HARVARD UKRAINIAN STUDIES - See also - Harvard University

THE CHRISTIANIZATION OF RUS' IN SOVIET HISTORIOGRAPHY 453their "inadequate knowledge of Russian Church practice and of Russianliterature."Toward historians in the Soviet Union, Tikhomirov expresses less acriticism than a comment that their treatments of Christianity in Rus' have"deal[t] with specialized aspects," and that even Grekov "deal[s] butbriefly with the baptism of Russia in 989. " 33 Tikhomirov's comment couldsupport two alternate interpretations. The less generous interpretationwould argue that because of the anti-religious attitude of the Soviet government,historians have found it difficult to discuss questions of religious history.The more generous interpretation would argue that scholars in theSoviet Union have dug deeper into specifics of the topic but have not yetsynthesized their results. However, Tikhomirov chooses in this context notto mention the works of Pokrovskii, Bakhrushin, and Budovnits, all ofwhom could be considered to have attempted a synthesis. As I will arguebelow, Tikhomirov may have had serious disagreements with the views ofeach of these scholars concerning their views on the Christianization processand use of sources, but he may have chosen not to air his disagreementexplicitly in an article published abroad.IINeither Pokrovskii nor Grekov discusses fontology very much in general oron this particular issue. Pokrovskii maintains that the chroniclers werebiased in their praise of the Rus' princes not only because they were courtiers.To support his claim that very few laymen in Rus' were literate, hepoints out that there is no mention in the Rus'skaia pravda of written contracts.Therefore, "all literary work was done by the clergy," who wereindebted to the princes and boyars for their support of the Church. 34Grekov's fontological approach to this issue can only be described asuncritical. He refers five times to "our [or "the] chronicler," withoutspecifying the Povesf vremennykh let (PVL). He finds the "dramatizedform" in which "the chronicler" tells "how Volodimer became familiarwith various faiths" to be "quite plausible." 35 He cites the Treaty of 945 asevidence that "from the beginning of the tenth century, Christianity in Kievwas well known." 36 He refers to the sermons of Hilarion and Kirill of33Tikhomirov, "The Origins of Christianity in Russia," p. 199. Note that Tikhomirovplaces the conversion a year later than the traditional date of 988.34Pokrovskii, Russkaia istoriia, p. 36.35Grekov, Kievskaia Rus' (1939), p. 250.36Grekov, Kievskaia Rus' (1939), p. 251. Subsequent editions change the date of the treatyto 944: Kievskaia Rus' (1944), p. 278; Kievskaia Rus' (1949), p. 473; Kievskaia Rus' (1953), p.477.