How to survive alone in the conditions of 10th century Rus? An 8-month experiment by Pavel Sapozhnikov

Life without electricity, plumbing, stores, smartphones, or even matches sounds like science fiction to a modern person. But those were exactly the conditions—of early medieval Northwestern Rus—in which reenactor Pavel Sapozhnikov spent eight months. It was not just an experiment, but a real attempt to live as our ancestors did: without the help of civilization, following the laws and rhythms of the ancient world. He shares how it all started, what turned out to be the most difficult, and what this isolation taught him in an episode of the program "Did You Know?"

The project on science and technology is partnered by Team Telecom Armenia.

Solitude as an Experiment: Why Hermit Life Was Not Medieval

According to Sapozhnikov, the idea of starting the first experiment alone was linked to the need to test the limits of what’s possible under conditions close to those of the Middle Ages. However, he emphasizes that solitary living was historically more of an exception than a rule.

"Honestly, I think that living alone—this whole concept of hermitage—was very rare at all times. It’s rare even now, although of course, today it’s easier: there are so many great, convenient things—from portable stoves to insulated tents—that allow survival in the wilderness. But in the past—technically and physically—surviving alone was nearly impossible," Sapozhnikov explains.

He notes that people historically always grouped together—not out of romanticism for community life, but because survival alone was practically impossible. Even basic subsistence required enormous labor. Sapozhnikov recalls his experience: having just a few structures and minimal livestock took up all his time. “You don’t need to produce anything for sale, you’re not even doing crafts—yet all your time goes to the basics. Grinding grain, washing, chopping wood, caring for poultry, cleaning.”

Even everyday actions became real challenges. Bathing, according to Sapozhnikov, was akin to completing a difficult quest: “You need to haul many buckets of water from a deep well. Then heat it—that means lots of firewood. And not just boiling it, but heating with stones baked in the oven. Even to get a bathhouse warm, you have to fire it up for half a day. And in a cold log house in winter—that’s critical.”

He adds that even modern technologies don’t help much in log homes: a log cabin is beautiful, but not energy-efficient. “Compared to foam blocks or bricks, the log loses. And in conditions where there’s prolonged frost outside, and you have to saw wood by hand, that becomes a problem. Basically, a whole day can go to just washing yourself once a week. And that’s if you’re lucky enough to combine it with other tasks—like laundry. That also needs water, firewood, and time.”

Labor as Survival: Low Efficiency and Constant Routine

Sapozhnikov explains how much time even grinding grain took. The millstones, he says, were very small—20 to 50 centimeters in diameter—and required multiple regrinds. “You had to grind several times, sift through hair sieves. I was very pleased when I managed to make white flour—almost like store-bought. But when I compared it with cheap modern wheat flour, I realized mine was awful. Coarse grind, soot, debris, gray,” he recalls.

He says that in winter he could sit all day grinding grain because there wasn’t much else to do—it was dark, cold, life slowed down. And he had to eat something the following week—even if just flatbreads.

Sapozhnikov stresses that in real historical conditions, this was handled by a community. There was division of labor, which was crucial: “If you’re alone—you do everything. Build, wash, grind flour, stoke the stove, feed livestock. But in each of these tasks, you’re worse than someone who does it all the time. That’s the essence of specialization. A woman who always grinds grain and a man who hunts daily—each is faster, better, more efficient at their own work. But when you do it all ‘okay,’ it’s slow and hard. That leads to burnout and low efficiency.”

Grain as the Basis of Life: Food, Hunger, and Tasteless Cooking

When asked what he ate during the experiment, Sapozhnikov replies: mainly grain. It was not only practical but also historically accurate. “Grain was the main product of almost all peoples and eras. Only very small groups could live by hunting or fishing. Because once you have 30–50 people, resources get depleted. Game disappears, there’s not enough firewood. Even fish becomes scarce. And cities were always dependent on outside supplies,” said Sapozhnikov.

He emphasizes that agriculture in that era was extremely inefficient. Agricultural miracles didn’t start until the 19th century. And in northwestern Russia—where he conducted the experiment—it was even considered a zone of risky farming. “You could harvest exactly what you planted. Or nothing. If you got three times more—that was a success. But you might get unlucky, and then there was hunger. Hunger was a companion of humanity until the 20th century. It’s easier now, but still not everywhere,” he noted.

He says the supplies were based on what was realistic for the time: barley, wheat, a bit of fish, very little meat, and almost no spices. Barley was tough, and boiling it was unpleasant. So—flour. “You start baking with it—flatbreads, pies, try unleavened or even sourdough bread. Simply because you want variety. Because humans have always had a drive toward the beautiful—whether in the Bronze Age, the Middle Ages, or today.”

He explains that even church calendars and fasts reflect this dependency on crops and reserves: “The major fasts occurred exactly when food was running out, and the new harvest hadn’t yet come. It was a form of social contract to get through hard times together. A very archaic but living system.”