Russian-Byzantine wars is a series of military conflicts between Old Russian state And Byzantium in the period from the second half of the 9th century to the first half of the 11th century. At their core, these wars were not wars in the full sense of the term, but rather - hiking and raids.
First trip Rus' against Byzantine Empire(with the proven participation of Russian troops) began a raid in the early 830s. The exact date is not indicated anywhere, but most historians point to the 830s. The only mention of the campaign is in the Life of St. George of Amastrida. The Slavs attacked Amastris and plundered it - this is all that can be extracted from the work of the supposed Patriarch Ignatius. The rest of the information (for example, the Russians tried to open the coffin of St. George, but their arms and legs were lost) does not stand up to criticism.
The next attack was on Constantinople (Constantinople, modern Istanbul, Türkiye), which occurred in 866 (according to Tales of Bygone Years) or 860 (according to European chronicles).
The leader of this campaign is not indicated anywhere (as in the campaign of the 830s), but we can almost certainly say that it was Askold and Dir. The raid was carried out on Constantinople from the Black Sea, which the Byzantines did not expect. It should be noted that at that time the Byzantine Empire was greatly weakened by long and not very successful wars with the Arabs. When the Byzantines saw, according to various sources, from 200 to 360 ships with Russian soldiers, they locked themselves in the city and made no attempt to repel the attack. Askold and Dir calmly plundered the entire coast, receiving more than enough booty, and took Constantinople under siege. The Byzantines were in panic; at first they did not even know who attacked them. After a month and a half siege, when the city actually fell, and several dozen men-at-arms could have taken it, the Rus unexpectedly left the Bosphorus coast. The exact reason for the retreat is unknown, but Constantinople miraculously survived. The author of the chronicles and an eyewitness to the events, Patriarch Photius, describes this with helpless despair: “The salvation of the city was in the hands of the enemies and its preservation depended on their generosity... the city was not taken by their mercy... and the disgrace from this generosity intensifies the painful feeling...”
There are three versions of the reason for the departure:
- fear of reinforcements arriving;
- reluctance to be drawn into a siege;
- pre-thought-out plans for Constantinople.
The latest version of the “cunning plan” is confirmed by the fact that in 867 the Russians sent an embassy to Constantinople, and a trade agreement was concluded with Byzantium, moreover, Askold and Dir committed first baptism of Rus'(unofficial, not as global as Vladimir’s baptism).
The campaign of 907 is indicated only in a few ancient Russian chronicles; it is not in the Byzantine and European chronicles (or they are lost). However, the conclusion of a new Russian-Byzantine treaty as a result of the campaign has been proven and is beyond doubt. It was that legendary hike Prophetic Oleg when he nailed his shield to the gates of Constantinople.
Prince Oleg attacked Constantinople with 2,000 rooks from the sea and horsemen from the land. The Byzantines surrendered and the result of the campaign was the treaty of 907, and then the treaty of 911.
Unconfirmed legends about the campaign:
- Oleg put his ships on wheels and moved overland with a fair wind to Constantinople;
- the Greeks asked for peace and brought poisoned food and wine to Oleg, but he refused;
- The Greeks paid each warrior 12 gold hryvnia, plus separate payments to all the princes - Kyiv, Pereyaslavl, Chernigov, Rostov, Polotsk and other cities (plausible).
In any case, the texts of the treaties of 907 and 911, included in the Tale of Bygone Years, confirm the fact of the campaign and its successful result. After their signing, the trade of Ancient Rus' reached a new level, and Russian merchants appeared in Constantinople. Thus, its significance is great, even if it was intended as an ordinary robbery.
Reasons for the two campaigns (941 and 943) Prince Igor to Constantinople are not precisely known, all the information is unclear and partially reliable.
There is a version that Russian troops helped the Byzantines in the conflict with the Khazar Kaganate (Jews), which repressed the Greeks on its territory. At first, the fighting developed successfully, but something happened after the defeat of the Russians in the Kerch Strait area near Tmutarakan (some kind of negotiations with an element of blackmail), and the ancient Russian army was forced to march against Byzantium. Cambridge document reads: “And he went against his will and fought against Kustantina at sea for four months...” Kustantina is, of course, Constantinople. Be that as it may, the Russians left the Jews alone and moved towards the Greeks. In the battle of Constantinople, the Byzantines introduced Prince Igor to “Greek fire” (an incendiary mixture of oil, sulfur and oil, which was shot through a copper pipe using bellows - pneumatically). The Russian ships retreated, and their defeat was finally sealed by the onset of a storm. The Byzantine Emperor Roman himself prevented the second campaign by sending an embassy to Igor with the goal of returning peace. A peace treaty was signed in 944, the result of the conflict was a draw - neither side gained anything except the return of peaceful relations.
The Russian-Byzantine conflict of 970-971 ended with approximately the same result during the reign of Svyatoslav. The reason was disagreements and mutual claims on the territory of Bulgaria. In 971, Prince Svyatoslav signed a peace treaty, and upon returning home he was killed by the Pechenegs. After this, most of it was annexed to Byzantium.
In 988 Prince Vladimir the Great besieged Korsun (Chersonese - modern Sevastopol), which was under Byzantine rule. The cause of the conflict is unknown, but the result was Vladimir’s marriage to the Byzantine princess Anna, and ultimately the complete baptism of Rus' (Korsun, of course, fell).
After this, peace reigned in relations between Rus' and Byzantium for many years (except for the attack of 800 renegades in 1024 on the Byzantine island of Lemnos; all participants in the campaign were killed).
The reason for the conflict in 1043 was an attack on a Russian monastery in Athos and the murder of a noble Russian merchant in Constantinople. The events of the sea campaign were identical to Igor's campaign, including the storm and Greek fire. Led the campaign Prince Yaroslav the Wise(He was called wise not for this battle, but for the introduction of “Russian Truth” - the first set of laws). Peace was concluded in 1046 and sealed by the marriage of the son of Yaroslav (Vsevolod) with the daughter of the Byzantine emperor.
Relations between Rus' and Byzantium have always been closely connected. The abundance of conflicts is explained by the formation of statehood in Rus' during that period (this was the case with the ancient Germans and Franks with the Roman Empire, and with many other countries at the stage of formation). An aggressive foreign policy led to the recognition of the state, the development of the economy and trade (plus income from robbery, let's not forget), as well as the development of international relations, no matter how strange it may sound.
The cooperation between Rus' and Byzantium was beneficial to both Rus' (trade, culture, access to other states with the help of the Greeks) and the Byzantine Empire (military assistance in the fight against the Arabs, Saracens, Khazars, etc.).
Prince Igor's campaigns against Constantinople (941 and 944)
After Byzantium refused to pay tribute to Rus', Prince Igor launched a campaign against Constantinople in 941, but it was unsuccessful. Having gathered larger forces, Igor repeated the campaign in 944, as a result of which a new peace treaty was concluded with Byzantium, according to which Byzantium undertook to pay indemnity to Rus' for those killed in the war, and resumed the annual payment of tribute to Rus'.
The struggle between Rus' and Byzantium for influence on Bulgaria (969–971). Battle of Dorostol (971)
The Russian prince Svyatoslav of Kiev in 969 undertook a campaign to Bulgaria. The military successes of the Rus near Philippopolis and Adrianople, the likelihood of creating a strong Russian-Bulgarian state and the attempt to move the capital to Bulgaria alarmed Byzantium. The commander Tzimiskes with 30 thousand infantry and 15 thousand cavalry opposed Svyatoslav, who had an army of 30 thousand.
On April 23, 971, the Byzantine army approached Dorostol (now Silistria in Bulgaria). On the same day, the first battle took place, which began with an ambush attack by a small Russian detachment on the Byzantine vanguard. Svyatoslav's troops stood in the usual battle formation, shields closed and spears extended. Emperor Tzimisces lined up horsemen in iron armor on the flanks of the infantry, and behind were riflemen and slingers who constantly showered the enemy with stones and arrows. Two days later, the Byzantine fleet approached Dorostol, and Tzimiskes launched an assault on the city walls, but it failed. By the end of the day on April 25, the city was completely surrounded by the Byzantines. During the blockade, Svyatoslav’s warriors made forays more than once, inflicting damage on the enemy.
On July 21, it was decided to give the last battle. The next day the Rus left the city, and Svyatoslav ordered the gates to be locked so that no one could think about escaping. According to the chronicler, before the battle, Svyatoslav addressed the squad with the following words: “Let us not disgrace the Russian lands, but let us lie down with their bones: the dead have no shame.” The battle began with Svyatoslav's warriors attacking the enemy army. By noon, the Byzantines began to gradually retreat. Tzimiskes himself rushed to the aid of the retreating troops with a select detachment of cavalry. To make better use of his numerical superiority, Tzimiskes lured the Rus to the plain with a false retreat. At this time, another detachment of Byzantines came to their rear and cut them off from the city. Svyatoslav’s squad would have been destroyed if there had not been a second line of troops behind their battle formation - the “wall” -. The soldiers of the second line turned to the Byzantines, who struck from the rear, and did not allow them to approach the “wall.” Svyatoslav’s army had to fight surrounded, but thanks to the courage of the warriors, the encirclement ring was broken.
The next day, Svyatoslav invited Tzimiskes to begin negotiations. Svyatoslav undertook not to fight with Byzantium, and Tzimiskes had to let the Rus' boats through without hindrance and give two measures of bread to each warrior for the road. After this, Svyatoslav’s army moved home. The treacherous Byzantines warned the Pechenegs that the Rus were coming in a small force and with booty. On the Dnieper rapids, Svyatoslav was ambushed by the Pecheneg Khan Kurei and was killed.
· 05/22/07Yu. Lazarev. Where your head lies, there we will fall
The first mention of the Slavic invasion of Byzantine possessions dates back to 493 (or 495). Then they crossed the Ister (Danube) and devastated Thrace. In 517, the Slavs went much further in their campaign to the south and penetrated into Macedonia, Epirus and Thessaly. It is known that their army appeared in the Thermopylae Pass.
In 527, the Ant tribes attacked the Byzantine Empire. Then the Byzantine troops barely managed to repel their invasion. Under Emperor Justinian, 80 fortifications were built in Istra to protect the northern borders of the state. However, these measures turned out to be fruitless, which was confirmed by the subsequent campaigns of the Slavs against Byzantium.
A. Klimenko. Leader of the Ants
The Slavic army first approached Constantinople in 540. The attackers could not take the city, but burned all its outskirts and devastated the surrounding area. In 548, an army of Sklavins invaded the empire, which successfully crossed the Ister and passed the entire Illyricum to Dyrrachium.
Byzantine chroniclers of that time left quite detailed descriptions of Slavic warriors and their combat tactics. It was said that they were armed mainly with spears, bows and arrows, and had only shields as defensive weapons. They sought to attack the enemy suddenly, skillfully setting up ambushes in forests and mountainous areas.
The great campaign of the Slavs against the Byzantine Empire took place in 550-551. Then detachments of Slavic warriors took a number of cities in Macedonia, operated in Thrace and stormed the seaside fortress town of Toper.
The invasions of Slavic tribes into the Balkan part of the Byzantine Empire became especially frequent at the end of the 6th century. In 577, a huge Slavic army, estimated by contemporaries to be up to 100 thousand people, crossed the Ister and ravaged Thrace, Macedonia and Thessaly.
From Byzantine sources it is known that the Slavs invaded the empire in large forces in 581, 585 and 586-587. They repeatedly, for example, besieged such a large coastal city as Thessalonica (Thessalonica). In 589, the Slavs, during their invasion of the Balkans, reached the Peloponnese.
However, the Byzantine Empire not only defended itself from its Slavic neighbors, but also attacked their lands. In the 590s, the imperial army under the command of the commander Mauritius Priscus crossed the Ister near the city of Dristra (Dorostol) and devastated the possessions of the Slavic princes Ardagast and Musokia. The Byzantines fought on the left bank for a long time and only with the onset of winter did they move back across the Ister.
In 597, the Byzantine army repeated its invasion of Slavic lands on the opposite bank of the Istra. This time the campaign was not unexpected, and the Slavs defended themselves courageously and skillfully. The advance detachment of the Byzantines, consisting of a thousand soldiers, which was the first to arrive on the left bank of the Istra, was exterminated. However, the Slavs lost the general battle, and their leader Piragast died on the battlefield. However, the advance into the interior of the Slavic lands turned out to be associated with heavy losses, and the Byzantines considered it best to stop the campaign.
In the same year, while the emperor's army was fighting in the Slavic lands beyond the Istrome, their enemy suddenly appeared in front of Thessalonica and besieged the city. It is known that during the six-day siege the Slavs used battering rams and stone-throwing machines. They were unable to take the city and were forced to retreat from it.
In 600, the allied army of Avars and Slavs approached Constantinople. But the outbreak of the plague forced them to sign peace with Byzantium. That was the end of the joint campaign. The Eastern Slavs became especially dangerous for the Byzantine Empire when they began to develop navigation. On their light one-wood boats, they successfully sailed on the Pontus Euxine (Black Sea), in the Propintis (Sea of Marmara), the Aegean, Ionian and Inland (Mediterranean) seas. There, Slavic boat flotillas attacked coastal cities and captured the merchant ships of the Byzantines, and not only them.
Thessalonica was besieged by the Slavs again in 610. The foot army approached from the land, and the boat fleet blocked the Gulf of Cellaria. After an unsuccessful three-day siege, the Slavs left the city.
Slavic boat flotillas more than once operated in the vastness of the Mediterranean. So, in 623, the Slavs made a sea voyage to the island of Cyprus and took rich booty there, and in 642 they attacked the coast of Southern Italy and, most likely, a number of islands of the Greek Archipelago.
But the first major campaign of the Slavic-Russians against Byzantium began in 907. It was headed by Prince Oleg.
I.Glazunov. Prince Oleg and Igor
By that time, our ancestors had already developed a clear military organization, which then existed for several centuries. The basis of the Old Russian army was the princely squads - the “elder”, consisting of the most experienced warriors, and the “young”, consisting of the “Youths”. The boyar militia and the militia of “warriors” also went to war, that is, the peasant army, which made up a foot army.
For sea voyages, large “propelled” boats were built, which were sailed with oars and sails. Such boats could accommodate 40-60 people with weapons and ammunition.
During the campaign against Constantinople, which began in 907, the army marched with 2 thousand horses, that is, the army of Prince Oleg numbered 80-120 thousand people. The flotilla went down the Dnieper and moved towards Constantinople along the Black Sea coast. The cavalry walked along the shore in full view of the flotilla. When the Russians approached Constantinople. The army on foot pulled the boats onto land. The first clash took place under the walls of the capital of Byzantium, after which the Byzantines took refuge behind the walls of the city. The Russians began to devastate the outskirts of the city. The siege of the city threatened to drag on, and Prince Oleg decided to frighten the Greeks - he put the boats on rollers, raised the sails and, with a fair wind, moved towards the walls of the city. The Byzantine army that came out to meet them was defeated, and the Greeks were forced to begin negotiations.
During the negotiations, Prince Oleg demanded that Byzantium pay him 12 hryvnia for each person. The Byzantines agreed; in addition, they also agreed to provide a number of benefits to Russian merchants: duty-free trade during a 6-month stay in Constantinople, free food and washing in Greek baths. Only after the conclusion of this agreement did the Russian army move away from the city.
A. Klimenko. Triumph of Prince Oleg
The Russians launched their second major campaign against Byzantium in the summer of 941, when a huge Russian army, led by Prince Igor, moved by sea and land to Constantinople. The Russians destroyed the suburbs and moved towards the capital, but on the approaches to it they were met by an enemy fleet armed with “Greek fire”. The battle raged under the walls of Constantinople all day and evening. The Greeks directed the burning mixture through special copper tubes to the Russian ships. This “terrible miracle,” as the chronicle reports, amazed the Russian soldiers. The flames rushed across the water, Russian boats were burning in the impenetrable darkness. The defeat was complete. But a significant part of the army survived. The Russians continued their campaign and moved along the coast of Asia Minor. Many cities and monasteries were captured, and a fair number of Greeks were taken prisoner.
K. Vasiliev. Prince Igor
But Byzantium managed to mobilize forces here too. Fierce battles took place on land and at sea. In a land battle, the Greeks managed to surround the Russians and, despite fierce resistance, defeated them. The already battered Russian fleet was defeated. This war continued for several months, and only in the fall did the Russian army return to their homeland.
In 944, Igor gathered a new army and set out on the campaign again. At the same time, the allies of Rus', the Hungarians, carried out a raid on Byzantine territory and approached the walls of Constantinople. The Greeks did not tempt fate and sent an embassy to meet Igor asking for peace. A new peace treaty was concluded in 944. Peaceful relations were restored between the countries. Byzantium still pledged to pay Rus' an annual monetary tribute and provide military indemnity. Many articles of the 911 treaty were confirmed. But new ones also appeared, corresponding to the relations between Rus' and Byzantium, already in the middle of the 10th century, equally beneficial to both countries. The right to duty-free Russian trade in Byzantium was abolished.
The Byzantines recognized the possession of Russia by a number of new territories at the mouth of the Dnieper, on the Taman Peninsula. The Russian-Byzantine military alliance was also improved: this time it was directed against Khazaria, which was beneficial for Rus', which was seeking to free its routes to the East from the Khazar blockade. Russian military detachments, as before, had to come to the aid of Byzantium.
Yu. Lazarev. Ambassadors of the Rus
The approval of the treaty took place first in Constantinople. There, the Russian embassy swore an oath on the text of the treaty of Emperor Roman I Lekapin, and here the Russian pagans, turning to Perun, swore an oath in arms to be faithful to the treaty. The Christian part of the Russians took the same oath in the Church of St. Sophia. Then the Byzantine embassy came to Kyiv.
Early in the morning, a procession moved towards the hill on which the statue of Perun stood. It was headed by the Kyiv prince himself. Next came his boyars and warriors. Members of the Byzantine embassy also came here. Igor and his people laid down their weapons, shields, gold at the feet of Perun and, in the presence of the Greek ambassadors, solemnly swore allegiance to the treaty.
After the ceremony on Perun Hill, part of those gathered moved to the Church of St. Elijah, and there the Byzantine embassy took an oath of allegiance to the treaty by Russian Christians from Igor’s closest associates.
The son of Prince Igor, Svyatoslav, also fought against Byzantium. His first campaign in the Balkans, undertaken in 967, ended in the successful implementation of Svyatoslav’s military-political plan - Bulgaria stopped resisting.
Svyatoslav continued the policies of His predecessors, seeking to increase the territory of the ancient Russian state, protect its borders, secure the Volga trade route and take control of the entire great trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.” As a result, Svyatoslav rushed to the Balkans, wanting to conquer Constantinople and transfer the political center of the ancient Russian state to the Danube. He told his mother and boyars: “I don’t like Kiev, I want to live on the Danube, in Pereyaslavets. That town is the middle of my land. All good things converge there: from the Greeks gold, wines, vegetables; from the Czechs and Hungarians - silver and horses; from Rus' - furs, wax, honey, servants.” In 967, during the reign of the Greek Emperor Nikephoros II Phocas, an ambassador came from Constantinople to Kyiv and asked Svyatoslav, on behalf of his sovereign, to go to war against the Bulgarians. The Greeks could not overpower the Bulgarians due to the fact that they lived in mountainous areas. The Greeks brought rich gifts with them and promised even more for the capture of Bulgaria. The prince agreed and began to gather an army. The glorious governor Sveneld, the heroes Sfenkel, Ikmor and others responded to his cry. Svyatoslav undertook two campaigns in Bulgaria - in 968 and 969. Having captured the capital of Bulgaria Preslava and captured Tsar Boris, Svyatoslav sent to tell the Greeks: “I want to go against you, take your city.” Following this, the Russians began to prepare for the campaign against Constantinople. They reinforced their army with the Bulgarians, who were dissatisfied with the dominance of Byzantium, and hired detachments of Pechenegs and Hungarians. At this time, John I Tzimiskes, a skilled military leader and brave warrior, ascended the royal throne in Byzantium. In 970, a battle took place near Adrianople, as a result of which the Greeks were defeated, brought gifts to Svyatoslav and promised peace. At this time, small reinforcements arrived from Kyiv to Svyatoslav. Not having sufficient forces and relying on an agreement with Tzimiskes, Svyatoslav did not occupy the mountain passes through the Balkans and left the mouth of the Danube open. This was his major strategic mistake. In addition, the army of the Rus was divided into two parts: the main forces were in Dorostol, the detachment under the command of Sfenkel was located in Preslav.
Tzimiskes took advantage of this. He gathered 300 ships armed with “Greek fire”, and in 971 he moved the fleet to the mouth of the Danube to block the Russians from returning to their homeland. The emperor himself set out on a campaign with a strong forward detachment of 2,000 “immortals” (well-armed personal guard), 13,000 cavalry and 15,000 infantry, etc. easily crossed the Balkans. He was followed by the rest of the forces and a large convoy with siege and flamethrower engines and food. In Bulgaria, Byzantine spies spread a rumor that Tzimiskes was not going to conquer the Bulgarian people, but to liberate them from the Rus, and the Rus soon lost support from the Bulgarians.
On April 13, 971, Tzimiskes began a battle on the outskirts of Preslava. As a result of this battle, the Byzantines captured Preslav, and only a few Rus, led by Sfenkel, managed to break through and go to Dorostol.
On April 17, Tzimiskes moved towards Dorostol, occupying a number of Bulgarian cities along the way. On April 23, the Byzantine army, significantly superior to the army of the Rus, approached Dorostol. The advance detachment of the Byzantine infantry inspected the surrounding forests and ravines in search of an ambush.
The first battle near Dorostol took place on April 23, 971. The Rus ambushed the vanguard of the Byzantines. They destroyed this detachment, but they themselves died. When Tzimiskes approached the city, the Rus were waiting for the enemy on the near approaches to Dorostol, “closed shields and spears, like a wall.” The Greeks formed a battle formation: infantry stood in the middle, cavalry in iron armor was on the flanks; in front, covering the front, there was light infantry: archers and slingers - they continuously fired arrows and threw stones. The battle was stubborn, the Russians repelled 12 attacks. Victory fluctuated: neither side gained the upper hand. By evening, Tzimiskes himself led his entire cavalry against the weary enemy. Under the blows of the numerous cavalry of the Byzantines, the Russian infantry retreated and took refuge behind the city walls of Dorostol.
On April 24, the Byzantine army was building a fortified camp near Dorostol. Tzimiskes chose a small hill on which tents were erected, a deep ditch was dug around and an earthen rampart was poured. Tzimiskes ordered spears to be stuck into the ground and shields to be hung on them. On April 25, the Byzantine fleet approached Dorostol and blocked the city from the Danube. Svyatoslav ordered to pull his boats ashore so that they would not be burned by the enemy. The Russians found themselves surrounded. On the same day, Tzimiskes approached the city, but the Russians did not go into the field, but only threw stones and arrows at the enemy from the city walls and towers. The Byzantines had to return to their camp.
A. Klimenko. Slashing
The second battle near Dorostol took place on April 26. The army of the Rus went out into the field and lined up on foot in their chain mail armor and helmets, closing long shields that reached their very feet and putting out their spears. After the Byzantine attack, a stubborn battle ensued, which went on for a long time without any advantage. In this battle, the brave commander Sfenkel fell. On the morning of April 27, the battle resumed. By noon, Tzimiskes sent a detachment to the rear of Svyatoslav’s squad. Fearing that they would be cut off from the city, the Rus retreated behind the fortress walls. After the ships arrived and blocked the exit to the sea, Svyatoslav decided to settle in a strong siege. On the night of April 29, a deep ditch was dug around Dorostol so that the besiegers could not get close to the fortress wall and install siege engines. The Russians had no food supplies, and on the dark night of April 29, they made their first big foray for food on boats. The Rus managed to search all the surrounding places and returned home with large supplies of food. At this time, they noticed a Greek baggage camp on the shore: people were watering horses and cutting wood. In one minute the Russians landed, surrounded them with forest, defeated them and returned to the city with rich booty. Tzimiskes, amazed by the audacity of the Rus, ordered to increase vigilance and not let the Rus out of the city. From land, he ordered all roads and paths to be dug up and guards posted on them.
The siege continued. At this time, the Greeks used battering and throwing machines to destroy the city walls and kill their defenders. One day after lunch, when the enemy’s vigilance was weakened, Svyatoslav made a second sortie. This time the Russians set fire to the siege works and killed the head of the siege engines. This success inspired them.
The third battle took place on July 20. Svyatoslav's warriors left the city and lined up for battle. The first attacks of the Byzantines were repelled, but after the Russians lost one of their major military leaders, they “threw their shields behind their backs” and began to retreat. The Byzantines found among the killed Rus women who, in men's equipment, fought as bravely as the men.
The next day, Svyatoslav gathered a military council and began to think with his squad, what should they do and what to do next? Some suggested fleeing in the dark of the night, others advised starting peace negotiations. Then Svyatoslav, sighing heavily, answered like this: “Grandfathers and fathers bequeathed brave deeds to us! Let's stand strong. We do not have the custom of saving ourselves by shameful flight. Either we will stay alive and win, or we will die with glory! The dead have no shame, but having run away from the battle, how will we show ourselves to people?!” After listening to their prince, the squad decided to fight.
The fourth and final battle was fought on July 22. The army of Rus went out into the field, and Svyatoslav ordered the city gates to be locked so that no one could think about salvation outside the fortress walls. The army of Tzimiskes also left the camp and lined up for battle.
At the first stage of the battle, the Rus attacked the Byzantine troops. Around noon the Greeks began to retreat. Tzimiskes, with a fresh detachment of horsemen, delayed the advance of the Rus and ordered the tired soldiers to refresh themselves with water and wine. However, the Byzantine counterattack was unsuccessful: the Russians fought steadfastly.
The Byzantines could not use their numerical superiority, since the Russians did not move far from the city. As a result, Tzimiskes decided to use cunning. He divided his army into two detachments. One detachment under the command of the patrician Romanus and the captain Peter was ordered to engage in battle and then retreat to lure the enemy onto the open plain. At this time, another detachment under the command of Varda Sklir was supposed to come from the rear and block the enemy’s retreat to Dorostol. This plan of Tzimiskes was successfully carried out: the Byzantines began to retreat, and the Rus, carried away by success, began to pursue them and moved away from the city. However, the battle was stubborn, and victory tilted in one direction or the other for a long time. Varda's detachment attacked the exhausted Rus from the rear, and a storm that began at that time carried clouds of sand into the eyes of Svyatoslav's army and helped the Byzantines. Frustrated by the onslaught from the front, pressed from behind, amidst a whirlwind and rain, the Russians fought bravely and with difficulty made their way to the walls of Dorostol. Thus ended the last battle near Dorostol.
The next day, Svyatoslav invited Tzimiskes to begin peace negotiations. Despite the fact that the Byzantines had numerical and technical superiority, they were unable to defeat their enemy in a field battle and take Dorostol by storm. The Russian army steadfastly withstood the three-month siege. The enemy was forced to agree to the conditions proposed by Svyatoslav. After the conclusion of peace, Svyatoslav undertook not to fight with Byzantium, and Tzimiskes had to freely let the Rus' boats through and give them two measures of bread for the journey. Both parties sealed their obligations with oaths.
After the conclusion of peace, a meeting between Svyatoslav and Tzimiskes took place. They met on the banks of the Danube, after which the army of the Rus moved towards Pontus. The treacherous Byzantines warned the Pechenegs that the Rus were coming in a small force and with rich booty. The Pechenegs were waiting for Svyatoslav’s army at the Dnieper rapids, the most dangerous place along the entire route. “Don’t go, prince,” said the old governor Sveneld, “don’t go to the rapids: the Pechenegs are standing there...” The prince did not listen. He went to the rapids and, seeing the Pechenegs, went back down again. After a hard winter on Beloberezhye, the squad went again. In a fierce battle with the Pechenegs, Svyatoslav and almost his entire squad fell. Only one governor, Sveneld, returned to Kyiv with a small army. The Pechenezh prince Kurya made a cup-cup from Svyatoslav’s skull and drank from it in memory of the victory over the Russian prince.
Svyatoslav undertook a campaign against Byzantium in order to establish himself on the Danube, which at that time had important political, economic and military significance for the Russian state. Svyatoslav's foreign policy was aimed at expanding the Old Russian state, strengthening its power and ensuring security. The Russian prince persistently strove to take possession of the Danube basin in order to reliably secure the route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.” Occupying the Balkans, the Rus created a springboard for attacking Byzantium from land. In addition, Svyatoslav’s attempt to stay in Pereyaslavets on the Danube shows the desire to move the political center of the Old Russian state closer to the rich countries of the south and to unite all the Slavic tribes.
The appeal of Emperor Vasily II at the critical moment of the uprising of Bardas Phocas for military assistance to the Kiev prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich, the capture of Chersonesus and the marriage of Vladimir to Anna, the sister of the emperors Vasily and Constantine, the baptism of Rus' - all these facts of the political history of Byzantium and Kievan Rus had important consequences for them . A lasting peace that lasted more than half a century enabled the empire, with the help of Russian troops, to carry out successful military campaigns in Asia Minor, Sicily and Bulgaria. Rus' got rid of the Pecheneg invasions and expanded its possessions in the northeast. In 1016, the united Russian-Byzantine forces liquidated the remnants of the Khazar possessions in Taurica. The Northern Black Sea region becomes the region of the border possessions of Rus' and Byzantium. The establishment of family ties between the ruling houses of Kyiv and Constantinople significantly increased the international authority of the Kyiv princes, and Christianization contributed to the strengthening of the feudal system in Rus'.
Peaceful relations between the two powers were disrupted in 1043, when the inhabitants of Constantinople were again shocked by the already faded from memory spectacle of countless ships and boats of the “Tauroscythians” approaching the walls of the city, as if ready, in the words of Psellus, “to immediately take the city with all its inhabitants." However, the campaign against Constantinople under the leadership of Yaroslav’s son Vladimir ended in failure. If we ignore the details given in individual sources 1), the matter appears as follows: the Russian ships were defeated by a strong storm, and partly by “Greek fire”; 6 thousand Russian soldiers thrown ashore, together with governor Vyshata, tried to make their way to their homeland, but most of them died in an unequal battle with Byzantine troops, and 800 people. were captured and blinded. The remainder of the Russian army, led by Vladimir Yaroslavich, successfully repelled the attack of the Byzantine ships sent in pursuit - all 24 triremes were sunk, and the warriors on them were destroyed or captured. Three years later, peace was restored and Vyshata returned to Rus'. This was the last war between Rus' and Byzantium.
Sources:
V. G. Bryusova “Russian-Byzantine relations of the mid-11th century”
A.V. Shishov “All the wars of the world”, “One Hundred Great Battles”
Comments
COLLECTION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF RUSSIAN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE OF THE IMPERIAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Volume XXXII, No. 4.
"RESEARCH IN THE AREA OF RUSSIAN SPIRITUAL VERSE."
Academician A. N. Veselovsky.
SAINT PETERSBURG.
Printing house of the Imperial Academy of Sciences.
“I will try to point out that the history of the saga, traced solely in its Latin reflections, is necessarily incomplete and that some of its gaps can be filled only with the help of Slavic, i.e., Byzantine data. The following note pursues exclusively the stated purpose.”
Somewhere I read a translation of a supposed chronicle of Byzantine historians about the battles in Bulgaria, about the same thing, only they had a more emotionally charged story. Only the Russian troops there look like a bunch of warriors, without any military tactics, who fight only inspired by the courage of their commanders, but the Byzantine army with iron discipline, effective battle formations and wise commanders.
Those tales are written in every book on the history of Russia in the period from the 8th to the 11th centuries.
There is little description here of the weapons of the Slavic warriors and tactical schemes in the battles of the Slavs with their enemies (although there are no schemes here at all).
And what does the battle of a Slavic horseman with a nomad(s) have to do with it, if the battle is described with the Romans (Byzantines), and not with the Avars?
Here, in the history of Russia, there is a pardon: the word “Rus” is Ukraine, Russian land. However, I know why this land is called Russia, the Muscovite Tsar named this territory (I don’t know exactly which one, but I don’t know why). And Rus' itself resembles only the words of the people who moved to the territory of present-day Ukraine, the remote part of Russia, but did not reach the places of Moscow, Belarus, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and other
Good article. It's a pity that there are few of them. As for nationalism and the Ukrainian “language” - this is all the nonsense of modern politicians, lured by the West (they hate the Slavs too much there for their victories and vast expanses of land). And the concept of Ukraine appeared only in the 16-17th century (i.e., the outskirts of central Rus', or “Chervona Rus” in the old days). A huge number of people in Russia have Ukrainian roots and relatives - and there is no nationalism.
Guys, if you dig deeper, you will find out that the history of the Slavs and Aryans is more than 40,000 years old (our ancient faith confirms this...). Our territory began from the English islands to northern Africa, and from there, in a straight line, to the Great Wall of China (find information about this wall and Chinese pyramids, pay attention to the population density of this country). Since childhood, we were told that Cyril and Methodius gave us a letter, but meanwhile they forgot to tell us that we had our own calendar, which we marked with runes... Thanks to the Polish Jews, who called themselves lords, over the past two thousand years we have been fighting with each other and were forcibly converted to Christianity (the faith they invented for the enslavement of the Slavic peoples, the Vedas say - they were martyred and after death they called Him God). By the way, the coat of arms does not depict a falling falcon, but runes - one symbol of which means “PEACE”, and below is its description: The shape of the World rune is the image of the Tree of the World, the Universe. It also symbolizes the inner self of a person, the centripetal forces striving the World towards Order. In a magical sense, the World rune represents protection and patronage of the gods.
Vadim, what do the Polish gentlemen have to do with it? Two thousand years ago there was no Poland. The Russes converted to Christianity themselves; at that time they were not the kind of people who could not voluntarily accept something; the Slavs always accepted what they liked, or rebelled and broke everything. We have been given politics, but it enslaves. And this is not a falcon depicted, but a symbol denoting a stribog.
Voluntary Christianity - well, how long can you cram this crap in, come to us in Siberia, we will tell you how the Old Believers were impaled, and the Old Believers in the churches were burned in the Siberian Belovodye, fleeing from Christian reprisals.
Dear, Ivan Alexandrovich is truly unfamiliar with History! Moreover, he has no literacy whatsoever, judging by his spelling of the words: “naresovan”, incorrectly”, “nekak” and “I think” - in my opinion!!! Historians and philosophers of the ancient world (Gorodotus, Strabo and many others) divided peoples , inhabiting the land known to them within those borders, into “Young peoples” and “Ancient peoples.” To the “Ancient peoples” they included civilizations (peoples) known even before the creation of the ancient world, to them they also included our ancestors, whose history goes back more than 60,000 years. I would like to draw attention to the different names of the same people, from the point of view of the people themselves and other peoples, in all times and eras, which is the case today. For example, today, we know the Germans and call them Germans, although the Germans themselves call themselves Germans. This fact also applies to the names of seas, rivers, cities. If the Danube was previously called Istra, this does not mean that it was not the Danube but another river, and the Black Sea was called Pontus - this does not mean that there was a completely different sea... So, different ancient peoples also called our ancestors differently: Scythians, Sarmatians, Goths and many more names can be found in different sources (among different peoples) of antiquity, antiquity, Asia. Ancient Scythia was a very formidable and respected civilization in the ancient world, with its own culture, art, laws, traditions, and writing. By the way, we still use the Scythian writing to this day - this is our Russian alphabet, which Cyril and Mythodius did not invent, but only rewrote. But the so-called “civilized Europe” and America use the borrowed Latin alphabet. Yes, the Europeans even accepted food like barbarians, until they learned from the Russian princes the order of serving dishes and eating food, and to this day they use this order. Ancient Scythia more than once conquered and imposed “tribute” (taxes) on Egypt, Greece, Persia, Rome, and Byzantium. Scythia was never defeated by anyone, neither the Greeks, nor the Byzantines, nor the Persians, even Alexander the Great, having sent his second army of more than 30 thousand soldiers to Scythia, was forced to forget about its existence. And when he himself decided to take revenge on the Scythians for the complete destruction of the second army, his military leaders and entourage were able to persuade the ambitious Alexander from going against the Scythians. So where did Rus' come from then, if it was Scythia? To do this, you need to look at the ancient writings of the Scythians themselves, in which almost every one mentions the words: “spring Rus'”, “in the yara of Rus' the edge of the yara”, “the joy of the spring Rus' of the world of the yara”, “the power of the yar Rus”, “the husband of the Scythians yar” Rus'" - Have you read it? And did you understand almost everything? Wow! But I did not give a translation from Scythian, but the original in the Scythian language. And in conclusion, to make everything clear, I advise you to read the works of Mikhailo Lomonosov on the History of Rus', although it is known that M. Yu. Lomonosov revered the exact sciences, not the humanities. At the same time, you will understand why the great Russian scientist was forced to study the History of Rus'.
Everyone says that the Russian people are long-suffering, that they were constantly under the yoke of other peoples. And it turns out that Prince Oleg was the first to start wars of conquest, enslaving other nations: Greeks, Poles, Bulgarians. This is where the hatred of other peoples for the Russian comes from, which is why they still call the Russian people occupiers!
Moscow's imperial ambitions are to blame for this confusion. But everything can be put in its place. The Rusini, the Russians, are now the basis of the Ukrainian nation, and the Russians are the periphery, and as a people they took shape later than the Belarusians. History is a complete quiche. Why does Russian answer whose question? What nationality are you? Englishman, are you? - Russian! This is already a forgery, because they were an integral part of Kievan Rus, but my friends emerged as a people after the collapse of Kyiv, and as a state, generally being an ulus of the Tatars.
This is the whole tragedy of our peoples. And it will come back to haunt you. They cut out Novgorod and perhaps the future of the Novgorod feudal republic and said - mine, assimilated, clumsy bears, dumplings, nesting dolls, log houses, women-yozhkas from the assimilated miracle, they took it, made it organically theirs, cultural values were pulled from Kyiv. Do you have carols? Of course there are, but which ones? A Word about Igor's Regiment - Old Russian literature? Yes? So why the hell at the hour when it was written Bogolyubsky created an alliance of Polovtsians and destroyed Kyiv. Realized how Kalita later carved Novgorod.
Where are the original chronicles? Burnt out? All? What nonsense? Where are the finds from the Kulikovo field? What confirms this battle? Fiction in the 16th century? You want to eat an apple and sit down... Igor Svyatoslavovich went against the Polovtsians, 1185 when the Suzdal region was in alliance with them. So it turns out that they wrote an ode against their intentions. Idiocy in general. But understand that a Muscovite is a completely different nation and everything will be chicks. Yes, they adopted a lot from Kyiv, but Kyiv is older, the people of Rusyn-Ukrainians had already formed, and you were still orphans. Truetskoy understood the Asian orientation of Muscovy, but no one listened to him. You continue to talk about the cradle of three nations, but a healthy person would not put three babies in one cradle. There are groups that, due to their similarity, can create a union and become a people, others, in any case, will fall away and be absorbed, or will absorb others and form their own. The Muscovites took only cultural trinkets, many of which they didn’t even use names for. like carols, because they tend to be a little different. Take a closer look at your Old Belief. Deal with the Yatychs and Ilmen Slovenes. Think about whether there is mental trauma in the Novgorod residents who were devoured by the Rostov-Suzdal land and forcibly assimilated. And stop worrying about your head - Russian, your books are Old Russian, the language is Old Russian - it can only be like that if you mean by it PERVINNA This is where you cut your tongue - y...y. But what about the article... It’s very incomplete, but it’s normal for a 4th grade education!
After all, you write sales in Russian in cut-down language, i.e. according to the laws that appeared before the ancient Sanskrit (some Gutar say that together with ..) And write to you in ugly Latin...
Well, regarding the etiology of the word “Rusin”, it has absolutely nothing to do with Kievan Rus. This was very well described in the 19th century by Gerovsky in his work on “The Word of the Rusins,” which states that the territory of residence of the Rusins is the Chernigov, Kursk and Voronezh provinces.
By the way...just recently the Carpathian Rusyns announced their desire to leave Ukraine and join the Russian Federation. How do you like it? If our rulers were not Jewish, they would have seized on this idea...
And “Crimea” has never been Ukrainian - everyone knows that!!! And you too...
In fact, there were much more Rus... and A.I.’s document speaks about this. Musina-Pushkin - “About the borders of Russia..” But about modern tales, are you familiar with the ancient “VELES BOOK”?
It is not a falcon depicted in the form of a trident, but a seagull. A diving seagull, which is in all images of the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist above his head. Google “fresco of the Arian baptistery” (baptistery) from Ravenna. Ravenna is the city of the Etruscans, founded by one of the peoples, our ancestors. These are Eastern Goths. In Crimea, with which its neighbor Kievan Rus never fought a war of extermination, Christian Gothia existed for a very long time - a remnant of the ancient Goths who once inhabited the northern Black Sea region. Back in the 4th century AD. in Korsun Tauride, a Christian Gothic diocese was organized, which, after the capture of Crimea by Catherine and the resettlement of the Christians of this diocese from Crimea to the Azov region (future Mariupol), was converted into a Greek Orthodox church. Olga and Vladimir were baptized in Korsun, where there were no other Christian churches in the 10th century. This means they were baptized here. Back in the first century, Christ’s companion, Andrew the First-Called, preached the word of God on the hills of Kyiv, where he erected an oak cross (proven fact). About the war with Justinian of the Rus. Justinian walked along the Adriatic coast, Ravenna (Visigothia), the Lombards, Ostrogothia (in Spain) and northern Vandalia, the same Gothic state, and destroyed them as a symbol of the Arian faith, which was the Gothic Christian diocese in Crimea. As we see, then, in the fifth century, Justinian tried to go to Rus'. Theological disputes between Monophysites - Christians of the Nicene rite and Christians of the Arian faith, until Justinian massacred all the Aryan-Goths (do not perceive the Goths primitively as Germans), lasted almost three centuries, and their echoes can be observed even in the 17th century in Poland and Ukraine. It is not for nothing that Nikon began the reforms that were supposed to destroy the remnants of the old faith the next year after the so-called. Pereyaslav Agreement.
Now about the wars with the Roman Greeks. All wars at that time could not have been between co-religionists. The church, brought together by the sword of Justinian, split only in the 11th century. This means that the Russians and Romans (Greeks) fought as representatives of different faiths. It was precisely because Justinian destroyed the Gothic Christians that the Rus went to war against the Greeks. In the 12th century, Andrei Bogolyubsky brought to Vladimir-Suzdal Rus' a new, Greek church, the Nicene creed - the Trinity, where Jesus was already accepted as a god equal to God the Father and the Holy Spirit. In fact, on all old icons there is no sign of the cross made with a pinch. In Rus' they crossed themselves with one or two fingers, as on old icons. God is one or God and the Holy Spirit. God the son was recognized, but was not considered equal to the first two in eternity, for his beginning was by the will of the Almighty. We open one of the few surviving chronicles - PVL and read from Nestor the words of Vladimir: “Our Lord is worshiped.” NOT consubstantial, as in the Trinity, but only similar to God, although full of God's grace. Here a person wrote about carols. So Muscovites do not have any church holiday songs other than translations from Greek. No carols, no water baptism, no singing, no generous gifts. There is nothing, because they have no history of their religion. The Byzantine Church failed on the battlefield, so it destroyed it through bribery and intrigue. Before Nikon, we walked in procession AFTER SOLON, and the Greeks forced us to walk AGAINST the sun. The Cossack Kondrat Bulavin, a friend and associate of Ivan Mazepa, also fought against the Elin faith of Muscovy. I am not at all for the Arian faith. I am for truth and justice, which have been stolen from us.
More about and from
How did Rus''s campaigns against Constantinople take place?
Geopolitics of Rus' / Article 2011
The campaign of the Russian Prince Oleg to Constantinople in 907 and the second campaign of Prince Igor in 944 have long been interpreted by researchers as land-sea campaigns, during which the actions of the fleet were accompanied by a parallel campaign of the ground army. More and more Tsar-grad - Constantinople - Istanbul
The basis for this was the words of the Tale of Bygone Years (and later chronicles after it) that Oleg set off on his campaign “on horseback and on ships,” and Igor “on boats and on horses.” The same point of view was developed in military-historical works, where the conviction was even expressed that the “main role” in Oleg’s campaign “was played by the ground army.”
This interpretation of this news from the chronicle made the inevitable conclusion that Rus' carried out military operations not only against the Greeks themselves, but also against Bulgaria, since the land campaign against Constantinople could only be carried out through its territory, and the chronicle did not contain any information about the alliance with the Bulgarians reports, although all allies (even small tribes) are listed in extreme detail when describing each of the indicated campaigns.
This was noticed by Karamzin, who wrote:
Oleg also led with him a land cavalry army; Did the inhabitants of Bessarabia and the strong Bulgarians let him through in a friendly manner? The chronicler does not talk about that. 1
In Soviet times, a similar question was posed by M.N. Tikhomirov:
How could Oleg and Igor’s campaigns against Constantinople go unnoticed in Bulgaria, past whose shores Russian boats stretched, and through whose territory the warriors who went on Oleg’s campaign, according to the chronicle, were supposed to march on horseback? 2
Answering the question posed, the author expressed in this article the assumption that there was no independent campaign of Rus' against Constantinople under Oleg at all - the Russians only took part in the siege of Constantinople by the Bulgarian Tsar Simeon in 922. We consider the criticism of this point of view in the work of M.V. to be fair. Levchenko “Russian-Byzantine treaties of 907 and 911.” ( Byzantine timepiece. M., 1952. T. 5. P. 118-121). Bulgarian historical works of this time have not survived (since they were obviously destroyed by the Byzantines), so posing the question in this form can hardly be considered legitimate.
A careful examination of the chronicle data and a number of general considerations, as we will see, allow us to conclude that the traditional idea of the land-sea nature of the campaigns of 907 and 944 is based on a misunderstanding - the transfer of all troops to the walls of Constantinople was carried out by sea. In my argument, I do not touch upon the controversial issue of the exact dating of these campaigns, since in this case one or another decision is not of fundamental importance. All dates are taken by me from the Tale of Bygone Years. I also do not touch on the genealogy of Russian chronicles; all the chronicle texts I used were contained as found out by A.A. Shakhmatov, already in the second edition of The Tale of Bygone Years.
First of all, we note that all other campaigns of Rus' against Constantinople - in 860, 941 and 1043. - were carried out, according to sources, exclusively by sea - as well as attacks on other points of the Empire - the island of Aegina in 813 and the southern coast of Crimea at the beginning of the 9th century. Russian campaigns in the Caspian Sea basin were carried out in the same way. The exclusively maritime nature of all these trips was not in doubt among researchers.
The participation of large ground forces could only make sense during a campaign of conquest. The tasks of the Russian campaigns of 907 and 944 were completely different, as eloquently evidenced by the texts of the peace treaties: despite the extreme benefits for Rus' of the peace conditions regulated by them, in these documents we do not even see a hint of any territorial concessions on the part of Byzantium - clearly , that such demands were not put forward by the Russians. The main purpose of their campaigns was to protect and expand privileges regarding trade and legal relations with the Greeks.
It is difficult to admit that a naval raid on Constantinople, the indispensable condition of which was the surprise of the attack, could be accompanied by a parallel campaign by the ground army. To make the journey from Kyiv to Constantinople, i.e. To travel at least 800 kilometers, crossing the Bug, Dniester, Danube and the Balkan ridge, a land army of that time, even a cavalry one, would have needed much more time than rowing ships equipped with sails to cover the corresponding distance along the Dnieper and the Black Sea. At the same time, one should take into account the inevitability of serious military resistance both from the Greeks and from Bulgaria, since it was not a military ally of Rus' during this period - in the annalistic news of the campaigns of 907 and 944, with a very detailed listing of the allied tribes, there is no mention about the Bulgarians, as already noted, no. On the contrary, it is reported that the Bulgarians in 944 informed the Greeks about the advance of Rus'.
It is quite obvious that in Thrace, in particular on the closest approaches to Constantinople, there could not but be large Byzantine forces, especially during Oleg’s campaign, given the extremely tense relations between Byzantium and Bulgaria, constantly interrupted by wars, throughout the reign of Tsar Simeon. Under these conditions, the movement of the ground army towards Constantinople was bound to turn into a grueling, protracted war, as happened during Svyatoslav’s second campaign.
If the campaign of 944 did not lead to military action, since the notified Greeks managed to pay off, then Oleg’s campaign in 907, which ended with the successful siege of Constantinople, would undoubtedly represent an extremely broad military operation, if we assume that a land army took part in it. Meanwhile, this campaign, like Igor’s campaign in 944, did not receive any reflection in Byzantine sources (more precisely, in the only source - the chronicle of Simeon Logothet, since the others rewrite its text). If it is quite possible to deliberately keep silent about the unpleasant fact of a sudden sea raid by the enemy, which ended with a short-term siege of the capital and payment of indemnity, then it is extremely difficult to imagine that even a historian of the 10th century. could not have mentioned at all the war with the land army, which occupied a significant part of the Byzantine territory - right up to the Bosphorus Strait.
And it is absolutely incredible that this would not be reflected in the Russian chronicle, which pays special attention to Oleg’s campaign. Meanwhile, her expression “on horseback” remains the only “evidence” in favor of a land campaign. The rest of the text undoubtedly indicates that the 907 campaign against Constantinople was carried out exclusively by sea.
Oleg went to the Greeks, leaving Igor to Kiev, and singing a multitude of Varangians, and Slovens, and Chuds, and Slovenes, and Krivichi, and Merya, and Derevlyans, and Radimichi, and Polyans, and Severo, and Vyatichi, and Croats, and Dulibs, and tivertsi, which are the essence of the talk: all of them are called from the Greek Great Skuf. And with all these Oleg went on horseback and on ships, and the number of ships was 2000. And he came to Constantinople; and the Greeks closed Judgment, and shut the city. And Oleg went to the shore and began to fight...
This story from the Tale of Bygone Years is followed by a borrowed story about the atrocities that accompanied military operations, a legend about the movement of Russian ships to the city by land with the help of wheels and sails, and a message about the agreement of the Greeks to pay any tribute.
And Oleg commanded to give tribute to 2000 per ship, 12 hryvnia per person, and to ships 40 per person. And I agree with the Greeks...
As we can see, the number of ships participating in the campaign is indicated twice, the landing is reported and it is indicated that the size of the tribute was determined by Oleg based on the number of soldiers who arrived on the ships, and those who allegedly followed the land route are not mentioned at all. Similar data is given by the following text of the preliminary agreement of 907:
And Oleg commanded to issue a war for 2000 ships at 12 hryvnia per key, and then give orders to Russian cities: the first to Kiev, the same to Chernigov, and to Pereaslavl, to Poltsk, to Rostov, and to Lyubech, and to other cities...
The expression “12 hryvnia per key” instead of the above “12 hryvnia per person” allows us to conclude that in the text of the agreement there is a slight reduction in the amount of tribute per warrior compared to the original condition - obviously due to the emphasis on “ways "to Russian cities. The term “key” here apparently means a gaff or a grappling hook (compare, for example: “And behold, the wicked ones approached, and they brought the keys to the ship”). Proposed I.I. Sreznevsky’s interpretation of the term “key” in the text of the Tale of Bygone Years as “rudder, helm” is not confirmed by data from other monuments. In addition, it is doubtful that the initial size of the tribute allocated in favor of the warriors was then reduced by forty times (40 people in the boat). The number of boarding hooks on the ship (apparently the same for identical ships), although it was probably less than the number of soldiers, was, however, not forty times - each boat should have had at least several such hooks . The translation “key” – “oarlock”, which is suitable in meaning, has not yet found confirmation in the monuments of ancient Russian writing.
Thus, the distribution of tribute is clearly differentiated. However, even with this more precise distribution, there is not a word about the ground army, but only the soldiers who arrived on ships are meant. If ground forces really participated in the campaign, then how could Oleg completely bypass them with such a careful distribution of tribute?
The content of the chronicle news about the campaign of 944 is similar:
Igor, having gathered together many troops, the Varangians, Rus' and the glades, the Slovenia and the Krivichi, and the Tverets, and the Pechenegs, and the Tales singing from them, went against the Greeks in boats and on horses, although to take revenge on himself. Behold, the Korsuns heard, and sent to Roman, saying: Behold, Rus' is coming, they have destroyed the ship, they have covered the sea with the ships. In the same way, the Bulgarians sent the message, saying: Rus' is coming, and they brought the Pechenegs to themselves.
The following tells about the emperor’s embassy to Igor with the promise of tribute, even greater than that which Oleg received, and about a separate sending of gifts to the Pechenegs:
It’s the same with the Pecheneg ambassador, who sent a lot of grass and gold.
Particularly characteristic is Igor’s speech to the warriors given in the chronicle after the peace proposal of the Greeks:
Whenever someone knows; who can prevail, us or them? Is anyone in the world with the sea? We are not walking on land, but in the depths of the sea...
As we see, we are talking only about the Russian sea voyage. Offering to agree to the terms of the Greeks, Igor reminds only of the dangers of a sea voyage. It is clear that if a ground army were moving towards Constantinople in parallel, then it would be the main concern that would cause it - due to the extraordinary complexity of the land campaign, as mentioned above (even if the speech itself was entirely invented by the chronicler, then it is obvious that he, putting such a phrase in Igor’s mouth meant precisely the sea voyage).
Mentions of the Pechenegs indicate one of the possible explanations for the expression “on horses,” which gave rise to misconceptions regarding the land campaign. There can hardly be any doubt that the steppe nomads - the Pechenegs, hired by Igor, did not participate in the sea voyage. Apparently, their task was to divert attention by attacks on the Crimean possessions of Byzantium in order to ensure a surprise naval raid of Russian troops on Constantinople (the independent task of the Pecheneg detachments is also indicated by the separate sending of gifts to them by the Greeks). The expression “on horses” could have meant precisely these auxiliary actions of the Pechenegs during the campaign of 944. Such use of mercenary troops of steppe nomads was undoubtedly practiced by Russian princes in the 10th century: under 985, the Tale of Bygone Years, reporting on Prince Vladimir’s campaign against the Volga Bulgars, directly says that the Torci who participated in the campaign traveled on horseback, while the Russian army moved by water. 3
As for the expression “on horseback” in the chronicle story about Oleg’s campaign, where the Pechenegs did not participate, it may indicate similar distracting actions against the Crimea by part of the Russian army, for example, the Tivertsy living in the Black Sea steppes, who are named among the tribes participating in the campaign. Finally, it is possible that the expression “on horseback and on ships” was simply, by analogy with Igor’s campaign, included in the news of Oleg’s campaign by one of the compilers of the early chronicles (there are similar cases - for example, when describing the Russian campaign of 941 in one from Russian sources in the Tale of Bygone Years, part of the story is borrowed from the description of the Ugrians’ campaign in the chronicle of George Amartol). 4
On the other hand, the words “on horseback” in both cases could simply mean a method of moving part of the Russian troops to the gathering place (probably at the mouth of the Dnieper) for boarding ships. Two circumstances speak in favor of this. Firstly, some of the tribes that participated in the campaigns of 907 and 944. (especially during the campaign of 907) due to their geographical location, they were weakly connected by waterways with the Dnieper basin (for example, Dulebs, Merya), and the “Croats” (white Croats) were separated by the Carpathian ridge, which completely excluded their arrival at the gathering place along the rivers Secondly, even the troops assembled in Kiev, apparently, for the most part followed the dry route to the mouth of the Dnieper, since it is difficult to imagine that 2000 ships could be concentrated on the Dnieper in the Kiev area at the same time (which in this case would have to carry everything overland past the Dnieper rapids) - one should think that the fleet was assembled or even built near the Dnieper mouth.
The above considerations leave no doubt that The Tale of Bygone Years reports under 907 and 944. only about sea voyages to Constantinople- campaigns that excluded the movement of Russian troops through the territory of Bulgaria (not to mention other campaigns, the maritime nature of which was always quite clear). Consequently, we can say with complete confidence that in the first half of the 10th century, the struggle of Rus' against Byzantium was not accompanied by clashes between the Slavic peoples.
There is an assumption that Askold's legendary campaign to Constantinople in 860 significantly changed Russian-Byzantine relations. According to legend, Askold and his retinue were baptized in Byzantium. Returning to Kyiv, this prince begins the first steps towards the Christianization of the population of the ancient Russian state. Thus, we can assume that already from the 9th century. the first, still very timid, attempts at peaceful contacts between Kievan Rus and Byzantium begin. These attempts were made not only by the supreme authorities of both states, but also by merchants and warriors, who in the 10th century. constantly appeared on the coast of Malaya
Asia and sought to establish stable trade and political relations with Constantinople-Constantinople.
During the reign of the Kyiv prince Oleg (882-912), the creator of the ancient Russian state, the foreign policy of Kievan Rus towards Byzantium was distinguished by a fairly easily traceable duality: hostility and peace. This duality will run through the entire history of diplomacy between Rus' and Byzantium. Prince Oleg undertook campaigns against Byzantium twice - in 907 and in 911. And subsequent great Kyiv princes would also either make campaigns or lead (or equip) embassies to Byzantium. As a result of these campaigns, a bilateral agreement was signed, which included trade, military and political articles. The treaties concluded as a result of the campaigns of Prince Oleg were beneficial for Rus'. According to the treaty of 911, Rus' received the right to trade duty-free in the markets of Constantinople. The Byzantine side was obliged to support at its own expense the merchants and ambassadors of Rus' during their stay in the territory of the empire, as well as to supply them with everything necessary for the return journey to Kievan Rus. After the conclusion of the treaties of 907 and 911. The Russians began to take an active part in Byzantine military expeditions, in particular, against the Khazar Khaganate, Pechenegs, Polovtsians and Arabs. Byzantium fought numerous wars and was in dire need of Russian soldiers. After Oleg's campaigns, Rus' and Byzantium, separated by the sea, seemed to become closer to each other - along the Crimean and Black Sea possessions of Byzantium. Trade relations between Byzantium and Rus' became regular. Every year, in the summer, a flotilla of Russians appeared in the Bosphorus Strait. Merchants settled not in Constantinople itself, but in the suburbs, but they had the right to trade in the capital itself. The richest silk fabrics that Byzantium received from China and Central Asia were in especially high demand among Russian merchants.
In 941, the great Kiev prince Igor (912-945) made a crushingly unsuccessful campaign against Byzantium. His army was burned near Constantinople by the famous “Greek fire”. Historians still cannot come to a consensus why, after such a serious defeat, Igor needed to go to Byzantium again in 944 - perhaps it was a revenge campaign. Apparently, Igor took into account all the shortcomings of his first campaign, and his second campaign was prepared very carefully. He went to Byzantium with a huge flotilla and large ground forces. Having learned that the Russian army was moving to Byzantium, the emperor gave the order to meet the Russians on the Danube, without waiting for them to approach the capital of the empire. On the Danube, Igor was met by Byzantine ambassadors with rich gifts and escorted with honors to Constantinople. In 944, in Constantinople, Prince Igor and the Byzantine emperor signed an agreement that was as successful for Rus' as the agreement of 911. It also included trade and military-political articles. Russian merchants received even broader rights and privileges on the territory of the Byzantine Empire, and Byzantine merchants were given the same rights on the territory of Kievan Rus. The Treaty of 944 recognized Rus' as a sovereign state for the first time. The recognition of the sovereignty of Rus' by Byzantium was undoubtedly a significant achievement of Russian diplomacy. However, do not be deluded by such brilliant results. It should be remembered that Byzantium at that time was constantly at war and was in great need of new warriors. Naturally, she needed to secure peaceful relations with her neighbor, Kievan Rus, which was gaining strength. By signing the treaty of 944, so beneficial for the Russians, the Byzantine emperor acted primarily in his own interests.
The campaigns of Oleg and Igor contributed to the establishment of regular diplomatic relations between Byzantium and Russia. Subsequent Russian princes considered the embassy campaign to Byzantium to be the main aspect of their foreign policy. In 946, the Grand Duchess Olga of Kiev went there. This campaign played a huge role both in the development of Russian-Byzantine diplomacy and in the further fate of the ancient Russian state itself. In 955, Olga made a second embassy to Constantinople and was baptized there. At this time, Constantine VII (945-959) Porphyrogenitus was the emperor of Byzantium. As a writer, he left a number of works, including about Kievan Rus and about Olga’s embassy.
At baptism, Olga takes the name Elena, in honor of St. equal to Queen Helena, mother of Emperor Constantine the Great. Returning to her homeland, she begins active work in the field of Christianization of Rus'. In the matter of the baptism of Rus', much attention is traditionally paid to the activities of Grand Duke Vladimir I, and this is quite fair, but Olga’s importance in it should not be diminished. Under her, a significant part of the Russians were converted to Christianity. Her son Svyatoslav did not want to follow his mother’s example and did not accept Christianity, declaring that if he accepted Orthodoxy, then the whole squad would laugh at him. We can say that Grand Duchess Olga brought the ancient Russian state onto the international stage. And it was she who laid the foundation for a very important direction of Russian foreign policy - the southwestern one. Olga’s campaigns had another important consequence: it was from this moment that Russian diplomacy began to strive for dynastic contacts with Byzantium. Vladi Olga had the intention of marrying her son Svyatoslav to the daughter of Constantine Porphyrogenitus Anna, but it was not successful. From the writings of Emperor Constantine that have come down to us, it follows that dynastic marriages between Byzantine princesses and barbarian Russians were clearly not to his liking. As already noted, despite a number of favorable diplomatic situations, the instability of Russian-Byzantine relations remained constant, which by 956 were again becoming complicated. The Holy Roman Emperor Otto took advantage of this circumstance and sent his missionary, the Catholic priest Adalbert, to Rus', giving him the title of Bishop of Russia. Adalbert's arrival in Kyiv caused general indignation - the people of Kiev did not want their state to turn into a Catholic diocese, and Adalbert and his retinue had to urgently leave Kievan Rus. The tangle of contradictory relations between Russia, Byzantium and Western Europe dragged on, but this did not lead to a diplomatic break on either side. In 973, Otto convened a congress of Catholic embassies, to which the Russian embassy was also invited - of course, not by chance. Despite the failure of Adalbert's mission, Otto did not lose hope for the inclusion of Rus' in the Catholic world. Even earlier, in 960, the Russian army took part in the war with the Arabs on the side of Byzantium.
In 967, the Byzantine emperor Nicephorus Phokas proposed to the Kyiv prince; Svyatoslav Igorevich (945-972) for a large payment to make a campaign in the Balkans against Bulgaria, hostile to Byzantium. In 968, Svyatoslav defeated the Bulgarian army, but did not deprive the Bulgarian sovereign Boris of the throne. After some time, the military forces of Boris and Svyatoslav united and a joint campaign against the Byzantine Empire took place. Svyatoslav was a prince-knight who preferred military glory to any other. He did not like Kyiv and dreamed of founding a new capital on the Danube in Pereyaslavets. Therefore, he makes three trips to the Danube, i.e. encounters the Byzantine Empire three times as its enemy. During the last campaign in 971, Svyatoslav’s army was defeated. On the way home to Kyiv, on the Dnieper rapids he was met by Pecheneg troops led by the leader Kurei. Svyatoslav was killed. In historical science, this meeting of the Pechenegs with the remnants of the Russian army is considered not accidental. There is reason to believe that it was prepared by Byzantine diplomacy. The murder of the Grand Duke of Kyiv did not play a significant role in Russian-Byzantine relations and did not serve as a reason for their rupture, despite all their coldness and instability.
In 987, during the reign of the Grand Duke of Kyiv Vladimir Svyatoslavich (980-1015), the Byzantine Emperor Vasily II asks for military assistance to fight the usurper Varda Phocas. Prince Vladimir fulfilled the request, but set a condition for Vasily II - to marry the imperial sister, Princess Anna, to him. Russian troops defeated the usurper, but Vasily II was in no hurry to fulfill his promise - apparently, he was unable to overcome the historical hostility to dynastic marriages with the Russians. Then Prince Vladimir captures Kherson (Korsun), a Byzantine possession in Crimea. And only after this, Emperor Vasily II sends Princess Anna to Korsun, satisfying the demand of Grand Duke Vladimir. At the same time, the French king Hugo Capet, seeking a military-political alliance between France and Byzantium, also tried to achieve the marriage of his son with Anna, but he failed.
The Byzantine emperor sends his sister to the Russian prince - but on the condition that Vladimir renounces paganism and accepts Christianity according to the Eastern rite. Prince Vladimir is baptized and receives the church name Vasily, in honor of his godfather, who was the Byzantine emperor himself. Prince Vladimir returns to Kyiv, returning Korsun, which he had captured, to Byzantium.
If the diplomacy of Byzantium in relation to Rus' was of a wary, hidden-hostile nature under a light veil of refined courtesy inherent in civilized Byzantines, then Vladimir’s act suggests that Russian diplomacy in relation to Byzantium was completely different - more open. In this historical episode, two worlds emerged - the dying world of Byzantium with its refined civilization and sophisticated diplomacy, and the world of the young state, which made contact openly and trustingly. Leaving Korsun, Vladimir leaves a military garrison there, maintained at the expense of the Kyiv state, which, being renewed, for a hundred years fought for the interests of the Byzantine Empire on all its vast borders.
Vladimir returned to Kyiv not only with his wife and army, but also with the new Metropolitan of Kyiv, appointed by the Byzantine Patriarch Sisinnius II. In 988, Christianity was accepted by the entire elite of Russian society. From the very beginning, Christianity in Rus' became an element of dynastic identity. Of the twenty first Russian saints who shone during the 10th-11th centuries, ten were princes. In the 11th century Prince Yaroslav the Wise exhumed the bodies of his ancestors, princes Yaropolk and Oleg, and transferred their ashes to the Tithe Church. If Constantine the Great was called the thirteenth apostle, then Vladimir I was called the apostle among the princes.
The adoption of Orthodoxy opened wide access to Rus' for the higher Byzantine culture. With the creation of the Church in Rus', liturgical books appeared, which were initially written in Greek. And here Bulgaria played a big role with its established century-old Christian tradition and Christian writing. Slavic writing comes to Rus' from Bulgaria, where it was brought in the 9th century. Thessalonica brothers Cyril and Methodius, who translated the Bible and liturgical books into Slavic. Liturgical books and religious objects were imported from Byzantium to Rus'.
The influence of high Byzantine culture on the younger culture of Kievan Rus was also reflected in architecture. In imitation of the St. Sophia Cathedral in Constantinople, the Kyiv princes began to build numerous St. Sophia cathedrals on the territory of Rus'. The first of them were built in Kyiv and Novgorod, and the last one in Vologda, during the reign of Ivan the Terrible (XVI century). Rus' adopted the art of mosaics and frescoes from Byzantium. In the beginning. XI century A Russian monastery was founded on Mount Athos, which became the center of Russian-Byzantine spiritual and religious ties and played a significant role in the diplomacy of the two countries. The last campaign against Byzantium was made in 1043 by the son of the great Kyiv prince Yaroslav the Wise, Prince Vladimir of Novgorod. The purpose of this campaign was to preserve the trading privileges of Russian merchants on the territory of the Byzantine Empire. But this campaign was unsuccessful, Prince Vladimir’s fleet was burned by “Greek fire,” and relations between Byzantium and Rus' were interrupted for some time. But already in 1047, Rus' helped the Byzantine Emperor Constantine Monomakh (1042-1055) to get rid of another usurper and pretender to the Byzantine throne. Rus' helped Constantine Monomakh retain the throne, and as a sign of gratitude and further strengthening of Russian-Byzantine relations, the Russian-Byzantine military-political alliance, Constantine Monomakh gives his daughter in marriage to another son of Yaroslav the Wise, Prince Vsevolod. From this marriage was born the future Grand Duke of Kiev Vladimir II, nicknamed Vladimir Monomakh in honor of his Byzantine grandfather-emperor. Cultural, trade, military-political ties between Byzantium and Rus' remained until the end of the 11th century. the most lively character, despite numerous military obstacles (wars with the Pechenegs, Arabs, Khazar Khaganate) and difficulties in the diplomacy of Rus' and Byzantium. In 1204, Constantinople was captured in the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) by the crusaders, and in 1240 Kyiv was captured and burned by the Mongol-Tatars. These two events threw both countries away from each other over a vast temporary historical space, and even the memory of previous relations gradually disappeared. There was practically one, but very significant connection between them: spiritual and religious. Russia owes Byzantium its Orthodoxy, which played and continues to play a huge role in its destiny and in the context of the entire world history.
