The Primary Chronicle in Light of World(-)System Theories and Social Constructivism

What is it about?

The text presents a new interpretation of the Old Rus’ Primary Chronicle through the lens of I. Wallerstein’s and A.G. Frank’s World(-)System Theories, combined with social constructivism and historical anthropology, which will allow me to elaborate on the utility and advantages that this concept offers for the large-scale study of pre-modern literature.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

In order to expose the advantages of using of both Immanuel Wallerstein’s and Andre Gunder Frank’s versions of world(-)system theories [W(-)ST], I will start with two classical interpretations of a text that is fundamental for old Rus’ culture – Povest’ vremennykh let. The first paradigm, the classical, took shape in the eighteenth century, when August Schlözer, a German scholar working in Russia, proposed the Norseman/Normanist/Norman Theory. The second paradigm is the Slavonic; here the world-system was defined by the mythical and historical unity of all Slavic lands, as a unity of culture and of the Proto-Slavic language, common to all Slavs. The latter paradigm has its roots in nineteenth-century Slavophile and Pan-Slavic ideas. These paradigms will serve as a starting point and continuous reference for my interpretation of the The Primary Chronicle through the lens of Wallerstein’s and Frank’s W(-)ST concept, combined with social constructivism and historical anthropology, which, as I hope, will allow me to elaborate on the utility and advantages that this concept offers for the large-scale study of pre-modern literature. The approach proposed here does not exclude the two above-mentioned paradigms of interpretation of The Primary Chronicle, but avoids the monopolist version of the past proposed by both of them, and eliminates the competitiveness between them. I use them as a context for my considerations. The dominant Russian interpretation of literature from the Middle Ages (Early Rus’) links it with Eastern Christianity as a key for understanding it. I would like to follow and expand Dmitry Likhachev’s interpretation, adding barbaric, pagan elements and their role in all cultures in transition, from oral culture to scriptworld, from paganism to Christianity, from non-central, local governance to centralized state-building, etc. Hence, I will explore the hypothesis that per analogiam to the influence of Western law, political and administrative systems etc. on old Rus’ culture, we can re-interpret medieval Rusian literature in the Western context.