The conversion of Kievan Russia to Christianity fits into a broad historical pattern. At about the same time similar conversions from paganism were taking place among some of the Baltic Slavs, and in Poland, Hungary, Denmark, and Norway. Christendom in effect was spreading rapidly across all of Europe, with only a few remote peoples, such as the Lithuanians, holding out. Nevertheless, it can well be argued that Vladimir's decision represented a real and extremely important choice. The legendary account
of how the Russians selected their religion, spurning Islam because it prohibited alcohol - for "drink is the joy of the Russian" - and Judaism because it expressed the beliefs of a defeated people without a state, and opting for Byzantine liturgy and faith, contains a larger meaning: Russia did lie at cultural crossroads, and it had contacts not only with Byzantium and other Christian neighbors but also with the Moslem state of the Volga
Bulgars and other more distant Moslems to the southeast as well as with the Jewish Khazars. In other words, Vladimir and his associates chose to become the Eastern flank of Christendom rather than an extension into Europe of non-Christian civilizations. In doing so, they opened wide the gates for the highly developed Byzantine culture to enter their land. Kievan literature, art, law, manners, and customs experienced a fundamental impact of Byzantium. The most obvious result of the conversion was the appearance in Kievan Russia of the Christian Church itself, a new and extremely important institution which was to play a role similar to that of the Church in other parts of medieval Europe. But Christianity, as already indicated, remained by no means confined to the Church, permeating instead Kievan society and culture, a subject to which we shall return in later chapters. In politics too it gave the Kievan prince and state a stronger ideological basis, urging the unity of the country and at the same time emphasizing its links with Byzantium and with the Christian world as a whole. Dvornik, Obolensky, Meyendorff, and many other scholars have given us a rich picture of the Byzantine heritage and of the Russian borrowing from it.
It must be kept in mind that Christianity came to Russia from Byzantium, not from Rome. Although at the time this distinction did not have its later significance and although the break between the Eastern and the Western Churches occurred only in 1054, the Russian allegiance to Byzantium determined or helped to determine much of the subsequent history of the country. It meant that Russia remained outside the Roman Catholic Church, and this in turn not only deprived Russia of what that Church itself had to offer, but also contributed in a major way to the relative isolation of Russia from the rest of Europe and its Latin civilization. It helped notably to inspire Russian suspicions of the West and the tragic enmity between the Russians and the Poles. On the other side, one can well argue that Vladimir's turn to Constantinople represented the richest and the most rewarding spiritual, cultural, and political choice that he could make at the time. Even the absence of Latinism and the emphasis on local languages had its advantages: it brought religion, in the form of a readily understandable Slavic rite, close to the people and gave a powerful impetus to the development of a national culture. In addition to being remembered as a mighty and successful ruler, Vladimir was canonized by the Church as the baptizer of the Russians, "equal to the apostles."
Vladimir's death in 1015 led to another civil war. Several of Vladimir's sons who had served in different parts of the realm as their father's lieutenants and had acquired local support became involved in the struggle. The eldest among them, Sviatopolk, triumphed over several rivals and profited from strong Polish aid, only to be finally defeated in 1019 by another son Iaroslav, who resumed the conflict from his base in Novgorod.
Sviatopolk's traditional appelation in Russian history can be roughly translated as "the Damned," and his listed crimes - true or false, for Iaroslav was the ultimate victor - include the assassination of three of his brothers, Sviatoslav, Boris, and Gleb. The latter two became saints of the Orthodox Church.
Prince Iaroslav, known in history as Iaroslav the Wise, ruled in Kiev from 1019 until his death in 1054. His reign has been generally acclaimed as the high point of Kievan development and success. Yet, especially in its first part, it was fraught with danger, and the needs of the state continued to demand strenuous exertion from the prince and his subjects. Civil war did not end with Iaroslav's occupation of Kiev. In fact, he had to flee it and ultimately, by an agreement of 1026, divide the realm with his brother Mstislav the Brave, prince of Tmutorokan, a principality situated in the area where the Kuban flows into the Sea of Azov and the Black Sea: Iaroslav kept Kiev and authority over the lands west of the Dnieper; Mstislav secured as his domain the territory east of it, with the center in Chernigov. Only after the death of Mstislav in 1036 did Iaroslav become the ruler of the entire Kievan state, and even then the Polotsk district retained a separate prince. Besides fighting for his throne, Iaroslav had to suppress a whole series of local rebellions, ranging from a militant pagan revival in the Suzdal area to the uprisings of various Finnish and Lithuanian tribes.
laroslav's foreign wars included a successful effort in 1031 to recover from Poland the southwestern section which that country obtained in return for supporting Sviatopolk, and an unsuccessful campaign against Byzantium some twelve years later which proved to be the last in the long sequence of Russian military undertakings against Constantinople. But especial significance attaches to laroslav's struggle with the attacking Peche-negs in 1037: the decisive Russian victory broke the might of the invaders and led to a quarter-century of relative peace on the steppe frontier, until the arrival from the east of new enemies, the Polovtsy.
At the time of Iaroslav the prestige of the Kievan state stood at its zenith; the state itself stretched from the Baltic to the Black Sea and from the mouth of the Oka river to the Carpathian mountains, and the Kievan ruling family enjoyed close connections with many other reigning houses of Europe. Himself the husband of a Swedish princess, Iaroslav obtained the hands of three European princesses for three of his sons and married his three daughters to the kings of France, Hungary, and Norway; one of his sisters became the wife of the Polish king, another the wife of a Byzantine prince. Iaroslav offered asylum to exiled rulers and princes, such as the princes who fled from England and Hungary and St. Olaf, the king of Norway, with his son, and his cousin Harold Hardrada. It should be added that
while the links with the rest of Europe were particularly numerous in the
reign of Iaroslav, they were in general a rather common occurrence in Kievan Russia. Following Baumgarten, Vernadsky has calculated, for instance, that six Kievan matrimonial alliances were established with Hungary, five with Bohemia, some fifteen with Poland, and at least eleven with Germany, or, to be more precise on the last point, at least six Russian princes had German wives, while "two German marquises, one count, one landgrave, and one emperor had Russian wives."
Iaroslav's great fame, however, rests more on his actions at home than on his activities in foreign relations. His name stands connected with an impressive religious revival, and with Kievan law, education, architecture, and art. Church affairs of the reign present certain very intricate puzzles to the historian. For some reason Kievan sources, and most importantly the Primary Chronicle, virtually omit Russian ecclesiastical history from the conversion in 988 to 1037, and, furthermore, give the impression that the years around the latter date, at the time of Iaroslav, produced a new departure in Russian Christianity, marked by such a strange act as the consecration in 1039 of a Kievan church which had been erected by Vladimir. In search of an explanation, Priselkov suggested that until 1037 the Russian Church was linked to the Bulgarian archbishopric of Ochrid rather than to Byzantium. Some specialists proposed that the Church at Kiev turned from Constantinople to Rome or simply took an independent and disobedient stand vis-a-vis Constantinople. A more recent interpretation, by Stokes, shifted the emphasis from international ecclesiastical politics to the internal history of the Kievan state and argued that the change under Iaroslav consisted in the transfer of the religious center of Russia, the seat of the metropolitan, from its original location in the city of Pereiaslavl, east of the Dnieper, to Kiev. At least until further evidence, it seems best to assume that Russia remained under the jurisdiction of the Byzantine Church and also had its own metropolitan, whether in Kiev or Pereiaslavl, from the time of the conversion. Whatever the interpretation of its pre-1037 development, Iaroslav did leave an impact on the Russian Church, changing or confirming its organization, having an able and educated Russian, Hilarion, serve as the first native metropolitan, and building and supporting churches and monasteries on a large scale. He has usually been credited with a major role in the dissemination and consolidation of Christianity in Russia.