socio-economic processes and class differentiation formed the background of state
formation (Klejn 1975 : 3 ; Latvakangas 1995 : 23 ). According to this point of view, finds
in most ancient towns ‘demonstrate the unity of Russian culture’ (Avdusin 1970 : 97 ). It
did not leave any space for discussions about the cultures of other populations apart from
those that had been colonised (Balodis 1943 : 609 ). At the beginning of the 1930 s, one
of the prominent founders of Soviet archaeology, Artemij V. Artsykhovskij, was very
nervous about investigating the earliest cultural layers of Novgorod, because of probable
Scandinavian finds. Even simple interlacing decoration on some ancient items made
him irritated. Only in private conversation was he able to say: ‘Nevertheless, there is
something Scandinavian in this interlacing’ (Avdusin 1994 : 30 ).
During the 1950 s to 1980 s a concept of so-called retainer culture was developed. It
was concluded that various grave types reflected the social differentiation in the society
of Old Rus’. All graves containing a rich inventory were determined as retainers’ graves
(Melnikova 1996 : 71 – 2 ). It was possible to speak only of other cultural elements which
were first incorporated and assimilated by Old Russian culture. Singling out strange
elements in material culture became a method of discussion for both Normanist and
Antinormanist. On the basis of this approach different calculations of the number of
Scandinavian graves were suggested (Avdusin 1969 : 58 ; Stalsberg 1989 : 464 ; Zharnov
1991 : 203 ). Ornaments decorated in Scandinavian style, ritual traits such as the bending
of weapons and boat graves were regarded as typical Scandinavian traits, but not simply
shaped tools such as knives, iron crampons for horses and strike-a-lights, which could be
produced by the local population (Kirpicˇnikov 1970 : 55 – 6 ; Stalsberg 1989 : 450 – 1 ). At
the same time burials with a cremation under a circular mound were not recognised as
Scandinavian (Stalsberg 1989 : 451 ), although these graves form the normal type of
burial in Sweden (Sˇaskol’skij 1970 : 26 ; Gräslund 1980 : 72 ; Jansson 1987 : 775 ). Cham-
ber graves known in both Rus’ and Scandinavia were not regarded by Scandinavian
scholars as typical Scandinavian graves. They were interpreted as showing Continental
influence on the burial practice of such Scandinavian urban centres as Hedeby and Birka
(Gräslund 1980 : 46 ). Even outside these centres in some rural areas of Sweden (Arbman
1936 ), Denmark and Norway (Eisenschmidt 1994 ; Stylegar 2005 ) they were interpreted
as an interregional burial rite.
It is a paradox that both the Normanists, who believe in the Scandinavian origin of
the Old Russian state, and the Antinormanists, who oppose this, in looking for the
traces of Vikings have been dealing with the study of female items in order to explain
male actions. It has became a common view to refer most of the Viking Age swords to
the so-called Carolingian type. Many swords have blades with pattern-welding or
inscriptions with Latin letters that are usually interpreted as the marks of Carolingian
manufacture. Interpreting some damaged signs as the name of a Slavic blacksmith
on the blade of a unique sword decorated with Scandinavian ornamentation made it
possible to argue that some swords could be produced in Rus’ (Avdusin 1970 : 55 ;
Kirpicˇnikov 1970 : 67 ; Androshchuk 2003 ). It is also claimed that it is impossible to
establish a sword’s provenance because the same types were in use all over Europe
(Avdusin 1969 : 55 ). Swords could also be captured in battle, bought, stolen or lost
(Blindheim 1970 : 114 ). Nevertheless, it is remarkable that finds of swords are restricted
to the same areas where Scandinavian women’s brooches were found (Callmer 1971 : 68
figs 1 – 2 ). Some scholars have suggested that some of the swords found in Rus’ might
have been imported there by Scandinavians (Kivikoski 1970 : 117 ).
–– Fjodor Androshchuk––