RUS (Kiev & Novgorod)

[Lurker from Codex]

Back on topic, Mstislav I of Kiev or the Great (father of Vsevolod) had a seal representing a Saint spearing a dragon. The source I've read says that depending on the dynastic orientation, it could be Saint George or Saint Theodore.

It was definetely St. George, or as we call him Georgiy Pobedonostets (Георгий Победоносец). He is still being used in modern iconography, e.g. in Moscow's CoA:



He is almost always depicted as a mounted warrior slaying a Zmey with a spear.

So yes, for now, we'll keep the actual one

Good to know.

[Jurand of Cracow]

Pskov wasn't really a part of Novgorod Republic until 1136, it was an independent state. In fact, there was no Novgorod Republic until 1136. Also, do you have to name it Pleskov..? I know it was called like that in 903 (or rather mentioned as Pleskov in archaic piece of literature "Povest Vremennih Let" that was written in 903). But there is no reason to keep it named Pleskov in 1132

I'd say that a unique name of Novgorod Republic is needed because the game span is of 400 years. I find "Novgorodskaya Zemlya" as Lifhrasir put it, to be better.

I personally think that Pskov should be indeed made independent. It'd also be good for the gameplay.

On the name - yeah, perhaps you're right, Pskov would fit better. On the other hand, I have doubts about north-eastern part of Rus - it was freshly conquered, and even maybe not yet in 1132. Thus, perhaps we should stick to the Finnish names there?

"Technically, Vladimir Monomakh (faction leader of Kievan Rus) is still alive at the start of the game. IRL he died in 1132 - that's when Kievan Rus was broken in separate entities, and lands around Kiev became known as Киевское Кяжество (Kyev'skoye Knyazhestvo)."

I'd indeed prefer naming Kievan Rus as Kyev'skoye Knyazhestvo.

I'd also prefer setting the game in such a way that at the beginning Vladimir is dead, and most of the provinces of the faction are independent. This would require rebuilding of the family tree of this faction, adding usurper traits etc.

Personally, I'm fine with the current symbol (white orthodox cross on blue background)

This is so true. And yet the game does NOT represent this in any way. Novgorod's main strength, it's financial/trading might, came from both its access to the Baltic Sea AND from the rivers leading straight to the Black Sea (Byzantium). Did you know that Rus people actually sucessfuly raided Constantinople with 200 ships coming from the Black Sea? It was in 860, before Rus became christians.... My point is, the main strategical difference between Novgorod and the rest of Rus lands is it's Baltic Sea -Volhov River connection... But we're talking 1132, the time of trade. Most valuable trade resources (for Novgorod, I mean) are located in Byzantium (spices and silk). However, it takes FOREVER for merchants to travel there on foot. Do you think it's possible to make a river connection between Novgorod and Constantinople via some map editing? No pressure, though. Just throwing ideas for future releases.

I'm also fine with the symbol.

I don't think it's worth to make a connection with the Tzargorod. It's 150 or more years after the Rus raids, it's a completely different world.

[Lurker from Codex]

I find "Novgorodskaya Zemlya" as Lifhrasir put it, to be better.

Agreed.

I personally think that Pskov should be indeed made independent. It'd also be good for the gameplay.

Not to mention the indy general that would make for an interesting opponent: Sudislav. It's such a pity his english wiki page is so tiny and lacking on interesting titbits of his life and personality.

On the other hand, I have doubts about north-eastern part of Rus - it was freshly conquered, and even maybe not yet in 1132. Thus, perhaps we should stick to the Finnish names there?

I'm not sure which provinces do you mean..? North-eastern part of Rus (Finland) isn't present in the game. The only Finnish province in SSHIP is Turku. I am fairly certain Turku is a Finnish name (medieval Rus people called it "Кабы" (Kaby) instead).

The northernmost provinces in SSHIP are Turku, Novgorod, Rostov, and Volga-Bulgaria.

[Lurker from Codex]

Not to mention the indy general that would make for an interesting opponent: Sudislav.

Disregard this. Sudislav was long dead in 1132.

[Alejandro Sanchez]

Hi guys! I'm sorry, I didn't have time to read the entire thread in detail.
My comments are follows:
- Up to the XIIIth century inclusively (that's for sure) the word княжество (knyazhestvo) and of course the republic is not used in medieval Russian primary sources. The region is called земля (zemlya). This is if you bother with the topic of pure medieval terms.
- The situation in the medieval Russian regions was such that there were two forces: the knyaz' and the veche (in different regions the veche was stronger or weaker). The knyaz' always made an agreement with the city where he was going to rule. Any descendant of Rurik could rule in any region. The strength of the position of any branch of Ryurikovichi family in any region depended on the sympathies of the local aristocracy.
- The heraldry system was fundamentally different from Western European. The knyaz' used the individual form of tamga or the image of his Saint Patron on the seal. On the Knyaz's banner most likely depicted the image of his personal Saint Patron. If the boyars or city had their own druzhina and banner, then most likely that on their banner was also depicted the most revered Saint Patron. Graphic sources also show the Golgotha cross.

Also, do you have to name it Pleskov..? I know it was called like that in 903 (or rather mentioned as Pleskov in archaic piece of literature "Povest Vremennih Let" that was written in 903). But there is no reason to keep it named Pleskov in 1132.

As far I know the toponym Pleskov in this form will be used for a long time at the same time with the form Pskov. For example (offhand) from Lavrentian Codex in 1138 (folio 101):

И придоша по нь плесковичи...

[Lurker from Codex]

I personally think that Pskov should be indeed made independent. It'd also be good for the gameplay.

I agree, but only if current faction leader of Kievan Rus Mstislav Monomakh will be dead at the start of the game. Pskov proclaimed independence in 1132, right after the death of Mstislav. Before that it was a part of Kievan Rus, just like Novgorod.

I'd indeed prefer naming Kievan Rus as Kyev'skoye Knyazhestvo.

Yes, but again, only if Mstislav will be dead. A thing to note: some provinces (principalities) were called "Zemlja" after Mstislav's death (Novgorodskaya Zemlja, Pskovskaya Zemlja), most of them were called "Knyazhestvo" (Kievskoye Knyazhestvo, Rostovo-Suzdalskoye Knyazhestvo, etc). That's because Novgorod and Psov became republican principalities with powerful aristocrats electing the ruler during Veche sessions. Other principalities had their own Veche's (city councils), but not nearly as influental as Novgorod and Pskov. Essentialy, other principalities remained monarchies. A whole lot of tiny, disjointed monarchies. The main reason mongols established the Tatar Yoke over the former Kievan Rus.

I'd also prefer setting the game in such a way that at the beginning Vladimir is dead, and most of the provinces of the faction are independent. This would require rebuilding of the family tree of this faction, adding usurper traits etc.

Mstislav is dead, you mean? Yes, I completely agree with you. I know it's a lot of work, but it will be worth it IMO.

I don't think it's worth to make a connection with the Tzargorod. It's 150 or more years after the Rus raids, it's a completely different world.

I didn't mean establishing river connection to raid Tzargorod, but to make trading (sending merchants, possibly establishing trade routes by connecting ports) with Byzantium possible. But okay, I can see your reasoning. Guess it's not that big of a deal.

Up to the XIIIth century inclusively (that's for sure) the word княжество (knyazhestvo) and of course the republic is not used in medieval Russian primary sources. The region is called земля (zemlya). This is if you bother with the topic of pure medieval terms.

Sorry, this is simply not true. Only Novgorod and Pskov became "Novgorodskaya Zemlja" (in 1136) and "Pskovskaya Zemlja" (in 1132), the rest were княжества. Before 1132 (year when Mstislav Monomakh died) all these principalities (княжества) were united under Veliky Knyaz and were known as Kievskaya Rus.

I posted a map from 1160 earlier in this thread. But this information is easily verifyable from any other source.

The situation in the medieval Russian regions was such that there were two forces: the knyaz' and the veche (in different regions the veche was stronger or weaker). The knyaz' always made an agreement with the city where he was going to rule.

That's not entirely correct either. It would be true for Pskov after 1132 or Novgorod after 1136.

Any descendant of Rurik could rule in any region. The strength of the position of any branch of Ryurikovichi family in any region depended on the sympathies of the local aristocracy.

Well... no. It wasn't that simple or disorganized. We're talking 1132. You speak Russian, right? Here:

После Ярослава Мудрого окончательно утвердился «лествичный» принцип наследования земли в роде Рюриковичей. Старший в роде (не по возрасту, а по линии родства), получал Киев, все остальные земли делились между членами рода и распределялись по старшинству. Власть переходила от брата к брату, от дяди — к племяннику. Второе место в иерархии столов занимал Чернигов. При смерти одного из членов рода, все младшие по отношению к нему Рюриковичи переезжали в земли, соответствующие их старшинству. При появлении новых членов рода им определялся город с землёй — (волость). Определённый князь имел право княжить только в том городе, где княжил его отец, в обратном случае он считался изгоем.

We know exactly which specific Knyaz ruled over which specific principality during which specific time period. And we also know which Rurikovich appointed each and every Knyaz for the position. Each Knyaz and his principality was a subject of Veliky Knyaz ruling in Kiev.

We have records of each knyazhestvo and its rulers with time periods and every detail. You need not to go any further than wiki. Here's is Polotskoye Knyazhestvo, for example.

The heraldry system was fundamentally different from Western European. The knyaz' used the individual form of tamga or the image of his Saint Patron on the seal. On the Knyaz's banner most likely depicted the image of his personal Saint Patron. If the boyars or city had their own druzhina and banner, then most likely that on their banner was also depicted the most revered Saint Patron. Graphic sources also show the Golgotha cross.

Yes, we figured that much already. Wasn't always patron Saints, though.

As far as I'm concerned, we should leave JoC's banners (provincial ones, I mean) as is. Even though some of them were established after 1132. First, there is no way in hell anyone can figure out CoA of every single province in 1132. Second, even if they do, these ancient CoA will look ugly at best. Third, there were a lot of principalities in the time period without CoA at all. And last but not least, JoC's work with PT looks gorgeous.

As far I know the toponym Pleskov in this form will be used for a long time at the same time with the form Pskov. For example (offhand) from Lavrentian Codex in 1138 (folio 101):

I was merely suggesting to rename it to Pskov for convinience sake. Sometimes even I, a native Russian speaker, get confused by ingame messages regarding Polotsk and Pleskov. "Building built in Pleskov" - hurray! Oh, wait, it's not Polotsk. Goddamit.

I can only imagine how hard it is for non-Russian speakers. We don't know for certain when the city was renamed, in fact, back in Medieval times cities were renamed naturally. As in, locals just used shorter/simpler ways to pronounce location names. The Lavrentian Codex has both "Ps'kov" and "Pleskov" mentions within it, e.g.:

В лѣт ҂s҃ . у҃ . аı҃ . [903 год ] Игореви же възрастъшю. и хожаше по Ѡлзѣ и слоушаша єг̑ . и приведоша ємү женоу ѿ Пьскова . именемъ Ѡленү (В год 6411 (903 год) Когда Игорь вырос, то сопровождал Олега и слушал его, и привели ему жену из Пскова, именем Ольга).

It's inconsistent, because is composed of different works written by different authors living in different time periods. And even then it's not always clear if the reference goes to Pskov/Pleskov the city or Pskova/Pleskova the river.

But whatever, if the devs leave it as Pleskov, I won't complain.

[Alejandro Sanchez]

most of them were called "Knyazhestvo" (Kievskoye Knyazhestvo, Rostovo-Suzdalskoye Knyazhestvo, etc). That's because Novgorod and Psov became republican principalities with powerful aristocrats electing the ruler during Veche sessions. Other principalities had their own Veche's (city councils), but not nearly as influental as Novgorod and Pskov. Essentialy, other principalities remained monarchies. A whole lot of tiny, disjointed monarchies. The main reason mongols established the Tatar Yoke over the former Kievan Rus.

Sorry, this is simply not true. Only Novgorod and Pskov became "Novgorodskaya Zemlja" (in 1136) and "Pskovskaya Zemlja" (in 1132), the rest were княжества. Before 1132 (year when Mstislav Monomakh died) all these principalities (княжества) were united under Veliky Knyaz and were known as Kievskaya Rus.

I don't know what you base your statement on. You use modern historiographic terms that did not exist in the Middle Ages. But our dispute is easy to resolve, right?
I base my statement on the study of medieval Russian chronicles. Here I'm publishing quotes from chronicles that ruin your statement. I’ll take the Lavrentian Codex because it's digitized and all my quotes are easy to check.

Folio 85v. Year ?

И перея всю землю Муромску и Ростовьску, и посажа посадникы по городом и дани поча брати.

Folio 99v. Year 1128.

...яко Роговолоду держащю и владеющю и княжащю Полотьскую землю...

Folio 120. Year 1169.

Видя бо виде озлобленье людий своихъ сихъ кроткых Ростовьскыя земля...

Folio 126. Year 1175.

...приехаша же со всею силою Ростовьская земля на Михалка к Володимерю и много зла створиша...

Folio 126v. Year 1176.

Седящема Ростиславичема в княженьи земля Ростовьскыя, роздаяла бяста по городомъ посадничьство Русьскым дедьцкимъ.

Folio 127v. Year 1176.

...видяще у собе великого князя всея Ростовьскыя земли.

Folio 148v. Year 1211.

...внукъ Володимера Мономаха, княживъ в Суждальстей земли лет 30 и 7...

Folio 159v. Year 1237.

Того же лета на зиму придоша от всточьные страны на Рязаньскую землю лесом безбожнии татари и почаша воевати Рязаньскую землю.

Folio 160v. Year 1237.

Створися велико зло в Суждальской земли.

Folio 167. Year 1247.

Тое же зимы приехаша численици и сщетоша всю землю Сужальскую и Рязаньскую и Мюромьскую...

Some quotes from Galician–Volhynian Chronicle

Бѣда бо бѣ в землѣ Володимерьстѣй от воеванья литовьского и ятвяжьскаго.

Данилу же князю воевавшю с ляхы землю Галичькую и около Любачева, и плѣни всю землю Бельзеськую и Червеньскую...

Наутрѣя же уставоше, и обьеха Данилъ городъ, и собравъ землю галичскую, ста на четырѣ части окрестъ его.

И прия землю Галичьскую и розда городы бояромъ и воеводамъ.

Половци же придоша в землю Галичькую, не восхотѣша ити на Данила, вземшю всю землю Галичькую, возвратишася.

Бысть первое приходъ ихъ на землю Рязаньскую, и взяша град Рязань копьемь...

Батыеви же устремлешюся на землю Суждальскую...

Се бо бѣша людие Миндогови и воевода ихъ Хвалъ, иже велико убиство творяше землѣ Черниговьской...

Си же учиниша пусту землю Володимерьскую...

These are not complete lists of similar quotes, of course.
So, now I hope that you, for your part, will provide evidence of your words with the quotes from medieval primary sources where used the term knyazhestvo.

That's not entirely correct either. It would be true for Pskov after 1132 or Novgorod after 1136.

For example remember the situation that arose in the Suzdal'skaya Zemlya after the murder of Andrey Bogolyubsky, when different towns of this land invited different knyazes.

Well... no. It wasn't that simple or disorganized. We're talking 1132. You speak Russian, right?

Yes, I'm Russian. Will you not deny that this order began to be violated as a result of the armed struggle between the members Rurikovich family and separatist tendencies? )

[Lurker from Codex]

I don't know what you base your statement on. You use modern historiographic terms that did not exist in the Middle Ages.

Yeah. This discussion is going to be very "productive".

So, now I hope that you, for your part, will provide evidence of your words with the quotes from medieval primary sources where used the term knyazhestvo.

If you wish to be anal about it, okay - the correct term was Knyazhenie / Knyazheniye (Княжение).

Давидъ Святославичь а Святославъ Ярославичь святаго Бориса и Глѣба братъ, тотъ Давидъ ни с кѣмъ не имѣаше вражды. Аще кто на нь рать въздвигнеть, он же покорениемъ своимъ рать уставляше, княжаше в Черниговѣ въ большемъ княженьи, понеже бо старии братьи своеи.

Translate into modern Russian:

Давыд Святославич, сын Святослава Ярославича, брат святых Бориса и Глеба, — Давыд этот ни к кому не имел вражды. Когда кто рать на него воздвигал, он рать ту покорностью своей умирял. Княжил в Чернигове он, в большом княжении, ибо старший был меж братии своей.

This relates to Davyd Svyatoslavich, Knyaz of Chernigov, died in 1123. He is actually the grandfather of Vsevolod's (faction leader of Novgorod) wife. Chernigovskoye Knyazhestvo ("KNYAZHENIE", sorry) was considerably vast, and had several smaller knyazhestva within it. He ruled in Chernigov, while his younger brothers ruled in knyazhestva within knyazhestvo. Knyazhenie. Whatever.

The word "Knyazhenie" naturally causes confusion for any modern russian speaker, since it can also mean "rulership" depending on context. I would much prefer Knyazhestvo, but it's up to the devs anyway.

Up to the XIIIth century inclusively (that's for sure) the word княжество (knyazhestvo) and of course the republic is not used in medieval Russian primary sources. The region is called земля (zemlya).

Why Zemlja? Let's call it VOLOST' (Волость) then. Go full bananas on this one. "Zemlja" literally means "Land". It can be used in any context. Principalities were called Volost, Udel, Nadel, Zemlja, Knyazhenie - whatever the authors of various texts could come up with.

This one is from your source:

Святополкъ же, прогнавъ Давыда, нача думати на Володаря и на Василка, глаголя, яко «Се есть волость отца моего и брата»

So yes. Might as well call it Kievskaya Volost, that'll be historically correct. And kinda inane, tbh.

OR be reasonable, remember that the game span is until 1550, and call it Kievskoye Knyazhestvo after all. It's the same as with JoC's coat of arms.



Sometimes one has to be slightly ahistorical for the sake of aesthetics.

[Jurand of Cracow]

- Up to the XIIIth century inclusively (that's for sure) the word княжество (knyazhestvo) and of course the republic is not used in medieval Russian primary sources. The region is called земля (zemlya). This is if you bother with the topic of pure medieval terms.
- The heraldry system was fundamentally different from Western European. The knyaz' used the individual form of tamga or the image of his Saint Patron on the seal. On the Knyaz's banner most likely depicted the image of his personal Saint Patron. If the boyars or city had their own druzhina and banner, then most likely that on their banner was also depicted the most revered Saint Patron. Graphic sources also show the Golgotha cross.

As far I know the toponym Pleskov in this form will be used for a long time at the same time with the form Pskov.

Hi Alexandro,
thanks for your comments, they're very enlighting.
My anwers would be:
- the SSHIP covers 12-16 centuries and a compromise should be found on the names. In this spirit I think Knayzhestvo will be fine for Kiev, and Zemlya for Novogorod.
- we need to have a coherent system for the whole map. If more historical pics for the Provincial Titles for the Russian provinces are found, I'll replace them.
- Pleskov - 1138 is just a beginning for the SSHIP. Do we have examples of the names from, say, 13th century?

[Alejandro Sanchez]

If you wish to be anal about it

Don't heat up boy, you're on the verge of insolence.

okay - the correct term was Knyazhenie / Knyazheniye (Княжение).

At least partially you admitted your wrong. Knyazhestvo and knyazhenie are not synonyms. This word knyazhenie cannot mean principality. And of course you didn’t imagine any quote like Kyev'skoe Knyazhestvo for example because you didn't find. Right?

Why Zemlja? Let's call it VOLOST' (Волость) then. Go full bananas on this one. "Zemlja" literally means "Land". It can be used in any context. Principalities were called Volost, Udel, Nadel, Zemlja, Knyazhenie - whatever the authors of various texts could come up with.

Zemlya - it's a commonly used and most common pure medieval term in conjunction with a toponym. Volost' are also used in this sense, but by several orders of magnitude less.
The terms udel, nadel, knyazhenie used most often without reference to the toponym in a single language construct. In addition in Novgorod and Pskov is also present knyazhenie

OR be reasonable, remember that the game span is until 1550, and call it Kievskoye Knyazhestvo after all. It's the same as with JoC's coat of arms.

I from the very beginning designated the period that I talked about: from the beginning of the Russian annals to the XIIIth century. What will it all be called in the game, I don't care.

[Alejandro Sanchez]

Hi Alexandro,
thanks for your comments, they're very enlighting.

Hi Jurand! Thanks! You're welcome!

My anwers would be:
- the SSHIP covers 12-16 centuries and a compromise should be found on the names. In this spirit I think Knayzhestvo will be fine for Kiev, and Zemlya for Novogorod.
- we need to have a coherent system for the whole map. If more historical pics for the Provincial Titles for the Russian provinces are found, I'll replace them.

It's your right to call it all in the game. My primary source studies say that the term Zemlya is used regardless of the balance of power between knyaz' and veche in the region.
Pure medieval name construct for the territory = toponym + addition (suffix and ending) 'skaya + word Zemlya.

- Pleskov - 1138 is just a beginning for the SSHIP. Do we have examples of the names from, say, 13th century?

Yes. Lavrentian Codex (folio 164v) about the Battle on the Ice in 1242:

В лето 6750. Великый князь Ярославъ посла сына своего Андреа в Новъгородъ Великый в помочь Олександрови на немци, и победиша я за Плесковом на озере

In the year 6750. Grand Duke Yaroslav sent his son Andrey to Novgorod the Great to help Alexander against the Germans, and they defeated beyond the Pleskov on the lake

Novgorod 1st Chronicle (XV cent.) also use toponym in the form Плесковъ (Pleskov) including in the events of the XV century, but for example Pskov 2nd Chronicle (XV cent.) use toponym in the form Псковъ (Pskov).

[Lifthrasir]

Easy guys
The point here is just to find the best way to represent these 2 factions in game, not to decide which source is right or wrong
In any case, thanks to you both for your inputs

Hi Alexandro,
thanks for your comments, they're very enlighting.
My anwers would be:
- the SSHIP covers 12-16 centuries and a compromise should be found on the names. In this spirit I think Knayzhestvo will be fine for Kiev, and Zemlya for Novogorod.
- we need to have a coherent system for the whole map. If more historical pics for the Provincial Titles for the Russian provinces are found, I'll replace them.
- Pleskov - 1138 is just a beginning for the SSHIP. Do we have examples of the names from, say, 13th century?

Actually, from what I could find in English, the word Kievan seems to have been used the 1st time during the 19th century. I've also found several sources (still in English) mentionning Kievskaya Zemlya but all quite recent actually (19th and 20th centuries).
I've found only one source in English saying that the Kievan Rus realm was known as the Russkaya Zemlya (meaning land of the Rus). However, I'm pretty sure that this means all territories hold by the Rurik dynasty (Novgorod included)

[Alejandro Sanchez]

I've found only one source in English saying that the Kievan Rus realm was known as the Russkaya Zemlya (meaning land of the Rus). However, I'm pretty sure that this means all territories hold by the Rurik dynasty (Novgorod included)

You're right, it's pure medieval native term for this country. It was used in two senses: as all country in general and as land of Kiev + land of Chernigov.

[Lifthrasir]

Thanks for the clarification. That's interesting

On another topic, it looks that both factions had quite a similar army mostly based on a core of elite units, Druzhina and a bunch of militia, probably including archers as well (the T.O. records mentioned raining arrows during the Battle of lake Peipus in 1242).
The main difference seems to have been in the mercenaries they could hire. I've found that Kiev used svoi poganye (meaning "our own pagans") since the reign of Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125). They were Turkic auxiliaries, often referred as Kazzaks or Kazaks, and were used against Cumans. They seem to have been mainly Torks, Pechenegs and Berendei and have settled in South Russia, being progressively absorbed within the local Russian population.
There are also records of Hungarian, Polish and German mercenaries employed by different principalities. From the mid-12th century, there were also Lithuanian tribesmen.
All this was, of course, before the Mongol invasion.

I'm trying to find more info about these mercenaries, especially about their availability and composition.

Edit: A few titles with their meaning, not sure if it can be of any use (perhaps for ancillaries) but who knows....

Druzhinnik [дружинник] - member of the druzhina

An armed retinue in ancient Rus' that served the prince and formed the main military force. In peacetime, the members were in charge of local districts and in war, formed the core of the army. They were closely associated with the prince, receiving full support/provision from him in addition to influential administrative posts. They counseled the prince, and participated in diplomatic negotiations. The druzhina was divided into two groups: the senior druzhina, or muzhi knazhiie, composed mainly of boyars who performed higher state functions; and the junior druzhina, or hryd (aka grid), who were responsible for the personal protection of the prince and carried out a variety of commissions for him in the royal court and provincial administration. In the 11th-12th centuries, the druzhina and the old landed nobility (zemski boyars) united to form a single aristratic class. In the chronicles, the word druzhina is sometimes applied more widely - to refer to the national militia, the entire princely army, or smaller military troops. [Encyclopedia of Ukraine]

In the 11th-12th century divided into two levels:

1. senior - druzhina starshaya (old) or druzhina lepshaya (better) or druzhina perednyaya (front) with members called knyazhnie muzhi (singular, knyazhnij muzh). Eventually became boyariny. Sometimes had their own druzhina. [Petrov & Wiki]. A member of the senior druzhina could be called knyazhnii muzh (prince's man) or more commonly, boiarin. They joined the druzhina by own free will and could change masters at will. They were advisors of the prince and occupied the highest military and civil posts – posadnik, tysyatski, voevoda. Sometimes they had their own druzhina. [Petrov].
2. junior - druzhina molodshaya (young) with members called otrok/otroki, gridin/gridni, detskij, etc. Became dvoryane. [Petrov & Wiki]. They could be Detskie (literally, children) and as such performed various tasks for the prince, accompanied him in capacity of retinue and body guards. In the princely council, they did not take part except for military advice. Only freemen could become detskie. [Petrov]. Or they could be Otroki (literally, boys/lads), primarily court servitors of the prince, in contrast to detskie who were military members of the druzhina. In the otroki were also unfree people, slaves (kholopy). In duties otroki included service at the table of the prince, cleaning things and fulfilling various of his orders. In the council of the prince, otroki did not participate, except for military advice. [Petrov].

Voevoda [воевода] - provincial governor, military commander, general.

Currently used for Baron/Baroness with more military overtones than "posadnik". Military leader, ruler of the Slavs, captain, commander, commander-in-chief. In Rus is known from the 10th cent. (recorded in chronicles in capacity of chief of the princely druzhina or leader of militia). From the end of the 15th cent. until the creation of a regular army (beginning 18th cent.) he was the military leader of regiments or troops. In the middle of the 16th cent. Voevody supervised city government, with help of city clerks. [Petrov].

Boyarin [боярин] - nobleman.

According to George Vernadsky in Ancient Russia p. 248-9 – Origin of the term “boyar” The Bulgar horde was composed of several clans, ogus. The clan elders were known as boils. The Turkish plural form of boil is boiler or boiliar. This is the origin of the Old Russian term boliarin, plural boliare (boyars). Bulgar knights were known as bagain or bagatur.
Boyars directed special branches of goverment. As feudal landlords, they were vassals of the knyaz, obliged to serve in his army, but possessing the right to leave to a new suzerain and were fully sovereign in their own patrimony and had their own vassals. [Petrov].
​According to Petrov:

1. senior druzhinik, advisor to prince in ancient Russian state in 9th-13th cent.
2. feudal landowner.
3. highest service rank in Russian state of 14th-17th cent., and also a person granted such a rank. Rank of boyarin gave the right to participate in the Boyar Duma. The close (blizhij) or room (komnatnyj) boyarin was a special confidant of the tsar and had the right of access to the royal chambers. Relatives of the tsaritsa received the title svojstvennoj boyarin (special/peculiar/inherent boyarin).

Dvoryanin [дворянин] - nobleman, courtier, servitor. Lower rank than boyarin, but close contact to the sovereign is implied. The junior members of the druzhina. According to Бикипедия, the Russian version of Wikipedia, the dvoryanstvo is a privileged class in feudal and, partly, bourgeois society. In the widest sense, "dvoryanstvo" means European feudal aristocrats in general. In this sense, one can speak of the "French noblity", "German nobility", etc.
The dvoryanstvo arose in Russia in the 12th century as the lower part of the military-service class, making up the court of a prince or great boyar.The word "doryanin" literally means "person with the princely court" or "courtier". Dvoryane were taken into the service of a prince for fulfilling various administrative, judicial and other assignments. In the system of European representation/presentation the top of the Russian dvoryanstvo of that time - an analogue of viscountship.

Velikij Knyaz [Великий Князь] - grand prince, or grand duke.The term "Veliki Knyaz" first appears in the Novgorod Chronicle in the year 1198 - Veliki Knyaz Ysaroslav. Interestingly, the term "Knyaz of Russia/Rus" князи Русьстемь appears in 1165.
Sreznevskij has several entries for "velikaya knyaginya" dating from 1282 to 1486.
See below for further primary sources.
According to George Vernadsky in Kievan Russia:

• P 178 – origin of kniaz The old Slavic word for prince is kniaz’ deriving from the old German kuning (koningr in Old Norse) meaning king. Presumably the 6th and 7th cent. Antian and Slovenian princes were clan/tribal elders, as well as the 10th cent. Drevlianian prince Mal. The nature of princely power shifted with the appearance of the Norsemen, who were gradually absorbed into the fabric of Russian political life.
• P 181 Late 12th cent. (?) Vsevolod III assumed the title of velikii kniaz’ (he also made some use of the title samoderzhets). This was the beginning of the end of the social and political equality of the members of the house of Riurik. He, and his brother, had a tendency to treat the lesser princes in their domains as podruchniki (lit. "under the arm"), which was resisted by those lesser princes.

Knyaz [князь] - a local prince, or a son/close relative of the velikii knyaz.A knyaz could be the ruler of a local principality, such Chernigov or Galicia, theoretically under the authority of the velikii knyaz, who ruled from Kiev, Vladimir, Tver or Moscow depending on the time period and the political situation.
A knyaz could also be a close relative of a velikii knyaz or local ruling knyaz, i.e. a member of the house of Riurik.
Knyazes could also be former velikij knyazes, especially during the Mongol rule when the khan could transfer the yarlik for the grand princely throne at will.

Knyazhich [княжич] - son of the Knyaz.

[Alejandro Sanchez]

I've found that Kiev used svoi poganye (meaning "our own pagans") since the reign of Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125).

Yeah, they had a collective name черные клобуки (Chernie Klobuki). Chernigov also had similar Turkic confederates - ковуи (Kovui).

They were Turkic auxiliaries, often referred as Kazzaks or Kazaks...

No, no, no! They were not called that )))

[Lifthrasir]

That's possible. The text I've read wasn't particulary clear and I might have been confused.
Anyway, the idea would be to restrict these to Kievan Rus and to share others with different rate of availability for the other mercenaries.
In fact, I'm trying to make a difference, even if not especially pronounced, regarding the unit roster for these factions

[Alejandro Sanchez]

I corrected your toponyms:

Volodimer' (with soft r at the end)- Володимерь
Galich' - Галичь (this is a purely grammatical correction, since this toponym is written with Cyrillic Г)
Polotsk also had the form Polotesk - Полотескъ
Pereyaslavl' (+soft l in the end)
Smolensk also had the form Smolenesk/Smolnesk - Смоленескъ/Смолнескъ
Rostov - Ростовъ
Ryazan' (with soft n at the end) - Рязань. Also known the form Rezan' - Резань

Don't know what is Goroden )

[Lifthrasir]

Thanks for that. Goroden is also known as Grodno or Hrodna (in Black Ruthenia - Belarus nowadays - see here for more details).

[Alejandro Sanchez]

Thanks for that. Goroden is also known as Grodno or Hrodna (in Black Ruthenia - Belarus nowadays - see here for more details).

Ah ) Thanks!

[j.a.luna]

That's possible. The text I've read wasn't particulary clear and I might have been confused.
Anyway, the idea would be to restrict these to Kievan Rus and to share others with different rate of availability for the other mercenaries.
In fact, I'm trying to make a difference, even if not especially pronounced, regarding the unit roster for these factions

Lifth, take a look this page, you can download in english also, it is a summary about all armies composition in middle ages.
This is about Kievan Rus, they had little armies of scandinavian mercenaries( vaeringjar, varyagui) at the beginning of the game, also druzhina, urban militia( spearmen and archers) , nobilitian men ( boyars), chernie klobluki (steppe Horse archers in black ropes absorved for russians)
Here the website: https://arrecaballo.es/edad-media/la...a-rus-de-kiev/