James Osborne (2:24)

Martin, your book is a deep exploration of how the story of the Vikings is interconnected with the earliest origins of the states of Russia and Ukraine and the very live ramifications of those connections today. In 2021, before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, President Putin published an essay on Ukraine. Those historical connections between Russia and Ukraine, and this purported history would then go on to serve as one of his justifications for the invasion of Ukraine. Before we get to the Vikings, could you provide an overview of that historical claim made by President Putin in 2021.

Martin Whittock (3:07)

Putin's claim, as shown in his essay on the historical unity of Russians and Ukrainians, which is its title, basically claims that because of a shared origin, that the Ukrainians and the Russians are one people and that any division of them into two sovereign states is an artificial modern construct. And in so doing, he referenced the ancient Rus, the Norse founders of the state of Kievan Rus, as his basic foundation story. Now, this wasn't new. In 2015, when seeking to justify his annexation of Crimea From Ukraine in 2014, he said Crimea has sacred meaning for Russia, like the Temple Mount for Jews and Muslims, and Crimea is the spiritual source of the formation of the multifaceted but monolithic, that's his word, Russian state. It was on this spiritual soil that our ancestors first and forever recognized their nationhood. So he was referring to the Christian baptism of the Russ ruler Vladimir the great in 900, which reminds us of this. Deep stories, contested, deep story. But, but, but again, he makes more of this as well. In 2016, a massive statue of Vladimir the Great of the Rus, who we'll hear about shortly, was erected in Borovitskaya Square in central Moscow. Taller than the comparable statue in Kiev, it was unveiled by Putin, and it was unveiled on Russian National Unity Day. So there's a theme running through all of this, a national holiday revived by in 2005. And all of this is part of a narrative that says the Ukrainians are not a sovereign state. This is the Putinist narrative. They are part of the Russian state and the modern differences between them are artificial constructs. Now, what's interesting is all of these statements are rooted in the origin stories of Kievan Rus or Kiev Rus as it is in Russian, and. And are used to support a narrative by Putin that there is one, his words, monolithic Russian nation that has been divided, in his view, by modern events, but must be brought back together again, if necessary, by force.

James Osborne (5:35)

So it's a religious claim. Partly, and it's also rooted in early medieval history. We'll revisit that towards the end, I think. But for now, let's go into the story of the Vikings and those Rus that you mentioned. The traditional narrative that listeners will most often have heard about, the Vikings, the Norse, between the 8th and 11th centuries, is of them going west from Scandinavia toward Britain and Ireland and Orkney and Iceland and Greenland and even reaching what's now Canada. But as you say in the book, if we look east, there's an equally rich story of Viking history. Could you tell us when The Vikings first started traveling east. And why?

Martin Whittock (6:29)

Well, the east is integrated into the. The Norse. The Viking story, really from its earliest phase, in fact, the east played a major part in the, part of the so called Viking age, which we often see from a Western perspective, which exploded in the middle of the 8th century, because alongside a whole range of causal factors at that point, changes taking place in the Islamic caliphate as a center of political power shifted from Damascus to Baghdad disrupted the flow of silver to Scandinavia, where it's crucial in gift giving and in fueling Viking economic and social interactions. For years before that, before the middle of the 8th century, silver had been reaching northern Europe from the Islamic world, traded for slaves, furs and amber. And facing this shortage of silver, raiding in the west offered Norse elites an alternative way to obtain precious metals and slaves. So the very beginning of the western features of the Viking age that we're very much aware of always had an eastern front. The eastern front was crucial in the origins of the Viking age. And at the same time, forest products of the eastern Baltic and the supply of slaves, Slavic lands there drew Swedish Viking adventurers eastward. And clearly part of this was to try to make direct contact with Islamic traders, as they would later do within about a generation or so on the Volga, which would allow that flow of silver to move more freely again in exchange for, as I say, slaves, furs, amber, and other products of the north. So the eastern front was always there within the Viking age. And it became more significant as Norse traders, settlers, slavers, raiders, particularly from Sweden, but not exclusively so, began to utilize the river systems of Russia to make direct contact with the Islamic world and also with Constantinople. And as a result, from about the year 800, vast streams of silver once again flowed northward. And this had a huge impact on Norse trading activities, including slave trading, from which rose eventually the little kingdoms, the little states, eventually the large polity of Kievan Rus.

James Osborne (8:52)

Okay, interesting. So we think often about the Danes and the Norwegians coming west, raiding for those materials. But would you say that the eastward expansion is. Is more about trading for those materials and having a secure and steady flow that isn't necessarily as tied up in violence and aggression as the westward expansion.

Martin Whittock (9:18)

It's a mixture. And I think that that does need to be borne in mind that the Norse were always a minority in the east, as indeed they often were in the west, but particularly so in the east. And so they had to come to terms with native peoples. They had to come to terms with the people who they were trading with in Constantinople. In the Byzantine Empire and in the Islamic caliphate. But nevertheless, alongside this, there is a significant degree of violence. There's a huge degree of slave trading. For example, one very striking example of the wide ranging nature of this trade network can be found in a 13th century Icelandic saga, the saga of the people of Laksadala, and in that an Irish princess captured as a teenager is sold to an Icelandic chieftain by a rust merchant operating on the Swedish island of Bruno. It's an example of slave trade which unites the west and the east of the Viking world. So although trade and interaction and setting up of independent trading post is very, very important in the east, there is still there a significant amount of violence.

James Osborne (10:26)

As well in the West. When the Vikings begin raiding and continue their raids on the Anglo Saxon kingdoms, eventually they start to settle, don't they, on the eastward side, those traders and those merchants who are reaching out to Constantinople and who are reaching out to the Islamic world, are they also putting down those same routes as well? Are they starting to form settlements? Are they integrating and assimilating? What's the picture there?

Martin Whittock (10:59)

It's a mixture, but in the end we are seeing permanent trading settlements being either taken over by the Norse or established as new settlements by the Norse. So we know there's a lot of traveling and trading. So, for example, we have runic inscription from Sweden that says Tola had this stone raised in memory of her son, Haralda, Ingvar's brother. They traveled valiantly far for gold and then the east gave food to the eagle. They died in the south, in Cirqueland, Saracen land, the Islamic caliphate. So there are people going and, and taking. But we increasingly see people going and setting up trading settlements, trading posts. And it's interesting that the Norse word, or Norse name rather, for this area in modern western Russia, parts of Belarus and then in Ukraine, is Gavar, which means the place of the towns, or Gatheriki, the kingdom of the towns. And in that name, Gavar, Gavariki. We realize that these trading settlements, which are semi permanent and then becoming permanent trading settlements based on the river systems of Russia, are a crucial, indeed critical ingredient in this Norse engagement with the east, from which will eventually arise a united polity which will be a mixed Norse Slavic one.

James Osborne (12:26)

You mentioned rivers in the answer, and I definitely want to talk about the importance of rivers. But when you're talking about these formal settlements, and you mentioned a few names, I wonder if, if we were looking at a map today of today's countries in Europe, where are we talking about geographically?

Martin Whittock (12:42)

The first will be along the southern shores of the Baltic. As from the 7th and 8th century, we see increased Norse settlement in these areas, but increasingly are utilizing river systems which flow into the Baltic and which by following them along their courses into what is now particularly northwestern Russia, they can then port ships across gaps in the river systems, across watersheds, to then connect with other river systems. So we need to envisage a huge area really of primary activity taking place in north western Russia and then moving down through the river systems through central western Russia. Air from Smolensk, for example, into, into Ukraine, and particularly in the end, Kiev will become the. The real center of, of Rus power.

James Osborne (13:42)

Okay, and you mentioned rivers. Again, let's talk about those rivers. I think it's in Bernard Cornwell's the Last Kingdom books where he talks about the rivers that come from the coast in England. The Vikings using those rivers like daggers to the heart of the English kingdoms. What role do rivers play in the Viking expansion eastwards into the areas you've just described? How important are they to the formation of these trading settlements and what will later become more formal small states?

Martin Whittock (14:16)

They are absolutely critical. We need to envisage them as the motorways of the early medieval world, which allow people access deep, deep into the heart of the European continent, particularly Eastern European continent. And those rivers that flow north into the Baltic will allow access well into the heart of Russia. It is then possible to pick up other major river systems that will then flow south into Ukraine and towards the Caspian Sea. They're absolutely major, but not only are they important in terms of their boat transport, and it's interesting that one of the possible words, origins for the name Rus, is from a mixed Finnish, old East Norse word which means rowers, those who row. But not only that, in the winter, these rivers will freeze. And it's possible that we're seeing movement on sledges, which of course people will also be equally familiar with from Scandinavia. Scandinavia. So whether they're flowing or whether they're frozen, these are major features of the landscape. And they become geopolitical features because they allow access to the heart of the continent. And we're absolutely right to recognize their importance in terms of their military use in the Viking wars in the British Isles, but we should also see them as major features, not just military, major features of economic movement and activity and trade that connect Scandinavia with the western ends of the Silk Roads and with the Mediterranean and with the Caspian sea area.

Blinds.com Advertiser (16:01)

At blinds.com, it's not just about window treatments. It's about you, your style, your space your way. Whether you DIY or want the pros to handle it all, you'll have the confidence of knowing it's done right. From free expert design help to our 100% satisfaction guarantee, everything we do is made to fit your life and your windows. Because@blinds.com, the only thing we treat better than windows is you. Shop blinds.com Labor Day mega sale happening now. Save up to 50% site wide plus a free measure. Rules and restrictions may apply.

Mint Mobile Fine Print (16:31)

Wayfair's Labor Day clearance is here right now. Score up to 70% off everything home plus fast shipping on everything right to your door. Shop now through September 2nd at Wayfair.com.

Martin Whittock (16:43)

Wayfair Every style, every home the types.

James Osborne (16:46)

Of ships they're using Just to clarify, these aren't going to be the dragon headed ships that cross from the shores of Denmark to the shores of England and Scotland, are they? They're going to be smaller, more navigable ships that aren't quite what we picture when we think of a Viking ship.

Martin Whittock (17:09)

That's absolutely right. So to start with, in terms of that first movement along the shores of the Baltic and the beginning of the river system, should be thinking of squatter, stronger, broader trading vessels if you like, not not the dragon proud ships of popular imagination. But we also have lots of evidence as well from the areas as they move south into the continent of native peoples selling unfinished huge log boats to the Norse who then finish them and put sails on themselves in order to traverse the river systems. And they will be easier to port round the cataracts and rapids that we found on a number of the rivers as they flow down towards the the Black Sea. These are large trees, you know, we're not talking about just dugout canoes. And and again, I must stress, we need to think of sledges as well because we always think of summer transport. And yet in many of these areas, winter transport is much easier if you're using sledges and if you're using frozen rivers or frozen snowy landscapes. So that's the kind of mental image we need to have more of a mixed economy of transport.

James Osborne (18:23)

Okay. And that mental image of these log boats and of these sledges, that does create a picture of a different kind of Viking and these different kind of Vikings that have gone east, they end up being called the Rus. Could I ask about the origins of that word when it first begins to be applied and what it means within.

Martin Whittock (18:51)

Russia itself in the 12th century, the tale of bygone years, sometimes known as a Russian primary chronicle Talks about adventurers from Scandinavia using force to subjugate the Slavic and Finnish tribes living southeast of the Baltic. The chronicle claims they were then driven out. But once free of these people, they're invited back in again and they bring law and order. Now, that clearly is a later spin designed to enhance the prestige and legitimacy of later rulers of the Rus. But the key thing is they're described as the Varangian Rus. What does that mean? Well, Varangian means something like those who swear loyalty, and it's derived from Old Norse. We find it later in medieval Greek and Old East Slavic as well. So that probably is because there's already a history of them serving as hired muscle in the body guard, or the Varangian guard, as it was called in the Byzantine Empire. They are the Varangians, but they're also described as the Rus. And that's a name that will run and run and of course still exists in the name of Belarus and of course, Russia today. And the word Rus may be derived from the word for rowers and. Or the old name for the Swedish coastal region of Ross Lagen, or it may possibly mean red in terms of hair color or complexion from a Slavic word. But the Finnish Norse origin is the more probable.

James Osborne (20:15)

Okay, so you have these Vikings who've set out east and they've established trading settlements and they're using the rivers. Because they're using the rivers, they take on this name Rus, relating to rowers. Is that generally the right kind of picture I'm painting there?

Martin Whittock (20:33)

I think so. These are the rowers who've come by sea and then they use the rivers in order to move into the heartland of the continent. Yes. And then they set up these little communities, independent little communities that are eventually fused together. And there's violence in that. There's hints in the sources, sometimes more than hints as well, of fighting between the different polities as one unified, relatively unified Russ state begins to emerge by about the year 900.

James Osborne (21:04)

And talking about that emergence of this more semi unified, coalesced state of the Rus people, in the book you write about a figure called Rurik. I want to bring him into that story. Who was Rurik and what was his role in the Kievan Rust story?

Martin Whittock (21:24)

The written source that I just referred to, the Russian Primary Chronicle, also sometimes called the Tale of Bygone Days, which is from the 12th century. Looking back at the origins stories of their community, recounts a story in which it says three brothers, Roerich, Cineas, Truvo, are invited back in to become rulers of the Slavs but they're significant because we are told Roerich sets up his community in Novgorod, Cneas in Belizero and Truevoir in his Bosque. So basically we talk about north western Russia, and each one of them has a Slavic version of an original old Norse name. And eventually we are told by the same source that Rorick amalgamated their lands under his rule and so was formed the nucleus what would become the, the princedom of the Rus. Now, this reflects very similar origin stories that we find from a number of medieval sources from Western Europe. And we this kind of thing being reflected in a number of early medieval origin stories. But what is clear is that there is a genuine movement of Norse elites into the area. And we are told that the primary mover within this was a man called Rurik. He's very, very significant because whatever his origins are, mythological or otherwise, he becomes the originator of the Rurakid dynasty, a dynasty which holds political power in Kiev and then eventually through convoluted routes in medieval Russia until the late 16th century.

James Osborne (23:12)

Is it through Rurik that we then see a formal state of Rus people? And I mentioned something called Kievan Rus earlier. Is this, is this when we get Kievan Rus?

Martin Whittock (23:25)

It begins with him. And we are told by the medieval sources it's his successor, a man named Oleg or Oleg Day, who then strikes south and seizes Kiev in about 882. So the medieval sources tell us that Roerich is the one who establishes a united community, united polity in north western Russia. And it's his successor who then pushes south to another trading settlement that had earlier been set up, we are told, by two independent Norse rulers, Askold and Dur, at Kiev, kills them, takes over their settlement, and basically then takes these two rival Rus, mini states of Novgorod in the north and Kiev in the south, and unites them in one polity which becomes known as the Kievan Rus. And that, we are told, happens in about 882.

James Osborne (24:20)

Okay, so we now have this distinction. Kievan Rus settlement with Norse Viking origins. But are these people even Vikings anymore? Is their culture similar? Is it completely different? Because Vikings have this pattern, don't they, of assimilating.

Martin Whittock (24:43)

I think for a couple of generations, we are seeing people who are distinctly different to the people amongst whom they live. But by the end of the second generation, so basically by the middle of the 10th century, we are seeing these communities become increasingly Slavic in their name, giving in their worship. So, for example, although they will convert to Eastern orthodox Christianity in 988, earlier than that, we are told these rulers have begun to worship Slavic gods. So therefore there's a significant Slavic orientation. So certainly, I think by the middle of the 10th century, we are seeing a state that is becoming increasingly Slavic. Not surprising given the fact the vast majority of the subject peoples will be Slavic, intermarrying into local Slavic elite families. And so by the time that we have Vladimir convert into Eastern Orthodox Christianity, it is a Norse Slavic state, which is increasingly becoming a Slavic state with Norse echoes. So there's an awareness of origins and a real awareness of connectivity to the northern world in a state that already, by the year 1000, is increasingly a Slavic state.

James Osborne (26:06)

You mentioned the Christianization of Kievan Rus and you also talked about this figure called Vladimir, Vladimir the Great. He is obviously an extremely important figure in this story and also in how this story now is being used and spoken about today by the Russian state. Can we sum Vladimir the Great up for listeners?

Martin Whittock (26:33)

Vladimir, as he's known in Russian, and Vladimir, as he's known in Ukrainian, is the Grand Prince of Kyiv and ruler of the rus in the second half of the 10th century. And in 988, a decision was made by his court to convert to Eastern Orthodox Christianity. This was not unique. A large number of northern peoples are converting to Christianity at this time. Not all, but a large number of them. But it was a game changer and of immense historic importance because it allied the Rus with the Eastern Roman Empire and built on well established trading and diplomatic, diplomatic connection with the Eastern Roman Empire. The Byzantine Empire centered on Constantinople and it also gave the Byzantines a strategic ally north of the Black Sea. So both sides gained from this connection. And it also meant that the people of the Rus now had increased access to trade with Constantinople with the wealth of the Eastern Mediterranean. And we know, for example, that a significant amount of silk, which we don't find a lot of because of its nature on archaeological sites, but the written sources tell us a significant amount of silk moved northward, so much so that its trade had to be contained and controlled by the Byzantines, so that not too much of it was moving north. They clearly wanted to keep a handle on the price. It was very, very important because that's the beginning of what we call the baptism of Rus. Vladimir said that the whole nation should convert. Anybody that didn't convert, he'd regard as a personal enemy. There are mass conversions, mass river baptisms, and. And that is why he today is celebrated in Eastern Orthodoxy as St. Vladimir or Sunt Vladimir. Vladimir. Vladimir the Great. There is some evidence that the movement towards Orthodoxy had started in the time of his grandmother Olga, who's known as Saint Olga. But it's. It's Vladimir. Vladimir who is now central to the story as tradition remembers it. And that's the start of the deeply emotive concept and mythology of Holy Russ, of Keev, the golden, of Russia, Orthodox and united. So we have this highly enhanced both religious, national and ethnic character which the rulers of Muscovy then take upon themselves and claim direct descent from what had once been Kiev.

James Osborne (28:59)

Okay, so you have Vladimir, Vladimir the Great, who has Christianized Kevan Russell almost in a similar way and at a similar time to the Christianizing Viking king Olaf Tryggvason in Norway. That seems like a broad comparison that you could make. But like Olaf Tryggvason, even though Vladimir the Great is seen as this great Christian hero and the founder of Holy Rus, he was a pagan, wasn't he? And am I right in saying before he Christianized his country, he tried to unite it under a different, different religion?

Martin Whittock (29:38)

Yes, yes, there does seem to be a previous phase in which he and his father tried to unite the new princedom of the Rus via Slavic paganism. But the game changer is when there's a decision that it's Eastern Orthodoxy which is likely to be the most powerful unifying force and is eventually chosen as the. The way by which this transformation will occur. The semi mythological, legendary sources talk about him and his emissaries weighing up Islam, Judaism, Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and eventually coming down on the side of Eastern Orthodoxy. But the key point is that having tried a number of ideological ways of uniting his very mixed realm, initially through promotion of Slavic paganism as opposed to Norse gods and goddesses, he then eventually, in 988, chooses Eastern Orthodoxy, and that sticks. And that becomes a major ideological glue that both unites and its character defines Kievan Rus right through. Although the great changes, you know, to the modern day in the Eastern Orthodox Church as its practice and experience in Russia and Ukraine today, you're talking about.

James Osborne (31:01)

His importance and the echoes of that importance and religious significance. But actually, I think that what you're describing, he sounds more like a religious opportunist looking for a means through which he can unite his country than someone like Alfred the Great, who is devout and driven by genuine faith and conviction. Is that unfair of me to say?

Martin Whittock (31:32)

I think they are genuinely impressed by Eastern Orthodoxy, the legend. But of course, it's written by Orthodox sources, of course, say that when emissaries came back from Constantinople, they said the incense, the sound the worship, we felt we were in heaven. I mean, they are genuinely impressed by Eastern Orthodoxy, but we are then seeing that written down by Eastern Orthodox medieval writers. Writers. So we would sort of expect that. And the wider evidence does suggest that he is looking for an ideologically unifying force that will both characterize his dynasty and characterize his state. So I think it is reasonable to think, as you've suggested, that at least in part, and a significant part, he is seeking an ideological unifying force. And he decides Eastern Orthodoxy because it is the one that has the greatest connection with his biggest trading partners south of the, the Black Sea. So I think there is a weighing up of options and are deciding which one's likely to bring the biggest return for both the dynasty and the nation. But for whatever reason, it sticks.

James Osborne (32:40)

It sounds pragmatic.

Martin Whittock (32:41)

I think there is significant pragmatism there. Yes, exactly. I think so.

James Osborne (32:44)

Okay, so Vladimir the Great is this really significant unifying figure. He's a religious figure. He has a really significant role in the history of the Rus people and Kevan Rus. After he exits the picture, things seem to get quite turbulent and there's a lot of chaos, specifically in the 13th century, 200 years after Vladimir the Great. How do we get to that chaos?

Martin Whittock (33:14)

Kievan Rus had always been a complex, what you might call poly focal state in which different areas and regions of a huge state had their own traditions, their own origin stories, their own local elites. And what we see in the century and a half after Vladimir the Great is an increasing descent into civil war, into rivalry between different branches of the ruling family. So even before the state is destroyed by the Mongols, we see it being past its, its golden age of stability. Now, what would have happened had the Mongol invasions not taken place in the 13th century is open to debate. And it's one of the great what ifs of history, because many states go through times of turbulence. But it doesn't mean to say that that's terminal and doesn't mean to say they're going to, going to break up. But what it means is that by the time that we have the Mongol invasions In the early 13th century, Kiev is destroyed in 1240, we are seeing a state that already is experiencing a significant amount of stress in terms of its unity and the glue that's holding it together, which makes it particularly open to outside interference, it might have overcome this, but it did not have the opportunity to overcome this because it, as has major areas of over which it rules, is devastated in the early 13th century by this huge movement of Mongol invasion, which sees kyiv destroyed in 1240, and I mean radically destroyed.

James Osborne (34:51)

Can we just dwell on those Mongol invasions a little bit longer? When do these attacks start and is there any pushback or is it just, do they just sweep through and completely destroy the, the Kievan Rush state?

Martin Whittock (35:06)

We see the first hints that something very, very significant is stirring in the East. Within the generation before the destruction of KYIV in the 1240s, we find, for example, Steppe nomads trying to come to terms with Kiev because they've discovered that something more threatening for their independence is coming from the East. And we have these hints of this contact with Kiev saying we need to work together. Something much more terrible is coming from the East. So within the decade or so before the destruction of Kiev in the 1240s, we see reconnaissance in force taking place from Mongol armies sweeping in from Central Asia, assessing basically what's going on, trying to get an idea of the political, real politic of the time, you know, who can we work with, who cannot work with, who will stand against us, who won't, what are the resources, how should we target these? And then moving away again and then returning in force in the 1230s and 1240s and basically destroying any community that stands against it and bringing into this expanding Mongol empire which will stretch right the way across Central Europe to the Hungarian plain, in, in a situation that basically rewards loyalty and utterly destroys opposition. And it's out of this, this wreckage that those who are left have to then decide how they are going to cooperate. Are they going to resist, continue to resist and risk absolute destruction? Or are they like the rulers of Muscovy following the destruction of Kiev? Are they going to try to play a middle game of trying to be as independent as much as they can, whilst also trying to show loyalty to the Mongol overlords and at times be willing to support them against other Slavic states or little city states as part of their own power politics being fought out. So this really is a very complicated period that really runs from the 1250s right to about 1500 as the, the shattered remnants of what once had been Kiev, Rus has to come to terms with a new reality. And eventually out of that, the rulers of Muscovy, of Moscow, they arise as the major game player. And then as Mongolian power, the so called Pax Mongolica, this, this huge unified empire begins to disintegrate. The rulers of Muscovy become, become the dominant force of what remains. And they then begin to extend their power at the expense of other Slav city states around them, out of which eventually will arise a political group that we now know as Russia, and then it extends further south into Ukraine in the 17th century.

James Osborne (37:50)

How do we then get Ukraine and Russia emerging as separate entities? Out of this picture, we see the.

Martin Whittock (37:59)

Center of gravity, political gravity, shifting to Moscow, particularly from the 16th century onwards. We notice it particularly under the rule of Ivan iv, so called Ivan the Terrible. We see the rulers of Muscovy celebrating themselves as the inheritors of all that was meant by Kiev, the golden Orthodox and holy, and beginning to push south into the Ukrainian lands as we would now know them, which themselves have experienced significant change, as well as other states have vied for this area. So the Ukrainian lands, as we now call them, are contested. They're contested from the south by the Ottoman Empire, from the west by Lithuanian Polish Commonwealth and by Polish settlers and Polish rulers. They're contested from the north by the rulers of Muscovy. And. And increasingly through the 17th century, through an incredibly complicated interplay of different forces, we see Russian power slowly moving south, moving south, moving south, moving south. Until in the end, they become dominant over what's called the Cossack Hetmanate, which was a state based on Kyiv. They come under the. The overlordship of the. The rulers of. Of Moscow. They clearly see it as being a temporary arrangement. That's. The Cossacks are one of convenience. But later on, Russ regard this as being a return of the Russian lands to Muscovy. And Putin makes a great deal of this when he looks back to the 1650s and said, There you are. That was when Ukraine willingly came under our authority. Well, the Cossacks at the time would have had a very different view of it than that. But from the Russians, that's when they become effectively the rulers of large swathes of Ukraine. But this is a process that takes place over a couple of hundred years after 1500, and is part of a kaleidoscopic complexity of competing different groups who want to dominate this area. North of the Black Sea and Ukraine, we now know it is being pulled in all sorts of directions.

James Osborne (40:03)

I want to return to that essay that we mentioned at the start, written by President Putin. We've now talked about the history of the region going back into the 9th century, 10th century. It's such a long story and it's so complex and it goes in so many different directions, touching so many different parts of the world. What does Putin get wrong or right about this history in regards to the shared history between Russia and Ukraine, what.

Martin Whittock (40:41)

Is undeniable is that there is a common origin deep story that unites the peoples of the Rus, out of which have now risen the modern nation states of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. They share so much in terms of religious orthodoxy, in terms of related language, in related history, but since the destruction of Kiev, they have also experienced significantly different trajectories of political development. And since the 19th century, when there was a significant attempt by the Russians to russify Ukraine and deny its existence as an independent community, which of course raises the whole point that there must have been significant differences for them to be erased or attempts to erase. So very often the Russians are saying, you're exactly the same as we are, there's no difference. And then carrying out Russification, which begs the question, why do you need to Russify if no difference? What we see after the 19th century is an increasing awareness of Ukrainian agency and a sense of community which continues through the 20th century, when Ukraine is both recognized as distinct Soviet Socialist republic within the ussr, but also suffers terribly at the hands of Stalin in the appalling collectivization campaigns, the holodomor, death by starvation, which strikes Ukraine more than almost any area of Russia in the 1930s. And there's again an attempt to snuff out Ukrainian national character. So there are common roots, there are common connections. But of course, what the Putinist narrative fails to recognize is that although we are the inheritors of our history, we are not prisoners of our history, and we still have agency. And it's quite clear that the modern Ukrainian community, and increasingly so since the Russian invasion, are aware of themselves and their difference and are increasingly aware of themselves and their difference from Russia, and increasingly saying, we recognize origins, but we also recognize that we have the right to choose our own current path and our own future path. We are not prisoners of our history. We have agency. Putin denies the agency whilst emphasizing the original origin, unification. And you cannot have one without the other. You need to recognize the reality of origins, absolutely. But you also need to, in my opinion, as a historian and a commentator, need to recognize current people's agency to decide their own trajectory and their own future. And therein lies the deeply contested nature of what's going on in Ukraine today.

Podcast Host Intro (43:50)

That was Martin Whittock, author, historian and commentator. His book Vikings in the East. From Vladimir the Great to Vladimir Putin. The Origins of a Contested Legacy in Russia and Ukraine is out now in hardback. Martin was speaking to James Osborne.

Gatorade Advertiser (44:20)

Martha listens to her favorite band all the time, in the car, gym, even sleeping. So when they finally went on tour, Martha bundled her flight and hotel on expedia to see them live. She saved so much she got a seat close enough to actually see and hear them. You were made to scream from the front row. We were made to quietly save you. More Expedia made to Travel savings vary and subject to availability. Flight inclusive packages are atoll protected.

Greg Jenner (44:51)

Hello, I'm Greg Jenner, host of youf're Dead to Me, the comedy podcast from the BBC that takes history seriously. Each week I'm joined by a comedian and an expert historian to learn and laugh about the past. In our all new season, we cover unique areas of history that your school lessons may have met. Missed from getting ready in the Renaissance era to the Kellogg brothers, Listen to you're Dead to Me now. Wherever you get your podcast.