Ryurik’s domain they do not identify it as his patrimony. Nevertheless,
there is chronicle evidence confirming that by the time of his father’s death Vruchiy
was Ryurik’s patrimony.29 After 1168, until his death which, as we shall see, probably
occurred in 1208, he is reported visiting Vruchiy on at least seven occasions (1187,
1190, 1193, 1195, 1202, 1206, 1207) to look after the administration of his domain.30
Significantly, no other prince is reported ruling the town during Ryurik’s lifetime.
This is strong testimony in support of the view that Vruchiy was his patrimony.
The chronicles to not inform us when Rostislav allocated Vruchiy to Ryurik but it
may be possible to suggest a probable date. In 1162, as noted above, Ryurik was prince
of Torchesk.31 Later in the same year, however, his younger brother David seized con-
trol of the town against his father’s wishes, therewith displacing Ryurik.32 Moreover,
in the same year Rostislav gave Belgorod to his youngest son Mstislav, presumably
as his patrimony.33 Ryurik however was older than Mstislav so it is logical to assume
that Rostislav had given him a domain earlier or about at the same time. Nevertheless,
since the chronicler reports that Rostislav returned Torchesk to his nephew Mstislav
Izyaslavich in 1163,34 this means that Ryurik was no longer prince of Torchesk in that
year. We have already noted that in 1162 Rostislav had Ryurik marry a Polovtsian
princess.35 It is highly likely therefore, although the chronicles do not confirm it, that
Rostislav allotted Vruchiy to Ryurik at the time of his marriage.
In 1167 Rostislav died.36 After his death his nephew Mstislav Izyaslavich occupied
Kiev rather than Rostislav’s brother Vladimir Mstislavich who had a prior claim.37
Mstislav’s arrogant conduct, however, angered many of the princes and the boyars.
In the winter of 1168 therefore, Andrey Bogolyubskiy of Suzdalia organized a coali-
tion of princes to attack Kiev. It drove out Mstislav and pillaged the town. Although
27 See under the year 1168: PSRL 2: 527–528; Gust., 308; see under 1167: PSRL 25: 74; for the correct
date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 159. This order of seniority is repeated elsewhere, see for example,
PSRL 2: 532–533, 541; PSRL 25: 75.
28 Under the year 1170: PSRL 2: 541. For the correct date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 159.
29 See for example, PSRL 2: 543, 547, 657, 669.
30 PSRL 2: 657, 669, 678, 690; PSRL 25: 100, 105, 106.
31 PSRL 2: 517.
32 PSRL 2: 519.
33 PSRL 2: 519.
34 PSRL 2: 521.
35 PSRL 2: 521–522.
36 PSRL 2: 532.
37 See under the year 1168: PSRL 25: 75–76; and under the year 1169: Gust., 309.
36 Martin Dimnik
Ryurik and David initially supported Mstislav, they later joined Andrey’s coalition.
After the campaign, on 8 March 1169, Gleb Yur’evich, Andrey’s younger brother, sat
on the throne of Kiev.38 In the following year the Rostislavichi buttressed their alli-
ance with the Yur’evichi. We are told that Ryurik, David, and Mstislav joined Gleb on
a campaign against Vasil’ko Yaropolchich, the nephew of Mstislav Izyaslavich.39
On 19 August 1170 Mstislav Izyaslavich fell ill, died, and was buried in Vladimir
in Volyn’.40 Following his death, the Novgorodians expelled his son Roman and invit-
ed Andrey Bogolyubskiy, who now became the most powerful prince in the land, to be
prince of Novgorod. Instead of occupying it in person or sending one of his sons, how-
ever, he appointed Ryurik Rostislavich to the town. Thus, on 4 October 1170 Ryurik
occupied Novgorod.41 This appointment shows that Andrey cultivated amicable rela-
tions with the Rostislavichi and by appointing Ryurik as his lieutenant he ingratiated
himself with the Rostislavichi even further. We know almost nothing about Ryurik’s
rule in Novgorod. The only information that the chronicles give us comes from under
the year 1171 which tells us that Ryurik deposed Posadnik Zhiroslav from office.42
By deposing Zhiroslav we see that Ryurik took active measures in the administra-
tion of the town but his eviction of the posadnik was probably unpopular with Andrey.
Zhiroslav was Andrey’s appointee and leader of the pro-Suzdalian faction. This is
confirmed by the news that after Ryurik deposed him he fled to Andrey in Suzdal’.
Furthermore, after Ryurik vacated Novgorod in the winter of 1171–72, Andrey reap-
pointed Zhiroslav as posadnik.43 When he antagonized Andrey Ryurik must have also
alienated the pro-Suzdalian faction in Novgorod. This is suggested by the news that,
according to a number of accounts, Ryurik ‘fled’ from Novgorod in the winter of
1171–72 and Andrey sent his son Yury to Novgorod as prince.44 The chroniclers do
not explain why Ryurik fled but it has been suggested that he was not reconciled with
the Novgorodians.45 The disgruntled townspeople must have been the pro-Suzdalian
faction. This, Ryurik’s only sojourn in Novgorod, was not a major episode in his po-
litical career. It was important, however, in that it was his first major administrative
appointment. With that, it appears, he became a major player in the politics of Rus’.
It also had special significance for his family. In 1172, while Ryurik was fleeing from
Novgorod with his wife their first son Rostislav was born.46
38 PSRL 1: 354–355; PSRL 25: 77–79; PSRL 2: 540–546.
39 PSRL 2: 550; Gust., 312.
40 See under the year 1172: PSRL 2: 559. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 183–184.
41 Novgorodskaya pervaya letopis’ starshego i mladshego izvodov (abbreviated NPL), edited by
A. N. Nasonov, (M.–L., 1950), 33, 221–222; see under the year 1171: PSRL 25: 82; under the year
1173: PSRL 2: 562; Gust., 313.
42 NPL, 34, 222.
43 NPL, 34, 222. Yu. A. Limonov, Vladimiro-Suzdal’skaya Rus’ (L., 1987), 69. Ryurik ruled Novgorod
from 4 October 1170 until the winter of 1171/1172, for about a year and a half (V. L. Yanin, Aktovye
pechati Drevney Rusi X–XV vv., vol. 1, Pechati X-nachala XIII v. [M., 1970], 115).
44 See under the year 1172: NPL, 34, 222; under the year 1173: PSRL 2: 566–567; under the year 1174:
PSRL 25: 83; PSRL 1: 365.
45 Ilovayskiy, Istoriya Rossii, 256; Hrushevs’kyi, Istoriia Ukrainy-Rusy, vol. 2, 199.
46 See under the year 1173: PSRL 2: 566–567.
37Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
Kiev in the 1170s
On 20 January 1171 Gleb Yur’evich of Kiev died.47 For the next half decade Kiev
witnessed turbulent times as its princes came and went because Andrey Bogolyubskiy
failed to successfully place a puppet on its throne. After Gleb’s death he appointed
Ryurik’s eldest brother Roman to Kiev.48 In 1173, however, Andrey and the Rostis-
lavichi had a falling out. Convinced that the Kievans had poisoned his brother Gleb,
Andrey insisted that Roman apprehend the culprits who had committed the deed and
send them to him. When Roman and his brothers refused to comply with Andrey’s
wishes he demanded that Roman, David, and Mstislav depart from Kiev, Vyshgorod,
and Belgorod and return to their patrimonial domain of Smolensk. He ignored Ryurik
who was ruling Vruchiy outside the Kievan lands. Roman, not wishing to confront
Andrey, returned to Smolensk as he was ordered to do and Andrey replaced him
with his own brother Mikhalko in Kiev. The latter, perhaps not wishing to suffer the
same fate that had befallen his brother Gleb, handed over Kiev to his younger brother
Vsevolod and their nephew Yaropolk Rostislavich. Roman’s brothers, however, were
discontented with these arrangements and retaliated. On 24 March Ryurik, David, and
Mstislav attacked Kiev, took Vsevolod and Yaropolk captive, and appointed Ryurik
to Kiev.49 Thus, for the first time, the Rostislavichi openly challenged the authority of
Andrey who was their genealogical senior in the dynasty of Monomashichi.
After Ryurik occupied Kiev we are told that the Rostislavichi consolidated their
control over the Kievan lands by marching against Andrey’s brother Mikhalko at
Torchesk and offering him Pereyaslavl’ in addition to Torchesk. He accepted the of-
fer, became their ally, and deserted Andrey. In addition, they also evicted Yaropolk’s
brother Mstislav from Trepol’.50 Thus we see that under Ryurik’s command the Ros-
tislavichi considered themselves to be powerful enough to challenge Andrey a second
time. It is noteworthy that Ryurik was not the senior prince of the Rostislavichi when
he occupied Kiev. Even though this was an irregularity, there appeared to be no hostil-
ity between him and his eldest brother Roman. The latter did not claim that Ryurik
was preempting his authority. Ryurik’s occupation was also irregular in that he had
not ruled his dynasty’s capital of Smolensk before occupying Kiev, as was done by
his father Rostislav and by his brother Roman. These however were critical times and
it appears that the brothers were prepared to circumvent tradition in order to act as a
unified family against Andrey.
The insubordination of the Rostislavichi enraged Andrey. Later in 1173 he or-
dered Ryurik to depart from Kiev and the Rostislavichi to vacate their domains in
the Rus’ land. The Rostislavichi, however, once again spurned Andrey’s commands.
He responded by marshalling a huge army consisting mainly of Monomashichi and
47 PSRL 2: 563–564.
48 See under the year 1174: PSRL 2: 567–568; Gust., 313. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov,
Khronologiya, 189.
49 See under the year 1174: PSRL 2: 569–571; Gust., 314; compare under the year 1172: NPL, 34, 222.
Concerning the dates, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 189–190.
50 PSRL 2: 571–572; Gust., 314–315. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 190.
38 Martin Dimnik
Ol’govichi troops and invited Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov to be its com-
mander-in-chief. The allies seized Kiev without a battle because the Rostislavichi
abandoned the town in the face of the overwhelming invading force. Ryurik sought
safety in Belgorod, which he would eventually treat as his patrimony; Mstislav forti-
fied himself in David’s Vyshgorod with David’s troops; and David rode to Galich to
solicit reinforcements from Yaroslav Osmomysl. After Ryurik deserted Kiev Svyato-
slav occupied it but dissention in his alliance among the Turkic tribesmen called the
Black Caps (Chernye klobuki) forced him to vacate the town. After he departed the
Rostislavichi invited Yaroslav Izyaslavich of Lutsk, who had brought reinforcements
from Volyn’ around 10 November, to occupy the Kievan throne.51 Svyatoslav objected
to Yaroslav’s rule, attacked him, and occupied Kiev, but after plundering it for twelve
days vacated the town. Around the beginning of 1174, we are told, the Rostislavichi
sent messengers to Andrey asking him to reinstate Roman in Kiev.52 Their request
demonstrates that despite their insubordination to him, they still recognized him to be
the senior prince in the House of Monomakh.
On 29 June 1174, before Andrey Bogolyubskiy could give the Rostislavichi a de-
finitive reply, he was murdered.53 His death disrupted the balance of power and, on the
one hand, enabled the Rostislavichi to assert their claim to Kiev more aggressively.
On the other hand, it also permitted Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov to play a
more commanding role in the politics of Kiev while at the same time acting as king-
maker in Suzdalia. Not surprisingly, after Andrey’s death the princes of Suzdalia were
thrown into disarray as they vied for supreme authority in the northeast. It would
be fifteen years before a prince of Suzdalia would intervene again in the politics of
southern Rus’.
In 1175 Roman Rostislavich occupied Kiev without any fear of being challenged
by the prince of Suzdalia.54 Ryurik presumably remained in Vruchiy, David had Vysh-
gorod, and Mstislav was in Belgorod. In the following year, we are told, Roman of
Kiev sent his two sons and Ryurik against the Polovtsy who had attacked towns along
the Ros’ River. David, who quarrelled with his brothers, at first refused to participate
on the campaign but joined the other princes at a later date. Despite the Rostislavi-
chi unified attack the Polovtsy defeated the four princes. Svyatoslav of Chernigov
held David responsible for the defeat and demanded that Roman punish him for his
conduct by depriving him of his domain of Vyshgorod. Roman however refused to
impose such severe measures against his brother and instead returned to Smolensk.
Svyatoslav therefore marched against Kiev and on 22 July 1176 seized control of the
town.55 Nevertheless, Svyatoslav failed to evict David and Mstislav from Kiev’s two
51 Yaroslav was the younger brother of Mstislav Izyaslavich who, as was noted above, died on 19 August
1170 (Baumgarten, Généalogies, V, 39).
52 PSRL 2: 572–580; Gust., 315–316; compare PSRL 25: 83; PSRL 1: 367. Concerning the date, see
Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 190.
53 PSRL 1: 369; PSRL 2: 580. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 78–79, 190–192.
54 PSRL 2: 600; Gust., 316; compare NPL, 34, 223.
55 PSRL 2: 603–605; Gust., 316. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 194. For a more
detailed discussion, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 135–136.
39Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
satellite outposts of Vyshgorod and Belgorod. Understandably, this arrangement was
unwelcome to Svyatoslav because it placed his actions under the close scrutiny of the
two hostile Rostislavichi. No other prince of Kiev in the past had to rule under such
constraining conditions. In the light of the restrictions that David’s presence in Vysh-
gorod could place on an Ol’govichi prince in Kiev it is not surprising that Svyatoslav
had attempted to force Roman to remove David from that Kievan outpost.
In 1179, it appears, the Novgorodians invited Ryurik’s youngest brother Mstislav
to become their prince. The following year, however, he fell ill and died.56 After Ms-
tislav departed from Belgorod, Ryurik evidently occupied the Kievan outpost. From
that time on, to judge from circumstantial evidence, he treated it as his patrimonial
domain in the Kievan lands and ruled it in addition to Vruchiy.57 By seizing control of
Belgorod Ryurik ensured that the two Kievan outposts would be controlled by the two
genealogically eldest Rostislavichi.
Ryurik as Co-ruler with Svyatoslav
On one occasion, in 1180, David Rostislavich was hunting along the right bank
of the Dnepr and Svyatoslav of Chernigov was hunting along the left bank. While on
the hunt Svyatoslav received news that Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo of Suzdalia had
taken his son Gleb captive. It should be noted that the princes of every dynasty in Rus’
looked upon the capture of one of their number as a great disgrace to their dynasty. In
his ire, therefore, Svyatoslav insisted on avenging himself immediately but as Vsevo-
lod was too far away he schemed to avenge himself against the Rostislavichi. The lat-
ter, he argued, were also Monomashichi and they continued to stymie his plans in the
Kievan lands. He therefore schemed to take David captive and to evict Ryurik from
Belgorod. After neutralizing the brothers he would take his revenge against Vsevo-
lod. David, however, escaped his clutches and fled to Ryurik in Belgorod. Having
declared war on the two brothers, Svyatoslav feared to return to Kiev and withdrew to
Chernigov. This allowed Ryurik to occupy Kiev once again even though he was not
the senior prince of the Rostislavichi.58
Although the chronicler claims that Svyatoslav plotted to evict the Rostislavichi
from the Kievan lands because Vsevolod captured his son, Svyatoslav’s statements
reveal that Vsevolod was not the primary object of his revenge. Svyatoslav also had
ample grounds for harbouring hostility towards the Rostislavichi themselves. He ar-
gued that they challenged his jurisdiction in Rus’ whenever opportunity arose. The
main reason why they succeeded in obstructing his authority was because they lived
in the Kievan outposts of Belgorod and Vyshgorod. After capturing David, he was
therefore determined to drive out Ryurik from Belgorod in order to become sole ruler
of all the Kievan towns.
56 PSRL 2: 606–607, 609; NPL, 36, 225; PSRL 25: 89.
57 Concerning Ryurik’s appropriation of Belgorod, see M. Dimnik, “The Patrimonies of the Rostislavichi
in the Kievan Lands: An Anomaly,” Mediaeval Studies, vol. 69 (Toronto, 2007), 198–199.
58 PSRL 2: 614–616; compare Gust., 317–318. For a more detailed discussion, see Dimnik, The Dynasty
of Chernigov 1146–1246, 145–147.
40 Martin Dimnik
In that same year Roman, the eldest Rostislavich, died in Smolensk.59 Since his
youngest brother Mstislav had died earlier in that year, Roman’s death reduced the
ranks of the Rostislavichi to two: Ryurik and David. The latter replaced Roman in
Smolensk, but in doing so vacated Vyshgorod therewith removing an important Ros-
tislavich from the Kievan land. After Roman’s death Ryurik became the senior prince
of the Rostislavichi. Thus he could now rightfully lay claim to Kiev on behalf of the
Rostislavichi and become the main challenger to Svyatoslav for Kiev.
In 1181 Svyatoslav campaigned against Suzdalia intending to avenge himself
against Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo. After the latter humiliated him in Suzdalia he
went to Novgorod and from there marched south against David. From Drutsk, where
he defeated David’s Smolensk forces, he set off south against Ryurik in Kiev. When
the latter learnt that Svyatoslav was approaching Kiev and that Svyatoslav’s cousin
Igor’ Svyatoslavich of Novgorod Severskiy and Polovtsian reinforcements were wait-
ing for Svyatoslav near Vyshgorod, Ryurik withdrew to Belgorod. Svyatoslav there-
fore occupied Kiev uncontested. Later, however, after Ryurik learnt that the Polovtsy
had set up camp at Dolobsk, located across the Dnepr from Kiev, he sent his troops
to attack them.
Ryurik’s troops scored a brilliant victory over the tribesmen. Since the Polovtsy
were essential to Svyatoslav’s military superiority, their defeat gave Ryurik the up-
per hand. He took advantage of his victory by dictating unfavourable terms of rule to
Svyatoslav. Thus, in 1181, because the latter was senior to Ryurik he acknowledged
Svyatoslav to be the senior prince in Rus’ by relinquishing the throne of Kiev to him.60
That is, Ryurik acknowledged Svyatoslav’s seniority on three counts: Svyatoslav was
physically older than he was, Svyatoslav belonged to a more senior generation, and
Svyatoslav belonged to a more senior dynasty.61 Nevertheless, Svyatoslav would not
be just a figurehead; he would have real power albeit greatly reduced. He would have
complete authority over Kiev and be the commander-in-chief of the co-rulers’ united
forces. Ryurik, for his part, made Belgorod his political base and assumed jurisdic-
tion over all the other domains in the Kievan lands that traditionally had fallen under
the jurisdiction of the prince of Kiev.62 The arrangement that Ryurik dictated to his
co-ruler was unprecedented in the history of Kievan Rus’. It is noteworthy that the
co-rulers belonged to rival dynasties.
59 PSRL 2: 616–618; Gust., 318.
60 Compare Mstislav Vladimirovich’s action in 1024, when he ceded control of Kiev to his brother
Yaroslav because, he observed, Yaroslav was senior to him (PSRL 2: 134–136; PSRL 1: 147–149.
See also M. Dimnik, “Succession and Inheritance in Rus’ before 1054,” Mediaeval Studies, vol. 58
[Toronto, 1996], 112–113).
61 Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich was descended from Svyatoslav Yaroslavich (d. 1076) who, at the time
of Yaroslav’s death in 1054, was Yaroslav’s second eldest surviving son. Ryurik was descended from
Svyatoslav’s younger brother Vsevolod (d. 1093). Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich was also the grandson
of Oleg Svyatoslavich (d. 1115), whereas Ryurik was the great-grandson of Oleg’s cousin Vladimir
Monomakh (d. 1125).
62 See under the year 1180: PSRL 2: 620–624; Gust., 317–318. For somewhat different interpretations
of dual rule, see Rybakov, Kievskaya Rus’, 492 and Tolochko, Drevnyaya Rus’, 216–217. For a more
detailed discussion, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 150–151.
41Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
According to the chronicler, Ryurik proposed the arrangement of co-rulers for
a moral reason: he wished to end shedding Christian blood. No doubt he also had a
more selfish motive. Namely, he believed that he lacked the necessary military power
to depose Svyatoslav decisively. If they were not reconciled any future confrontations
would undoubtedly end in an impasse just as they had in the recent past. Ryurik’s
solution, therefore, was to mark time. He relinquished his claim to Kiev for the time
being but, as we shall see, he made Svyatoslav designate him as his successor after
his death.
Two years later, in 1183, Svyatoslav and Ryurik buttressed their political union
with a personal bond. Svyatoslav’s son Gleb married Ryurik’s daughter Anastasia.63
After that, the chroniclers frequently stress Ryurik’s family tie with his co-ruler by
identifying Ryurik as Svyatoslav’s svat, namely, as his daughter-in-law’s father.64
Ryurik and Svyatoslav’s duumvirate would prove to be a successful working ar-
rangement. After their political alliance was bolstered by their family tie they worked
hand in glove especially in the defence of the Kievan lands against Polovtsian attacks.
The years from 1184 to 1187 witnessed the height of nomadic incursions on both
banks of the Dnepr. Svyatoslav and Ryurik retaliated frequently and scored victorious
punitive raids on a number of occasions. Ryurik became especially conscientious in
defending his domains along the Ros’ River region and in prodding Svyatoslav into
leading offensive and defensive campaigns against the marauders. Nevertheless, since
the princes were unable to pursue the marauders after each lighting strike the tide of
incursions did not subside until the late 1180s. The chroniclers evidently report only
the major military encounters.
Thus, we are told that on 23 February 1184 Khan Konchak pillaged the Pereyaslavl’
lands. Svyatoslav summoned Ryurik and they rode in pursuit of the tribesmen. Nev-
ertheless, after Svyatoslav’s brother Yaroslav came from Chernigov and joined
them with reinforcements he persuaded them to organize a summer campaign. They
agreed but later Svyatoslav dispatched Igor’ Svyatoslavich of Novgorod Severskiy
and Ryurik sent Vladimir Glebovich of Pereyaslavl’ after the nomads. Even though
Igor’ and Vladimir had a falling out, Igor’ pursued the raiders, defeated them at the
Khiriya River, and took many captive.65 According to this information we see that
the duumvirs shared the obligation of defending all the lands of Rus’. In keeping
with this obligation it is noteworthy that Ryurik participated on campaigns against the
Polovtsy on the left bank even though his own lands on the right bank had not been
plundered. Accordingly, in the summer of 1184 Svyatoslav and Ryurik launched the
major campaign that Yaroslav had advised. On 30 July they scored a great victory at
the Erel’ River where Khans Osoluk Burchevich and Kobyak and many others were
taken captive.66
63 PSRL 2: 624–625.
64 See, for example, PSRL 2: 628, 651, 652, and 659.
65 PSRL 2: 628–629; Gust, 318–319; concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 201.
66 PSRL 2: 630–633; PSRL 1: 394–396; PSRL 25: 91; concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya,
82, 202.
42 Martin Dimnik
In 1185 Khan Konchak once again raided the lands of Pereyaslavl’. After being
informed of his incursion Svyatoslav and Ryurik marshalled a retaliatory force. On
1 March, on finding the nomads camped in a water meadow, the princes attacked the
enemy and captured many of the marauders but the khan escaped.67 In the same year
Igor’ of Novgorod Severskiy led his disastrous campaign against the tribesmen. After
his defeat at the Kayala River, the Polovtsy took advantage of their victory by in-
creasing the number of their raids. Khan Konchak attacked the Pereyaslavl’ lands and
Khan Koza pillaged Chernigov territories.68 Two years later, in 1187, Khan Konchak
pillaged the Ros’ River region again. After that, the chronicler reports, marauding
tribesmen often raided Ryurik’s lands on the right bank of the Dnepr.69
On one occasion, towards the beginning of April in 1187, Svyatoslav and Ryurik
rode out against the Polovtsy who were raiding the ford of Tatinets, on the right bank of
the Dnepr River. After being alerted by the Turkic Black Caps to the deployed princely
retaliatory force, the nomads fled to the left bank of the river. The princes, however,
were unable to ride in pursuit because the spring thaw had suddenly swelled the river
which became impassable. They therefore returned home. In pillaging Tatinets the no-
mads invaded Ryurik’s domains. After the failure of the April campaign, the chronicler
reflects Ryurik’s concern for the defense of the Ros’ River region. He reports the prince’s
enthusiasm for Svyatoslav’s plan to conduct a campaign in the winter of 1187 and his
suggestion to Svyatoslav that he summon all his allies to assemble at Chernigov.70
That winter, therefore, Svyatoslav and Ryurik set out on a second campaign against
the Polovtsy but they quarrelled. When they reached the Sneporod River Yaroslav of
Chernigov did not want to go further but Ryurik insisted on pressing on.71 Although
Svyatoslav was prepared to go deeper into the steppe in search of the nomads he re-
fused to continue without his brother. Ryurik, the chronicler relates, obstinately argued
that the brothers continue the march, but they would not. Ryurik lost the quarrel and
was forced to return home without finding the tribesmen.72 Ryurik’s determination to
pursue the tribesmen vividly demonstrated his responsible conduct in the defense of
his lands, contrary to Tatishchev’s claim that he paid little attention to the ruling of
the land. Significantly, this was the first reported occasion on which Ryurik disagreed
with Svyatoslav, but it would not be the last.
On 1 October 1187 Yaroslav Osmomysl’ of Galich died.73 His passing gave rise to
a vicious succession rivalry during which a number of contenders challenged Yaro-
slav’s sons Oleg and Vladimir for their father’s throne. After Vladimir fled to King
Béla III of Hungary Roman Mstislavich of Vladimir in Volyn’ replaced him in Galich.
67 PSRL 2: 634–636; concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 202.
68 PSRL 2: 644–649; Gust., 320.
69 PSRL 2: 653.
70 PSRL 2: 652–653.
71 The Sneporod has been identified as the Samara, an eastern tributary of the Dnepr below the Erel’
(Ugol), (L. L. Murav’eva and L. F. Kuz’mina, [compilers] Imennoy i geograficheskiy ukazateli k
Ipat’evskoy letopisi [M., 1975], 101).
72 PSRL 2: 653–654; compare Gust., 320–321. For a more detailed examination of the campaigns against
the Polovtsy, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 156–160, 162–181, 187–188.
73 PSRL 2: 657; Gust., 321.
43Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
The king however marched against Galich with the intention of reinstating Vladimir.
Roman therefore fled to the Poles but after they refused to help him he rode to his
father-in-law Ryurik in Belgorod to ask for military assistance. Ryurik sent his son
Rostislav to help him capture Galich.74
Meanwhile, Béla III who was in Galich sent envoys to Kiev inviting Svyatoslav
to send his son Gleb to Galich. He explained that he was prepared to perform the
favour that Svyatoslav had asked of him at an unspecified date. Svyatoslav therefore
dispatched Gleb but without alerting Ryurik to his action. Not surprisingly, Ryurik
became furious when he learnt that Svyatoslav had a special agreement with the king
but Svyatoslav assured him that he had sent his son on a personal matter. Although the
chronicler does not reveal the nature of the personal matter, from later information it
would appear that Svyatoslav had probably requested the king to negotiate a marriage
for Gleb’s daughter Evfimia with an unnamed prince of Byzantium.75 Ryurik was evi-
dently appeased with the explanation because the princess was also his granddaughter.
To prove his goodwill towards his co-ruler and to buttress their alliance Svyatoslav
agreed to join Ryurik in attacking the king in Galich.
In 1188, therefore, Svyatoslav and Ryurik marched against Béla III. On the way
Svyatoslav made a proposal to Ryurik. He suggested that Ryurik rule all the Gali-
cian lands and, in exchange, relinquish to him ‘all the Rus’ lands around Kiev’ (vsei
Rouskoi zemli okolo Kyeva). Ryurik rejected the offer because, the chronicler reports,
he did not wish to part with his patrimony (otchina). Instead, he proposed that they
divide the Galician lands between them. As a result they failed to reach an agreement
and returned home.76 From this information, we see that Svyatoslav was using Galich
as a bargaining chip to gain possession of Ryurik’s Kievan lands. This would allow
him to become the sole ruler of Kiev and the Kievan lands and remove Ryurik as the
co-ruler of Rus’! If Ryurik agreed to the proposal the prince of Kiev would once again
become the single most powerful prince in Rus’. Ryurik’s response was enigmatic. He
refused to part with his Kievan possessions because they were his patrimony.
Which was the patrimony near Kiev that Ryurik was alluding to? As we have
seen, in 1168, the chronicler reported that Ryurik’s domain was Vruchiy but he did
not identify it as Ryurik’s patrimony.77 Nevertheless, the chronicles give convincing
evidence after 1168 that Vruchiy was his patrimony.78 Just the same, was Vruchiy
the patrimony that Ryurik had in mind in 1188 when he refused to relinquish con-
trol of it to Svyatoslav? This is unlikely since the domain of Vruchiy cannot be de-
scribed as ‘all the Rus’ lands around Kiev’.79 Under the year 970 the Povest’ vremen-
nykh let gives us a relevant item of information. It states that Svyatoslav Igorevich
74 PSRL 2: 660–661; compare Gust., 321.
75 See Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 208–209.
76 PSRL 2: 662–663; Gust., 322; concerning the date for the rivalry over Galich, see Berezhkov,
Khronologiya, 204–205. For a more detailed examination, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov
1146–1246, 191–193.
77 Under the year 1170: PSRL 2: 541.
78 See for example, PSRL 2: 543, 547, 657, 669. See also footnote 30 above.
79 Compare Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 193 where it is stated incorrectly that Vruchiy
was the patrimonial domain that Ryurik referred to in this instance.
44 Martin Dimnik
(d. 972) allocated Kiev to his son Yaropolk. To Oleg, his younger son, he gave as a
patrimony the lands of the Dereva tribe whose capital was Vruchiy. 80 Svyatoslav’s
distribution of patrimonial domains therefore confirms that Vruchiy was not part of
the Kievan lands.81
Consequently, what patrimony did Ryurik have in mind when he rejected Svyato-
slav’s offer? Clearly we must look for towns closer to Kiev. In 1180, as we have seen,
when Svyatoslav failed to evict Ryurik and David from their towns in the Kievan
lands, Ryurik was ruling Belgorod and David was in Vyshgorod. These Kievan out-
posts do qualify as being located around Kiev. Were they the patrimony that Ryurik
refused to surrender to Svyatoslav?
Rostislav it appears was the prince who first allocated Kievan towns to his sons.
There is no documented proof that he intended the towns to be their patrimonies but
circumstantial evidence suggests this. As we have seen, around 1162 he gave Vruchiy,
which is not in the Kievan lands, to Ryurik; from later evidence we learn that it was
his patrimony. It is reasonable to assume that he also gave patrimonies to his remain-
ing sons. Thus, it appears that he gave Belgorod as a patrimony to his youngest son
Mstislav. We may infer this from Mstislav’s reply to the Novgorodians under 1178
when he initially declined their invitation to rule Novgorod because, he claimed, he
did not want to depart from his patrimony.82 Although the chronicler does not identify
the patrimony, later evidence makes it clear that the domain in question was Belgorod.
Since, however, Ryurik occupied Belgorod in 1178 after Mstislav went to Novgorod
it appears that he appropriated the town for himself at that time.83
The chronicles neglect to state to which son Rostislav allocated Vyshgorod. Nev-
ertheless, under the year 1174 we learn that Andrey Bogolyubskiy expelled David
from Vyshgorod, Roman from Kiev, and Mstislav from Belgorod. In the same year
he commanded his officials to drive out Ryurik and David ‘from their patrimonies’
(iz otchini svoei).84 We therewith receive indirect confirmation that Andrey looked
upon Vruchiy and Vyshgorod as Ryurik and David’s patrimonies. Significantly, he did
not challenge the two Rostislavichi concerning their patrimonial claims. Rather, he
was determined to evict them because they rebuffed him by refusing to surrender to
him the Kievans whom he accused of poisoning his brother Gleb.85 Andrey’s conduct
reveals that he acknowledged the Rostislavichi claims to Kievan towns as their patri-
monies and that he did not believe their claims to be a contentious issue.
We have no documented evidence informing us when the Rostislavichi ap-
propriated the Kievan towns as their permanent domains. We also are not told
if they gained control of them all at the same time or if they laid claim to them
80 PSRL 2: 55–57; PSRL 1: 67–69; NPL, 119–121.
81 See also A. N. Nasonov who observes that Vruchiy and the derevskaya zemlya around it were
not considered to be part of Rus’ or ‘the Rus’ land’ (“Russkaya zemlya” i obrazovanie territorii
drevnerusskogo gosudarstva [M., 1951], 29).
82 PSRL 2: 606–607.
83 See footnote 57 above.
84 PSRL 2: 573–574.
85 PSRL 2: 569.
45Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
as opportunity arose. For example, did they seize control of Belgorod and Vysh-
gorod while Rostislav ruled Kiev and the other towns during the turbulent 1170s?
There can be little doubt, however, that they consolidated their control during
Ryurik’s rule as senior prince of the dynasty. As we have seen, in 1181 when he
concluded his agreement with Svyatoslav, the prince of Kiev formally acknowl-
edged the Kievan towns to be the permanent possessions of the Rostislavichi. Or,
what is most likely, at that time Svyatoslav merely formalized an existing situa-
tion, namely, that Ryurik as the senior prince of the Rostislavichi controlled the
princely appointments to all the Kievan towns except to Kiev. Up to the creation
of the duumvirate, the prince of Kiev enjoyed the prerogative, at least notionally,
of appointing minor princes to Kievan domains. After the unprecedented pact in
1181 the prince of Kiev formally relinquished that power to Ryurik and the Ros-
tislavichi. Thus we see that in 1188 when Ryurik refused to turn over control of
his patrimony in the Kievan lands he was evidently referring to Belgorod, Vysh-
gorod and all the other Kievan towns.
In the following year, peace was restored in Galicia. Vladimir Yaroslavich escaped
from Hungarian captivity and with the help of Polish forces reinstated himself in
Galich in the early part of August. He then sought backing for his rule from his uncle
Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo in Suzdalia and pledged to be Vsevolod’s loyal vassal.
The latter therefore forbade all the princes from challenging his nephew’s rule in Gal-
ich. In the light of this threat they agreed.86 Significantly, this was the first time after
Andrey Bogolyubskiy’s death in 1174 that the prince of Suzdalia believed himself to
be powerful enough to interfere in the politics of southern Rus’.
Two of the princes most acutely affected by Vsevolod’s threat were the other two
senior Monomashichi: Ryurik of Belgorod and Roman of Vladimir in Volyn’. There
was an important difference in the seniority of the three cousins. Ryurik and Roman
belonged to the branch of Monomakh’s family descended from his eldest son Mstis-
lav. Vsevolod belonged to the branch descended from Monomakh’s second youngest
son Yury Dolgorukiy. Although Ryurik and Roman belonged to a more senior branch,
even more relevant was the consideration that all three belonged to different genera-
tions: Vsevolod belonged to the second generation after Monomakh; Ryurik belonged
to the third generation after Monomakh; and Roman belonged to the fourth genera-
tion after Monomakh. Therefore, Vsevolod was the most senior of the three.87 His
seniority gave him the right to assume the role of the ‘father’ of the Monomashichi in
keeping with the instruction that Yaroslav the Wise had given to his sons before his
death. As we shall see, in his dealings with Ryurik and Roman, Vsevolod would place
great importance on his genealogical seniority. Indeed, to judge from later circumstan-
tial evidence, it was probably at this time that Ryurik and Roman, in acknowledging
Vsevolod to be the senior prince of the Monomashichi, agreed to defer to his judg-
ment in all major political decisions.
86 PSRL 2: 666–667; Gust., 322. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 205.
87 Baumgarten, Généalogies, V, 7, 16, 27, 47; IX, 6; VI, 1, 14. For a more detailed examination, see
Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 193–194.
46 Martin Dimnik
In the summer of 1190 we are told that Svyatoslav and Ryurik brought peace
to the land of Rus’ by forcing the Polovtsy to accept their terms.88 In the autumn,
however, the period of peace ended after Svyatoslav took Khan Kuntuvdey of
Torchesk captive because jealous neighbouring tribesmen levied false accusations
against him. Svyatoslav released Kuntuvdey only after Ryurik convinced him of
the khan’s innocence. Since the latter was the ruler of Torchesk in the Poros’e re-
gion, which was one of the Kievan towns under Ryurik’s jurisdiction, Kuntuvdey
was Ryurik’s vassal. Although Svyatoslav attempted to reestablish peace with the
khan he refused to ignore the unjust charge. He rode to the Polovtsy and per-
suaded them to attack towns along the Ros’ River administered by the Black Caps
who had slandered him. Since the Turkic tribesmen were also Ryurik’s vassals,
Kuntuvdey’s attacks on their towns penalized Ryurik rather than Svyatoslav who
had insulted the khan. Ryurik alerted Svyatoslav to the danger of renewed attacks
and warned him that the two of them should not be looking after their private
affairs in Vruchiy and Chernigov while leaving Rus’ undefended.89 Thus we see
that Ryurik’s concern for Kuntuvdey, for the defense of Rus’, and for running his
domain bespeak a responsible attitude contrary to Tatishchev’s claim that he paid
little attention to the ruling of the land.
In the same autumn of 1190 another crisis strained Ryurik and Svyatoslav’s re-
lationship. The chronicler reports that Svyatoslav had a dispute, which he does not
explain, with Ryurik, David, and the Smolensk land. We are told that Svyatoslav as-
sembled all the Ol’govichi to help him find a means to avoid violating his oath to the
Rostislavichi. The chronicler once again fails to describe the nature of the oath. As
was to be expected, Ryurik as the senior prince of the Rostislavichi was their spokes-
man and, as we shall see, he may also have had the greatest personal interest in the
dispute. Moreover, the news that he drew Vsevolod of Suzdalia into the controversy
suggests that the issue was of concern to all the Monomashichi.
According to the account, Ryurik reminded Svyatoslav that in 1181, when he be-
came prince of Kiev, he had promised to adopt the same terms of rule in relation to
the Rostislavichi that Ryurik’s eldest brother Roman had adopted when he was prince
of Kiev. If Svyatoslav kept his promise then the Rostislavichi would remain his allies.
If, however, he intended to revive the dispute that the Ol’govichi had originally had
with Ryurik’s father Rostislav, Svyatoslav would violate his promise to them. If he did
that, the Rostislavichi would break their alliance with him.90 To judge from Ryurik’s
vague declaration, it appears that Roman had settled to the satisfaction of the Rostis-
lavichi a dispute that the Ol’govichi had had with Rostislav when he ruled Kiev. The
Ol’govichi had challenged him on some unidentified issue but later withdrew their
challenge when his son Roman became prince of Kiev. Ryurik demanded that Svya-
toslav not renew that challenge.
88 PSRL 2: 668. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 206.
89 PSRL 2: 668–669; Gust., 322–323. For a more detailed examination, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of
Chernigov 1146–1246, 196–197.
90 PSRL 2: 670.
47Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
If we review the relations between Ryurik and Svyatoslav over the previous de-
cade we will see that the controversy may have already surfaced on at least two earlier
occasions. The first time was in 1180 when Svyatoslav failed to capture David and to
drive out Ryurik from Belgorod. The second time was eight years later when Svya-
toslav and Ryurik marched against Béla III. Before they besieged Galich Svyatoslav
proposed that Ryurik take all the Galician lands and in exchange give to Svyatoslav
his Kievan domains. Ryurik, however, refused to relinquish control of his Kievan pat-
rimony. To judge from Svyatoslav’s desire to evict David and Ryurik from Rus’ on the
first occasion, and Svyatoslav’s request for the domains around Kiev on the second
occasion, the Rostislavichi jurisdiction over the Kievan towns was the main object of
Svyatoslav’s concern in each instance.
In 1190, the terms of Roman’s rule some fifteen years earlier were central to the
dispute. As we have seen, after Rostislav’s death Andrey Bogolyubskiy appointed
his puppets to Kiev. From 1171 to 1173 Roman was his appointee.91 Later, after An-
drey’s death Roman occupied Kiev again, from 1175 to 1176, but as an independent
ruler.92 On one of these two occasions, probably the second, he most likely formally
acknowledged Belgorod and Vyshgorod as the patrimonies of Mstislav and David. In
doing so he imitated Andrey Bogolyubskiy’s tacit recognition of the patrimonies and
the formal recognition made by Mstislav Izyaslavich. The latter, on becoming prince
of Kiev in 1169, had officially endorsed the Rostislavichi in their domains.93
Even though the Ol’govichi objected to Roman’s confirmation of Rostislavichi pat-
rimonies, it was at that time that they evidently pledged to abide by his verdict. On oc-
cupying Kiev in 1181 Svyatoslav assumed the same authority over the Kievan lands that
Roman had held. Nevertheless, Ryurik’s victory over the Polovtsy undermined Svyato-
slav’s military advantage enabling him to force Svyatoslav to formally acknowledge the
Rostislavichi patrimonies of Belgorod and Vyshgorod just as Roman had done. What is
more, although the chronicles do not report this, Ryurik was probably able to demand an
even greater concession from Svyatoslav. Taking advantage of his victory he demanded
that Svyatoslav also confirm the lesser Kievan domains as Rostislavichi patrimonies.
Thus, if our interpretation of the crisis of 1190 is correct, Svyatoslav attempted to
seize control of Belgorod, Vyshgorod, and the other Kievan outposts without breaking
the oath that he had made in 1181 to Ryurik. That is, he attempted for the third time
since 1180 to deprive the Rostislavichi of their Kievan patrimonies. By doing so he
would depose Ryurik as a duumvir. Moreover he would significantly lessen the ter-
ritorial base of the Rostislavichi because Ryurik, as the senior prince of his dynasty,
would be required to occupy the Rostislavichi capital of Smolensk in place of David.
He would also have to compensate any other Rostislavich who had been ruling a Ki-
evan patrimony with a domain in the Smolensk lands.
In wishing to evict the Rostislavichi from the Kievan domains Svyatoslav and the
Ol’govichi had right on their side. The Ol’govichi would have challenged Rostislav’s
91 PSRL 2: 567–568; for the correct date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 189.
92 PSRL 2: 600, 604.
93 PSRL 2: 534.
48 Martin Dimnik
patrimonial allocations to his sons in the Kievan lands by reminding him that, accord-
ing to tradition, he did not have the authority to grant the Kievan towns as patrimo-
nies because Kiev was not his patrimony. By giving Kievan towns away as patrimo-
nies he violated the so-called testament of Yaroslav the Wise according to which the
Kievan lands were to become the common patrimony of his three eldest surviving
sons - Izyaslav, Svyatoslav, and Vsevolod - and their descendants. Furthermore, the
Ol’govichi would have reminded Rostislav that he could grant Kievan domains to his
sons only as temporary possessions. After his death his sons would have to relinquish
control of them. Each new prince of Kiev assumed the authority either to reappoint the
incumbent prince to a Kievan domain or to give it to another prince of his choosing.
Svyatoslav objected to Ryurik because the Rostislavichi retained their Kievan do-
mains after Rostislav’s death and therewith violated traditional practice. That would
have been the formal reason why Svyatoslav sought to evict the Rostislavichi from the
Kievan lands. There was also a more practical reason that he had expressed in 1180
when he attempted to capture David of Vyshgorod and evict Ryurik from Belgorod.
He had declared that by living in the two Kievan outposts the brothers stymied his
plans in the Kievan lands at every turn.
In the end Svyatoslav’s plans whatever they were came to naught. Ryurik’s envoys
gave him the agreement that Ryurik, David, and Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo required
him to accept on oath. At first he refused to agree to the terms and dismissed the
envoys but later he summoned them back and complied with the Monomashichi de-
mand.94 We are not told the terms of the settlement but we may assume that they were
similar if not the same as the ones that he had accepted in 1181.
Thus, in 1190 Svyatoslav backed down from his challenge to the Rostislavichi
and Ryurik retained control of the Kievan patrimonies with even greater authority.
Svyatoslav may have had two cogent reasons for not rejecting Ryurik’s terms. On the
one hand he did not wish to initiate a full-scale war that would also allow the Polovtsy
to intensify their incursions. On the other hand, as we shall see, in 1181 he had desig-
nated Ryurik to be his successor to Kiev. Thus, after his death Ryurik would assume
control of Kiev in addition to the Kievan domains. At that time his crusade to make the
Kievan towns incontestable Rostislavichi patrimonies would be virtually assured.
After Ryurik and Svyatoslav were reconciled over the crisis of 1190 they returned
to the business of defending the Kievan lands against nomadic incursions. Thus we
are told that two years later the two stood guard at Kanev all summer to defend Rus’
from Polovtsian raids.95 In the winter of 1192 Ryurik was also reconciled with Khan
Kuntuvdey. He bribed the Polovtsy into handing over the miscreant and reinstated
him as a vassal. Nevertheless, he did not repeat Kuntuvdey’s controversial appoint-
ment to Torchesk. Instead he gave the khan a less important town on the Ros’ River in
part, no doubt, as punishment for his attacks on the Poros’e region.96 Moreover, in this
94 PSRL 2: 669–670. See Dimnik, “The Patrimonies of the Rostislavichi”, 206–209. For a somewhat
different interpretation of the controversy, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 197–199.
95 PSRL 2: 673; Gust, 323.
96 PSRL 2: 674; Gust., 323.
49Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
way Ryurik demonstrated his administrative acumen by obviating any future opposi-
tion from the Black Caps who had objected to Kuntuvdey’s rule in Torchesk.
In 1193 Ryurik demonstrated his talents as a negotiator by concluding peace with
the Lukomorskie Polovtsy. Following his success Svyatoslav proposed that the co-
rulers conclude peace with all the nomads above all with the Burchevichi.97 The two
princes therefore went to Kanev to parley with the tribesmen who came to the left
bank of the Dnepr. They, however, insulted the princes and the negotiations came
to naught. After the Polovtsy departed Ryurik recommended to Svyatoslav that they
launch a winter campaign against the nomads. Svyatoslav however excused himself
on the grounds that he had personal business to look after in his patrimony. Ryurik
observed that he also had personal business to attend to, namely, he proposed to lead
a campaign against the Lithuanians. Svyatoslav however accused Ryurik of shirking
his obligation to the Kievan lands since the Poros’e region was under his jurisdiction
and defending it was his duty.98 Despite Svyatoslav’s criticism of Ryurik, his intention
to campaign against the Lithuanians testifies to his attitude of responsibility for the
administration and defense of his patrimonial domain of Vruchiy.
That winter the Polovtsy intensified their raids on the Poros’e region. Ryurik’s son
Rostislav, in response to a request from the Black Caps, led a campaign against the no-
mads without informing his father. His force scored a brilliant victory. On learning of
Rostislav’s raid Svyatoslav complained to Ryurik accusing his son of renewing war with
the tribesmen. Moreover, despite the imminent danger to the Poros’e region that this raid
created, Ryurik still proposed to lead a separate campaign against the Lithuanians. Ryurik
took Svyatoslav’s criticism to heart and aborted his private campaign. During January
and February of 1194, therefore, the two princes stationed their troops at Vasiliev guard-
ing against any possible raids. Since the nomads did not strike Svyatoslav went to his
domain and Ryurik returned to Vruchiy. After the princes withdrew, however, the nomads
renewed their attacks. The chronicler’s remark at the end of this report is noteworthy in
the light of Tatishchev’s accusation that Ryurik paid little attention to the ruling of the land.
The chronicler remarks that Ryurik “stood guard at Vasiliev for a long time, serving his
lands”.99 This was Ryurik and Svyatoslav’s last joint military expedition.
Ryurik as Sole Ruler of Kiev
Towards the end of July in 1194 Svyatoslav died in Kiev. His last official act
was to summon Ryurik to Kiev.100 This news confirms that he had pledged to des-
ignate Ryurik as his successor. Ryurik’s authority in Kiev however would be differ-
97 The Lukomorskie Polovtsy probably lived at the mouth of the Dnepr River and along the shores of
the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov. The Burchevichi lived along the east bank of the Dnepr River
(S. A. Pletneva, “Polovetskaya zemlya,” Drevnerusskie knyazhestva X–XIII vv., ed. L. G. Beskrovniy
[M., 1975], 286–288).
98 PSRL 2: 676; Gust., 323.
99 PSRL 2: 676–679. For a more detailed examination, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–
1246, 202–204.
100 PSRL 2: 681.
50 Martin Dimnik
ent from Svyatoslav’s authority. While Svyatoslav ruled Kiev he had held at best
a notional superiority over his co-ruler Ryurik and the Rostislavichi. After Ryurik
became sole ruler of Kiev, however, the Ol’govichi had to swear oaths of allegiance
to him. Moreover, as co-rulers Svyatoslav and Ryurik had addressed the interests of
both the Ol’govichi and the Rostislavichi. It remained to be seen if Ryurik would
continue this policy or favour the Rostislavichi at the expense of the Ol’govichi.
He would undoubtedly be persuaded to favour his own dynasty by the fact that he
wielded greater power than Svyatoslav had done. He was now the sole ruler of both
Kiev and the Kievan domains and he did not have to work with a co-ruler from a
rival dynasty who could curtail his actions.
According to the Hypatian chronicler, the Kievans welcomed Ryurik with the
customary pageantry and he “sat on the throne of his grandfather and his father”
in St. Sophia.101 This information suggests that, contrary to Tatishchev’s assertion
that the Kievans had little love for him, at least at the beginning of his reign he was
popular with the townspeople. Moreover, from the chronicler’s report we may as-
sume that the townspeople acclaimed him as grand prince and the metropolitan en-
throned him. According to the Suzdalian Laurentian chronicler, however, Vsevolod
Bol’shoe Gnezdo sent his officials to install Ryurik.102 Vsevolod’s chronicler wished
to emphasize that his prince, genealogically the most senior member of the Mono-
mashichi, wielded supreme authority over the dynasty including over the appoint-
ment of the prince of Kiev. Nevertheless, the report is not accurate. Since Vsevo-
lod’s emissaries could not have arrived in Kiev from distant Suzdalia as quickly as
Ryurik had travelled from nearby Belgorod, Vsevolod’s envoys must have arrived
after Ryurik was already installed. Consequently, they would have merely conveyed
Vsevolod’s official approval of a fait accompli. The important point to note is that
Vsevolod’s intervention in Ryurik’s installation was a warning to him that Vsevolod
planned to meddle in his affairs.
On becoming prince of Kiev one of Ryurik’s most important tasks was to allocate
Kievan domains to the minor Monomashichi. Thus, on 17 May 1195 his brother Da-
vid of Smolensk came to Kiev to help him distribute the Rostislavichi patrimonies in
the principality of Kiev. Ryurik seemingly invited his younger brother to come and
help him make the allocations out of deference to his status as the only other surviv-
ing son of Rostislav. Even though Ryurik, as prince of Kiev and senior prince of the
dynasty controlled all the Kievan domains, he chose not to distribute them without
his brother’s collaboration. It is noteworthy, however, that he avoided seeking advice
from Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo. Since he treated the towns as Rostislavichi patrimo-
nies he considered allotting them to be a Rostislavichi matter which did not require
Vsevolod’s approval. Consequently, he kept Belgorod in his own family by giving it
to his son Rostislav, and he allowed David to keep Vyshgorod. He granted five lesser
outposts to his son-in-law Roman Mstislavich of Galich. Thus only the Monomashichi
101 PSRL 2: 681.
102 PSRL 1: 412; PSRL 25: 95. For a more detailed examination, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov
1146–1246, 211–212.
51Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
now ruled the Kievan domains especially after Ryurik removed the only Ol’govich,
Svyatoslav’s son Gleb and his own son-in-law, from Kanev.103
Vsevolod, however, challenged Ryurik’s allocations. He pointed out that Ryurik
and the Rostislavichi had acknowledged him as the senior prince in the House of
Monomakh. To be sure, Ryurik admitted this in one of his messages to Vsevolod when
he stated: “you, brother, are the eldest of us all in Vladimir [Monomakh’s] tribe.”
(A ty, brate, v Volodimeri plemeni starei esi nas.)104 The chronicler does not report
on what occasion all the Monomashichi, above all the Rostislavichi and Roman, ac-
knowledged Vsevolod as their senior prince. As noted above, however, this may have
occurred in 1189 when Vsevolod demanded that all the princes of Rus’ pledge not to
evict his nephew Vladimir Yaroslavich from Galich.
Vsevolod observed that despite his seniority Ryurik had ignored him by refusing
to grant him towns. He therefore withdrew his military support to Ryurik and told him
to seek help for the defence of Rus’ from those to whom he had allotted towns. Vsevo-
lod was especially furious because Ryurik had given Torchesk, Trepol’, Korsun’, Bo-
guslavl’, and Kanev to his son-in-law Roman. Vsevolod however demanded to have
those towns for himself and threatened to attack Ryurik. On being told of Vsevolod’s
ire, Roman agreed to return the towns to Ryurik in exchange for either other domains
or a comparable payment. Ryurik handed over the five towns to Vsevolod and he was
appeased. Vsevolod, in turn, gave Torchesk to Ryurik’s son Rostislav, his own son-in-
law, and dispatched his posadniki to administer the other four towns.
It is noteworthy that Vsevolod challenged Ryurik’s distribution of towns to Ro-
man not because he claimed that Ryurik lacked the authority to allocate the towns
but because Ryurik had ignored him, that is, out of wounded pride. In other words
Vsevolod, like his brother Andrey Bogolyubskiy at an earlier date, acknowledged
the Kievan towns to be Rostislavichi patrimonies which they had the right to rule.
But Vsevolod undoubtedly had a more practical reason than merely wounded pride
for demanding the towns. By gaining control of a number of Kievan domains he in-
creased his influence over Ryurik. Just as the latter had curbed Svyatoslav’s rule in
Kiev with his jurisdiction over the two neighbouring Kievan outposts, Vsevolod could
curtail Ryurik’s power as prince of Kiev through the posadniki that he had appointed
to the four Kievan towns. Nevertheless, there was an important difference between
Svyatoslav and Ryurik’s rule in Kiev. Although Svyatoslav and Ryurik had been co-
rulers, Ryurik had acknowledged Svyatoslav to be the senior partner because he was
senior in age and in genealogical seniority. As prince of Kiev Ryurik, however, was to
be neither an autonomous ruler nor the senior partner. He had to rule under the thumb
of Vsevolod, the senior prince of all the Monomashichi who now also obtained a ter-
ritorial foothold in the Kievan land itself.
Roman was furious when he learnt that Torchesk had been given to his brother-in-
law Rostislav claiming that Ryurik had wanted to give the town to Rostislav from the
very beginning. Ryurik however reminded Roman that he had voluntarily surrendered
103 PSRL 2: 681–685; Gust., 324. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 207.
104 PSRL 2: 686; see I. Ya. Froyanov, Kievskaya Rus’ (L., 1980), 56.
52 Martin Dimnik
the towns to Vsevolod and after that they were his to do with as he pleased. He cau-
tioned Roman that they should not estrange Vsevolod because all the Monomashichi
acknowledged him to be their senior prince. Refusing to be reconciled Roman conspired
against Ryurik by forming an alliance with Yaroslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov and
persuading him to seize Kiev. On learning this news Ryurik informed Vsevolod that
Roman and the Ol’govichi were planning to wage war against him and called upon
Vsevolod to come to his defense. In the face of his father-in-law’s impending retaliation
Roman sought safety with the Poles. Unfortunately for him, while with the Poles he was
wounded in battle and, on returning to Volyn’, sought to be reconciled with Ryurik. The
latter forgave him for his betrayal and gave him the town of Polonyy and a district on
the Poros’e region in compensation for his loss of the five towns.105
In the autumn of 1195, after Yaroslav’s overt declaration of hostility and his failed
alliance with Roman, Ryurik took precautions against this new threat to his rule from
the Ol’govichi. He, David, and Vsevolod challenged Yaroslav with an ultimatum.
They demanded that he and the Ol’govichi pledge never to seize their patrimony,
neither Kiev nor Smolensk, either from them, or from their descendants, or from any
other prince from the House of Monomakh. With this demand the Rostislavichi, for
the first time, attempted to secure their control permanently over Kiev. In other words,
they attempted to violate the directive given by Yaroslav the Wise in his so-called
testament that Kiev must not become the permanent possession of any one of his
sons but remain the common patrimony of Izyaslav, Svyatoslav, and Vsevolod and
their descendants.106 Should Yaroslav capitulate to Ryurik’s demand and relinquish the
rightful claim of the Ol’govichi, then the Monomashichi, but above all Ryurik and the
Rostislavichi, would become the sole claimants to Kiev.
In making their controversial demand the Rostislavichi attempted to realize Mono-
makh’s ambition of securing Kiev as the patrimony of his descendants. As it has been
suggested elsewhere, in 1097 at the Congress of Lyubech, Svyatopolk Izyaslavich
the prince of Kiev, and Vladimir Monomakh the prince of Pereyaslavl’ demoted the
Svyatoslavichi of Chernigov to the place below Monomakh in the order of succession
to Kiev. Consequently, in 1113 after Svyatopolk died, Monomakh rather than Oleg
Svyatoslavich occupied Kiev.107 Later, before his death in 1125, Monomakh seem-
ingly convinced the citizens of Kiev to recognize his eldest son Mstislav as his suc-
cessor and to proclaim Kiev to be his patrimony.108 All of Mstislav’s heirs, however,
were not as capable as their father had been at ruling Kiev and failed to maintain their
control over it against powerful Ol’govichi challengers. In 1195, the Rostislavichi
endeavoured to usurp the right of succession from the Ol’govichi once again. Signifi-
cantly, in the House of Monomakh the Rostislavichi did not have first claim to Kiev.
As we have seen, Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo had that right as the patriarch of all the
105 Concerning the controversy over Ryurik’s allocation of domains, see PSRL 2: 683–688; Gust., 324;
compare under the year 1196: Mosk. 96–97. Compare also Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–
1246, 213–214, where it was suggested wrongly that David was older than Ryurik.
106 PSRL 2: 688–690; Gust, 325; under the year 1196: PSRL 25: 97.
107 M. Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov, 1054–1146 (Toronto, 1994), 216–218.
108 Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov, 1054–1146, 305–308; 324–331.
53Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
Monomashichi. Indeed, in the early 1170s he had ruled Kiev fleetingly when his elder
brother Andrey Bogolyubskiy had appointed him to the town.
Yaroslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov did not reject the Monomashichi demands
outright but conceded on one point. He promised that he and the Ol’govichi would
not seek to evict Ryurik from Kiev and therewith prudently agreed to maintain the
status quo. After all, Ryurik was already ensconced in Kiev and Yaroslav realized that
should he attempt to evict him Ryurik could summon the superior forces of the united
Monomashichi to his aid. Nevertheless, Yaroslav refused to give up the right of future
Ol’govichi generations to ruling Kiev. Rather, he proclaimed bluntly, that following
Ryurik and David’s death succession to Kiev would be decided by God’s providence.
In other words, the Rostislavichi and the Ol’govichi would have to determine who
was to rule Kiev through military force. Yaroslav pointed out that as the Ol’govichi
and the Monomashichi were both offspring of Yaroslav the Wise, they both had a le-
gitimate claim to ruling the capital of Rus’.109 In 1195, therefore, Yaroslav rebuffed the
Rostislavichi by rejecting the most controversial demand that they had made to date.
His refusal to comply with Ryurik and David’s ultimatum however was too important
for the Rostislavichi to pass over without a military challenge.
It was most likely Ryurik who prompted the other two Monomashichi to formulate
the challenge to Yaroslav since he was the one whom Yaroslav had planned to depose. If
he was driven out of Kiev he would lose political superiority in southern Rus’. Thus, af-
ter Yaroslav rejected the demand, it was again Ryurik who took the initiative by turning
to Vsevolod for help. He took advantage of Vsevolod’s insistence that the Rostislavichi
respect him as the patriarch of the Monomashichi by requesting him to assume the
responsibility of leading a campaign against Yaroslav. Vsevolod complied with the re-
quest by promising to march against Chernigov in the winter. Acting as the commander-
in-chief of a joint campaign with the Rostislavichi would bolster his status as the senior
prince of the Monomashichi. Nevertheless, after Yaroslav sued for peace and promised
to accept all of Vsevolod’s terms, he cancelled the campaign. In 1195, at the beginning
of the winter, Yaroslav also sent a delegation to Ryurik requesting him to refrain from in-
vading the territories of Chernigov before he, Vsevolod, and David had decided whether
to be reconciled or to initiate war. Ryurik agreed, sent the Polovtsy back to their camps
in the steppe, and withdrew to his patrimony of Vruchiy.110
We may assume that when Yaroslav asked Ryurik for a truce he probably prom-
ised not to challenge Ryurik for Kiev. In return, to judge from subsequent information,
Ryurik granted him the town of Vitebsk which was under Rostislavichi jurisdiction but
located west of the principality of Smolensk. Although Ryurik sent messengers to his
brother in Smolensk asking him to arrange for Yaroslav’s occupation of the town, the
109 According to a late source, Yaroslav declared that the Ol’govichi and the Monomashichi both had
the right to rule Kiev from the days of their forefathers according to the ladder system of succession
instituted by Yaroslav the Wise depending on to whom God chose to give it (“Patriarshaya ili
Nikonovskaya letopis’,” PSRL 10 [SPb., 1885], 26–27).
110 Concerning the demand of the Monomashichi, see PSRL 2: 688–690; under the year 1196: PSRL 25:
97. Concerning the dating of these events, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 207. See also Dimnik, The
Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 215–217.
54 Martin Dimnik
prince of Vitebsk, who was David’s son-in-law, refused to hand it over. Yaroslav, how-
ever, was convinced that David was the one who refused to comply with Ryurik’s direc-
tive and made preparations for war. In March of 1196 he dispatched an Ol’govichi force
commanded by two of his nephews to evict David’s son-in-law from Vitebsk.
The Ol’govichi force defeated David’s troops and took captive his most senior
nephew Mstislav Romanovich. Moreover, after defeated Smolensk soldiers informed
Yaroslav’s nephews that the people of Smolensk were dissatisfied with David’s rule,
the two Ol’govichi suggested to their uncle that he launch an attack on David him-
self in Smolensk. Ryurik sent messengers to warn Yaroslav that should he capture
Smolensk and kill David he, Ryurik, would retaliate by attacking Chernigov. In the
light of Ryurik’s threat Yaroslav turned back from his campaign and sent messen-
gers to Ryurik absolving himself of any wrong doing. He argued that David was the
guilty party because he had helped his son-in-law to keep Vitebsk. Ryurik, for his
part, sought to free David from blame by explaining that his messengers had not yet
reached David before Yaroslav waged war. The outcome of their disagreement was
that the two princes remained at odds.111 The incident reveals Ryurik’s loyalty to his
brother and to the Rostislavichi. As senior prince of the dynasty he assumed the role
of the defender of its princes, their rights, and their claims.
Following the Vitebsk conflict Ryurik once again sent messengers to Vsevolod in
Suzdalia admonishing him for failing to attack Chernigov as he had promised to do.
As a result of Vsevolod’s failure to attack Chernigov, Ryurik argued, Yaroslav had sent
his troops against the Rostislavichi at Vitebsk which took captive Ryurik’s nephew
Mstislav Romanovich. As we have seen under the year 1180 when Vsevolod himself
had captured Svyatoslav’s son Gleb, the princes of every dynasty in Rus’ looked upon
the capture of one of their number as a great disgrace to their dynasty. Ryurik there-
fore demanded that Vsevolod avenge the insult by freeing Mstislav. Vsevolod prom-
ised to come with his forces but instructed Ryurik that, in the meantime, he begin ag-
gressive action against the Ol’govichi. During the summer of 1196, therefore, Ryurik
conducted sorties into the Chernigov lands but Vsevolod failed to arrive. Yaroslav, for
his part, pleaded with Ryurik to refrain from plundering Ol’govichi domains and tried
to reassure Ryurik that he neither intended to attack Kiev nor that he had any argument
with Ryurik. What is more, he promised to release Mstislav if Ryurik would pacify
him with David and Vsevolod. Despite these conciliatory overtures Ryurik stubbornly
refused to cooperate and continued conducting his raids onto Ol’govichi lands.112
Meanwhile, by the autumn of 1196 Roman’s wounds which he had sustained
while fighting with the Poles had healed. He therefore renewed his alliance with
Yaroslav who was undoubtedly eager to find allies in the light of Ryurik’s persistent
incursions. In retaliation Roman ordered his men to raid Rostislavichi domains in the
Kievan lands. By attacking Rostislavichi towns he forced Ryurik to withdraw some
111 Concerning the campaign against Vitebsk, see PSRL 2: 690–694; Gust., 325; under the year 1196:
PSRL 25: 97–98. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 207. Compare Dimnik, The
Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 218–220 where it is suggested wrongly that David was older than
Ryurik.
112 PSRL 2: 694–696. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 207.
55Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
of his troops from raiding the Chernigov lands. Thus, as a counter measure, Ryurik
dispatched his nephew Mstislav Mstislavich to Vladimir Yaroslavich of Galich ask-
ing him to assist Mstislav in pillaging Roman’s domains. While Roman’s troops and
Ryurik’s allies were raiding each others territories, Ryurik himself rode to join forces
with Vsevolod who had finally invaded the Chernigov lands.113
After Vsevolod joined forces with David he wished to be reconciled with Yaroslav
and the Ol’govichi but David remained adamant that they should attack Chernigov.
David reminded Vsevolod that he had promised to join Ryurik and David at Chernigov
where they would dictate to Yaroslav terms acceptable to all three Monomashichi.
Vsevolod, however, had his mind set on negotiating a private agreement. Therefore,
ignoring David’s objections and without informing Ryurik of his intention, he sent
messengers to Yaroslav to negotiate a separate pact.
Not surprisingly, Vsevolod changed to his own advantage some of the terms that
Ryurik had insisted the Monomashichi impose upon Yaroslav. Similar to Ryurik, he
required Yaroslav to set Mstislav Romanovich free. Nevertheless, Vsevolod had a
personal motive in making this demand because Mstislav was his relative through
marriage.114 He also introduced a new demand. He insisted that Yaroslav evict from
Chernigov Yaropolk, the son of Vsevolod’s eldest brother Rostislav.115 In 1174, after
the death of Andrey Bogolyubskiy, Yaropolk had succeeded him to Vladimir for a
brief period. As Vsevolod’s genealogically most senior nephew and with Yaroslav’s
military support he remained a potential challenger to Vsevolod’s rule in Vladimir.
Yaroslav appeased Vsevolod by promising to free Mstislav and to evict Yaropolk. Fur-
thermore, Vsevolod insisted that Yaroslav sever his alliance with Roman. Although
this demand was in keeping with Ryurik’s wishes Vsevolod made only a token effort at
enforcing it. It was to his advantage to keep Yaroslav and Roman’s pact alive because
as allies they presented a threat to Ryurik’s control of Kiev. Fear of being attacked by
the two princes would guarantee Ryurik’s dependence on Vsevolod’s military support
and in this way buttress Vsevolod’s supremacy in the House of Monomakh. Thus,
in the light of his political interests he did not object when Yaroslav refused to end
his pact with Roman. Finally, in keeping with the demands that the Monomashichi
had made in the previous year, Vsevolod prohibited Yaroslav from either driving out
Ryurik from Kiev or David from Smolensk. To Ryurik’s great displeasure, however,
Vsevolod omitted the demand that the Ol’govichi relinquish their claim to Kiev on
behalf of future generations of Ol’govichi.
As was to be expected, after Ryurik learnt the terms that Vsevolod’s agreement
he was furious and rejected it. Even though David had kissed the Holy Cross to the
settlement Ryurik refused to be pacified. He accused Vsevolod of breaking his every
promise. Above all, he looked upon Vsevolod’s unwillingness to break the alliance
between Roman and Yaroslav, and the latter’s refusal to renounce the claims of future
113 PSRL 2: 696–698.
114 According to Vsevolod’s chronicler, the prince’s main objective for marching south was to obtain the
release of his svat Mstislav and to secure Kiev for Ryurik (PSRL 1: 413).
115 Baumgarten, Généalogies, VI, 16; Rapov, Knyazheskie vladenyia, 165–166.
56 Martin Dimnik
generations of Ol’govichi to Kiev as devastating failures for the Rostislavichi. The
chronicler reports that in his indignation he repossessed the four Kievan towns that he
had granted to Vsevolod a year earlier and allotted them to his brothers.116 After that
Ryurik remained estranged from Vsevolod.
On 23 April 1197, David died and Mstislav Romanovich, whom Yaroslav had set
free as he promised, succeeded him as prince of Smolensk.117 For a few years fol-
lowing David’s death inter-dynastic rivalries subsided and, to judge from chronicle
information, allowed Ryurik to direct his energies to cultural projects. On 1 January
1198 we are told that the metropolitan consecrated the church of St. Vasily that Ryurik
had built and dedicated to his patron saint.118 In the same year he commissioned rein-
forcing the supporting wall beneath the church of St. Michael at the Vidubitskiy mon-
astery.119 In the following year, after the wall was completed, his chronicler reported
that the prince with his family came to the monastery for a blessing ceremony. As has
been noted above, in his encomium of gratitude Igumen Moisey of the Vidubitskiy
monastery praised Ryurik with great enthusiasm giving us, contrary to Tatishchev’s
scribe who claimed that the Kievans had little love for Ryurik, a glowing portrayal of
the prince.120 Moreover, building a church and the restraining wall for the Church of
St. Michael were activities that reflected a responsible administration, one that Tatish-
chev’s chronicler denied existed during the period of Ryurik’s rule.
After the few years of relative peace the last decade of Ryurik’s career proved to
be turbulent. During the first five years the bane of his life was his son-in-law Roman
Mstislavich. After Vladimir Yaroslavich died in Galich in 1198 Roman occupied the
town.121 Refusing to forgive his father-in-law for granting the five Kievan towns to
Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo he began raiding Ryurik’s lands and those of neighbour-
ing Rostislavichi. In 1201 Ryurik finally summoned the Ol’govichi to help him retali-
ate against Roman. Five years earlier, as we have seen, Yaroslav of Chernigov had
refused to sever his pact with Roman. In 1201, however, Yaroslav’s successor Oleg
Svyatoslavich broke that alliance. He chose to work with Ryurik just as his father
Svyatoslav had collaborated with him when the two had exercised dual rule over
southern Rus’. Accordingly, Oleg rode to Ryurik’s assistance.
Roman, however, rallied the troops from Galich and Vladimir in Volyn’. Signifi-
cantly, the Monomashichi, the Turkic Black Caps, and the militias from all the towns
116 Concerning Vsevolod’s campaign against Chernigov, see PSRL 2: 694–702; Gust., 325–326; see also
under the year 1197: PSRL 1: 413; PSRL 25: 98–99. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya,
85, 208. For a more detailed examination of the negotiations, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov
1146–1246, 220–221, 223–227.
117 PSRL 2: 702; Gust, 326; see under the year 1198: PSRL 25: 99; PSRL 1: 414. According to Berezhkov,
David was 57 years of age when he died (concerning David’s death, see his Khronologiya, 208).
118 See under the year 1197: PSRL 2: 707. Concerning the correct date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 208.
119 See under the year 1199: PSRL 2: 708–711; Gust., 326. Concerning the correct date, see Berezhkov,
Khronologiya, 209–210.
120 PSRL 2: 711–715. Concerning the encomium, see footnotes 4 and 5 above.
121 See under the year 1199: Gust., 326. Gust. reports the death of Yaroslav Mstislavich and other events
under the year 1199 which the Lav. also puts under the year 1199, but which, according to Berezhkov,
occurred in 1198 (Khronologiya, 209). This suggests that the events that Gust. reports under the year
1199 also occurred in 1198.
57Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
in the Kievan lands also came to his aid. Such overwhelming desertion of Ryurik’s
allies seemingly buttresses the view that he was unpopular in the Kievan lands. To
be sure, the chronicler reports that the Kievans opened the gates of the lower town
(podol’) to Roman’s troops. This evidence suggests that there may be an element of
truth to Tatishchev’s claim that the Kievans had little love for Ryurik.122 Neverthe-
less, the desertion of the Monomashichi and the inhabitants of the Kievan towns in
this instance is the only recorded evidence before 1201 of opposition to Ryurik from
among his allies. This implies that at least until that year he was not generally disliked.
Rather, in this instance the desertions may have been prompted by a specific incident.
That event may have been Ryurik’s alliance with the Ol’govichi who not long ago,
under Yaroslav’s command, had been the bitter enemies of the Rostislavichi. Ryurik’s
resolve to seek assistance from his erstwhile rivals for Kiev may have alienated his
Monomashichi relatives and the Kievans.
In face of the opposition from the townspeople and Roman’s troops, Ryurik and
Oleg surrendered. Roman permitted Ryurik to withdraw to his patrimony of Vruchiy
and Oleg to return to Chernigov. From a late chronicle we learn that, before march-
ing against Ryurik, Roman had sent messengers to Suzdalia advising Vsevolod that
he proposed to expel Ryurik from Kiev. In this way he sought approval for his action
from Vsevolod out of deference to his seniority in the House of Monomakh. Vsevo-
lod concurred with Roman’s plan and the two concluded an agreement.123 Thus, after
Ryurik departed from Kiev Vsevolod and Roman appointed Ingvar’ Yaroslavich of
Lutsk to Kiev.124
Two years later Ryurik punished the Kievans for betraying him. On 2 January
1203 he, with the help of Oleg and the Ol’govichi, sacked Kiev. We are told that the
Polovtsy from the entire Polovtsian land were especially brutal in massacring the in-
habitants. In this way Ryurik ruthlessly avenged himself against the Kievans who had
expressed their hostility to him by opening the town’s gates to Roman. According to
the chronicler the evil meted out that day on the inhabitants of Kiev was unparalleled
since the introduction of Christianity to Rus’.125 According to this statement, we may
conclude that Ryurik’s devastation exceeded all previous ones including the one in
1168 inflicted by Andrey Bogolyubskiy’s coalition. It is noteworthy that whereas in
the 1180s the Polovtsy were Svyatoslav and Ryurik’s fiercest enemies, by the turn of
the thirteenth century many tribesmen had been subdued sufficiently to serve Ryurik
as auxiliaries in his battles against other princes.
After Ryurik let his troops pillage the town and massacre the populace, he pru-
dently refrained from occupying it. He had no desire to face the hostility of its survi-
122 Tat. 4, 341; Tat. 3, 184–185.
123 See under the year 1201: PSRL 10: 34. See also under the year 1202: Tat. 4, 327; Tat. 3, 167.
124 See under the year 1202: PSRL 1: 417–418; Gust., 327–328; PSRL 25: 160. Concerning the date, see
Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 86–87. Ingvar was Roman’s junior cousin, see, Baumgarten, Généalogies,
XIV, 1. See also Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 241–242.
125 PSRL 1: 418–419; PSRL 25: 100. According to the Novgorod chronicler the attackers captured Kiev on
1 January, on the Feast of St. Basil (NPL, 45, 240). Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya,
87, 247. For a more detailed examination of the sack of Kiev, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov
1146–1246, 243–245.
58 Martin Dimnik
vors. Nevertheless, lest Kiev fall into Roman’s hands once again he appointed Oleg’s
younger brother Vsevolod Chermnyy as its prince.126 Presumably, the appointment
would serve as an interim measure until such a time when he himself could return
as the town’s prince. His selection of an Ol’govich was calculated. He could not ap-
point one of the Monomashichi since all the junior princes ruling Kievan towns had
deserted him for Roman. Ryurik also refused to ask Oleg because as the senior prince
of the Ol’govichi he could have threatened his own claim. Vsevolod Chermnyy, the
second Ol’govich in seniority after Oleg, was a safer choice. Paradoxically, therefore,
whereas in 1196 Ryurik had demanded that the Ol’govichi, as a dynasty, relinquish
their claim to Kiev forever, he himself was now forced to appoint an Ol’govich to rule
it as his lieutenant. In the meantime he returned to Vruchiy.
Since Ryurik and Oleg had sacked Kiev in retaliation for Roman’s raids on
Ryurik’s lands, Roman took it upon himself to mediate reconciliations between
the princes. First he approached Vsevolod of Suzdalia and Oleg. Thus, in February
of 1203 the two sent delegations to each other and concluded peace.127 Roman him-
self was also pacified with the Ol’govichi. Meanwhile, on 16 February he marched
against Ryurik in Vruchiy who capitulated without opposition and promised to break
off relations with Oleg and the Polovtsy. Furthermore, Roman advised him to petition
Vsevolod to reinstate him in Kiev and promised to intercede on his behalf. Ryurik
did as Roman advised him and, the chronicler reports, Vsevolod forgave him for the
atrocities that he had perpetrated against the Kievans and reinstated him in Kiev.128
Roman had a number of reasons for placating Ryurik and returning him to Kiev.
As long as he was denied Kiev he would inevitably continue raiding Roman’s lands
and the Kievan lands with the Ol’govichi and the Polovtsy. Moreover, it would be
futile to appoint another prince to Kiev in Ryurik’s stead as appointing Ingvar’ had
proven to be. Ryurik would inevitably challenge any prince of Kiev whether he was
an Ol’govich or another Monomashich. Therefore, if Roman could not appoint a sub-
stitute for Ryurik to rule Kiev, the most logical solution appeared to be to reappoint
Ryurik himself but under controlled conditions as a subservient lieutenant. Roman
sought to accomplish this by making Ryurik break off his pacts with the Ol’govichi
and the Polovtsy and by making him dependent on Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo and
himself. In this way Ryurik would be a pawn in Vsevolod and Roman’s hands.
In reappointing Ryurik to Kiev Roman restored temporary peace to the land.
That winter (1203/1204) in a gesture of solidarity, Ryurik, Roman, and other princes
conducted a successful campaign against the nomads from whom they seized much
booty. On returning from the steppe they assembled at Trepol’ to allot towns as pay-
126 “Novgorodskaya chetvertaya letopis’,” PSRL 4 (Petrograd, 1915), 180; “Novgorodskaya
pyataya letopis’,” PSRL 4(ii) (Petrograd, 1917), 180. Compare Fennell who believes that only the
“Novgorodskaya chetvertaya letopis’” gives this information. He identifies this reference as an error
and suggests that Vsevolod’s name was taken from a later entry (The Crisis, 41, n. 28).
127 Ipat. has no information for the years 1199 to 1205, and the text in Lav. for the years 1203 to 1205 is
corrupt. However, circumstantial evidence suggests that the princes were reconciled in February of
1203 (PSRL 1: 418–421; concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 87).
128 See under the year 1203: PSRL 1: 419; under the year 1202: PSRL 25: 100. For a more detailed
examination, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 246–247.
59Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
ment to the princes according to the services that each had rendered. But their col-
laboration was shattered because they disagreed over the allocations. Roman quar-
relled with Ryurik, took him captive, and had him tonsured as a monk in Kiev.129 By
incarcerating Ryurik in a monastery he followed the precedent set in 1059 by the
triumvirate – Izyaslav, Svyatoslav, and Vsevolod — who forced their uncle Sudislav
to adopt a monk’s habit and to give up his political rights.130 In like manner, after tak-
ing ecclesiastical vows Ryurik relinquished his political rights and became, as it were,
politically dead. After deposing Ryurik for the second time and removing him from the
political arena, Roman, with the approval of Vsevolod in Suzdalia, appointed Ryurik’s
son Rostislav to Kiev.131
On 19 June 1205 Roman was killed in battle with the Poles; he was survived by
two sons, Daniil and Vasil’ko, who were minors.132 On learning of Roman’s demise
Ryurik discarded his monk’s habit and seized control of Kiev. He sent for Vsevolod
Chermnyy, now the prince of Chernigov, and formed an agreement with him to cap-
ture Galich.133 Their pact resembled the one that Ryurik and Vsevolod’s father Svya-
toslav had made in 1188, when they had campaigned unsuccessfully against King
Béla III.134 Ryurik and Vsevolod’s campaign was also a failure. Since the chronicler
reports that the Ol’govichi achieved nothing they were most likely the ones who had
hoped to occupy Galich. In return for letting the Ol’govichi take possession of Galich,
Vsevolod undoubtedly promised Ryurik to defend his rule in Kiev.
Ryurik’s rule in Kiev was vulnerable on two counts. On the one hand, by replac-
ing his son Rostislav in Kiev he would have provoked Vsevolod in Suzdalia who had
made the appointment in conjunction with Roman. On the other hand, as an erstwhile
monk his right to rule Kiev was controversial. As has been noted, it was unknown in
Rus’ for a prince who had become a monk to leave his monastery and reenter politi-
cal life. Ryurik therefore needed a powerful ally to help him confront any rivals and
Vsevolod Chermnyy evidently promised to give him the needed backing. Ryurik ex-
pressed his gratitude by giving Vsevolod his Kievan outpost of Belgorod.135
In the early summer of 1206 Ryurik and Vsevolod organized a second campaign
against Galich but once again failed to capture the town. Instead the townspeople took
matters into their own hands and invited Vladimir Igorevich from the Igorevichi, the
cadet branch of the Ol’govichi, to become prince of Galich. On his return journey to
Chernigov, Vsevolod Chermnyy seized the opportunity to use the troops at his dis-
posal to betray Ryurik. He occupied Kiev and forced Ryurik to flee to his patrimony
129 PSRL 25: 101.
130 Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov, 1054–1146, 44–45.
131 Concerning Ryurik’s deposition, see under the year 1203: PSRL 25: 101; under the year 1204: Gust.,
328–329; under the year 1205: PSRL 1: 420–421. See also Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–
1246, 247–248.
132 See under the year 1206: PSRL 1: 425; under the year 1205: PSRL 25: 104. Concerning the date, see
Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 88.
133 See PSRL 25: 104; under the year 1206: PSRL 1: 425–426.
134 See footnote 76 above.
135 PSRL 25: 104; under the year 1206: PSRL 1: 426. See also Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–
1246, 251–252.
60 Martin Dimnik
of Vruchiy. Vsevolod also scored a second victory against Ryurik by doing what his
father Svyatoslav had been unable to do. He seized control, albeit fleetingly, of the
Kievan towns over which Ryurik had jurisdiction.
Why did Vsevolod violate the oath that the Ol’govichi had taken on several occa-
sions to Ryurik promising not to evict him from Kiev? According to the information
given by a number of chronicles, Vsevolod argued that it was improper for a monk
to wield political power.136 In his opinion becoming a monk had disqualified Ryurik
from being a rightful claimant to Kiev. At the same time by entering a monastery he
had also released the Ol’govichi from their oaths to him that they would not depose
him. Finally, although Vsevolod antagonized Ryurik by seizing Kiev it should be
noted that after successfully occupying the town he also alienated Vsevolod Bol’shoe
Gnezdo by evicting his son Yaroslav from Pereyaslavl’.
Despite Vsevolod’s seemingly easy victory over Ryurik his rule in Kiev was made
vulnerable after he disbanded the troops which he had assembled to attack Galich.
Soon after he occupied Kiev the one-time monk attacked him and removed him os-
tensibly without difficulty. Vsevolod was unable to repel Ryurik’s siege with only his
personal retinue and the town’s militia. Indeed, the loyalty of the town’s militia may
have been divided owing to the citizens’ age-old hatred of the Ol’govichi and love
of the Monomashichi. It is true that in 1201 the Kievans had deserted Ryurik and
opened the town’s gates to Roman but at that time they were choosing between two
Monomashichi. In 1206 the townspeople were faced with backing either Vsevolod an
Ol’govich or Ryurik a Monomashich. Many would have sided with the Monomashich.
Nevertheless, the determining factor for Vsevolod’s expulsion may have been the fact
that the two Rostislavichi, Mstislav Romanovich of Belgorod and Rostislav Ryurik-
ovich of Vyshgorod, to whom Vsevolod Chermnyy had evidently given those outposts
and in return expected their military backing, deserted him and sided with Ryurik.
Consequently, Vsevolod had no choice but to the hand back Kiev to Ryurik.137
At the beginning of 1207 Vsevolod made what appeared to be a perfunctory effort
at evicting Ryurik. Not only was the latter probably expecting an attack but Vsevo-
lod besieged Kiev with a small force consisting only of Ol’govichi troops and the
nomadic Polovtsy. After Ryurik repelled the attackers Vsevolod commanded his men
to pillage the surrounding area of Kiev for three weeks and then returned home.138 In
the summer he launched a more serious attack for which he marshalled troops from
the Ol’govichi, the nomads, the princes of Turov and also Vladimir Igorevich from
Galich. On this occasion he caught Ryurik by surprise probably because he advanced
on Kiev via Trepol’ in the south rather than from Vyshgorod in the north from where
Ryurik normally would have expected the Ol’govichi to attack him. On learning of
Vsevolod’s approach Ryurik fled to his patrimony of Vruchiy. Vsevolod then expelled
Mstislav Romanovich from Belgorod and the latter’s cousin Mstislav Mstislavich
136 “Tipografskaya letopis’,” PSRL 24 (Petrograd, 1921), 85; “Piskarevskiy letopisets,” PSRL 34 (M.,
1978), 81.
137 PSRL 1: 426–428; PSRL 25: 104–105; Gust., 330. For a more detailed examination, see Dimnik, The
Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 253–257.
138 PSRL 1: 428; PSRL 25: 105.
61Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
from Torchesk. His success in evicting the Rostislavichi from the Kievan towns forced
the Kievans to submit to him.139 Thus it would seem that in the seesaw battle for Kiev
Ryurik appeared to be losing ground against Vsevolod and the Ol’govichi who were
powerful enough to successfully challenge him especially since he could not ask the
now hostile Vsevolod of Suzdalia for military support.
Nevertheless, Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo was not ignoring his namesake’s victo-
ries in southern Rus’. He accused Vsevolod Chermnyy of seizing domains to which
only the Monomashichi and he in particular had a rightful claim, and organized a
campaign against him. According to the chronicles his objective was not to attack
Vsevolod Chermnyy in order to defend Ryurik’s right to rule Kiev as he had done in
1196 when he had marched against Yaroslav of Chernigov. His intention was to attack
Chernigov in order to reclaim Pereyaslavl’. That is, he proposed to avenge himself
against Vsevolod Chermnyy because the latter had taken possession of Pereyaslavl’
and evicted his son Yaroslav from that town which he looked upon as his patrimo-
nial inheritance.140 Significantly, his antagonism towards Vsevolod Chermnyy did not
mollify him towards Ryurik.
After Ryurik was informed that Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo had set out to attack
Chernigov, he quickly assembled a force, marched against Kiev, and forced Vsevolod
Chermnyy to abandon it a second time.141 According to Tatishchev who alone gives
this explanation, Ryurik succeeded in evicting Vsevolod because he summoned the
Polovtsy and with them conducted a surprise attack. Vsevolod was unable to drive off
the enemy with the small force at his disposal because he had sent off the majority of
his retinue to help defend Chernigov against the impending attack from Suzdalia.142
Although the surprise of the attack may have been a salient factor in Ryurik’s victory,
the conduct of the citizens may have also worked against Vsevolod. As already noted
the Kievans preferred the Monomashichi to the Ol’govichi and thus may have rallied
to Ryurik’s support. Moreover, they realized that if they did not submit to Ryurik he
would let loose the Polovtsy to pillage their lands. The advisable thing to do, there-
fore, was to let Ryurik occupy Kiev. Ironically, Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo’s planned
siege of Chernigov never took place. While on his march south he discovered that
his alleged allies, the princes of Ryazan’ who were accompanying him, were plot-
ting against him with the Ol’govichi so he diverted his attack against the lands of
Ryazan’.143
In February of 1208 Vsevolod Chermnyy made a feeble effort to regain control
of Kiev. Not only did he have too small a force but on this occasion, unlike in the
previous summer, Ryurik must have been prepared for the attack. Since his troops
were insufficient to capture Kiev Vsevolod’s main objective may have been simply to
139 PSRL 1: 429; PSRL 25: 106; Gust., 330. For a more detailed examination, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of
Chernigov 1146–1246, 258–260.
140 PSRL 10: 54.
141 PSRL 1: 432–433; PSRL 25: 106.
142 Tat. 4, 337; Tat. 3, 181.
143 PSRL 1: 429–432.
62 Martin Dimnik
plunder Kievan lands to appease his exasperation with the Kievans.144 This was to be
Vsevolod’s last campaign against Ryurik.
There is much conflicting chronicle information and disagreement among histori-
ans concerning the date of Ryurik’s death. According to two minor chronicles, which
we believe have the correct information, Ryurik died in 1208 in Kiev and Vsevolod
Chermnyy succeeded him to the throne.145 According to Tatishchev, Ryurik’s last re-
corded action in 1208 occurred on 4 September when, as prince of Kiev, he helped
his son Rostislav occupy Galich. Nevertheless, Rostislav was evicted from the town
later that autumn. This most likely occurred after he lost the backing of his father who
probably died soon after 4 September.146 Ryurik would have been some seventy years
of age at the time of his death. It is ironic that for a prince who was particularly promi-
nent in the politics of Rus’ and was a popular subject for chroniclers for some fifty
years, there is an inordinate amount of seemingly unexplainable confusion concerning
the date of his death. And yet, to judge from the straightforward reports of it given
by the Piskarevskiy letopisets and the Tipografskaya letopis’, there appeared to be no
irregularities surrounding his death that might have created the confusion.
We also do not know where he was buried. As a Mstislavich he was eligible for
burial in St. Fedor’s monastery founded by his ancestor Mstislav Vladimirovich.147
However, as we have seen, on 1 January 1198 he consecrated the Church of St. Basil
(Vasily) in Kiev that he had built.148 Fourteen years earlier, in 1184, Svyatoslav, when
he was prince of Kiev, had also erected a church in honour of St. Vasily.149 To date
only one church dedicated to that saint, the so-called Trekhsvyatitel’skaya, has been
identified. According to one view Ryurik did not build a new church but repaired the
church founded by Svyatoslav after it was damaged in 1196 by an earthquake.150 Ac-
cording to tradition a prince was frequently buried in the church that he himself had
built. Therefore, it is very possible that he was buried in the Church of St. Vasily.
144 PSRL 1: 434; PSRL 25: 107. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, 100. For a more
detailed examination, see Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 260–263.
145 “Tipografskaya letopis’,” 85; “Piskarevskiy letopisets,” 81. Compare Tatishchev who says that Ryurik
died in 1211 in Kiev (Tat. 4, 341; Tat. 3, 184). Other sources say that he died in 1215 in Chernigov
(PSRL 1: 438; PSRL 25: 110) or in 1216 (Troitskaya letopis’, rekonstruktsiya teksta, editor, M. D.
Priselkov [M.–L., 1950], 301). Yet another chronicle gives 1219 as the date of his death (Gust., 334).
For an examination of the problem, see Dimnik, “The Place of Ryurik Rostislavich’s Death: Kiev or
Chernigov?” Mediaeval Studies, vol. 44 (Toronto, 1982), 371–393. Compare J. Fennell, “The Last
Years of Riurik Rostislavich,” Essays in Honor of A. A. Zimin, ed. D. C. Waugh (Columbus, Ohio,
1985), 159–166, and O. Tolochko, “Pro mistse smerti Riuryka Rostyslavycha,” Ukrajinskyj istorychnyj
zhurnal (1997, 5), 136–144.
146 PSRL 25: 108; “Ermolinskaya letopis’,” 62; only one chronicle gives the date of Rostislav’s occupation
of Galich, namely “Nikonovskaya letopis’,” (PSRL 10: 60); see also Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov
1146–1246, 264–265.
147 Concerning St. Fedor’s monastery as a mausoleum for the Mstislavichi, see M. Dimnik, “Dynastic
Burials in Kiev before 1240,” Ruthenica, VII (Kiev, 2008), 82–83, 90, 92, 94, 95.
148 See under the year 1197: PSRL 2: 707; Gust., 326. Concerning the correct date, see Berezhkov,
Khronologiya, 208.
149 PSRL 2: 634; Gust., 319.
150 See Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146–1246, 153–156; for the location of the Trekhsvyatitel’skaya
church, see P. P. Tolochko, Kiev i Kievskaya zemlya v epokhu feodal’noy razdroblennosti XII–XIII
vekov (Kiev, 1980), 54–55.
63Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
Conclusion
We have seen that Ryurik was a man of his day. His father Rostislav gave him
Vruchiy as his patrimonial domain. At a later date he also appropriated his brother Ms-
tislav’s patrimony of Belgorod in the Kievan lands and made it his permanent posses-
sion. Ryurik was a faithful advocate of the tradition of lateral succession according to
genealogical seniority which he demonstrated by allowing his elder brother Roman to
occupy Kiev ahead of him. In keeping with this tradition he, as David’s elder brother,
occupied Kiev ahead of David.
Ryurik was an indefatigable champion of his dynasty’s claims to Kiev and to the
Kievan towns. His dogged determination to defend these claims was revealed in his
challenge to Andrey Bogolyubskiy, in his dealings with Svyatoslav, in his rivalries
with Roman of Galich and Yaroslav of Chernigov, and in his persistent battles with
Vsevolod Chermnyy. By asserting Rostislavichi control over the Kievan outposts,
especially Belgorod and Vyshgorod, Ryurik ensured that the Rostislavichi would be
in a position to monitor and influence the politics of the prince of Kiev.
Contrary to Tatishchev’s claim that Ryurik paid little attention to ruling the land,
we find ample evidence of his conscientious concern for the administration of his
domains. We learn of his monumental building projects in Kiev where he erected the
Church of St. Vasily and funded the construction of the restraining wall below the
Church of St. Michael. We also know that he commissioned a chronicle whose author
wrote an encomium in praise of his patron. Ryurik expressed his concern for the ad-
ministration of his patrimony of Vruchiy on a number of occasions when he used this
obligation as an excuse for absenting himself from campaigns against the Polovtsy.
It was evidently also he who was largely responsible for drawing up the terms of his
co-rule with Svyatoslav.
Ryurik collaborated with the other Rostislavichi to maintain harmony among the
members of his dynasty. His willingness to allocate Kievan towns to his relatives
demonstrated his loyalty and fair conduct towards them. He also showed a readiness
to work hand in glove with his brothers against Andrey Bogolyubskiy’s heavy handed-
ness and with David in the pursuit of Rostislavichi claims against the Ol’govichi. He
came to the defense of his relatives when he sought to obtain Mstislav Romanovich’s
release from the Ol’govichi and when he prevented Yaroslav of Chernigov from at-
tacking Smolensk and killing David. Moreover, he was loyal to his vassals as, for
example, when he intervened on behalf of Khan Kuntuvdey after Svyatoslav took him
captive. He allegedly acted out of compassionate concern for his subjects when he
insisted that he and Svyatoslav cease fighting for Kiev and become co-rulers because
he wished to stop shedding Christian blood.
To judge from chronicle evidence Ryurik was an exceptional military commander
from an early age. As a young prince his father sent him on campaigns and placed
him in command of Smolensk troops. In his early years he is reported as participat-
ing on more campaigns than his brothers Roman, David and Mstislav. Later, Ryurik
was most assiduous in defending his Kievan patrimonies from nomadic incursions by
joining Svyatoslav on numerous campaigns. He also levied attacks against the Lithu-
64 Martin Dimnik
anians who evidently pillaged the territories of Vruchiy. He continued to exercise his
prowess in war up to the last years of his life in his battles for Kiev against Vsevolod
Chermnyy. In addition to waging war, however, he also exhibited skill as a negotiator
in concluding peace with the Polovtsy, in pacifying Kuntuvdey, and later in negotiat-
ing with the tribesmen to serve as his auxiliaries.
In his quest to secure control of Kiev for the Rostislavichi Ryurik experienced a
number of temporary setbacks. In neglecting to give Vsevolod of Suzdalia towns in
the Kievan lands he antagonized him as the patriarch of the House of Monomakh.
He experienced other setbacks when Roman evicted him from Kiev on two occa-
sions, when Roman forced him to become a monk, and when Vsevolod Chermnyy
drove him out of Kiev on two occasions. Having to acknowledge the overlordship of
Andrey Bogolyubskiy and later of Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo limited his freedom of
action for a period but ultimately did not weaken the Rostislavichi hold on Kiev and
the Kievan towns. Another setback was the Kievans’ opposition to him. Nevertheless,
the townspeople seemingly had an ambivalent relationship with him. When it was a
matter of backing one of two Monomashichi, either Roman or Ryurik, they supported
Roman. However, when it came to choosing between Ryurik, a Monomashich, and
Vsevolod Chermnyy, an Ol’govich, they sided with Ryurik. Moreover, although the
Kievans were antagonistic towards Ryurik the chronicles never report that he was
unpopular with the citizens of Vruchiy or Belgorod.
Ryurik also suffered a number of more lasting failures. In 1195 he antagonized
his son-in-law Roman when he gave five Kievan towns to Vsevolod in Suzdalia. As
a result Roman remained his enemy for the next ten years until his death. In 1196
Ryurik suffered a major failure when he and the Monomashichi were unable to force
Yaroslav and the Ol’govichi to renounce their claim to Kiev for future generations of
Ol’govichi. Ryurik therewith failed to realize Monomakh’s desire to make Kiev the
patrimony of the Monomashichi.
In conclusion we have seen that, on the one hand, in agreement with Tatishchev’s
source, Ryurik suffered much at the hands of his son-in-law Roman, he had no peace
from any direction, and the Kievans’ love for him was at best ambivalent during most
of the last decade of his life. On the other hand, we have seen that contrary to the ac-
cusation made by Tatishchev’s source that Ryurik paid little attention to the ruling of
the land, the latter appeared to be one of his main preoccupations, especially when it
came to defending his Kievan domains against Polovtsian incursions. His greatest ob-
jectives, however, were to gain permanent possession of Kiev and the Kievan towns
for the Rostislavichi. He successfully obtained control of the Kievan towns but failed
to secure Kiev as his dynasty’s patrimony even though he evidently died in 1208 as
prince of Kiev.
Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies
University of Toronto
65Ryurik Rostislavich (d. 1208?): the Unsung Champion of the Rostislavichi
The Rostislavichi of Smolensk
|