Киевтің алғашқы викинг билеушілері: Аскольд және Дір

Earliest known Norse rulers of Kiev

Askold and Dir (Haskuldr or Hǫskuldr and Dyr or Djur in Old Norse; died in 882), mentioned in both the Primary Chronicle, the Novgorod First Chronicle, and the Nikon Chronicle, were the earliest known rulers of Kiev.

Also — Oskold, Oskol'd, Oskolod. (Осколд, Оскольд, Осколод)

There are several versions of the origin of the name Askold. The most likely version interprets it as the Norse name Haskuldr or Höskuldr. However, the spelling Askold may only be a change in the Scandinavian manner (similar to Vytautas – Vitold)." According to Doctor of Historical Sciences, professor Igor Danilevsky, who is a specialist on the history of Kievan Rus, the Scandinavian origin of the name is certain and it has long been proved. The suffix ald is found in Celtic names. There is also a theory of the Hungarian origin of the name, which has no sufficient grounds. G. Magner defended the theory of the Slavic origin of the name, deriving it from the word "skoldyryt" – to accumulate. Other supporters of the theory of Slavic origin saw in the word the roots oskal (grin), sokol (falcon), kol (spike) and kolo (circle). It is also possible that the part old is a contraction of volod/ vlad (lord, ruler). This hypothesis does not contradict the data of modern historical grammar. Boris Rybakov expressed a conjecture that the appearance of the names of Askold and Dir in the annals is a consequence of an error of one of the early chroniclers. Allegedly, in fact, in the original text it was about one Kievan prince Askoldyr or more precisely Oskoldyr. Soviet and post Soviet historiography, whose supporters deny the role of the Scandinavians in the creation of the Rus' state or deny at all any participation of the Scandinavians (Normans) in the socio political life of Rus'; reject and seek to refute the "Norman theory" of the creation of the Kievan Rus'. Anti Normanist historians denied the Scandinavian (Old Norse) origin of the name Askold. Anti Normanism includes a wide range of concepts and hypotheses, the common features of which are the denial of the essentiality of the influence of the Scandinavians on the political and economic processes of the formation of ancient Rus' and the advancement of alternative Norman hypotheses. A number of late medieval sources, among them the Kievan Synopsis (1674), report that Oskold was the last representative of the local dynasty of Prince Kyi. Referring to these annalistic evidences, Aleksey Shakhmatov considered the fact of the Slavic origin of Prince Oskold beyond doubt. Among the researchers of the 20th century this idea was shared by professor Mikhail Tikhomirov, and professor Rybakov, in confirmation of the Slavic origin of the prince, the name Oskold derived from the name of the river Oskil, and therefore in his opinion it would be correct to use not "Askold", but exactly "Oskold", as it is found in the Old Rus' chronicles (or "Oskolod" – as indicated in the Nikiforov Chronicle of the XV century, Suprasl Chronicle of the XVI century or medieval Polish chronicle of Maciej Stryjkowski). According to the historian and archaeologist L. S. Klein, the "Norman theory", "Normanism" never existed as a scientific concept, while Anti Normanism exists, but is primarily an ideological platform based on an inferiority complex. Anti Normanism is distinctive for Russia.

Some historians, based on late and unreliable sources, try to declare Askold and Dir to be direct heirs of the legendary Kyi, a representative of the dynasty of "Kievichi". The existence of this "princely dynasty" is based on the information of the Polish historian of the XV century Jan Dlugosz, who wrote that the chronicle's Kievan princes Askold and Dir, killed by Igor (according to the Primary Chronicle killed by Oleg), were descendants of Kyi. This message of Dlugosz was used in the works of Dmitry Ilovaysky (who treated the facts quite arbitrarily) and Mykhailo Hrushevsky (who strove to prove the existence of a distinct Ukrainian ethnos already in the IV century); Aleksey Shakhmatov also referred to them in his historical reconstructions. However, this point of view is rarely supported by specialists. In any case, the Primary Chronicle was written approximately 250 years after the events involving Askold and Dir. The beginning of the Synod Scroll or "Older Edition" of the Novgorod First Chronicle is missing. The surviving text starts in the middle of a sentence in the year 1016. The lost contents of the Synod Scroll before the year 1016 are unknown, and can only be speculated about. The Laurentian Codex of the Primary Chronicle relates that Askold and Dir were sanctioned by Rurik to go to Constantinople (Norse Miklagård, Slavic Tsargrad). When travelling on the Dnieper, they settled in Kiev seizing power over the Polans who had been paying tribute to the Khazars.

The Rus' attack on Constantinople in June 860 took the Greeks by surprise, "like a thunderbolt from heaven," as it was put by Patriarch Photios in his famous oration written for the occasion. Although the Slavonic chronicles tend to associate this expedition with the names of Askold and Dir (and to date it to 866), the connection remains tenuous. Despite Photius' own assertion that he sent a bishop to the land of Rus' which became Christianized and friendly to Byzantium, most historians discard the idea of Askold's subsequent conversion as apocryphal. We may suppose that the names of Rurik and his kin, of Askold and Dir, and of Oleg and Igor' survived in popular legend at Kiev in somewhat the same fashion as the heroes of the later bÿlinÿ. The problem for the author of the Primary Chronicle was to extract from these fragmentary survivals the semblance of an historical account. While there may be some conceivable doubt whether Rurik and his relatives, and possibly Askold and Dir, were actual personages, Oleg and Igor are soundly attested, presumably with dates, by the treaties with the Greeks in which they are mentioned by name. So the existence of Askold and Dir should be taken with a pinch of salt, as these two rulers were semi legendary personalities, and the existence of Rurik should be taken with an even bigger pinch of salt, as he was a legendary personality in history. A Kievan legend identifies Askold's burial mound with Uhorska Hora (Hungarian hill), where Olga of Kiev later built two churches, devoted to Saint Nicholas and to Saint Irene. Today this place on the steep bank of the Dnieper is marked by a monument called Askold's Grave.

(assoc. ed. David J. Birnbaum (Harvard Library of Early Ukrainian Literature, vol. 10, parts 1–3) – This 2003 Ostrowski et al. edition includes an interlinear collation including the five main manuscript witnesses, as well as a new paradosis ("a proposed best reading"). – A 2014 improved digitised version of the 2002/2003 Ostrowski et al. edition.