Russian fortress Constantinople. “Oleg’s Shield” Constantinople (also known as Constantinople, also known as the mythical “Troy”, now Istanbul), the center of Russian governorship in Asia Minor. Here the Russians collect tribute from local tribes for the capital city of Vladimir - Owner of the world! Dead midnight! All

The reasons that prompted Oleg to attack Constantinople are already known to us from previous Rus’ raids on the capital of Byzantium: on the one hand, this is the desire of the new ruler of Dnieper Rus' to obtain recognition of his status from the empire and thereby confirm and extend the validity of the “Russian”-Byzantine treaty; on the other hand, the reluctance of the imperial authorities to be in allied relations with the pagans and provide them with trade and any other benefits. The immediate cause of the conflict, judging by the text of the treaty of 911, was some kind of skirmishes between the Rus and the Greeks, in which it came down to a “strike with a sword.”

Oleg's campaign against Constantinople is described in detail in The Tale of Bygone Years. The “conspiracy of silence” that surrounds this event in Byzantine literature appears in striking contrast to the chronicler’s awareness. However, there is still one indirect evidence. In Leo the Deacon we find news that Emperor John Tzimiskes threatened Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich with the fate of his father, who “disdained the oath agreement” - this, of course, is a clear allusion to the previous Byzantine-“Russian” agreement, violated by Igor in 941.

Unfortunately, the detail of the chronicle story does not at all guarantee the accuracy of the information it conveys. First of all, this concerns chronology. The Tale of Bygone Years dates Oleg's campaign against Constantinople to 907. At the same time, it dates preliminary negotiations with the Greeks, the results of which received legal formalization only in 911, when the second, “expanded” embassy of Prince Oleg signed the famous treaty. The reasons for this diplomatic delay are left without any explanation. The chronicler simply filled the resulting time gap with “empty years.” It is difficult to say what considerations motivated him in this case 1 . But in fact, both events occurred in the same year, evidence of which can be found in the “Tale” itself. In the article marked 907, Oleg’s ambassadors negotiate with the “King of the Walnuts,” the brothers “Leon and Alexander.” Meanwhile, this message can only be true in relation to 911, because it was in this year that Emperor Leo VI the Wise appointed Alexander as his co-ruler. Thus, the standing of “Rus” under the walls of Constantinople most likely lasted throughout August 911 and ended on September 2, the day the treaty was signed.

The entire article 907 is no more reliable than the date set. This is no wonder, because the chronicler, in fact, composed a hymn in honor of the prophetic prince, in whose person the Russian land triumphed over the Greeks. To take the hymns at their word would, of course, be naive. When reading the story of Oleg’s overseas exploits, it should be remembered that the relationship between history and poetry here is approximately the same as between the Iliad and the real siege of Troy.

The epic grandeur of the campaign planned by Oleg becomes obvious from the very first lines. He allegedly manages to assemble a huge fleet - 2000 “ships”. The chronicler needs this fantastic figure, of course, only in order to send along with Oleg all his “Tolkoviny” (allies) - “many Varangians, and Slovenians, and Chud, and Krivichi, and Meryu, and Derevlyans, and Radimichi, and Polyans , and the North, and the Vyatichi, and the Croats, and the Dulebs, and the Tivertsy” (moreover, the last four Slavic tribes, according to the chronicle narrative itself, have not yet been “tortured” by the Kyiv princes as tribute). But even this armada of “ships” is not able to accommodate all of Oleg’s “warriors”, of which, we note, there are already 80,000 (based on 40 people per boat - the number indicated in the chronicle), so the other part of them “went” to Constantinople by land , “on horseback,” although equestrian squads among the Rus and Eastern Slavs did not yet exist.

Having mobilized the entire Russian land under Oleg’s banners, the chronicler, however, failed to properly dispose of this countless army. It is literally melting before our eyes. The horse army is the first to disappear, since Oleg’s treaty requires tribute from the Greeks only for the “men” in the “ships”. And then, as if all the Varangian-Finno-Slavic “talkies” fall through the ground, instead of which “Rus” suddenly appears, whose interests are the only ones taken into account in negotiations with the “kings”. This turn of events convinces us that in fact the naval campaign of 911 was carried out by the forces of Oleg’s squad; The militia of the East Slavic tribes did not participate in the raid.

However, in the list of “interpretations” worthy of attention are the “Slovenians”, who later appear in the joke with the sails: “And Oleg said: “Sew the sails of the Russians, and the Slovenes are sprinkled,” and so it was... And Rus' raised the sails of the Slovenes, and the Slovenes are sprinkled, and the wind tore them apart; and deciding to the Slovenes: “let’s take our thick sails [sails made of rough canvas], the essence of the Slovenes’ sails is not given.” Pavoloka in Rus' was the name for expensive fabric of two types: silk and “paper” (cotton). The “Slovenians” also got “woolly” sails, but made of cotton fabric - easily torn (“crumbly”). The meaning of the anecdote is apparently the same as in the fairy tale about tops and roots: dividing the expensive “pavoloks” looted from the Greeks - silk and paper stock - the “Slovenians” were flattered by something more luxurious and durable in appearance than silk, but unsuitable for seaworthiness. actually fabric.

Here the chronicler is clearly retelling a “Russian” squad legend known to him, which depicts some kind of conflict between “Rus” and the “Slovenes” over the division of booty or squad “honor”. Moreover, the “Slovenians” were included in the “interpretations” only due to the fact that they are the characters in this anecdote, and only in order to give the chronicler the opportunity to tell it (the chronicler knows nothing else about the “Slovenians”). In the mouth of a Kyiv scribe of the 11th century. the story with the sails sounds like a mockery of the Novgorodians, the rivals of the “Polyan-Rus”. Therefore, “Slovenes” are inserted into the list of “Tolkovinas” immediately after the Varangians, and, being in this place, they should designate Ilmen Slovenes. Despite the fact that the chronicler in this case went from anecdote to history, all commentators on this passage still call the “Slovenes” Novgorodians. Meanwhile, the Slavic contingent of the “Russian” army, apparently, was represented by Moravian and Croatian warriors, perhaps led by the governor (the motive of rivalry between the squads of the prince and the governor is developed later in the “Tale”, in the story of the Drevlyan tribute). It is characteristic that the text of the agreement does not mention “Slovenians”. This could only happen if they were part of “Rus” - a circumstance that was quite natural for the Croats and Moravans who came to Kyiv along with Oleg’s Rusyns, and completely impossible for the Ilmen Slovenes.

In light of the above, a tenfold reduction in the number of Oleg’s “ships” will look like the most likely figure. By the way, this is exactly what the incredulous editor of the Commission List of the Novgorod I Chronicle did.

The description of military operations at the walls of Constantinople again raises the question of the actual relationship of the entire chronicle article of 907 to the “legends of deep antiquity” and, even more so, to the “memoirs of the participants in the campaign.” It has been noted, for example, that the story about the robberies and robberies of “Rus” in the vicinity of Constantinople (“and you fought near the city, and committed many murders to the Greeks, and destroyed many chambers, and burned churches; and in their name, the plunderers, some were flogged, others were tormented , some I shot, and others were swept into the sea, and I did a lot of evil to Rus' to the Greeks, as much as they did wars”) is compiled from reports of two Byzantine sources - the Continuator of the Chronicle of George Amartol and the Life of Vasily the New - about the attack on Constantinople by Prince Igor in 941 .( Shakhmatov A. A. “The Tale of Bygone Years” and its sources // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature of the Institute of Russian Literature of the USSR Academy of Sciences, IV. M.; L., 1940. S. 54 - 57, 69 - 72). This gave rise to a number of researchers to argue that the 911 treaty “does not have any hint of hostile relations between the Russians and the Greeks” ( Bakhrushin S.V. Works on source study, historiography and history of Russia in the era of feudalism. M., 1987. S. 30 - 31; Tikhomirov M.N. Historical connections of Russia with the Slavic countries and Byzantium. M., 1969. P. 109). There is some truth in these arguments, but it would be wrong to completely deny the authenticity of the chronicle account of the atrocities of the Rus. In medieval and, in particular, Old Russian literature, there are many descriptions of real events using (sometimes verbatim) ancient, biblical, etc. "model" texts ( Bibikov M.V. Byzantine historical prose. M., 1996. S. 30 - 31). Meanwhile, the text of Oleg's treaty retained clear traces of the fact that the swords of the Rus were stained with the blood of the civilian population of the Byzantine Empire. Its “chapters” open with a statement about the end of violence: “At the first word, let us make peace with you, Greeks,” and at preliminary negotiations, Emperors Leo and Alexander demanded that the Russians no longer “do dirty tricks in the villages and in our country.”

But the cited criticisms are correct in the sense that there really was no “Russian-Byzantine war,” that is, full-scale military action, in 911. Oleg did not sail to Constantinople to fight with Byzantium; the demonstration of military force was supposed to persuade the Greeks to conclude a peace treaty. Oleg's strategic plan was to break into the Golden Horn Bay (the Byzantine fleet at that time was involved in naval operations against the Arabs in the Mediterranean). This vulnerable spot of the Byzantine stronghold had been known to the Russians since 860. Then they managed to take the city by surprise. But now, for some reason, the surprise attack failed, and the entrance to the bay was securely blocked by a chain stretched between both banks. And yet Oleg carried out a maneuver, thanks to which, 542 years later, Mehmed II entered the Church of Hagia Sophia as a winner. At this point in his story, the chronicler again resorts to poeticization of history: “And Oleg commanded his howls to make wheels and put ships on wheels, and with a fair wind they raised the sails... and went to the city.” The peninsula separating the inner harbor of Constantinople from the sea is covered with vineyards, arable land and quite mountainous; in order to make the boats placed on wheels here move, a wind of such extraordinary strength is needed that it would rather disrupt the entire enterprise than help it come true. But there is nothing incredible in the very fact of transporting the boats overland to the Golden Horn Bay. Of course, the ships were unlikely to be placed on wheels; rather, they were laid on round rollers and pulled by a drag. Wood in the required quantity could be obtained without difficulty - the Thracian forests were then approaching Constantinople itself.

The success of this maneuver stunned the Greeks. Seeing enemy ships floating in the middle of the bay, which was considered inaccessible, the co-emperors agreed to begin negotiations with Oleg. They were also forced to take this step by the repentant mood that gripped the population of the capital. Suddenly they remembered how several years before, in 904, the imperial authorities refused to help Thessalonica, which was under siege by the Arabs. The inhabitants of Thessalonica were outraged that they were abandoned to their fate, and prophesied that Saint Demetrius, the patron saint of the city, would certainly punish Constantinople for this betrayal. And now in the capital on every corner one could hear: “It is not Oleg, but Saint Dmitry himself who was sent to us by God.” It was unthinkable to resist the heavenly punishment. Further intransigence of the government to the demands of the barbarians, who merely sought to have a profitable bargain in the Constantinople market, threatened to lead to open rebellion. Both of these circumstances - Oleg’s seizure of the territory of the Golden Horn and the tense situation inside the city - ensured unforgettable diplomatic success for the ambassadors “of Russian descent.”

Oleg's treaty with the Greeks

The signing of a long-term peace treaty was preceded by negotiations to end hostilities. Oleg wanted to receive a “tribute” - a ransom for his “warriors”. This place in the Tale is generally quite dark. The chronicler gives a double calculation of tribute: first, Oleg “commanded” to give tribute “for 2000 ships, 12 hryvnia per person, and 40 men per ship”; but his ambassadors, who came to Constantinople, asked to “give 12 hryvnia per key to the wars for 2000 ships.” Historians have explained the obvious discrepancy between the sizes of these two tributes in different ways. But few people took into account the capabilities of the imperial treasury and considerations of imperial prestige. Even if, following the Novgorod I Chronicle, we estimate the strength of Oleg’s army at 8,000 people (200 rooks of 40 soldiers each), then the tribute required for them will be 96,000 hryvnia or 2,304,000 spools (the hryvnia of the early 10th century was equal to about a third of a pound, that is, 24 Byzantine spools). Here we must remember that the Byzantine treasury received approximately 8,000,000 zolotniks annually and that Emperor Mauritius quarreled to death with the Avar Khagan Bayan over 100,000 zolotniks - an amount 23 times less than what we received as a result of a tenfold reduction in the number of Oleg’s soldiers! (According to the chronicle, it turns out that Oleg demanded to pay him three annual budgets of the empire - another evidence of the fantastic nature of the chronicle calculation of his army.) But the international status of the Avar Kagan far exceeded the dignity of the “blessed Russian prince.”

It seems that the tribute of 12 hryvnia per warrior is a creation of the heated imagination of the ancient Russian warriors, which was included in the chronicle from their “Constantinople” legends. The two systems for calculating tribute probably reflect the fact that Oleg, excited by the success achieved, initially asked for too much, but then, during the negotiations, agreed to take “according to rank.” The expression “12 hryvnia per key” is usually understood as payment per key (steering) oar, that is, per boat. However, V. Dal in his dictionary (article “Klyuch”) also indicates that among the Western Slavs the word “key” means an estate of several villages and hamlets with a town, governed by a key. “Oleg’s rook power,” he writes, “was probably divided into keys according to the volosts from which the boats were sent, or according to private commanders over the keys, departments of people.” Considering Oleg’s Carpathian origin, perhaps this interpretation of the size of the tribute received from the Greeks should be preferred. Another part of the tribute was given in precious things and products. Returning to Kyiv, Oleg took with him “gold, and grass, and vegetables, and wine, and all sorts of ornaments.”

Another important point of the negotiations was the “structures” that the Greeks pledged to “give to Russian cities.” The text immediately following the list of cities regulates the conditions of detention of “Russian” ambassadors and merchants: “let them eat a month for 6 months, bread and wine, and meat, and fish, and vegetables; and let them give them [bath] as much [as] they want; and then go home to Rus', and let them take from our Tsar on the way the brush, and anchors, and ropes, and sails, and as much as they need.” With the second mention of cities, the agreement determines the order of trade for Russian merchants: “and let them enter the city through the same gates with the Tsar’s husband, without weapons, 50 men each, and let them make purchases as they need, without paying toll [duties] at any cost.” with what". Thus, by “way of life” we must understand the trade charter, which stipulates the rules of trade of the Rus on the Constantinople market. As we see, Oleg achieved extremely favorable conditions for the “Russian” merchants: they received support from the imperial treasury and were exempt from duties.

The agreement was sealed with an oath. Emperors Leo and Alexander “kissed the cross themselves, and Olga took the company [oath], and his men, according to Russian law, swore by their weapons, and by Perun, their god, and Volos, the god of cattle, and established peace.” The name Volos does not at all prove that among Oleg’s ambassadors there were representatives of the Slavic aristocracy of Kyiv. This deity was also known to the Western Slavs and, most likely, the ambassadors who swore by Volos belonged to the Croats or Moravians.

On September 2, fourteen “men from the Russian family” signed a written agreement on “irreversible and shameless” love between the Rus and the Greeks. His articles can be divided into four main sections:

1. The procedure for examining and punishing criminal offenses committed by the Russians or Greeks against each other on the territory of the Byzantine Empire. Murder, as required by imperial law, was punishable by death and confiscation of property, with the exception of that part that was due to the murderer's wife. For causing bodily harm, a fine was imposed on the perpetrator (“five liters of silver according to Russian law”), and if he was “unmovable,” then he had to remove “the very ports” from himself. The caught thief was exacted three times the amount taken; if they resisted capture, the owner of the stolen property could kill him with impunity. The verdict was passed only on the basis of irrefutable evidence; at the slightest suspicion of falsity of testimony, the opposing party had the right to reject it, swearing “according to their faith.” Perjury was punishable by execution. The parties agreed to extradite the escaped criminals to each other.

2. Providing mutual assistance on the territory of other states. In the event of a shipwreck of a Byzantine merchant ship near the coast of any other country, the nearby “Russian” merchants were obliged to take the ship and crew under guard and escort the cargo to the borders of the empire or to a safe place. If trouble overtook the Greeks near the “Russian land,” then the ship was transported to the latter, the goods were sold, and the proceeds were to be transported to Constantinople with the first embassy or trade caravan. Violence, murders and robberies committed by the Russians on the ship were punished in the above manner. The agreement is silent about the fact that “Russian” merchants had the right to demand the same from the Greeks. This circumstance is probably due to the fact that the Rus went on trade expeditions in entire flotillas (according to rough estimates, one trade caravan arriving from Kyiv to Constantinople in the middle of the 10th century consisted of at least a thousand people - see. Konstantin Porphyrogenitus. About managing an empire. Note 63. P. 329). The large number of “Russian” merchants is also reflected in the Greek demand to limit their access to Constantinople: they had to enter the city through one gate of 50 people. It is clear that with such a scale of trading enterprises, the Rus did not need outside help.

3. Redemption of “Russian” and Greek slaves and prisoners of war and capture of fugitive slaves. Seeing a Greek captive at the slave market, the “Russian” merchant had to ransom him; The Greek merchant was obliged to do the same in relation to the captive Rus. In the homeland of the slave, the merchant received the ransom amount for him or the average price of the slave at the current exchange rate (“20 zlotys”). In the event of a "rati" (war) between the "Russian Land" and Byzantium, a ransom of prisoners of war was provided for - again at the average price of a slave. Runaway or stolen “Russian” slaves were to be returned to their owners; the latter could search for them on the territory of the empire, and the Greek who resisted the search of his house was considered guilty.

4. Conditions for hiring Russians for military service. When announcing the recruitment of mercenaries into the army, the Byzantine emperors were obliged to recruit into the service all the Rus who wished it, and for the period that would suit the mercenaries themselves (the Rus sought long-term mercenary service, up to lifelong). The property of a killed or deceased mercenary, in the absence of a will, was transferred to his neighbor “to Rus'.”

The negotiations ended with a solemn ceremony, which was supposed to show the barbarians the power of the empire and encourage Oleg to follow the example of previous “Russian” princes who converted to Christianity. The Russian ambassadors were invited to the Church of Hagia Sophia to inspect Christian shrines: “Tsar Leon honored the Russian ambassadors with gifts, gold and pavilions... and put your men to them, show them the church beauty, and the golden plates, and in them real wealth: there is a lot of gold , and trails, and precious stones, and the passion of the Lord, a crown and a nail, and a scarlet robe, and the relics of saints, teaching them to their faith and showing them the true faith; and so release them to your land with great honor.” But it seems that none of the Rus wanted to abandon pagan errors.

Before leaving his camp, Oleg once again confirmed his firm intention to maintain “incorruptible and shameless love” with the Greeks, ordering his shield to be hung on the city gates, “showing victory.” This symbolic act is usually interpreted in a completely opposite sense - as a sign of the victory of the Rus over Byzantium. However, the word “victory” in the 11th - 12th centuries. it also had the meaning of “protection, patronage” (cf. victorious - “intercessor, defender” in the Assumption Collection). Likewise, the shield nowhere and never symbolized victory, but only protection, peace, cessation of warfare. The raising of his shield by the leader of the army during a battle meant a call for the start of peace negotiations; in 1204, noble crusaders hung their shields on the doors of the houses they occupied in Constantinople to prevent other knights from plundering them. The prophetic prince left his talisman to the Greeks, which was supposed to protect the city from enemy attacks; he was returning to his

Test

Goals, objectives and results of the campaigns against Byzantium of the ancient princes (Oleg the Prophet and Igor Rurikovich)

Introduction

In my test, I want to consider the legendary victorious campaigns of the ancient Russian princes Oleg the Prophet and Igor Rurikovich, their goals, results, tasks.

The study of the campaigns of Oleg the Prophet and later Igor Rurikovich is not only educational, academic, but also historical and legal in nature.

The campaign of Oleg the Prophet and Igor Rurikovich is described in detail in the “Tale of Bygone Years” (beginning of the 12th century). The purpose of these campaigns was the rich ransom of the empire, paid to the pagans in order to avoid ruin. However, relations with Byzantium were not limited to robbery. Russian princes and merchants willingly traded with Byzantium. With the onset of spring, the tribute collected in winter, mainly furs, as well as honey, wax and slaves, was exported there. Because of this, another goal of the campaigns of Oleg the Prophet and Igor Rurikovich was the conclusion of agreements on very favorable terms.

The results of Oleg the Prophet's first campaign against Byzantium were not only the establishment of one-time payments and the imposition of permanent tribute, but also the conclusion of a peace treaty in 907. According to the agreement concluded on very favorable terms for the ancient Russian princes. Russians coming to the city were actually supported by the Byzantine authorities and did not pay taxes. However, this raid is not mentioned in any Byzantine or other source, except for the Old Russian chronicles.

In 911, a new Russian-Byzantine treaty was concluded, the authenticity of which is not questioned.

Igor Rurikovich - Prince of Kyiv. He began to reign in 912 after the death of Oleg, who ruled during his childhood.

Prince Igor’s first campaign against Byzantium in 1941 did not proceed exactly as written in the “Tale of Bygone Years” and turned out to be a failure. In a naval battle, the Russian fleet was truly defeated and out of 10,000 thousand ships, only ten remained. Not only the Byzantine, but the Arab Elmakin and the Cremona Bishop Liutprand and other historians speak about this unfortunate Igor’s campaign. In the second campaign, Igor accepted the Greeks’ offer of peace and signed an agreement with them in 944, which was less beneficial for Rus' compared to the agreement of 911.

It must be borne in mind that the treaties between Kievan Rus and Byzantium reflected the earliest stage of international relations. Then the subjects of different states looked at each other as hidden enemies, and everyone who ended up in a foreign country felt like in an enemy camp.

1. The campaign of Oleg the Prophet

Rurikovich treaty of Byzantium Rus'

Oleg the Prophet set out on his first campaign against Byzantium in 907. The purpose of this campaign was not only the rich ransom of the empire, paid to the pagans in order to avoid ruin, but also the conclusion of agreements on favorable terms for the Grand Duke.

On the campaign he took with him the Varangians, Slavs, Chuds, Krivichi, Meryu, Drevlyans, Radimichi, Polyans, Northerners, Vyatichi, Croats, Dulebs, Tiverts, known as interpreters. According to the Tale of Bygone Years, 2,000 rooks of 40 warriors each took part in the campaign. The Byzantine Emperor Leo the Philosopher gave the order to close the gates of the city and block the harbor with chains, thus giving the Varangians the opportunity to rob and plunder the suburbs of Constantinople. And Oleg went ashore and began to fight, and committed many murders to the Greeks in the vicinity of the city, and broke many chambers, and burned churches. And those who were captured, some were beheaded, others were tortured, others were shot, and some were thrown into the sea, and the Russians did many other evils to the Greeks, as enemies usually do.

And Oleg ordered his soldiers to make wheels and put ships on wheels. And when a fair wind blew, they raised sails in the field and went to the city. The Greeks, seeing this, were frightened and offered Oleg peace and tribute.

Oleg, moving a little away from the capital, began negotiations for peace with the Greek kings Leon and Alexander and sent Karl, Farlaf, Vermud, Rulav and Stemid to their capital with the words: “Pay me tribute.” And the Greeks said: “We will give you whatever you want.” And Oleg ordered to give 12 hryvnia per person to his soldiers for 2000 ships, and then give tribute to Russian cities: first of all for Kyiv, then for Chernigov, Pereyaslavl, Polotsk, Rostov, Lyubech and for other cities: for in these cities sit great princes subject to Oleg. “When the Russians come, let them take as much allowance for the ambassadors as they want; and if merchants come, let them take monthly food for 6 months: bread, wine, meat, fish and fruits. And let them give them a bath - as much as they want. When the Russians go home, let them take food, anchors, ropes, sails and whatever else they need from the Tsar for the journey.” And the Greeks obliged, and the kings and all the boyars said: “If the Russians do not come for trade, then let them not take their monthly allowance; Let the Russian prince, by decree, prohibit the Russians who come here from committing atrocities in the villages and in our country. Let the Russians who come here live near the church of St. Mammoth, and let them be sent to them from our kingdom, and their names be written down, then they will take their monthly allowance, first those who came from Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl, and from other cities. And let them enter the city only through one gate, accompanied by the king’s husband, without weapons, 50 people each, and trade as much as they need, without paying any fees.”

Kings Leon and Alexander made peace with Oleg, pledged to pay tribute and swore allegiance to each other. And he hung his shield on the gates as a sign of victory, and left Constantinople. And Oleg returned to Kyiv, carrying gold, and grasses, and fruits, and wine, and all sorts of ornaments. And they called Oleg the Prophetic, since the people were pagans and unenlightened.

According to the agreement concluded on very favorable terms for the ancient Russian princes. Russians coming to the city were actually supported by the Byzantine authorities and did not pay taxes.

Some modern historians consider the campaign itself to be legendary, since there is not a single mention of it by Byzantine authors, who describe similar campaigns in sufficient detail in 860 and 941. There are also doubts about the treaty of 907, the text of which is an almost verbatim compilation of the treaties of 912 and 944. Apparently the campaign still took place, but without the siege of Constantinople. The Tale of Bygone Years, in its description of Igor Rurikovich’s campaign in 944, reports the words of the Byzantine king to Prince Igor: “Do not go, but take the tribute that Oleg took, and I will add more to that tribute.”

In 911, Oleg confirmed his peace treaty with Byzantium. IN

In the course of lengthy ambassadorial agreements, the first detailed written agreement in the history of Eastern Europe was concluded between Byzantium and Russia. This agreement opened with an ambiguous phrase: “We are from the Russian family... sent from Oleg the Grand Duke of Russia and from everyone who is at his hand - the bright and great princes and his great boyars...”

The treaty confirmed “peace and love” between the two states. In 13 articles, the parties agreed on all economic, political, and legal issues of interest to them, and determined the responsibility of their subjects if they committed any crimes. One of the articles talked about concluding a military alliance between them. From now on, Russian troops regularly appeared as part of the Byzantine army during its campaigns against enemies. It should be noted that among the names of the 14 nobles used by the Grand Duke to conclude peace terms with the Greeks, there is not a single Slavic one. Having read this text, one might think that only the Varangians surrounded our first sovereigns and used their power of attorney, participating in the affairs of government.

According to the Tale of Bygone Years, in the same year, 912, Prince Oleg dies from a snake bite.

. Campaign of Igor Rurikovich

Prince Igor went on his first campaign in 941. With a fleet of several hundred people, Igor landed on the shores of Bithynia, spread his devastation to the Thracian Bosporus and approached Constantinople; but his ships could not withstand the “Greek fire”, and Igor himself escaped with only 10 ships.

Igor was not despondent, but wanted to take revenge on the Greeks and in 944 he gathered another large army, called the Varangians from overseas, hired the Pechenegs - who gave him amanats as proof of their loyalty - and two years later he again went to Greece with a fleet and cavalry. The Khersonians and Bulgarians again let the Emperor know that the sea was covered with Russian ships. Lekapin, not confident of victory and wanting to save the Empire from the new disasters of war with a desperate enemy, immediately sent envoys to Igor. Having met him near the Danube mouth, they offered him tribute, which the brave Oleg had once taken from Greece; they promised more if the Prince wisely agreed to peace; They also tried to disarm the selfish Pechenegs with rich gifts. Igor stopped and, calling his squad, announced to them the desire of the Greeks. “When the Tsar,” answered the faithful comrades of the Prince of Russia, “gives us silver and gold without war, then what more can we demand? Is it known who will win? are we? are they? and who advises the sea? Below us is not the earth, but the depths of the sea: in it is common death for people.” Igor accepted their advice, took gifts from the Greeks for all his soldiers, ordered the hired Pechenegs to ruin neighboring Bulgaria and returned to Kyiv.

Lekapin sent Pslov to Igor, and the Prince of Russia to Constantinople, where they concluded a solemn peace (treaty of 944).

The 944 treaty mentions all Russian people in order to more strongly emphasize the idea immediately following this phrase about the binding nature of treaties for all Russian people. Treaties were concluded not on behalf of the veche, but on behalf of the prince and the boyars. Now we can have no doubt that all these noble and powerful men were large landowners, not just yesterday, but with a long history of their own, who managed to grow stronger in their estates. This is evidenced by the fact that with the death of the head of the family, his wife became the head of such a noble house. Russian Truth confirms this position: “What the husband has laid on a nude, the same is the mistress” (Trinity List, art. 93). A significant part of the norms of customary oral law in a processed form was included in Russian Pravda. For example, Article 4 of the 944 treaty is generally absent from the 911 treaty, which established a reward for the return of a runaway servant, but a similar provision is included in the Extensive Pravda (Article 113). Analyzing Russian-Byzantine treaties, it is not difficult to come to the conclusion that there can be no talk of any dominance of Byzantine law. They either provide the so-called contractual agreement, based on a compromise between Russian and Byzantine law (a typical example is the rule on murder), or they implement the principles of Russian law - Russian law, as we see in the rule on blows with a sword “Whether to strike with a sword or to strike with a sword” or a vessel, for that blow or beating, and give 5 liters of silver according to the Russian law” or in the norm on theft of property. They indicate a fairly high development of inheritance law in Rus'.

Conclusion

In conclusion on this topic, we can say that the campaigns of Prince Oleg the Prophet and Prince Igor Rurikovich were of great importance for the ancient Russian state. The result of the campaigns of these two princes was not only the establishment of one-time payments, the imposition of a permanent tribute, but also the conclusion of a peace treaty in 907, according to which the Russians who came to the city were actually supported by the Byzantine authorities and did not pay duties.

Kievan Rus of the 9th-12th centuries is, firstly, the cradle of the statehood of three fraternal peoples - Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians, and secondly, it is one of the largest powers of medieval Europe, which played an important historical role in the destinies of the peoples and states of the West and East and the remote North.

The young state of Rus', which emerged at the beginning of the 9th century, very soon became famous in all parts of the Old World: English, Norwegian and French kings sought to establish marriage ties with the great princes of Kyiv; The Byzantine Empire was a constant trading counterparty of Rus', and in the east, Russian merchants sailed throughout the “Khorezm” (Caspian) Sea and reached Baghdad and Balkh (modern Afghanistan) with camel caravans.

Bibliography

1. “Ancient Rus'” Tikhomirov M.N., 1972

2. “From Rus' to Russia”, Gumilyov L.N., 1992

“History of Russia”, Zuev M.N., 1998

.“History of Russia”, Munchaev Sh.M., V.M. Ustinov, 1997

“History of Russia”, Orlov A.S., 1999

“Native Antiquity”, Sipovsky V.D., 1993

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.