Rus attack on Constantinople. "Ida Askold and Dir in the Greeks ..."

B. Olshansky. In the summer of 908. Going to Constantinople

882
Askold - a Varangian from Rurik's squad, a Kiev prince in 864-882. (ruled with Deer).

According to the "Tale of Bygone Years", Askold and Dir were boyars of the Novgorod prince Rurik, who released them on a campaign against Constantinople. They settled in Kiev, seizing power over the glades, which at that time did not have their own prince and paid tribute to the Khazars (864).

Rus' campaign to Constantinople in 860
Trizna of Russian vigilantes. Painting by G. Semiradsky.

The chronicles associate the names of Askold and Dir with the first campaign of Rus against Constantinople, dated 866 (probably took place in 860; Byzantine sources report only one leader of the Rus, without naming him), which was followed by the so-called first baptism of Rus. It is possible that the Christian name of Askold was the name of Nikola, since on the site of his grave a church was built in honor of this saint.

Askold and Dir were killed (882) by the Novgorod prince Oleg, who accused them of illegal seizure of power, since they were not from the Rurik family.

According to the Novgorod first chronicle, the Vikings Askold and Dir are not associated with Rurik, and came to Kiev before Rurik was invited to Novgorod, but after the Rus campaign against Constantinople. In Kiev, they called themselves princes and began to fight with the Drevlyans and Uglichs.

Hike to Constantinople of Askold and Dir in the Radziwill Chronicle, 15th century

Description in later sources

In the Pskov 2nd Chronicle (15th century) it is said that: “And the princes in that summer were byahu on the Ruska lands; From Varyag 5 princes, the first name is Skald (that is, Askold), and the other is Dir, and the third is Rurik ... ".

The Nikon and Joachim Chronicles contain information unknown from other sources about the events of the 870s: the flight of a part of the Novgorod nobility from Rurik to Askold during the struggle for power in Novgorod, the death of Askold's son in the struggle against the Bulgarians (872), Askold's campaigns against Polotsk ( 872), Krivichi (where Rurik planted his governors) and Pechenegs (875). The campaign of Rus to Constantinople (860), attributed by the Tale of Bygone Years to 866, is dated 874-875.

Siege of Constantinople by the Russians, led by Askold and Dir. Patriarch Photius and Emperor Michael III touch the surface of the sea with the Robe of Our Lady. The Radziwill Chronicle.

In addition to the ancient Russian chronicles, Askold and Dir are mentioned in the work of the 15th century Polish historian Jan Dlugosh (possibly compiled to substantiate Poland's claims to the Kiev inheritance, as opposed to the Moscow Rurikovichs). In his interpretation, Askold was a Polyansky prince, a descendant of Kiy, the founder of Kiev. He was the governor of Prince Dir, who may have removed the latter from the throne and became an autocratic ruler.

Historiography according to Askold

Askold's grave, Ivan Bilibin

In 1919, Academician A. A. Shakhmatov linked Prince Askold with Southern Priilmeny (center of Staraya Russa). According to his hypothesis, Rusa was the original capital of the most ancient country. And from this "ancient Rus ... soon after" 839, a movement of Scandinavian Rus began to the south, which led to the founding of a "young Russian state" in Kiev around 840. In 1920, Academician S.F. Platonov noted that future research would collect ... the best material for clarifying and strengthening A. A. Shakhmatov's hypothesis about the Varangian center on the southern bank of the Ilmen. The prominent historian of the Russian diaspora GV Vernadsky also linked Prince Askold with Staraya Russa.

BA Rybakov put forward a bold assumption about the presence of "Askold's chronicle" in Ancient Russia.

The name Askold, according to most researchers, comes from the Old Norse Haskuldr or Hoskuldr. According to another version, the name has local, Slavic roots. BA Rybakov believed that the name Oskold may come from the ancient self-designation of the Scythians: chipped.

In 2010, V.V.Fomin considered it possible to assume that Askold and Dir were connected with Staraya Russa Rus (center of Staraya Russa), forced to leave Priilmenye, as soon as Rurik, representing Varangian Rus, first settled in Ladoga, was established there.

Dir (in the Ipatiev Chronicle also Dird,? -882) - the legendary Varangian who seized Kiev together with Askold and was killed with him by the Novgorod prince Oleg.

According to The Tale of Bygone Years, he was a boyar of the Novgorod prince Rurik. Together with Askold, they allegedly went down the Dnieper to Kiev in the land of the meadows, which at that time did not have a prince and paid tribute to the Khazars, and sat there as princes. Further in the PVL it is reported that in 866, under the leadership of Dir and Askold, Russia made the first campaign to Constantinople (and Byzantine sources indicate that the campaign was in 860), then in about 882 Rurik's successor, Prince Oleg of Novgorod, captured Kiev and, according to legend, he deceived Dir and Askold to his boat and killed both because of the illegality of their rule due to the lack of princely dignity, introducing them to Igor, the son of Rurik.

Death of Askold and Dir. Engraving by F. A. Bruni, 1839.

According to another hypothesis, Askold and Dir ruled at different times. The mention of Dir is sometimes seen in the message of the Arab geographer al-Masudi (mid-10th century), about a certain powerful Slavic ruler: “The first of the Slavic kings is the king of Dir, he has vast cities and many inhabited countries, Muslim merchants arrive in his land from various kinds of goods. " Therefore, Dir could rule either after Askold, or even before his arrival. According to one version, Deer, mentioned by al-Masudi, ruled after Oleg the Prophet, but was deposed and killed by the legendary Oleg II (who, in turn, was expelled by his cousin Igor Rurikovich around 936). According to this version, the author of PVL combined the legend of the elimination of Askold by Prince Oleg the Prophet with the legend of the elimination of Dir by the legendary Oleg II. According to another version, Dir reigned in Kiev until Askold and took part in the campaign in 860. It has been suggested that Dir can be identified with the "king of the Slavs", to whom the Caucasian tribe of the Sanarians in the 850s turned for help against the Arab caliph. This "king of the Slavs" was placed by the author of the 9th century al-Ya'kubi on a par with the rulers of Byzantium and Khazaria. VN Tatishchev, relying on the "Joachim Chronicle", believed that Askold's invitation to Kiev was due to the lack of a ruler among the glades, that is, as other historians believe, after the death of Dir. However, Tatishchev himself considered the appearance of Dir a mistake in reading the text of the chronicle.

Death of Askold. Unknown artist of the late 19th century

Askold and Dir, allegedly killed by Oleg together, were buried in various places: “And they killed Askold and Dir, carried him to the mountain and buried Askold on the mountain, which is now called Ugorskaya, where now Olmin's yard; on that grave Olma built the church of St. Nicholas; and Dirov's grave - behind the church of St. Irene. " According to one of the versions, this indicates an artificial connection in the chronicles of Askold and Dir, which may have happened due to a misreading of the Scandinavian spelling of Askold's name - Hoskuldr, or under the influence of local legends about Dir and his grave.

According to another version, "Deer" is the title or nickname of Prince Askold, whose existence is beyond doubt among many. Academician Rybakov Boris Aleksandrovich, Soviet historian and Slavic scholar, wrote: “The personality of Prince Dir is not clear to us. It is felt that his name is artificially attached to Oskold, because when describing their joint actions, the grammatical form gives us a single, not double, as it should be when describing the joint actions of two persons. "

Hike to Constantinople.

Having concentrated power in his hands after the death of the brothers, Rurik lived in Novgorod, distributing to the best warriors for feeding the city of Polotsk in the land of the Krivichi, Rostov in the land of Mary, Beloozero in the land of Vesi, Murom (the city of the Finnish tribe of the same name on the Oka River). He allowed Askold and Dir to go on a campaign against Constantinople. There are different opinions about the origin of Askold and Dir. According to one version, Askold, the Russian kagan, was a direct descendant of Kiy, the founder of Kiev. He ruled Kiev along with Deer (or Dmir). According to another version, Dir was the prince of Kiev, and Askold served as his voivode. According to the third version, Askold and Dir were Rurik's vigilantes and comrades.

With a small retinue, they went down the Dnieper to Kiev, stopped at the meadows and began to gather an army. Kievans paid tribute to the Khazars. Askold and Dir promised to free them from tribute and settled in a rich city. The Varangians, led by experienced military leaders, conducted several successful campaigns in the steppe, and the Khazars no longer wanted to demand tribute from the Kievites. For four years of active combat life, the squad of Askold and Dir has grown significantly. They decided to go to Constantinople.

Preparations for a difficult campaign ended, and 200 rooks set off in 860. along the Dnieper to the Black Sea. Each boat had 40-50 people.

Sacrifice of Rurik 862.
Engraving by B. Chorikov. XIX century.

They chose a very good time for the hike. In Constantinople that year there was neither an army nor Emperor Michael III, who was waging a difficult struggle with the Arabs. Only Patriarch Photius was in the capital, but he did not think about the invasion of the enemy, burdened with state, religious and personal affairs. In the summer of 860, Emperor Michael III went on a campaign against the Arabs. The boats of Askold and Dir hurried to the capital of the Byzantine Empire.

On June 18, 860, the weather was calm and sunny in Constantinople. Suddenly in the north a motley spot appeared in the strait, and people froze with horror: the boats of the Russians cut a soft wave, approaching the city. The rooks went exactly on the course outlined by Askold and Dir. Each knew her place in the ranks. The Russians clearly landed troops, took the low suburban gates, scattered around the outskirts. The warriors of Askold and Dir worked harmoniously: they threw everything of value into the boats, then fire into the houses ...

And the Byzantine warriors were preparing for an enemy assault. They hoped very much for the high, solid walls of Constantinople.

Having coped with the first task of the raid, the Russians approached the city and began to build an embankment. There were too few defenders, and their mood quickly changed. They were close to panic, despair. On the outside, under the walls, stubborn lovers of other people's good are swarming. From the inner side of the fortress, as from a volcano that suddenly woke up, the noise of panicking Constantinople rushes.

And suddenly the volcano began to subside: something important happened in the city. There, in the church of Hagia Sophia, Patriarch Photius spoke calmly, firmly. And his speech was strange. He denounced fellow citizens, recalling how "the Greeks unjustly ran around visiting Russians", about other sins.

The mound was growing. And the inhabitants of the capital of the world power went to the temple, from where they heard a confident voice: “We received forgiveness and did not have mercy on our neighbor. The delighted themselves, grieved everyone, the glorified themselves, dishonored everyone ... Finally, the time has come to turn to the Mother of the Word, to Her, the only hope and refuge. We will cry out to her: "Venerable, save your city, as you know!"

They raised the robe of the Mother of God from the Blachernae Church, and the people set out on the procession. The patriarch and the clergy in full vestments, banners, a solemn choir of voices, a string of townspeople and in front - a miraculous robe ...

The Russians from below saw people on the fortress wall and the sky clipped by the edge of a brick wall. In the sky, people moved slowly, united by a single spirit ...

For several decades in a row, the Slavs went to the Slavs, and they did not have unity, there was no powerful support of the spirit that led the Byzantines along the wall. Rurik brought order to the Slavs with a sword - was it possible? Fear calmed down the Slavs a little, but there was something else between the high wall and the Byzantine sky. It was not fear that led the townspeople to the procession.

The Byzantines kept walking and walking along the wall. A single mass. The voices of the singers had a magical effect on the Russians. The Russians were not shy. And the state that they experienced cannot be called fear. That was a stronger feeling. And it wasn't a feeling at all, but Vera. At that moment, the soldiers realized that it was impossible to defeat the people on the wall, just as it was impossible to make the sun not shine. And when the unhurried procession approached the builders of the embankment along the edge between the sky and the wall, one of the Russians screamed, threw the tool and rushed to the boats, dragging his comrades-in-arms with him. No one fired at them, no one chased them. And they ran, ran, as if from fire.

Excited Russians went home ...

In 867, as Photius says in a letter to the Pope, the Rus tribe adopted the Christian faith. It was one of the tribes that settled in the Black Sea region. However, some historians argue that Askold was the first in Russia to accept the Orthodox faith, which means that many of his squads were also.

This episode, recorded in the message of the Patriarch of Constantinople, must be borne in mind when discussing the topic of the Baptism of Rus, which took place more than a century after the events described.

First siege. On June 18, 860, the astonished and frightened Byzantine capital closed its gates: from the side of the Hieron fortress by land, as well as by sea in boats along the smooth surface of the Bosphorus, a huge and unknown army was approaching its walls. The newcomers landed on the shore and immediately rushed forward, hoping to take by a sudden storm the almost defenseless Byzantine capital. It was the Russian army that secretly approached the Byzantine borders and attacked Constantinople at the moment when the Byzantine troops, led by Emperor Michael III, left to meet the Arabs in Asia Minor. On the same days, the Greek fleet sailed to the island of Crete to fight pirates and at the disposal of Patriarch Photius and Patriarch Nikita Orifa, who remained at the head of the city, were a small number of armed soldiers and old, already out of use ships. They had to rely only on the might of the Constantinople walls.

So after the attacks on the possessions of Byzantium in the Crimea and Asia Minor, after the truce with the local Byzantine authorities, the establishment of friendship with Byzantium in 838, Russia undertook the first grandiose campaign against Constantinople and announced to the world its political and military birth.

All these events took place long before the so-called vocation of the Varangians; the attack of Constantinople was carried out two years before the appearance of the chronicles of Rurik and his brothers in the Russian lands.

The surprise of the attack on the Byzantine capital did not go unnoticed for contemporaries. The chroniclers were convinced that the Russians had carried out preliminary political reconnaissance and knew perfectly well the state of affairs in the empire. This was also confirmed by Greek sources. In his first sermon, delivered in the Church of St. Sophia and dedicated to the invasion of the "Ross", Patriarch Photius also said: "The unexpected invasion of the barbarians did not give time for rumors to announce him so that something could be thought of for safety."

And the events under the walls of Constantinople developed rapidly. The Russians surrounded the capital from all sides, blocking it from the sea and from land. Emperor Michael with great difficulty made his way into the besieged city and led its defense. The first night he spent in prayer, prostrating himself in the clothes of a commoner on the slabs of the Blachernae Church. Prayers and mourning took place throughout the city. Meanwhile, the Russians devastated the outskirts of Constantinople, plundered villages and monasteries.

The Russians spent a week under the walls of Constantinople. And exactly one week later they lifted the siege, plunged into their ships and sailed north. Patriarch Photius said that “the city was not taken by their (russ. - A.S.)mercy. "

What kind of mercy was it that the Russians agreed to? Subsequent events reveal the reasons for the lifting of the siege.

Already at the end of the week, negotiations began between the besiegers and the besieged. Things were moving towards a peaceful deal. A Greek contemporary of events reported that “the leader of so many of those nations personally desired him (the emperor - A.S.)see".

Apparently, the negotiations were conducted by prominent dignitaries of both sides, and the peace treaty was approved by the emperor and the leader of the Russians. We do not know its content, but we assume that it was under this agreement that the Russians lifted the siege and left home, but not empty, but, as Photius said in his second sermon, after the Russians left, with enormous riches. It could be the ransom they took from Byzantium, but it could also be the booty that the attackers took with them. And most likely there was both.

The story did not end there. Byzantine sources say that some time after the departure of the Russian army, the Russian embassy appeared in the city. In the biography following Mikhail IIIemperor Basil I of Macedonian (created in the 10th century) it is reported: “And the people of the Russians, warlike and godless, through generous gifts of gold and silver and silk fabrics, Basil attracted to negotiations and, having concluded a peace treaty with them, convinced them to become participants in divine baptism and arranged so that they received the archbishop. " Patriarch Photius, already familiar to us, also wrote in his letter to the archbishops that the Russians “exchanged the Hellenic and godless faith,” that is, paganism, for Christianity and became one of the “friends” of the empire.

Diplomatic recognition of Russia.For the first time in their history, the Russians held negotiations with Byzantium at the state level, and not somewhere in the province, in distant Surozh, but in the Byzantine capital itself, with prominent dignitaries and the emperor. The result of these negotiations was the conclusion between Russia and Byzantium of peace, or, as they said in those days, a treaty of "peace and love", when the parties ceased hostilities and entered into friendly relations. Byzantium thus achieved peace on its northern borders, continuing the war with the Arabs. But what did Russia get? Undoubtedly, the biggest conquest was the official recognition of the Byzantine Empire. This was a genuine diplomatic recognition of the young state. And it is no coincidence that our famous ancient chronicler Nestor wrote down, talking about the reign of the Byzantine emperor Michael III: “... start calling Ruska the earth. About seven bo uvedahom (learned. - A.S.)as in the time of seven tsars Rus came to Tsargorod, as it is written in the annals grechstem ”. Nestor believes that the Russian land, Russia as a state became known precisely from the time of this campaign against Constantinople, which gave her world fame. The agreement of "peace and love" crowned the military victory of Rus' by a diplomatic interstate agreement with the great empire.

In itself, such an agreement was no exception in the then world. Such "confessions" were snatched from Byzantium by Khazaria, Avar Kaganate, Bulgaria and other newly formed states. Now it was Rus' turn. Of course, we cannot say that it was at this time that the Russian state was formed. The process was complex and lengthy, but if we needed a clear reference point, then we could say following our chronicler: the year 860 became famous in Russian history. It was from this year that the new state entered the international arena.

But the Russians did not just achieve recognition from Byzantium; they again insisted that Byzantium baptize Rus and send its archbishop to Kiev. For a previously unknown power, this was a great diplomatic victory: after all, the act of baptism became part of the interstate Russian-Byzantine agreement.

Byzantium, in turn, aspired, as in relations with other states, so that the baptism of Rus became a political means of influencing its new ally. However, the traces of this baptism were quickly lost on the roads of history. Askold and Dir, to whom the Russian chronicle attributes the leadership of the campaign to Constantinople, were subsequently killed by Prince Oleg. Paganism was triumphant.

At this time, Russia was interested not only in prestigious issues, but also in direct economic benefits. Peace and love agreements usually provided for free access to the markets of both partners - merchants, the exchange of embassies, that is, the establishment of normal political and economic ties between states. 50 years later, in the agreement of Oleg with Byzantium, an echo of this clause of the agreement of 860 is heard. to the Greek land for trade or an embassy ... ”Ambassadorial and trade contacts were apparently stipulated in the agreement of the early 60s. IX century

And one more curious condition is seen in this first major diplomatic agreement of Ancient Russia. In the mid 60s. Russian army struck on the Caspian coast near the city of Abesgun, on the lands of a certain Hasan ibn Zayd, a vassal of the Arab Caliphate. Thus, the rear of the Arab armies, leading an offensive against Byzantium from Asia Minor, was threatened. Scientists rightly believe that in this case Russia could well fulfill its allied obligations in relation to Byzantium, about which the parties agreed all in the same agreement. In addition, Russia could pursue this attack and its own goals - to seize the booty in the rich trading areas of the Caspian Sea and provide its merchants with a way to the East.

Make your dreams come true. This moment has come.

Gabriel García Márquez

The Kiev princes Askold and Dir came to Russia together with Rurik in 862. For two years they were side by side with the Novgorod prince? however, in 864 they left Novgorod and went to Constantinople to serve the Byzantine king. Going down the river, Askold and Dir on this journey found a small city on the banks of the Dnieper River, which, according to the legend of the chroniclers, did not belong to anyone. The founders of the city died long ago, and the residents of the city, without a ruler, paid tribute to the Khazars. Askold and Dir captured this city, as well as the adjacent lands. This town was called Kiev. Thus, by 864, a situation arose when the Varangians formed two control centers in Russia: in the north in Novgorod, under the rule of Rurik, in the south in Kiev, under the control of Askold and Dir.

Hiking to Byzantium

Ancient Byzantium, where the Kiev princes Askold and Dir went from Novgorod, was a large state, whose service was considered an honor by many. For this purpose, Rurik's comrades-in-arms left Novgorod, and only the city of Kiev, met on their way, changed their plans. It should be noted that ancient Byzantium highly appreciated the capabilities of the Varangians. Northern warriors were gladly accepted to serve in the Byzantine army, as their discipline and military qualities were appreciated.

Having seized Kiev, the princes Askold and Dir grew bolder and declared that Byzantium was henceforth an enemy for Kiev. The Varangians, being experienced sailors, under the command of Askold and Dir set off along the Dnieper on a campaign against Byzantium. In total, the military escort consisted of 200 ships. It was from this campaign that all subsequent campaigns to Byzantium began.

Hike to Constantinople

Askold and Dir with their troops descended the Dnieper into the Black Sea and there besieged the city of Constantinople. The campaigns to Byzantium had just begun, the Greeks for the first time faced a new enemy at the walls of their city, whom they christened Scythians. The prince of Byzantium, Michael 3, being at that time on a military campaign, hastily return to his capital as soon as he heard rumors about the danger hanging over the city. In Constantinople itself, they did not hope for a victory over the Scythians. Here she relied on a miracle, since the forces were unequal. And it happened. In the temple of the city there was a shrine - the icon of the Robe of the Mother of God, which was considered the patron of the city and more than once saved it in difficult situations. Byzantine patriarch Photius in front of everyone lowered the icon into the sea, which was quiet. But literally at once a terrible storm arose. The enemy fleet was almost completely destroyed, only a few ships managed to get to Kiev. Thus, ancient Byzantium was saved from the invasion of Askold and Dir, but the campaigns did not stop there.

Confrontation with Novgorod

In 879, Prince Rurik dies, leaving behind a minor heir - Prince Igor, who was taken over by his relative Oleg. Having become the ruler, Oleg decided to annex the southern lands to his possessions and set off on a campaign against Kiev in 882. On the way to Kiev, Oleg captured the cities of Smolensk and Lyubech. Foreseeing that the princes Askold and Dir, possessing a large army and not inferior to him in military craft, would not surrender Kiev without a fight, Prince Oleg, acting on behalf of Igor, went on deception. Having sailed to Kiev, he left almost all his army on ships, and he introduced himself as a merchant who had arrived from distant countries. He invited the princes of Kiev to him. Askold and Dir went out to meet the eminent guest, but were captured by Oleg's soldiers and killed.

So Oleg, on behalf of Igor, began to rule Kiev, saying that from now on Kiev was destined to be the mother of Russian cities. So, for the first time, the northern and southern Russian lands were united under one state, the name of which was Kievan Rus.

Campaign of Rus against Byzantium in 860 - Rus attack on the outskirts of the Byzantine capital of Constantinople in June 860.

Hike

“Michael, the son of Theophilus [ruled] with his mother Theodora for four years and one - ten years, and with Basil - one year and four months. During his reign on June 18, in the 8th indict, in the summer of 6368, in the 5th year of his reign, the Dews came on two hundred ships, which, through the intercession of the most glorious Mother of God, were defeated by Christians, completely defeated and destroyed. "

Presumably these ships were quite large, able to accommodate 30-40 people, like typical Viking ships. According to the Tale of Bygone Years, Prophetic Oleg, demanding tribute from Constantinople, said that he had 40 people on the ship, and if he could exaggerate, then in no way underestimate. The larger ships of the Rus simply could not be navigated through the Dnieper rapids or the lower reaches of the Don, controlled by the Khazars. Thus, the total number of the Rus who participated in the raid was up to 8000.

The appearance of the ships was completely unexpected for the inhabitants. It is known that the Byzantines used advanced warning methods for that time, such as a chain of light beacons, but they did not expect an attack from the Black Sea. The landed warriors began to plunder the suburbs of Constantinople in the evening and all night long, to seize people fleeing in panic. The situation was complicated by the fact that Michael III took even part of the garrison to the war with the Arabs. The Byzantine fleet, which also did not offer noticeable resistance to the Rus, fought with the Arabs and Normans in the Aegean and Mediterranean seas.

The Byzantines were dimly aware who attacked them. Photius, already in the days of the siege, called the Rus " people from the north», « people from the ends of the earth". In his sermon, Patriarch Photius colorfully described the ritual sacrifices of the Rus, which he considered the Lord's punishment for the sins of the inhabitants:

“One could see babies being cut off by them from nipples and milk, and at the same time from life, and their ingenuous coffin - oh woe! - the rocks on which they crashed; mothers sobbing with grief and stabbed next to newborns, frantically letting out their last breath ... not only human nature was overtaken by their atrocity, but all the dumb animals, bulls, horses, birds and others that got in the way, were pierced by their ferocity; the bull lay next to the man, and the child and the horse had a grave under the same roof, and women and birds were stained with each other's blood. "

At the same time, Photius unambiguously emphasizes that the retreat of the attackers from Constantinople was initiated by the Russians themselves:

“Oh, how everything was then upset, and the city was hardly raised on a spear, so to speak! When it was easy to take it, and the inhabitants could not defend themselves, it is obvious that it depended on the will of the enemy - to suffer or not to suffer ... The salvation of the city was in the hands of the enemies and its preservation depended on their magnanimity ... the city was not taken by their mercy and the dishonor added to suffering from this generosity intensifies the painful feeling of captivity. "

Later authors, such as the continuer of the chronicle of George Amartol, Leo Grammatik and Theodosius Melitensky, report that Michael III quickly returned to the capital without an army, “ barely getting through”, And together with Photius raised prayers to God, plunged the maforia of the Mother of God into the sea. Suddenly, a strong storm arose and scattered the ships of the Rus, after which they fled. This legend is repeated even later "The Brussels Chronicle" and "The Tale of Bygone Years".

On the other hand, Photius, an eyewitness and participant in the events, does not report the return of the emperor to the besieged capital, which completely excludes such a scenario, but speaks of a calm sea. A letter dated September 28 from Pope Nicholas I to Emperor Michael III contains a reference to the recent plundering of the vicinity of Constantinople by pagans ( pagani), who left, avoiding any revenge ( nulla fit ultio). In the Venetian Chronicle of John the Deacon, who was not interested in glorifying the Byzantine Church and the emperor, the attackers ( normanorum gentes) "Returned in triumph" ( triumpho ad propriam regressa est). The successor of Theophanes in the "Life of Emperor Basil" calls the people of the dews " irresistible”, Referring to the baptism of the Rus soon after the 860 raid. The story of the miraculous punishment of the Rus, thus, turns out to be nothing more than a pious fantasy of the Byzantine chroniclers.

The reasons for the departure of the Russians are unknown. Historians put forward different versions: either the Russians were afraid of the approach of the Byzantine army, or they simply did not want to be drawn into a siege, being satisfied with rich booty, or they hoped to conclude a profitable trade agreement with the empire. According to some versions, the legendary victorious campaign of Prophetic Oleg to Constantinople in 907, known only from the "Tale of Bygone Years", but not mentioned by any other sources, could reflect the memories of the success of the 860 raid.

VV Sedov, in his concept of the "Russian Kaganate", suggested that this could be related to the unsuccessful mission of the Russian embassy to Constantinople in 838.

The conclusion of peace, the first baptism of Russia

Main article: The first baptism of Russia

“… Even for many, many times famous and leaving everyone behind in ferocity and bloodshed, the very so-called people of Ros - those who, having enslaved those who lived around them and therefore became overly proud, raised their hands against the very Roman state! But now, however, they too have changed the pagan and godless faith in which they lived before, for the pure and genuine religion of Christians ... placing them in the position of subjects and hospiters instead of the recent robbery and great boldness against us. And at the same time they so inflamed their passionate striving and zeal for faith ... that they received a bishop and a pastor and with great zeal and diligence meet Christian rites. "

Theophan's successor contains another story, compiled in the 950s, about the baptism of the Rus in the time of Basil I (867-886) and Patriarch Ignatius (867-877). According to him, the Byzantines themselves are already persuading the Russians to accept Christianity by gifts, while the head of the Russian Church receives the rank of archbishop. The possible date of baptism in the history of the Continuer Theophan is closely related to the possible date of baptism according to Photius, but if in both cases we are talking about the same event, then the testimony of the participant in the baptism of Patriarch Photius is more reliable.

The reports about the first baptism of the Rus do not indicate exactly where this people lived and who was their ruler. In the ecclesiastical and academic environment, it is considered quite established that the princes Askold and Dir with the "bolyars" and a certain number of people were baptized in Kiev from a bishop (possibly from Cyril and Methodius) sent by Patriarch Photius of Constantinople in the early or mid-860s.

Historiography

Most historians adhere to the version set out in the ancient Russian annals, since Nikita Paphlogonyanin definitely indicated that the attack took place from the Black Sea. Photius in the 1st homily named the attacking enemies Scythians, which, like the first baptism of Rus, indicates the homeland of the Rus in Eastern Europe.

There is also a version according to which the “dews” of Patriarch Photius and, accordingly, the participants in the campaign of 860 were actually the Baltic Rugs and / or Dalmatian

Remained in the history of Tauride Russia as a dark era, about which no information has been preserved, except for the instructions of the Patriarch of Constantinople Photius (c. 820-896, patriarch in 858-867 and 877-886) that the Rus at that time were busy conquering "Surrounding peoples", including, presumably, the East Slavic tribes.

But in 860 the Russians again reminded of themselves.

In parentheses I will note: it has long been established that the chronicle date of the campaign against Constantinople - 866 - is erroneous. Nikita Paphlagonyanin in the Life of Patriarch Ignatius, reporting on the church council that took place in May 861, says that the council was “a little later after the invasion”. Currently, most researchers accept the date of 860, although there are skeptics who postpone this event to 862 - 865. (cm.: Zvyagin Yu. Yu. Chronology of Russian chronicles. M., 2011.S. 56 - 81).

The next appearance of the Tauride Rus on the historical stage was so noisy and memorable that The Tale of Bygone Years even put this event at the foundation of ancient Russian history, suggesting that it be considered the beginning of the Russian land. Under 852, the chronicler noted: “I will start Mikhail [MikhailIII, 842 - 867] reign, began to call the Russian land. About this more uvedakh, as if under this tsar Rus came to Tsargorod, as it is written in the Greek annals. The same way we will start and put the numbers. " In fact, the actual acquaintance of the Greeks with the Rus took place much earlier - at the endVIII in.

Byzantine Empire in 867

Information about the first invasion of the Russians to Constantinople got into the Byzantine chronicles (Continuation of Amartol, Continuation of Theophanes) and some Western European monuments (Chronicle of John the Deacon, Brussels Code). But the most important details of the new military clash between Taurida Rus and Byzantium are contained in the primary source - two letters from the Patriarch of Constantinople Photius, who witnessed the siege.



Fotius considered the Rus raid on the Byzantine capital to be a heavenly punishment, retribution from above for the immoral behavior of his compatriots. From his words, it follows that some of the Russians living in Constantinople became victims of the famous Greek slyness. “And how can we not endure terrible troubles,” the patriarch asks his flock, “when we were murderously paying those who owed us something small, insignificant?” And then he reproaches the Byzantines for being morally inferior to the pagans: “They did not have mercy on our neighbors ... many great ones of us received freedom out of love for mankind; and we have made a few threshers 1 our slaves. At this point in the epistle, Photius, as it were, in passing refers to some well-known injustice committed by the Greeks in relation to the Russians. It must have been shortly before the invasion of Constantinople that a loud story took place, which became the subject of gossip and gossip. As can be assumed, several Rus were turned into slaves for debts, and their debt was so small that even many Byzantines recognized the court's decision as unjust.

1 This is the traditional translation of the obscure Greek word found in the original text of Photius. In 1956 M. V. Levchenko suggested replacing the "threshers" with "others." But, as you can see, this replacement does not add clarity to the text, rather the opposite.

But it seems that the court in this way only reacted in its own way to the general change in Byzantium's policy towards the Russians. Another passage from Photius's letters makes it clear that Byzantium unilaterally terminated the alliance agreement with the Rus, and the emperor Michael himself was the initiator of the new "Russian" policy. “Why did you,” Photius asks again, “despised the sharp spear of your friends as a weak one, but spat on a natural remedy, and dissolve auxiliary alliances, like a mischievous and dishonest person?”

In this case, the personal appeal of the patriarch is addressed to the “Greek”, or, more precisely, to each of the Greeks. But the hint is quite transparent, because, of course, no one needs to explain which particular "Greek" had the right to enter into diplomatic relations with neighbors, to conclude and dissolve military alliances. Probably, the raid on Amastrida resulted in the conclusion of a union treaty with Byzantium, which provided for the hiring of the Rus for the imperial service. I must say that Patriarch Photius was a half-breed - his mother was a Khazark. It is possible that due to this very circumstance Photius was in opposition to Michael, advocating a more "sensitive" policy towards the peoples of the "Great Scythia". It was not for nothing that the emperor once reproached him with "Khazar mug" in his hearts.

So, according to the authoritative testimony of the First Hierarch of Constantinople, the responsibility for the military conflict lay entirely on the Byzantine side. The Rus appeared under the walls of Constantinople as avengers for the wrongs inflicted on them, in the consciousness of their righteousness - legal and moral.

According to various indications found in the sources, the Rus flotilla numbered from 200 to 360 ships, which could accommodate approximately 8,000 - 13,000 people. Incidentally, Photius writes about an "uncontrollable army", which can be interpreted in the sense that the Rus army did not have one-man command, the main leader.

The forces of the Rus, even by military standards of that time, were not so significant as to seriously threaten the capital of the empire itself. But the campaign was well prepared. The Rus chose the most opportune moment for the attack. All the attention of the imperial authorities was then focused on the Syrian border, where in 859 the Arabs inflicted a crushing defeat on the Byzantine army near Samosata, almost capturing the emperor himself, who, according to the Continuer Theophanes, “escaped with difficulty, leaving tents and all property.” Spring 860 MikhailIII spent in feverish preparations for a new campaign and in early June led an army into Asia Minor; the fleet also went to the Syrian coast. Only a small garrison remained in the capital under the command of Patrik Nikita Oorifa. The Rus, as it turned out, were just waiting for this.

At sunset on June 18, 2 sentries standing on the northern towers of the Constantinople fortifications sounded the alarm.

2 The date is given in the Brussels Code: “Michael, the son of Theophilus [ruled] with his mother Theodora for four years and one - ten years, and with Basil - one year and four months. During his reign on June 18, in the 8th indict, in the summer of 6368, in the 5th year of his reign, dew came on two hundred ships ... ". This date is certified by the full compliance of all chronological indications - day, month, indict, year from the Creation of the world and the year of the reign (see:Ancient Russia in the light of foreign sources. M., 2000.S. 106 ). It has long been established that the chronicle date of the campaign against Constantinople - 866 - is erroneous. Nikita Paphlagonyanin in the Life of Patriarch Ignatius, reporting about the church council that took place in May 861, says that the council was “a little later after the invasion”. Currently, most researchers accept the date of 860, although there are skeptics who postpone this event to 862 - 865. (see: Zvyagin Yu. Yu. Chronology of Russian Chronicles. M., 2011, pp. 56 - 81).

At first, no one in the city could understand where the trouble came from. Patriarch Photius says that "a people living somewhere far away from us, barbaric, roaming, proud of weapons, unexpected, unnoticed, without military art, rushed to our borders as menacingly and so quickly, like a sea wave." The surprise attack left the authorities and the population in complete confusion. Struck with horror, the residents of Constantinople gazed numbly from the walls at how in the setting rays of the sun dozens of red boats freely broke through into the "hieron" - "holy place", that is, into the reserved inner bay of the Golden Horn, usually blocked off by a giant chain on floats, but now for some reason defenseless (by the way, this is the only known case of this kind; neither before nor after the siege of 860 did the Greeks make such "gifts" to their enemies).

Fotius' speech, despite its abundant rhetorical figures, sharply makes one feel the disturbing experiences of the inhabitants of the Byzantine capital: “Do you remember that gloomy and terrible night when the life of all of us was ready to go down with the sunset and the light of our existence was absorbed by the deep darkness of death? Do you remember that unbearably sad hour when enemy ships came to us, breathing something fierce, savage and deadly? When the sea quietly and serenely spread out its ridge, giving them a pleasant and longed-for voyage, and raising fierce waves of battle against us. As they passed in front of the city, carrying and advancing the swimmers who raised their swords and as if threatening the city with death by the sword. When the darkness seized quivering minds and the rumor was opened only for one message: "the barbarians have already climbed over the walls of the city, the city has already been taken by the enemy."

But the Rus for some reason did not go to storm the city fortifications, which, in essence, were defenseless. Instead, they began to plunder the neighborhood. Photius paints terrible pictures of the cruelty of the “people grew up”: “He ruins and destroys everything: fields, pastures, herds, women, children, elders, young men, killing everyone with a sword, mercifully, sparing nothing ... Ferocity ruined not only people, but and dumb animals - oxen, horses, chickens and others, which only came across the barbarians. There was a dead ox and a man beside him. The horse and the young man had one deathbed. The blood of women merged with the blood of hens ... The streams of the river turned into blood. Some wells and reservoirs could not be recognized, because they were filled with bodies over the top ... ”.

By the way, from the words of Photius it is clear that along with the usual murders, the Rus made human sacrifices to their gods, slaughtering young men and horses, women and chickens on pagan altars, or throwing their victims into the water for ritual purposes.

Other details are added by Nikita Paphlagonyanin in his story about the demoted Patriarch Ignatius, who during these days was held as a prisoner on the island of Terevint: “At that time, the destructive Scythian people called the dews broke through the Euxine Sea into the bay, devastated all populated areas and monasteries, looted all the utensils and money. They killed all the people they captured. Monasteries also burst into the patriarchs with barbaric ardor and passion. They took for themselves all the property found in them and, capturing the closest servants in number 22, at the stern of one ship they hacked all of them with axes into pieces. " Ignatius himself, a puny little eunuch who looked like a man out of this world, was not touched by the Rus, however.

Later, Pope Nicholas I, in a letter to the Byzantine emperor Michael III, noted that among the environs of the Byzantine capital, plundered and devastated by the enemy, there were even the Princes' Islands in the Sea of \u200b\u200bMarmara, 100 kilometers from Constantinople.

Having betrayed country villas, palaces and monasteries to fire and sword, the Russians began a siege. And here they acted energetically and purposefully. They did not have siege machines and devices, but they used the construction tools that they always carried on themselves. Some of them began to dig trenches under the walls, while others tried to erect an earthen embankment flush with the wall, which allowed them to move to the city fortifications.




The situation was critical. Although Patriarch Photius managed to form and arm the detachments of militias from the inhabitants of the capital, no one hoped to survive with the help of only his own forces in the city - neither the authorities, nor the military, nor the inhabitants. Meanwhile, the imperial army marched along the rocky roads of Asia Minor in the direction of Syria, the formidable Byzantine fleet anchored in the harbors of Cyprus. Of course, a messenger was sent to Michael, but in order to help the besieged capital, the emperor needed time - several long weeks. But under the walls of Constantinople, the count was no longer for days - for hours: the digging became deeper, the earthen rampart was getting higher ...“The city was almost raised on a spear,” Photius testifies.

At the end of the third week of the siege, Patriarch Photius decided to resort to the intercession of heavenly powers. After a solemn prayer, a procession was held. Tens of thousands of townspeople watched as the patriarch, in order to protect the defenseless city from the fury of the barbarians, bypassed the city fortifications with a sacred relic - the Most Pure Robe of the Mother of God. And suddenly the inexplicable happened. Photius tells about it this way: “She [Riza] flowed around the walls, and the enemies inexplicably showed their rear. She fenced off the city, and the mound of enemies fell apart, as it were, according to a given sign. She covered the city, and the enemies were exposed from the hope that they inspired. For as soon as this virgin Riza was surrounded by the wall, the barbarians began to lift the siege of the city, and we got rid of the expected captivity and were honored with unexpected salvation. The invasion of enemies was unexpected, and their removal was unexpectedly accomplished.




What happened in itself was a miracle. But later Byzantine historians, not content with such an outcome of the case, emphasized even more sharply in what had happened the element of miraculous deliverance. Lev Grammaticus, for example, writes: “Vasilevs, returning [from the campaign], stayed with Patriarch Photius in the Blakherna Church of the Mother of God, where they begged and propitiated God. Then, carrying out the holy omophorion of the Mother of God with psalmics, they attached it to the surface of the sea. While before that there was silence and the sea was calm, suddenly a breeze of winds and a continuous surge of waves rose, and the ships of the godless dew crashed. And only a few escaped the danger. " Repeating his words, "The Tale of Bygone Years" also tells about the immersion in the sea of \u200b\u200bthe Robe of the Theotokos, after which "a storm with the wind rose, and the great waves that have been erected [against each other], restrain the godless Russia. And to the shore of adherence and beating, as if few such troubles were avoided from them, returning home with victory ”.

However, all these details are speculation. Prologue 3 says that the Rus lifted the siege from Constantinople on July 7. This means that they stood under the city for 19 days. During this time, MikhailIII I would hardly have had time to receive news of the Rus attack and return from the campaign, even with part of the army 4. And even if he had reached the Bosphorus, he still would not have been able to cross it, since the Rus fleet ruled in the strait. Photius in his epistles depicts Constantinople abandoned to its fate, which would have been impossible if the emperor was in the capital. Likewise, this most important eyewitness of the siege is silent about the storm and the defeat of the Rus flotilla, although there is no doubt that if something like this actually happened, he would not fail to note such a visible manifestation of God's wrath. In Western Europe, they were generally convinced that the Russians had retreated in triumph. The Venetian chronicler John the Deacon (the turn of the 10th-11th centuries) writes that they, "having indulged in violent plunder of the suburbs and mercilessly beating up a great many, retreated with the spoils."

3 The Prologue is an Old Russian collection of hagiographies, which originates from the Byzantine monthly passages, in which the Lives of the saints are arranged in accordance with the days of their church memory. The prototypes for it were the Greek Minologies and Sinaxari. Among such collections, the closest to the Slavic Prologue is considered to be Minologiy, compiled under Emperor Basil II (975-1025) and two ancient Synaxars of the first half of the 11th century - the beginning of the 12th century. The first of them contains the "preface", the Greek name of which is taken in the Old Slavic translations for the title of the entire book.

4 According to the chronicle of Simeon Logofet, ambassadors from Constantinople found the emperor at Mavropotamus (Black River). The exact location of this hydronym is difficult, but it is usually associated with Cappadocia, a historical region in the east of Asia Minor, about 500 km from Constantinople.

So what happened on July 7 under the walls of Constantinople - a miracle? For the besieged, no doubt yes. But the Russians, probably, looked at the matter differently. They, too, began to experience some difficulties. Patriarch Photius briefly noted that diseases had spread in the Rus camp. However, this was not at all what prompted the Russians to lift the siege. Not a single war can do without disease, and the Rus camp, apparently, was not engulfed in a general pestilence. The main reason the Rus retreated from the city was that they fully achieved their goal. After all, they did not want to destroy the second Rome at all. Contrary to another well-established myth, neither in 860, nor later - under Oleg, Igor and Yaroslav - the Rus had no idea of \u200b\u200b"taking" Constantinople. After all, that would mean slaughtering a cash cow with your own hands. With whom, then, trade furs and slaves, from whom to demand tribute, who in this case will pay the coveted denarii for service in the imperial guard? No, the facts show that only the vicinity of Constantinople suffered from the raids of the Rus, while the city itself never. But after each raid, the Russians took to the banks of the Dnieper a new treaty, sealed with the imperial seal, the main points of which were trade benefits for northern "guests" and the opportunity for the Russians to be freely hired for the imperial service (service with a noble and wealthy master was the social ideal of that era).

In fact, the Russians stretched out their hands to the udder, not to the throat. Their goal was to intimidate Byzantium in order to secure favorable peace terms for themselves. They sailed to Constantinople in order to avenge their kinsmen and restore the union that Michael had broken. It was not for nothing that Photius noted that the Rus, sailing past the city walls, shook their swords in rage. This is a gesture of an angry person seeking revenge. The vengeance was satisfied with a bloody binge in the metropolitan area. Legal justice was restored by renewing the union agreement. It is likely that the terms of "friendship" were enshrined in a written agreement that has not come down to us - the first in a long series of Russian-Byzantine agreements. The presence of the RusIX in. letters - "Russian letters" - certifies the Life of Constantine the Philosopher. Proof that the peace was concluded officially, according to all the rules of Byzantine diplomacy, is one formula from Oleg's treaty with the Greeks in 911, according to which this document was supposed to approve “the boundary between Christians and Russia former love ". How this love was established in 860 we do not know. Perhaps the messenger sent by Photius to the emperor returned to the Rus with an offer of an amicable deal. In any case, the Rus retreated from Constantinople not driven by panic, but in the firm belief that from now on, both their goods and their blood would be sold here.

The first baptism of the Rus

The terms of the Russian-Byzantine treaty of 860, concluded under the walls of Constantinople, were a certain diplomatic success for the Greeks, for, having humbled imperial arrogance, the Russians themselves bowed under the “light yoke” of Christ (Matt. 11; 29-30). The follower of Theophanes reports that “satiated with the wrath of God”, the Rus “returned home - Photius, who then ruled the church, prayed to God about this, - and soon an embassy arrived from them in the royal city, asking to be admitted to God's baptism. Which is exactly what happened. "

Acceptance of baptism according to the Greek rite formally meant the recognition of vassal dependence on Byzantium. It is not for nothing that Patriarch Photius, just a few years after the disastrous events of 860, spoke of the terrible Rus as allies and subjects of the empire. In his district epistle 866 - 867, talking about the baptism of the Bulgarians, he noted: “And not only this people exchanged their former ungodliness for faith in Christ, but even many times glorified by many and leaving behind the so-called dew in the cruelty and foul murder of all, who, having enslaved those around them, and from here thinking of themselves high, raised their hands against the Roman state. And at the present time, even they have exchanged the Hellenic and impious doctrine [that is, paganism], which they had previously maintained, for the pure and genuine Christian faith, lovingly placing themselves in the rank of our subjects and friends, instead of robbing us and the great insolence against us, which had just before. And to such an extent their desire and zeal of faith flared up that they accepted the bishop and the shepherd and kissed the Christian beliefs with great zeal and zeal. "

These words of Photius are further proof that the Rus did not want to destroy Constantinople at all. Paradoxically, with the power of their sword, they imposed their friendship on the empire. The barbaric concepts of freedom and honor, strange as it may seem, found their full and complete embodiment in service dependence on a strong, rich and generous master. The Russians fulfilled their allied obligations sacredly. In a letter to the Bishop of the Bosporus Anthony, Patriarch Photius, no longer fearing new invasions of the "godless people," was complacently punning that now, thanks to the baptism of the peoples of the Black Sea region, this sea, which was once "Aksinos" ("inhospitable"), has become not just "Euxinos" "(" Hospitable "), but moreover -" Evsevis "," pious. "

We also find evidence of the legal registration of the canonical territory of the ancient "Russian Metropolia" in the list of dioceses of the Patriarchate of Constantinople ("List of Episcopes", Notitiae Episcopatuum), compiled at the beginning of the 10th century. Emperor Leo VI the Wise. Here, the Russian Metropolitanate, which is under the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, is ranked 61st.

Unfortunately, it remains unknown with which city this metropolis was associated. Most likely, the department of the "Russian" bishop was located somewhere on the territory. The center of the metropolis could be the city of Rusia or the region of Russia, located in the Kerch Strait region, not far from Matarkha / Tmutorokan.

Of course, this “first baptism of Rus”, which took place somewhere between 860 and 866, can be considered as such very conditionally. It is unlikely that it covered more than several hundred people - "Russian" princes and their warriors. Therefore, neither by its quantitative nor by its temporal indicators, the “first baptism of Rus” marked the milestones in the long process of penetration of Christianity into the Northern Black Sea region and the Middle Dnieper region. But the appearance of the "Russian Metropolia" was extremely important in terms of church organization. In this sense, the 860s. are important as the starting point from which the Russian Church began its arduous earthly journey along the thorny path of historical Christianity.