1992/12/01 by Martin Dimnik · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Social Sciences · #Byzantine Studies and History #Historical and Archaeological Studies #Eurasian Exchange Networks #Ruler #Brother #History #Politics #Capital (architecture) #Administration (probate law) #Period (music) #Statute #Law #Classics #Political science #Ancient history #Art
paper · doi:10.1080/00085006.1992.11091999
openalex publication_date 1992/12/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/03
Sviatoslav became the autonomous ruler of Chernigov, the second most important town in southern Rus', in 1054 after the death of his father Iaroslav Wise. In addition, he received the territories of Murom and Tmutarakan'.1 He was not, however, the first independent prince of Chernigov. His uncle Mstislav had made Chernigov his capital from 1026 to 1034 when he ruled the entire left bank; during that period his elder brother Iaroslav Wise ruled the right bank. Nevertheless, it was the latter's son Sviatoslav who sired the future dynasty of Chernigov; it was he who probably did most to centralize the administration of the principality; and it was he, in the main, who consolidated the organization of the Church in the Chernigov land. The puipose of this investigation is to determine Sviatoslav' s success in consolidating the organization of the eparchy of Chernigov. It should be noted, however, that relevant information is scarce and, when available, not always reliable. The chronicles provide most of the information, but a number of them are of later provenance and the evidence they offer is of questionable reliability. Our task is complicated further in that the chronicles frequently transmit useful information only through indirect references to the Church and its institutions or through entries reporting isolated Church-related activities of political and ecclesiastical personages. Additional snippets of evidence can be gleaned from Church statutes, saints' lives, art, architecture, archaeology and onomastic evidence. Given the nature of the evidence, therefore, many of our observations will be tentative or inconclusive. Nevertheless, it is hoped that the study will be useful because an investigation of this nature has never been made. It is also hoped that the examination will shed new light on the activities of a prince of Rus', namely Sviatoslav, engaged in setting up the ecclesiastical organization of his principality during the middle of the eleventh century.