RUSSIAN LANDING TROOPS. PRINCE SVYATOSLAV AGAINST THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE
Gumelev Vasiliy Yuryevich 1 , Parhomenko Alexander Viktorovich 2
1 Ryazan high airborne command school (the military institute) name of the General of the army V. Margelov, candidate of technical sciences
2 Ryazan high airborne command school (the military institute) name of the General of the army V. Margelov, associate professor
Abstract
Describes the main events that took place during Russian troops in Bulgaria Danube (967 – 971 years) and its geopolitical results.
One of the first attempts to create an empire was made by the Russians in the middle of the 10th century. The Grand Duke of Kyiv Svyatoslav the Brave (942 - 972), who defeated Khazar Khaganate during a daring landing operation in 965, he conducted an unsuccessful, but glorified for centuries Russian courage and stamina in battle, a landing operation in Bulgaria on the Danube.
In the sixties of the tenth century, Byzantium was undoubtedly the most powerful power in Europe, the Near and Middle East (Figure 1).
Figure 1 - The Byzantine Empire at the end of the 9th - the first half of the 10th century
The population of the empire reached 24 million people (the population of Russia was 5-6 times less). The Byzantines (Romans, that is, the Romans - as they called themselves), were brave and rigidly organized on the basis of centuries of tradition. The center of the spiritual, social and cultural life of the Romans for many centuries was concentrated in the same center of their statehood - the capital of Byzantium, the city of Constantinople (Tsargrad of Russian Chronicles). But because of the abundance of enemies, the economically developed, cultural and rich Orthodox Byzantine Empire was constantly defending itself from numerous wild barbarian tribes and other states. With difficulty, if it succeeded, she returned the lost territories.
In the middle of the 10th century, the Byzantines developed extremely humiliating and economically unprofitable relations with Danube Bulgaria - the Romans paid tribute to the Bulgarians. In 967, the Byzantine emperor Nikephoros II refused to pay tribute to them. He began to act in relation to Bulgaria according to the traditional Byzantine policy, cynically and rigidly following the principle "divide and rule". The Byzantine emperor decided, using the Russians, to eliminate the very statehood of Bulgaria.
And according to in Bulgaria in 967, a Russian rook landing landed, which he personally led Grand Duke. Svyatoslav quickly captured most of Bulgaria. The strategic plan of Emperor Nicephorus was a success. The chronicler called the Byzantine payment to the Russians for the landing operation carried out against the Bulgarians a tribute. Svyatoslav did his job, but he was in no hurry to leave Bulgaria. The Byzantine emperor clearly did not like this. The state machine of Byzantium started working according to a simple, but trouble-free and well-established scheme that has been tested for centuries.
Therefore, already in the next year 968:
“The Pechenegs came to the Russian land for the first time ... and Olga locked herself up with her grandchildren ... in the city of Kyiv.”
The siege of the Russian capital was carried out extremely fiercely. Upon learning of the Pecheneg raid, Svyatoslav left Bulgaria and returned to Kyiv. So easily and simply through a rather primitive intrigue, the Byzantines thought that they had solved their problems with the Bulgarians with the blood of the Russian barbarians. But it was this time that the crafty Romans were wrong. Very serious problems for the Byzantine Empire have just begun ...
Three days before the death of his mother, Princess Olga (she died on July 11, 969), Svyatoslav had a conversation with her and his closest associates, in which, according to him, he formulated his understanding of the further construction of the Russian state:
“I don’t like to sit in Kyiv, I want to live in Pereyaslavets on the Danube - for there is the middle of my land, all good things flow there ...”.
The prince's plans were reasonable enough. It seems that for centuries ahead he foresaw an urgent need for the development of the Russian state - to own the seas. Later, Peter I will build the capital Russian Empire on the seashore, only the sea will be much colder and Russian people will die much more. So the brave Russian prince was a wise statesman, and not an impudent, greedy martinet and adventurer, as they try to present him in some historical works and works of art.
In the same year 969, the Bulgarian Tsar Peter also dies, and on December 10, 969, John Tzimiskes, cousin of Emperor Nicephorus, hacked him to death with his own sword and became the new emperor of the Romans.
After such events, Prince Svyatoslav sensibly decided to proceed with the implementation of his plan. Clearly understanding the riskiness and danger of the business he had conceived, in 970, before the second landing in Bulgaria, he determined the procedure for managing the Russian land - he divided it between his sons.
The second Bulgarian expedition of Svyatoslav began successfully for the Rus, and the whole of Bulgaria quickly found itself under the control of Prince Svyatoslav. At this time, Emperor John I Tzimiskes began preparations for a war with the Rus. And the Russian landing continued to develop the offensive.
Imperial troops, according to Byzantine sources, surrounded and killed all the Pechenegs allied to Svyatoslav who took part in this war. And then, allegedly, the main forces of Svyatoslav were defeated.
The Russian chronicle tells the events differently. According to her information, Svyatoslav came close to Constantinople, but then withdrew, taking a large tribute from the Romans.
In the winter of 970 - 971, Bulgarians rebelled in the rear of Svyatoslav and captured the city of Pereyaslavets, which he had to take again and leave a strong garrison in it. Byzantium was forced to hastily transfer the most combat-ready troops from the east of the empire from Asia Minor to the borders of Bulgaria. John I Tzimiskes was gaining time to concentrate the necessary forces and means against the Rus. He tried to convince Svyatoslav to leave Bulgaria, promising tribute, but he deceived and did not pay tribute.
“And the Russians were executed, and there was a cruel slaughter, and Svyatoslav overcame, and the Greeks fled. And Svyatoslav went to the capital, fighting and smashing the cities that stand and are still empty.
Next, Svyatoslav went to the city of Dorostol, located in the lower reaches of the Danube River. Here the prince with the main forces could wait out the winter, and in the spring begin new campaign against the Greeks. Meanwhile, Emperor John again tried to draw Svyatoslav into negotiations, offering favorable peace terms and trying to pay off with silks and gold. But not well. Prince Svyatoslav was not going to change his strategic goals. Negotiations dragged on.
The offering of weapons in the form of gifts by Byzantine ambassadors to Prince Svyatoslav is shown in Figure 2.
In the spring of 971, Emperor John I Tzimisces decided that enough forces and reserves had been accumulated and personally led fighting against the Russian landing. On April 23, 971, Emperor Tzimisces approached Dorostol. In the battle in front of the city, the Rus were thrown back into the fortress. Svyatoslav had to gain a foothold in Dorostol. The Russians were surrounded. The heroic three-month defense of the city began, glorifying Russian weapons for centuries.
With ramming machines, the Romans methodically destroyed the city walls. But throughout this siege, the Russians almost daily made sorties from the fortress, trying to destroy the Byzantine siege camp.
Both sides suffered heavy losses - in the continuous small skirmishes and large battles that the Russians regularly arranged for the Byzantines, several Russian and Byzantine commanders fell.
Figure 2 - The legend of Svyatoslav. Artist B. Olshansky
Before the decisive battle, Svyatoslav gathered a military council. Being a man of honor, the brave prince said to his soldiers:
«… It does not befit us to return to our homeland, fleeing;[we have to] either win and stay alive, or die with glory, having accomplished feats, [worthy] valiant men!»
Listening to the prince Russian army decided to fight. Before the upcoming battle, a cruel ritual with infant sacrifices was performed. The Byzantines perfectly understood what this meant. Among many peoples of Aryan origin, especially among the various tribes of the Scythians, the sacrifice of women and babies before the upcoming battle meant that the warriors had already said goodbye to their lives and were ready to die, but not retreat or surrender.
The last battle near Dorostol was fought by Russian troops on July 22, 971. The Russians once again entered the field in front of the fortress. Svyatoslav the Brave ordered the city gates to be locked - to raise the morale of those who could give slack under enemy pressure. The prince believed his fighters, but he knew human weaknesses too well.
The army of Emperor Tzimiskes also left the siege camp and formed up for battle. The battle immediately took on an extremely fierce character. Prince Svyatoslav was wounded in the battle.
The Russians were forced to retreat. The Rus, who had been attacking the Byzantines all the time and had moved far from the city fortifications, made their way to Dorostol and took refuge behind the city walls. Thus ended the last but glorious battle of the Russian landing near Dorostol.
The next day, the prince, wounded in battle, Prince Svyatoslav, invited Emperor John I Tzimisces to begin peace negotiations.
Despite the fact that the Byzantines had numerical and technical superiority, they were unable to defeat the Russian landing, blocked in the fortress from land and from the Danube River, to take Dorostol in a field battle and by storm. The Russian army steadfastly withstood a three-month siege. Although this Russian-Byzantine armed confrontation can be called a siege rather conditionally. Prince Svyatoslav, having a much smaller and only foot army, skillfully used the engineering structures and fortifications of the Dorostol fortress in field battles.
The Byzantine historian John Skilitsa reports that supposedly the warrior-emperor John I Tzimiskes, wanting to stop the bloodshed, offered Svyatoslav personal combat. But he did not accept the challenge. It is quite possible that this episode was simply invented by the Greeks, who wanted to humiliate the leader of the Rus. Or perhaps the call was sent to the already wounded Svyatoslav in order to increase the authority of the emperor in the troops, which probably fell after three months of fierce hostilities.
The emperor was forced to agree to the conditions proposed by Prince Svyatoslav. Svyatoslav with an army left Bulgaria, the Byzantines had to freely let the boats of the Rus pass and provided his soldiers (twenty-two thousand people) with a supply of bread for two months. Prince Svyatoslav also entered into a military alliance with Byzantium, trade relations were restored.
All eastern Bulgaria was annexed to Byzantium. The capital of Bulgaria was renamed in honor of the Caesar in Ioannopolis, and the entire Danube Bulgaria turned into the Byzantine province of Paristrion.
The defeat of the Russians was the end of sovereign Bulgaria, which was reborn only two centuries later.
After the conclusion of peace, at the request of Prince Svyatoslav, he had a personal meeting with Emperor Tzimiskes (Figure 3).
Figure 3 - Meeting of Svyatoslav with the Byzantine emperor Tzimiskes
on the banks of the Danube. Artist K.V. Lebedev
They met on the banks of the Danube:
“Sitting in a boat on a bench for rowers, he talked a little with the sovereign about the conditions of peace and left. Thus ended the war between the Romans and the Scythians.
The fact that Svyatoslav was sitting in front of the emperor of the most powerful power had a special meaning. It was also understandable to the Byzantines, who gave great value various court ceremonies, and freedom-loving Russians.
Tzimisces was the Byzantine emperor from 969-976. He was born around 925, and died, poisoned by one of his courtiers, on January 11, 976. John emerged as a capable military leader.
Having become emperor, John I Tzimisces spent most of his reign in campaigns and battles. He was a true patriot of his country and made great efforts to revive the former greatness of Byzantium. Having seized power in the country, Tzimiskes enlisted popular support, absolutely rightly believing that without the trust of the broad public strata, all his undertakings would go to waste. The emperor ordered to distribute all his vast fortune to the poor and constantly arranged spectacles in Constantinople, to which many people flocked. Such a policy, of course, can be called populism. And you can not name. Give people your (or at least half) of the good acquired by overwork for the sake of the prosperity of your Motherland. And then honestly decide for yourself whether you are a populist or a patriot.
So on the banks of the Danube there was a meeting of two worthy commanders.
After the conclusion of a peace treaty and the meeting of the prince with the emperor, the Russian landing force moved to the Black Sea.
Emperor John I Tzimiskes was not only a warrior and commander, but also a prudent politician. The chronicler then describes the events as follows:
“Having made peace with the Greeks, Svyatoslav in boats went to[Dnieper] thresholds. And the governor of his father, Sveneld, said to him: “Go around, prince, the thresholds on horseback, for the Pechenegs are standing at the thresholds.” And he did not listen to him, and went in the boats. …
In the year 6480 (972). When spring came, Svyatoslav went to the rapids. And Kurya, the prince of the Pechenegs, attacked him, and they killed Svyatoslav, and took his head, and made a cup from the skull, bound him, and drank from him. Sveneld came to Kyiv to Yaropolk. And all the years of Svyatoslav's reign were 28.
Prince Svyatoslav was not only a commander, but also a warrior. He could have survived if he had listened to the advice of the governor. But like a true soldier, he did not abandon his comrades who had fought side by side with him in many battles. Prince Svyatoslav remained brave until the end of his life. In a fierce battle with the Pechenegs, not only he himself fell, but almost all of his squad. The last battle of the brave prince made an indelible impression on the Pechenegs. Such a ritual cup could only be made from the skull of a very brave warrior. And not everyone among these wild warriors was allowed to drink from this cup.
Summing up the brilliant reign of Svyatoslav, we can make a well-founded conclusion that during the first landing operation he successfully solved the most important task of ensuring the security of the Russian state building from the hostile policy of the Khazar Khaganate.
The second task - the creation of a peaceful trading foothold on the western coast of the Black Sea - was not completed, since Byzantium opposed Russia here. In the time of Svyatoslav, it was united and had significant military forces and resources due to the results state activity Emperor John I Tzimiskes.
But the military exploits of the Russian landing in Bulgaria will never be forgotten by the descendants and successors of the soldiers of Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich.
Bibliographic list
- Gumelev V.Yu., Parkhomenko A.V. Russian landing. The death of the country of "archers". // Humanities Scientific research. - June 2013 [ Electronic resource]. URL:http://human.snauka.ru/2013/06/314
- Gumilyov L. N. Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe [Text] / L. N. Gumilyov. - M.: Thought, 1993. - 782 p.
- Nestor the Chronicler. The Tale of Bygone Years. [Electronic resource] - URL: http://lib.rus.ec/b/149931
- Leo Deacon. Story. Nauka, M.: 1988. [Electronic resource] - URL: http://www.rummuseum.ru/portal/node/
- Defense of Dorostol. [Electronic resource] - URL:
During the time of the Macedonian sovereigns, Russian-Byzantine relations developed very lively. According to our chronicle, the Russian prince Oleg in 907, that is, in the reign of Leo VI the Wise, stood with numerous courts under the walls of Constantinople and, having ruined its environs and interrupted a large number of Greek population, forced the emperor to enter into an agreement with him and conclude an agreement. Although the Byzantine, eastern and western sources known so far do not mention this campaign and do not name Oleg at all, nevertheless it must be admitted that the basis of the Russian chronicle message, which is not devoid of legendary details, is a real historical fact.
It is very likely that the preliminary agreement of 907 was confirmed in 911 by a formal agreement, which, according to the same Russian chronicle, gave the Russians important trading privileges. The famous "History" of Leo the Deacon, an invaluable source on the history of the second half of the tenth century, has an interesting passage, which was usually ignored, although at present it should be regarded as the only allusion to agreements with Oleg attested in Greek sources. This hint is an appeal to Svyatoslav, which Leo the Deacon puts into the mouth of John Tzimiskes: "I believe that you have not forgotten about the defeat of your father Ingor, who, despising the oath agreement (taV enorkouV spondaV), sailed to our capital with a huge army of 10 thousands of ships, and sailed to the Cimmerian Bosporus with barely a dozen boats, himself becoming a herald of his misfortune.
These "swear agreements" made with the Byzantine Empire prior to Igor's time must be the agreements with Oleg reported by the Russian chronicler. It is interesting to compare with the given data the news from Byzantine sources about the participation of Russians from the beginning of the 10th century in the Byzantine troops in the form of auxiliary detachments and the corresponding place in the agreement of 911 in our chronicle about allowing the Russians, if they wish, to serve in the army of the Byzantine emperor.
In 1912, the American Jewish scholar Schechter published and translated into English language curious, unfortunately, preserved only in fragments of the Jewish medieval text about Khazar-Russian-Byzantine relations in the 10th century. The value of this document is especially great in that in it we meet the name of "King of Russia Khalgu (Helgu)", i.e. Oleg, and we find new news about him, for example, about his unsuccessful campaign against Constantinople. However, the chronological and topographical difficulties presented by this text are still in the process of preliminary study, and therefore it is not yet possible for us to make a definite judgment about this new and, of course, in the highest degree interesting find. In any case, in connection with the latter, an attempt is now being made to re-examine Oleg's chronicle chronology.
During the reign of Roman Lecapenus, the capital was twice attacked by the Russian prince Igor, whose name, in addition to Russian chronicles, was preserved both in Greek and Latin sources. Igor's first campaign in 941, undertaken by him on numerous ships to the Black Sea coast of Bithynia and to the Bosphorus, where the Russians, devastating the country, reached Chrysopolis (modern Scutari, against Constantinople) along the Asian shore of the strait, ended for Igor in complete failure. Russian ships, especially due to the destructive effect of "Greek fire", were mostly destroyed. The rest of the ships returned to the north. Russian captives were executed.
With much larger forces, Igor undertook the second campaign of 944. According to Russian chronicles, Igor collected large army from the "Varangians, Rus, Polyans, Slavs, Krivichi, Tivertsy and Pechenegs." The frightened emperor sent the best boyars, rich gifts to Igor and the Pechenegs and promised the first to pay tribute, which Oleg took from Byzantium. Igor, approaching the Danube and consulting with the squad, decided to accept the conditions of the emperor and returned to Kyiv. The following year, an agreement and peace, less beneficial for the latter, in comparison with Oleg's agreement, was concluded between the Greeks and the Russians, "until the sun shines and the whole world stands, in the present and in the future." The friendly relations formalized by this agreement became even more definite under Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, in 957, when the Russian Grand Duchess Olga arrived in Constantinople, where she was received with great triumph by the emperor, empress and heir. An official modern record of Olga's reception in Constantinople has been preserved in the well-known collection of the 10th century "On the Ceremonies of the Byzantine Court". Particularly important are the relations of Vasily II the Bulgar-Slayer to the Russian Grand Duke Vladimir, whose name is associated with the idea of converting himself and the Russian state to Christianity.
In the eighties of the tenth century, the position of the emperor and his dynasty seemed critical. Having raised an uprising against Vasily Vard Fok, having almost all of Asia Minor on his side, he approached the capital itself from the east, while on the other hand the Bulgarians, victorious at that time, threatened it from the north. In such cramped circumstances, Vasily turned for help to the northern prince Vladimir, with whom he managed to conclude an alliance on the following conditions: Vladimir had to send a six thousandth detachment to help Vasily, in return for which he received the hand of the emperor’s sister Anna and pledged to accept for himself and for his people Christian faith. Thanks to the Russian auxiliary detachment, the so-called "Varangian-Russian squad", the uprising of Varda Foka was suppressed, and he himself died. Having got rid of the terrible danger, Vasily, apparently, did not want to keep the promise given to Vladimir regarding his sister Anna. Then the Russian prince besieged and took the important Byzantine city in the Crimea Kherson (Korsun). After that, Vasily II relented. Vladimir was baptized and married the Byzantine princess Anna. The year of the baptism of Russia: 988 or 989, exactly unknown; some scientists stand for the first, others for the second. For some time between Byzantium and Russia, times of peace and harmony again came; both sides fearlessly traded with each other.
In 1043, during the reign of Constantine Monomakh, in Constantinople, according to the source, there was a quarrel between "Scythian merchants", i.e. Russians, and Greeks, during which one noble Russian was killed. It is very likely that this circumstance served as a pretext for a new Russian campaign against Byzantium. Russian Grand Duke Yaroslav the Wise sent his eldest son Vladimir on a campaign with a large army on numerous ships. But the Russian ships were completely defeated, especially thanks to the famous "Greek fire". The remnants of the Russian army, led by Vladimir, hastily withdrew. This was the last Russian attack on Constantinople in the Middle Ages. The ethnographic changes that took place in the second half of the 11th century in the steppes of modern southern Russia, in the form of the appearance of the Polovtsy, deprived Russian state opportunity to maintain direct relations with Byzantium.
The time of the Macedonian dynasty, as is known, was distinguished by intense cultural work in the field of science, literature and education. The activities of such persons as Photius in the 9th century, Constantine Porphyrogenitus in the 10th century.
Foreign policy of Byzantium in the 2nd half of the 9th-11th centuries. characterized by constant wars with the Arabs, Slavs, later - with the Normans. In the middle of the 10th c. Byzantium conquered Upper Mesopotamia, part of Asia Minor and Syria, Crete and Cyprus from the Arabs. In 1018 V. conquered the Western Bulgarian kingdom. Balkan Peninsula to the Danube was subordinated to the power of V. In the 9-11 centuries. big role in foreign policy Byzantium began to play relationships with Kievan Rus. After the siege of Constantinople by the troops of the Kiev prince Oleg (907), the Byzantines were forced to conclude in 911 a trade agreement beneficial for the Russians, which contributed to the development of trade relations between Russia and Byzantium along the great path from the "Varangians to the Greeks."
The ninth chapter is entirely devoted to the history ancient Russia, or "rosam" as they are called in the Byzantine tradition in the text itself. This chapter is called: "On the Dews, Departing with Monoxyls from Russia to Constantinople." The Introduction gives an idea of the era when the work of Constantine was written, the author (authors), the sources on which it was based, the organization of work on it, the main ideas carried out in it, and the significance of work as a historical source and monument. literature. Of course, in the Introduction, all these issues are covered very briefly. But they are touched upon many times, sometimes much more fully and specifically, in the Commentary [Konstantin Porphyrogenitus // SBE, under. Red A. Prokhorova, M. Sov. Encyclopedia, 1773. - T. 13 - S. 45].
During the time of the Macedonian sovereigns, Russian-Byzantine relations developed very lively. According to our chronicle, the Russian prince Oleg in 907, i.e. in the reign of Leo VI the Wise, stood with numerous courts under the walls of Constantinople and, having ruined its environs and killed a large number of the Greek population, forced the emperor to enter into an agreement with him and conclude an agreement. Although the Byzantine, Eastern and Western sources known so far do not mention this campaign and do not name Oleg at all, nevertheless it must be admitted that the basis of the Russian chronicle message, which is not devoid of legendary details, is a real historical fact. It is very likely that the preliminary agreement of 907 was confirmed in 911 by a formal agreement, which, according to the same Russian chronicle, gave the Russians important trading privileges [Leo Deacon. History.// Translated by M.M. Kopylenko, Rev. Ed. -- G.G. Timpani. M., 1988, p. 57].
Political position Constantine VII in relation to the countries and peoples described in the work "On the Management of the Empire" is entirely based on the imperial ideological doctrine, in the development and propaganda of which the basileus themselves, including the grandfather and father of Constantine VII, took an active part in this era. However, it was the activity of Constantine Porphyrogenitus that was especially fruitful in this respect. The empire, in his view, is a "world ship", the emperor is an unlimited ruler, endowed with the highest virtues ("Christ among the apostles"), Constantinople is "the queen of cities and the whole world." The cult of serving the empire, the only and divine, is the main moral principle that determines the behavior of the Romans, whether they are "from commanding or from subordinate" [Konstantin Porphyrogenitus. On the management of the empire / Under. ed. G. G. Litavrina, A. P. Novoseltseva. Greek text, translation, commentaries. -- Ed. 2nd, corrected. - M., Nauka, 1991. - 496 p. -- (Ancient sources on the history of the peoples of the USSR).]. The ideas developed by Constantine Porphyrogenitus are not only a political doctrine and the doctrine of imperial power, but also a theory of the moral values of a loyal Byzantine and a catechism of his behavior. The peoples surrounding the empire are considered from the point of view of this doctrine only as "useful" or "harmful" to the empire.
The "Roman" dispensation seems to Constantine natural, and therefore ideal. God Himself guards the empire, and its capital is under the special protection of the Mother of God herself. The empire does not know the fragmentation of power, and therefore does not know internal strife and bloody anarchy. It is characteristic that Constantine associates unanimity and firm order within the empire with the dominance of unanimity, i.e. the culture of the empire is conceived by him, in all likelihood, primarily as a Greek-speaking culture.
The admiration and obedience of foreigners to the empire is portrayed by Constantine as the norm in international relations: the empire does not enter into friendship with other countries and peoples, but bestows it; he who has made peace with her thus acquires security guarantees; all "barbarian" peoples (Christian and pagan), ever with the permission of the emperor or arbitrarily settled on the lands of the empire, especially those who paid the empire a "pact" (tribute) or received baptism from it, are obliged to obey it now and continue to be her "slaves". This is the position of the royal author in relation to the Armenians and Georgians, and in relation to the Serbs and Croats, even in relation to the Bulgarians, although in the memory of Constantine it was Bulgaria that threatened the very existence of the Byzantine Empire as a European power.
According to the suggestions of the emperor, ignorant "barbarians" not only can, but must openly lie, arguing that both the very insignia of power (crowns and mantles) and the Greek fire were transferred by God through an angel directly to Constantine the Great himself, that this Equal-to-the-Apostles emperor forbade entering into kinship between members of the ruling dynasty in the empire with representatives of the families of sovereigns of other countries (both non-Christian and Christian), making an exception only for the Franks, since "he himself led a family from those parts" [Litavrin G.G. On the legal status of the ancient Rus in Byzantium in the 10th century (preliminary remarks) // Byzantine essays. - M., 1991. -- S. 82-83.].
As for the northern region, here Constantine, as already noted in historiography, makes the main bet on the allied empires ("friends") of the Pechenegs, whose military power can be used against both the Russians and the Hungarians, as well as against the Khazars and Bulgarians. Against the Khazars, according to Constantine, the empire can also send the Uzes, Alans and Black Bulgars. Provides Konstantin and the possibility of breaking the alliance with the Pechenegs. In this case, their worthy opponent could be, if not the Hungarians, then the bonds.
Unusual in this strategic doctrine of Constantine Porphyrogenitus is the complete absence of even the slightest hint of the allied relations of the empire with Kievan Rus, while, according to chapter 9, the agreement with them remained in force even at the time of writing the work "On the Administration of the Empire".
Therefore, two assumptions can be made: either another special chapter on the dews was not included in the book (or was lost), where appropriate recommendations were given in this regard, or the articles of the agreement on military assistance to the Ross to the Kherson theme were not implemented in the period described, as it turned out incompatible with the military agreement of the empire with the Pechenegs, who were preferred as allies by the Byzantine government under Constantine VII.
The "swear agreements" made with the Byzantine Empire prior to Igor's time must be the agreements with Oleg reported by the Russian chronicler. It is interesting to compare with the given data the news of Byzantine sources about the participation of Russians since the beginning of the 10th century in the Byzantine troops in the form of auxiliary detachments and the corresponding place in the agreement of 911 in our chronicle about allowing the Russians, if they wish, to serve in the army of the Byzantine emperor [A.A. Vasiliev. Byzantium and the Arabs. SPb., 1902, vol. 2 - S. 166-167.].
During the reign of Roman Lecapenus, the capital was twice attacked by the Russian prince Igor, whose name, in addition to Russian chronicles, was preserved both in Greek and Latin sources.
With much larger forces, Igor undertook the second campaign of 944. According to Russian chronicles, Igor gathered a large army of "Varangians, Rus, Glades, Slavs, Krivichi, Tivertsy and Pechenegs." The frightened emperor sent the best boyars, rich gifts to Igor and the Pechenegs and promised the first to pay tribute, which Oleg took from Byzantium. Igor, approaching the Danube and consulting with the squad, decided to accept the conditions of the emperor and returned to Kyiv. The following year, an agreement and peace, less beneficial for the latter, in comparison with Oleg’s agreement, was concluded between the Greeks and the Russians, “until the sun shines and the whole world stands, in the present and in the future” [A.A. Vasiliev. Byzantium and the Arabs. SPb., 1902, vol. 2, p. 164-167, 246-249, 255-256. ].
The friendly relations formalized by this agreement became even more definite under Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, in 957, when the Russian Grand Duchess Olga arrived in Constantinople, where she was received with great triumph by the emperor, empress and heir. The official modern record of Olga's reception in Constantinople has been preserved in the well-known collection of the 10th century "On the Ceremonies of the Byzantine Court" [Constanine Porphyrogenitus. De Cerimonis aulae byzantinae, Bonn. ed., pp. 594-598].
In the first half of the 10th century, Byzantium finally received a general distribution in the empire of the thematic military-administrative system of provincial government, which ensured a more perfect organization of the collection of state taxes, the defense of the country and the recruitment of the thematic peasant militia. At the head of each theme was a strategist appointed by the emperor, who had full military and civil power. The emperor relied on a powerful branched bureaucratic system of power. The empire was dominated by a high-ranking, mostly civil nobility, to which the ruling Macedonian dynasty belonged at that time. But at the same time, a landowning provincial aristocracy, which traditionally played a major role in the Byzantine army, was taking shape, rapidly growing stronger.
Byzantium considered the Pechenegs as one of its most important northern neighbors, serving as the basis for maintaining a balance in the north in the empire's relations with Russia, the Magyars and the Bulgarians. In the 10th century, Konstantin Porphyrogenitus, in his work “On the Management of the Empire”, dedicated to the son and heir to the throne Roman, devotes a lot of space to the Pechenegs. First of all, the royal writer advises, for the benefit of the state, to live in peace with the Pechenegs and have friendly relations with them; if the empire lives in peace with the Pechenegs, then neither the Russians, nor the Magyars, nor the Bulgarians can open hostile actions against the empire. From the same work it is clear that the Pechenegs served as intermediaries in the trade relations of the Byzantine possessions in the Crimea, i.e. themes Kherson, with Russia, Khazaria and other neighboring countries[ Constantini Porphyrogeniti. De administrando imperio, cap. 37--40. (Konstantin Porphyrogenitus. On the management of the empire. Text, translation, commentary edited by G.G. Litavrin and A.P. Novoseltsev. M., 1989, pp. 154--167. Links of A.A. Vasiliev himself to other editions of this works excluded.- Scientific ed.)]. Obviously, for Byzantium, the Pechenegs in the tenth century had the highest degree importance both politically and economically.
It is known from handwritten sources that in the last third of the 10th c. Byzantium entered the struggle with Russia for Bulgaria; despite the initial successes of the Kiev prince Svyatoslav Igorevich, Byzantium won. An alliance was concluded between Byzantium and Russia under the Kiev prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich, the Russians helped the Byzantine emperor Vasily II suppress the feudal rebellion of Foki Varda (987--989), and Vasily II was forced to agree to the marriage of his sister Anna with the Kiev prince Vladimir, which contributed to rapprochement Byzantium with Russia. At the end of the 10th c. in Russia, Christianity was adopted from Byzantium (according to the Orthodox rite).
Constantinople (Tsargrad) was built in 324-330 on the site of an ancient Greek city Byzantium during the time of the Roman emperor (306-337) Constantine I the Great Flavius. The city was profitable geographic location and natural fortifications, which made it almost impregnable. Construction was carried out on a grand scale in the city and gradually Constantinople, being the imperial residence, overshadowed old Rome. The Church also connects with his name the adoption of Christianity as the state religion by the Roman Empire.In the III-IV centuries, as a result of the general crisis of the slave-owning formation and its gradual change by feudal relations, the Roman Empire experienced a deep economic and political crisis. In fact, the empire broke up into a number of independent states (Eastern, Western parts, Africa, Gaul, etc.).
In the 60-70s of the 4th century, the problem of the Goths became especially acute.
In the reign of Emperor Theodosius (379-395), the last, essentially already ephemeral, unification of the empire was achieved. After his death, the final political division of the Roman Empire into 2 states took place: the Western Roman Empire (the capital is Ravenna) and the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium, the capital is Constantinople).
In the west, the most important feature was the weakening of the central imperial power and the gradual formation of independent political formations - barbarian kingdoms - on the territory of the Western Empire.
In the Eastern Roman Empire, the processes of feudalization retained the features of greater continuity of old social structures, were slower, took place while maintaining a strong central government emperor.
| years | EMPEROR | NOTES |
|---|---|---|
| 395 - 408 | Arkady | 3rd Flavian dynasty |
| 408 - 450 | Theodosius II | |
| 450 - 457 | Marcian | |
| 457 - 474 | Leo I | |
| 474 - 474 | Leo II | |
| 474 - 491 | Zinon | |
| 491 - 518 | Anastasius I | |
| 518 - 527 | Justin I (450 - 527+) | The peasant who has risen to military service to the head of the imperial guard, in 518 he was proclaimed emperor. Founder of the Justin dynasty |
| 527 - 565 | Justinian I (483-565+) | conquered North Africa, Sicily, Italy, part of Spain. Under Justinian, the empire had the most territory and influence. Carried out the codification of Roman law (Corpus juris civilis), stimulated large-scale construction (the Church of St. Sophia in Constantinople, a system of fortresses along the Danube border). |
city of Konstantinopol. Church of St. Sophia. Modern look. Rebuilt by the Turks into a mosque after the capture of Constantinople.
| 565 - 578 | Justin II (?-578+) | |
| 578 - 582 | Tiberius II | |
| 582 - 602 | Mauritius (?-602x) | He was brutally tortured with his family by the strategist Foka; |
| 602 - 610 | Fock | |
| 610 - 641 | Heraclius I (?-641+) | Founder of the Heracleian dynasty |
| 641 - 641 | Constantine III Heraclius II | |
| 641 - 668 | Constant II | |
| 668 - 685 | Constantine IV | |
| 685 - 695 | Justinian II (669 - 711x) | Son of Constantine IV. At the turn of the 7th-8th centuries, Byzantium was in deep crisis, experiencing enormous internal and external difficulties. The feudal system, developing, gave rise to many contradictions, discontent permeated all sectors of society. In addition, a significant part of the territory of the empire was captured by the Arab Caliphate. Only with the greatest exertion of forces, the truncated empire gradually strengthened its positions again, but could not regain its former greatness and brilliance. |
| 695 - 698 | Leonty (? - 705x) | |
| 698 - 705 | Tiberius III (? - 705x) | |
| 705 - 711 | Justinian II (669 - 711x) | The 1st reign of Justinian II ended with the fact that the commander Leonty overthrew Justinian and, having cut off his nostrils and tongue, exiled him to the Khazars, where he announced his intention to become emperor again. At first, the kagan received him with honor and even married his sister to him, but later decided to kill him and hand over his head to Tiberius. Justinian fled again and, with the help of the Bulgarian Khan Tervel, managed to capture Constantinople, killed Tiberius, Leontius and many others. Having lost the support of the inhabitants and the soldiers, Justinian and his infant son were killed by Philippicus. The Heraclean dynasty ended. |
| 711 - 713 | Philippic | |
| 713 - 716 | Anastasius II | |
| 715 - 717 | Theodosius III | |
| 717 - 741 | Leo III the Isaurian (c. 675 - 741+) | Founder of the Isaurian dynasty. Repelled the onslaught of the Arabs in 718. at Constantinople, in 740. near Akroinos. Published in 726. Eclogue. He laid the foundation for iconoclasm, issuing an edict in 730 against the veneration of icons. |
| 741 - 775 | Constantine V Copronym | Consistent supporter of iconoclasm; A squad from Russia took part in the campaign against the island of Cyprus, recaptured from the Arabs in 746. |
| 775 - 780 | Leo IV Khazar | |
| 780 - 797 | Constantine VI | |
| 797 - 802 | Irina (803+) | Wife of Leo IV, mother of Constantine VI, regent during his reign, later empress. Deposed by the logothete Nicephorus and exiled to the island of Lesbos, where she soon died. End of the Isaurian dynasty |
| 802 - 811 | Nikephoros I | |
| 811 - 811 | Stavraky | |
| 811 - 813 | Michael I | |
| 813 - 820 | Leo V | |
| 820 - 829 | Michael II | Founder of the Amorite dynasty. Under Michael II, there was one of the largest uprisings led by Thomas the Slav, who in 820 was proclaimed emperor by the rebels. He besieged Constantinople for a year, then went to Thrace, where he was defeated by government troops and executed in 823. |
| 829 - 842 | Theophilus | |
| 842 - 867 | Michael III | 860 - the campaign of the Rus against Byzantium. |
| 867 - 886 | Basil I | Founder of the Macedonian dynasty |
| 886 - 912 | Leo VI Philosopher | 907 - the campaign of the Kiev prince Oleg to Byzantium. The capture of Constantinople and the treaty in 911. |
| 912 - 913 | Alexander | Brother of Leo VI |
| 913 - 920 | Constantine VII | |
| 920 - 945 | Roman I Lecapenus (?-948+) | 941 - the campaign of the Kiev prince Igor against Byzantium. Roman I repulsed the attack and signed a peace treaty with Russia in 944. Deposed by sons. |
| 945 - 959 | Constantine VII Romanovich Porphyrogenitus (905-959+) | 955 - the embassy of Olga, Igor's widow, to Constantinople. |
| 959 - 963 | Roman II | |
| 963 - 969 | Nikephoros II Phocas | Commander and Emperor. Carried out important government reforms. Until 965, Byzantium paid an annual tribute to Danube Bulgaria. Nicephorus Foka refused to pay this tribute and in the spring of 966 started a war with the Bulgarians. However, the empire had to wage a fierce struggle with the Arabs at that time, so Nicephorus decided to draw the Russians into the war with the Bulgarians. With rich gifts, he persuaded the Kiev prince Svyatoslav to begin military operations in the Balkans. Svyatoslav invaded the Danubian Bulgaria in 967. |
| 969 - 976 | John I Tzimisces (c.925-976+) | He was married to Theodora, daughter of Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus. |
| 976 - 1025 | Basil II the Bulgar Slayer (957-1025+) | The first decades of his reign were marked by riots. big feudal lords against the central government strong earthquakes and floods, droughts, which caused very great damage to the population of the empire, as well as failures in foreign policy, in particular, the defeat of the Byzantine troops from the Bulgarians and Russians. However, in the future, Vasily II managed to stabilize the internal and external position of the empire and subdue the territories that had fallen away from it. In 1014, after the defeat of the Bulgarian army near Strumica, on the orders of Vasily II, 15 thousand captured Bulgarian soldiers were blinded. Basil II's sister Anna was the wife of Prince Vladimir I of Kiev. |
| 1025 - 1028 | Constantine VIII | |
| 1028 - 1034 | Roman III | |
| 1034 - 1041 | Michael IV | |
| 1041 - 1042 | Michael V | |
| 1042 - 1055 | Constantine IX Monomakh | Daughter Maria was the wife of the Kiev Grand Duke Vsevolod I Yaroslavich and the mother of Vladimir Monomakh. |
| 1055 - 1056 | Theodora | End of the Macedonian dynasty |
| 1056 - 1057 | Michael VI | |
| 1057 - 1059 | Isaac I | |
| 1059 - 1067 | Constantine X | |
| 1068 - 1071 | Roman IV Diogenes (?-1072) | Deposed and blinded by the Dukes |
| 1071 - 1078 | Michael VII | |
| 1078 - 1081 | Nikephoros III | |
| 1081 - 1118 | Alexei I Komnenos (1048-1118+) | Founder of the Komnenos dynasty. Daughter Barbara was the wife of the Kiev prince Svyatopolk II Izyaslavich. He seized power, relying on the military nobility. Repulsed the onslaught of the Normans, Pechenegs and Seljuks. 1096-1099 - 1st Crusade; July 15, 1099 Jerusalem is captured by the crusaders. Kingdom of Jerusalem formed. |
| 1118 - 1143 | John II | |
| 1143 - 1180 | Manuel I | 1147-1149 - 2nd Crusade; Daughter Manuil Olga was the 2nd wife Yuri Vladimirovich Dolgoruky. |
| 1180 - 1183 | Alexei II | |
| 1183 - 1185 | Andronicus I |
Cousin Manuel. |
| 1185 - 1195 | Isaac II | Founder of the Angel Dynasty 1189-1192 - 3rd Crusade |
| 1195 - 1203 | Alexei III | |
| 1203 - 1204 | Isaac II Alexey IV | 1202-1204 - 4th Crusade The campaign, organized on the initiative of Pope Innocent III and the Venetian merchants, was directed mainly against Byzantium, on parts of which, after the capture of Constantinople in 1204 by the crusaders, a Latin Empire, which broke up in 1261. |
| 1204 - 1204 | Alexey V | |
| 1205 - 1221 | Theodore I | Founder of the Laskaris dynasty |
| 1222 - 1254 | John III | |
| 1254 - 1258 | Theodore II | |
| 1258 - 1261 | John IV | |
| 1259 - 1282 | Michael VIII | A native of a noble Byzantine family, the founder of the dynasty of Byzantine emperors Palaiologos. In 1261, Constantinople was recaptured by the Byzantines. |
| 1282 - 1328 | Andronikos II | |
| 1295 - 1320 | Michael IX | |
| 1325 - 1341 | Andronikos III | |
| 1341 - 1376 | John V John VI (before 1354) | |
| 1376 - 1379 | Andronicus IV | |
| 1379 - 1390 | John V | |
| 1390 - 1390 | John VII | |
| 1390 - 1391 | John V | |
| 1391 - 1425 | Manuel II | |
| 1425 - 1448 | John VIII | From 1409 his wife was Anna (1415+), daughter of Vasily I Dmitrievich. |
| 1448 - 1453 | Constantine XI (1453x) | The last Byzantine emperor. His niece Sophia was the wife of Ivan III. In 1453, Constantinople was conquered by the Ottoman Empire and renamed Istanbul by the Turks. |
For more than a thousand years, Byzantium has been a link between East and West. Originating at the end of antiquity, it existed until the end of the European Middle Ages. Until it fell to the Ottomans in 1453.
Did the Byzantines know that they were Byzantines?
Officially, the year of the “birth” of Byzantium is considered to be 395, when the Roman Empire was divided into two parts. The western part fell in 476. Eastern - with the capital in Constantinople, lasted until 1453.
It is important that it was called "Byzantium" later. The inhabitants of the empire themselves and the surrounding peoples called it "Roman". And they had every right to do so - after all, the capital was moved from Rome to Constantinople in 330, back in the days of the unified Roman Empire.
After the loss of the western territories, the empire continued to exist in a truncated form with the former capital. Considering that the Roman Empire was born in 753 BC, and died under the roar of Turkish cannons in 1453 AD, it lasted 2206 years.
Shield of Europe
Byzantium was in a permanent state of war: in any century of Byzantine history, for 100 years there will hardly be 20 years without war, and sometimes there will not be 10 years of peace.
Often, Byzantium fought on two fronts, and sometimes enemies pushed it from all four corners of the world. And if the rest of the European countries fought, basically, with an enemy more or less known and understandable, that is, with each other, then Byzantium often had to be the first in Europe to meet unknown conquerors, wild nomads who destroyed everything in their path.
The Slavs who came to the Balkans in the 6th century so exterminated the local population that only a small part of it remained - modern Albanians.
Byzantine Anatolia (the territory of modern Turkey) for many centuries supplied empires with warriors and food in abundance. In the 11th century, the invading Turks devastated this flourishing region, and when the Byzantines managed to recapture part of the territory, they could not gather either soldiers or food there - Anatolia turned into a desert.
On Byzantium, this eastern bastion of Europe, many invasions from the east crashed, the most powerful of which was the Arab one in the 7th century. If the “Byzantine shield” could not withstand the blow, and prayer, as the British historian of the 18th century Gibbon noted, would now be heard over the sleeping spiers of Oxford.
Byzantine Crusade
Religious warfare is by no means an invention of the Arabs with their Jihad or the Catholics with their Crusades. At the beginning of the 7th century, Byzantium was on the verge of death - enemies were pressing from all sides, and Iran was the most formidable of them.
At the most critical moment - when the enemies approached the capital from two sides - the Byzantine emperor Heraclius makes an extraordinary move: he proclaims a holy war for the Christian faith, for the return of the Life-Giving Cross and other relics captured by Iranian troops in Jerusalem (in the pre-Islamic era, the state religion in Iran was Zoroastrianism).
The church donated its treasures for the holy war, thousands of volunteers were equipped and trained with the money of the church. For the first time, the Byzantine army marched on the Persians, carrying icons in front. In a hard struggle, Iran was defeated, Christian relics returned to Jerusalem, and Heraclius turned into a legendary hero, who even in the 12th century was remembered as his great predecessor by the Crusaders.
double-headed eagle
Contrary to popular belief, the double-headed eagle, which became the emblem of Russia, was by no means the emblem of Byzantium - it was the emblem of the last Byzantine dynasty of the Palaiologos. The niece of the last Byzantine emperor Sophia, having married the Moscow Grand Duke Ivan III, transferred only the family, and not the state coat of arms.
It is also important to know that many European states (Balkan, Italian, Austria, Spain, Holy Roman Empire) considered themselves the heirs of Byzantium for one reason or another, and had a double-headed eagle on their coats of arms and flags.[
For the first time, the symbol of the double-headed eagle appeared long before Byzantium and the Paleologs - in the 4th millennium BC, in the first civilization on Earth, Sumer. Images of the double-headed eagle are also found among the Hittites, an Indo-European people who lived in the 2nd millennium BC in Asia Minor.
Russia - the successor of Byzantium?
After the fall of Byzantium, the vast majority of Byzantines - from aristocrats and scientists to artisans and warriors - fled from the Turks not to fellow believers, to Orthodox Russia, but to Catholic Italy.
The centuries-old ties between the Mediterranean peoples turned out to be stronger than religious differences. And if Byzantine scientists filled the universities of Italy, and partly even France and England, then in Russia the Greek scientists had nothing to fill in - there were no universities there.
In addition, the heir to the Byzantine crown was not the Byzantine princess Sophia, the wife of the Moscow prince, but the nephew last emperor Andrei. He sold his title to the Spanish monarch Ferdinand - the very one for whom Columbus discovered America.
Russia can be considered the successor of Byzantium only in a religious aspect - after all, after the fall of the latter, our country became the main stronghold of Orthodoxy.
Influence of Byzantium on the European Renaissance
Hundreds of Byzantine scholars who fled from the Turks who conquered their homeland, taking with them their libraries and works of art, breathed new energy into the European Renaissance.
Unlike Western Europe, in Byzantium the study of the ancient tradition was never interrupted. And all this legacy of their Greek civilization, much larger and better preserved, the Byzantines brought to Western Europe.
It would not be an exaggeration to say that without the Byzantine emigrants, the Renaissance would not have been so powerful and bright. Byzantine scholarship even influenced the Reformation: the original Greek text of the New Testament, promoted by the humanists Lorenzo Valla and Erasmus of Rotterdam, had big influence on the ideas of Protestantism.
Abundant Byzantium
The wealth of Byzantium is a fairly well-known fact. But how rich the empire was - few know. Just one example: the size of the tribute to the formidable Attila, who kept most of Eurasia at bay, was equal to the annual income of just a couple of Byzantine villas.
Sometimes a bribe in Byzantium was equal to a quarter of payments to Attila. Sometimes it was more profitable for the Byzantines to pay off the invasion of barbarians not spoiled by luxury than to equip an expensive professional army and rely on an unknown outcome of a military campaign.
Yes, they were in the empire and hard times, but the Byzantine "gold" has always been valued. Even on the remote island of Taprobana (modern Sri Lanka), Byzantine gold coins were appreciated by local rulers and merchants. A hoard of Byzantine coins was found even on the Indonesian island of Bali.
