The Rise of Kievan Rus'
Whereas our knowledge of the earliest developments on Ukrainian lands, based on scanty historical evidence, is riddled with uncertainties, there is no question that a political entity known as Kievan Rus' began its existence sometime in the late ninth century and lasted until the mid-fourteenth century on the lands inhabited by the East Slavs.
The political and cultural center of Kievan Rus' was in the middle Dnieper region of Ukraine, although the sphere of Kievan rule eventually extended north of Ukrainian lands. This and the next four chapters will survey the rise, consolidation, decline, and transformation of Kievan Rus' during four periods: (1) the 870s to 972, the era of growth and expansion; (2) 972 to 1132, the era of consolidation; (3) 1132 to 1240, the era of disintegration; and (4) 1240 to 1349, the era of political transformation.The origin, of Rus'
While it is true that in comparison with the Khazar and early Slavic eras there is more historical data available about Kievan Rus', its first century is still shrouded in uncertainty and controversy. Among several problematic issues is the question of the origin of Rus'. Who were the Rus', and what were the beginnings of the state structure known as Kievan Rus'? These are among the most disputed and certainly most written-about questions in the history of eastern Europe. Admittedly, the ongoing and often passionate debate that these questions have provoked among scholars and publicists frequently reflects less the actual issues of early medieval eastern European historical development than the needs of subsequent generations to find in their past an appropriate ‘foundation myth’ that will both explain the origin of their people and provide for an appropriate degree of national pride. Did the East Slavs create their own state, or did they need outsiders to do it for them? In other words, was Kievan Rus' the first state on East Slavic territory, or was it just a successor to earlier ones? Finally, were the Rus' Scandinavian outsiders, indigenous East Slavs, or both?
The controversy surrounding these questions derives from the different interpretations given to certain passages in the opening pages of one of the oldest and best-known written sources for the early history of the East Slavs, the Rus' Primary