Eastern Europe in the 9th century. Western Europe in the 9th-11th centuries What century is this?

Polyudye

The key to understanding early Russian statehood is polyudye.

It is extremely important for us to establish the existence of polyhumans at the level

one union of tribes, that is, at a lower stage of development than the "union

unions" - Rus'. For the Vyatichi tribal union, we have information about the complete

the cycle of polyudye - the annual tour of the "blessed prince" of all subject

territories, collecting “clothes” (obviously furs) and selling the collected valuables down

along the Don to Itil, in return for which the Vyatic nobility received in the 9th century a large

the amount of oriental silver in coins, and oriental decorations that influenced

to local tribal craft.

Next to the tribal union of the Vyatichi ("Slavs") existed simultaneously with

with him the super-union Rus, which united five or six separate tribal unions,

similar to the Vyatic one. Polyudye also existed here (the Russians brought their furs

"from the most distant ends of the Slavs"), but it differed significantly from

Vyatichesky primarily by the size of the subject territory, and therefore

there must have been a different, higher organization of tribute collection.

In Rus', like the Vyatichi, the second task was to sell the results of Polyudye.

Rus, significantly exceeding what we can assume for the Vyatichi.

The Rus sold their goods to both Byzantium and the lands of the Caliphate, reaching as far as Ray,

Baghdad and Balkh (!).

The same phenomena occurring in each of the independent

tribal unions and in the synchronous super-union of Rus', with all their similarities

differ in that what happened in the “union of unions” was an order of magnitude higher

what was done within individual unions that had not yet reached the highest degree

integration.

Perhaps this is where the starting point for new

socio-economic relations, a new formation. The tribal union was the highest

stage of development of the primitive communal system, which prepared individual

tribes for the upcoming historical life in large associations in which

inevitably and quickly the ancient patriarchal forms of communication disappeared, being replaced

new, wider. The creation of a tribal union was already a preparation for

transition to statehood. "Chief of Chapters", who led a dozen tribes and

called the "bright sovereign" or, in the transmission of foreigners, "king", was already

not so much the ruler of primitive tribes as the head of the nascent

states. When does society rise an order of magnitude higher and create from

tribal unions a new (both quantitatively and qualitatively) association, "union

unions" of tribes, then the question of statehood can only be resolved

clearly: where tribal integration has reached such a high level,

the state has already taken shape.

When the chronicler listed in detail which of the East Slavic

tribal unions became part of Rus', he described to his readers

the state of Rus' at one of the stages of development (in the first half of the 9th century),

when Rus' still covered only half of the tribal unions. Polyudye is the first,

the most naked form of domination and subordination, the exercise of the right to

land, establishing the concept of citizenship. If in the union of tribes Polyudye is still in

to some extent may be based on old tribal ties, then in a super union

it is already completely abstracted and separated from all patriarchal

memories.

In connection with the falsifications that are allowed in relation to the Russian

history of the Normanists, it should be noted that in the sources Polyudie appears

before us as a purely Slavic institution with Slavic terminology.

Polyudye is known, for example, in Poland, where it was called "stan", and the fees charged

exactions - "goshenie".

We find the Russian word “polyudye” both in chronicles and in charters.

Polyudye has nothing to do with the Varangians; on the contrary, in Scandinavian

lands to denote this phenomenon, Russian, Slavic

word. In the Scandinavian saga of Harald, when such detours are mentioned

the borrowed Slavic word "poluta" ("polutasvarf") is used. Them

the Slavic word means circular princely detour and emperor

Konstantin Porphyrogenitus.

Polyudye was known as a detour to the most remote Slavic lands

characteristic of the entire 9th century (maybe the end of the 8th century?) and for

the first half of the 10th century, although it is known as a local survival phenomenon

and in the 12th century. He left us a detailed description of Polyudye for the middle of the 10th century.

Emperor Constantine, and one of the tragic episodes was the murder of the prince during

the time of collecting Polyudya - the chronicle describes in detail under the year 945.

Analyzing the polyudje of the 940s, we must spread the idea

about him at an earlier time (up to the turn of the 8th--9th centuries; the difference is

the volume of lands subject to Rus' was, but it no longer created high-quality

differences. Super-union of the early 9th century of five or six tribal unions and a super-union

mid-10th century, out of eight to ten unions, one was not fundamentally different

from another.

Let's begin our consideration of Russian polyudia with a description of Emperor Constantine

(around 948), rearranging some sections according to thematic principle.

Konstantin Porphyrogenitus.

"About the Russians coming from Russia on monoxide to Constantinople."

"The winter and harsh way of life of these same Rus is as follows. When it comes

the month of November, their princes immediately leave Kyiv with all the Rus and

go to polyudye, that is, a circular detour, and specifically to the Slavic lands

Vervianov [Drevlyan] Druguvitov [Dregovichi] Kriviteinov [Krivichi] North

and the rest of the Slavs paying tribute to the Rus. Feeding there for a while

the whole winter, they are in the month of April, when the ice on the Dnieper River melts, again

return to Kyiv. Then they take their single shafts, equip and

leaving for Byzantium..."

"The same-trees coming to Constantinople from Outer Rus' come from

Nevogarda [Novgorod], in which Svyatoslav, the son of a Russian prince, sat

Igor, as well as from the fortress of Miliniski [Smolensk] from Telyutsa [Lyubech] Chernigozh

[Chernigov] and from Vyshegrad [Vyshgorod near Kyiv]. They all go down the river

Dnieper and gather in the Kyiv fortress, called "Samvatas" (?). Tributaries

them, the Slavs, called Kriviteins [Krivichs] and Lensanins [Polotchans],

and other Slavs cut down single-tree trees in their mountains in the winter and, having finished them,

with the opening of time (swimming), when the ice melts, they are introduced into nearby lakes.

Then, since they (the “lakes”) flow into the Dnieper River, then from there they themselves

enter the same river, come to Kyiv, pull boats ashore for

equipment and sell it to the Russians. The Russians, buying only the very best decks, are de-equipping

old single shafts, they take oars, rowlocks and other gear from them and equip them

An interesting story about Emperor Constantine's Polyudia, annually

who saw with his own eyes the Russian "single-trees" - monoxyls, has long been known

historians, but no attempt has ever been made to recreate Polyudye in the middle of the 10th century

century in all its real scope as an all-Russian annual phenomenon. And without

We will not be able to understand this and the essence of the state of Rus' in the 8th-10th centuries.

Let's start with the “single-trees”, in which small fragile shuttles were often seen

Slavs, hollowed out from one tree, which explained their Greek

name - "monoxyls". Small shuttles that could only hold three

people, at that time they really existed, as we know from the “Note

Greek toparch", a younger contemporary of Constantine. But here we are talking about

completely different: from the above text it is clear that the ships were equipped

rowlocks and oars, while the shuttles were controlled by one stern oar and

never had rowlocks or oars: the shuttle was too narrow for them.

The nature of monoxyls is clarified by describing their passage through

Dnieper rapids: people get out of ships, leaving cargo there, and push

ships through the rapids, "while some push the bow of the boat with poles, and

others in the middle, others in the stern." Everywhere plural; one boat

pushed by a whole crowd of people; in the boat there is not only cargo, but also “shackled in chains”

slaves." It is clear that before us are not dugout shuttles, but ships that raised

20-40 people (as we know from other sources).

The significant size of Russian rooks is also evidenced by the words

Konstantin that, having done the most difficult part of the journey, dragging his

ships through the rapids, the Russians "again supply their single-shafts with the missing

accessories: sails, masts and yards, which they bring with them."

The masts and yards finally convince us that we are not talking about shuttles, but about

ships, boats. They are called single-shafts because the keel of the ship

was made from one tree (10-15 meters long), and this allowed

build a boat suitable not only for sailing along the river, but also for distant

sea ​​travel.

The entire process of annual production of several hundred ships has already

speaks about the government's approach to this important matter. The ships were getting ready

throughout the Dnieper basin ("lakes" flowing into the Dnieper) and even the basin

Ilmenya. The vast lands of Krivichi and Polotsk are named, where during the winter

The shipwrights were working.

We are already very familiar with this vast expanse of the Dnieper basin,

all the rivers of which converge at Kyiv; back in the 5th-6th centuries, when it began

spontaneous movement of northern Slavic tribes to the south, Kyiv became the master

Dnieper shipping. Now, throughout this entire region, the “tributers” of the Rus are cutting down

same trees in “their mountains”. True, Konstantin writes that

tributary Slavs sell their freshly made boats in Kyiv. But not

by chance the emperor connected shipbuilding with citizenship of Rus'; obviously this

was the duty of the tributary Slavs, who received some kind of

On the application of the state principle in the manufacture of commercial goods

The fleet also says that Konstantin indicated regional ship collection points

over 900 kilometers: Novgorod (the Ilmen, Desna and Seim basins),

Smolensk (Upper Dnieper basin), Chernigov (Desna and Seim basins), Lyubech

(Berezina basin, part of the Dnieper and Sozh), Vyshgorod (Pripyat basin and

Black grouse). In Kyiv, a special tract was allocated (apparently Pochayna?),

where all the boats delivered from these rivers were finally equipped. Name

this fortress - "Samvatas" - has not yet been deciphered by scientists.

So, the process of making a fleet took winter and part of spring

(alloy and equipment) and required the efforts of many thousands of Slavic carpenters and

shipbuilders It was placed under the control of five regional commanders, from

of which one was the son of the Grand Duke, and ended in the capital itself. TO

to the work of the men who made the wooden frame of the ship, we must add labor

Slavic women who wove sails for the flotilla.

The size of the merchant fleet is unknown to us; military flotillas

numbered up to 2 thousand ships. Annual trade expeditions exporting

the results of Polyudya were obviously less numerous, but could not be

and too small, since they had to make their way through the lands of the Pechenegs,

robbed Russian caravans at the Thresholds.

Let us roughly assume that the number of single-deck ships is 400-500 vessels. For one sail

required about 16 square meters of "thickness" (rough but strong

two weavers for the whole winter. Considering that after the thresholds they placed spare

sails, we get the following approximate calculation: for the manufacture of all sails

required the work of 2 thousand weaving mills throughout the winter, that is

the labor of women in 80-100 villages of that time. Let's add to this the cultivation and

spinning flax and hemp and producing approximately 2 thousand meters of "uzishch" -

ship ropes.

All these calculations (providing, of course, only approximate results)

still show that behind the laconic lines of the source we can and should

consider the phenomena mentioned in them in all their real life

incarnation. And it turns out that only one part of that social complex

which is briefly called polyudyu, represents a significant

conscription Construction of camps, transportation of tribute to Kyiv, production

boats and sails for them - all this is the primary form of labor rent, the burden

which fell on both the princely servants and the communal peasants.

Let us consider Polyudye itself from the same perspective as an annual

state event, we will reveal, as far as possible, its practical

organizational entity. The treatise of Emperor Constantine contains enough

data for this.

Firstly, we know the lands of those tribes (more precisely, tribal unions), according to

which Polyudye passed through. This is the region of the Drevlyans (between the Dnieper, Goryn and

upper reaches of the Southern Bug); Dregovichi region (from Pripyat north to

watershed with the Neman and Dvina basins, in the east - from the Dnieper

inclusive); the vast Krivichi region in the upper reaches of the Dnieper, Dvina and Volga

and finally, the region of the northerners, covering the Middle Desna, Posemye and basins

upper reaches of Pel and Vorskla.

If we draw these four areas on a map, we will see that they

cover a space of 700x1000 kilometers, almost touching each other

different, but leaving a large “white spot” in the middle about 300 kilometers in

diameter It falls on the land of the Radimichi. Radimichi not included

Constantine Porphyrogenitus to the list of tribes that paid tribute to Kyiv.

The Emperor was precise: the Radimichi were subjugated by Vladimir's commander, Wolf Tail.

only in 984, after the battle on the Peschana River, 36 years after

writing a treatise.

Secondly, we know that Polyudye lasted 6 months (With November to

April), that is, about 180 days.

Thirdly, we can add speed to Konstantin's information

movement of polyudya (not forgetting about its conventions), equal to approximately 7--8

kilometers per day.

Fourthly, we know that the detour was circular and, if followed

in order to describe the tribes, he moved “posolon” ​​(along the sun).

Multiplying the number of days by the average daily speed (7--8

kilometers), we get the approximate length of the entire route of Polyudya - 1200-1500

kilometers. What could be the specific route of Polyudya? Detour by

the perimeter of the four tribal unions should be immediately rejected, since it would go

in the complete off-road conditions of forest and swampy outskirts and in total

would be about 3 thousand kilometers.

In the chronicle story about Olga’s “reforms” there are two groups of exact

geographical location: in the north near Novgorod - Meta and Luga, and in

south near Kyiv - Dnieper and Desna. Polyudye, departing in the fall from Kyiv and

returning there in the spring could take advantage of precisely these

Kyiv rivers, forming an almost complete ring: first the way up

Dnieper to Smolensk, and then down the Desna to Olga’s city of Vyshgorod,

standing at the mouth of the Desna.

Let's check this by counting: the path from Kyiv to Smolensk along the banks of the Dnieper

(or on ice) was about 600 kilometers. Check-in to the Drevlyans before

Iskorostenya, where Igor collected tribute, increased the distance by 200--250

kilometers. The path from Smolensk to Kyiv, along the Desna to Yelnya (city

mentioned in the 12th century), Bryansk and Chernigov was approximately 700-750

kilometers. The total distance (1500-1600 kilometers) could be covered with

November to April.

He also satisfies us with regard to all four mentioned by Constantine.

tribal unions. First on his list are the Vervians (Drevlyans); more likely

all that the princely polyudye began with the land of the Drevlyans closest to Kyiv,

lying one day's journey from Kyiv to the west. On the way from Kyiv to the capital

Drevlyansky land - Iskorosten - lay the town of Malin, not mentioned

chronicle, but, quite likely, was the residence of the Drevlyan prince

Mala, who wooed Olga. In addition to Iskorosten, Polyudye could also be visited by

Vruchy (Ovruch), located 50 kilometers north of Iskorosten.

The Drevlyan tribute, collected in November, when the rivers had not yet stopped, could

be rafted along the Uzha to the Dnieper to Chernobyl and from there to Kyiv, so as not

burden the upcoming roundabout.

From the Drevlyan Iskorosten (and Ovruch) Polyudye had to move to

northeast direction to Lyubech, which was like the northern gate

"Inner Rus'" by Constantine Porphyrogenitus. Heading north, up

Dnieper, Polyudye fell into the land of the Druguvits (Dregovichi), who lived on both

lived next to the Radimichi.

In the upper reaches of the Dnieper, the princely bypass entered a vast area

Krivichi, passing along its southern outskirts, and reached the Krivichi capital -

Bryansk was part of the northwestern outskirts of Seversk land

(Novgorod-Seversky, Sevsk) and through Chernigov, which was already outside the Severshchina,

brought Desna to Kyiv.

This circular route did not cross the lands of the listed tribes,

and walked along the inner edge of the possessions of each of the four tribes, skirting everywhere

white spot of Radimichi, not mentioned by Emperor Constantine among

subject to Rus'. It is not possible to move the proposed route anywhere to the side.

seems possible, since then one of the tribes will inevitably fall out or

the speed of movement will change greatly compared to 1190, when, as

It was established that Polyudye moved at an average speed of 7-8 kilometers per day.

The average speed of movement of polyudia does not mean, of course, that

riders and riders walked only 7-8 kilometers per day. Day's journey to

such forested areas usually equate to 30 kilometers. In such

In this case, the entire princely detour of 1500 kilometers can be divided into 50

daily segments: travel day and overnight. The overnight place was probably called

became a place in the 10th century. There are still 130 days left for longer stops.

Thus, we must imagine Polyudye as a movement with

the usual speed of medieval horse riding, with stops on average 2-3

day at each overnight stop. In large cities there could be more stops

long-term due to the reduction of stay in minor encampments.

The slowness of the general movement made it possible to drive away from

main route; therefore, the path of polyudya appears not as a line, but as a strip

20-30 kilometers wide, along which tribute collectors could travel

(tributers, virniks, emtsy, youths, etc.).

In the traffic lane of the “big polyudya” described by Konstantin

Porphyrogenitus, we know from sources of the X-XII centuries a number of cities and

towns (according to archaeological data, often dating back to the 10th century), which

could have been camps of Polyudya:

The path from Kyiv

Iskorosten - Vruchy - Chernobyl - Bryagin - Lyubech - Strezhev - Rogachev -

Kopys - Odrsk - Kleplya - Krasny - Smolensk

The path from Smolensk

Dogobuzh (?) Luchin (?) - Yelnya - Rognedino - Patsyn - Zarub - Vshchizh -

Debryansk - Trubech - Novgorod-Seversky - Radogoshch - Khorobor - Sosnitsa -

Blestovit - Snovsk - Chernigov - Moraviysk - Vyshgorod - Kyiv

Five cities (Kyiv, Vyshgorod, Lyubech, Smolensk and Chernigov) from this

list are named by Konstantin, the rest at different times for different reasons

mentioned by chroniclers and the charter of Rostislav of Smolensk.

In one of the cities, Kopys, the memory of polyudye was preserved until the 12th century.

century. Among the large number of points mentioned in Rostislav’s letter

(1136), only two collected taxes, called polyud: “On Kopys

polyudya four hryvnia..."

Kopys is located on the Dnieper, on the route of our Polyudye.

Smolensk was the most distant and turning point of the princely circle

detour, middle of the road. Somewhere near Smolensk polyudye must have

go to the Desna river system. Arrival in Dorogobuzh is possible, but Desninsky

the journey began, in all likelihood, from Yelnya. Smolensk marked

Constantine as one of the important centers, from where in the spring, after the opening of the rivers,

Monoxy boats are heading to Kyiv. It is quite possible that the tribute collected in the first

half of Polyudye, did not bother with herself, but remained in the camps until spring,

when it could easily be floated down the Dnieper. The main point

Smolensk, called a fortress by Constantine, could be used to store the tribute.

Polyudye was undoubtedly crowded. Constantine writes that the princes

leaving in November “with all the Russians.” Igor went to the village land from all over

his squad and, having collected tribute, sent most of the squad with tribute to

Kyiv, and he himself remained in a hostile land with a “small squad”. One must think that

this smaller part of the squad seemed to the prince still sufficient to

maintain the prestige of the Grand Duke and protect his safety.

Together with the squad, the grooms riding with the convoy had to go to Polyudye,

various servants, “breadwinners”-cooks, “craftsmen” who repaired saddles and

harness, etc. Some idea of ​​the population of Polyudya can be given

words of Ibn Fadlan (922) about the Kiev prince: “Together with him (the king of the Rus) in

in his castle there are 400 men from among the heroes, his associates and

the reliable people he has..." Even if we take into account that the prince had to

leave some of the “heroes” in Kyiv to defend the capital from

Pechenegs, then in this case Polyudye consisted of several hundred

vigilantes and “reliable people”. The camp was supposed to receive this entire mass.

According to winter time, there should have been “istbys” in the camp - warm

premises for people, stables, barns for storing and sorting tribute, suseki and

haylofts for pre-stored grain and fodder. The camp should have been

equipped with ovens for baking bread, millstones, a forge for various

weapons affairs.

Much in the everyday life of the camp had to be prepared in advance, before

invasions of Polyudia itself. There had to be people performing various

work on preparing the camp, serving it during polyudye and guarding

camp complex (maybe with tribute left until spring) until the next

the arrival of the prince with his “heroes”.

The fact that polyudye did not penetrate into the deep regions of the tribes

but went only along the very border of the territory of each tribal union, forces

us to think about the method of collecting tribute. One would think that the mechanics of collecting tribute

directly from the peasant population has already been sufficiently developed

local princes and a certain amount of tribute from distant areas

was taken in advance to the points through which the Kyiv Polyudye passed

We should not imagine Polyudye as a wild ride of the Kyiv

squads in villages and cities indiscriminately. Tribute was charged

(we know this from the events of 945), and, in all likelihood, Polyudye,

carried out annually, visited the same camps year after year, to

to whom the local princes brought the stipulated tribute in advance, that is, they “carried

The Polyudye route was 200-250 kilometers from the external borders

tribal unions of the Drevlyans, Dregovichs, Krivichis and Northerners. Without

preliminary "cart" organized by the local tribal nobility is difficult

imagine such a large and cumbersome mechanism as a polyudye. After all, if

would be constantly attacked by the gluttonous and greedy masses of Kyiv vigilantes

were exposed to the same areas along the Dnieper and Desna, then the population of these

places would simply run away, go deep into the tribal territory, away from

dangerous roundabout route. If this did not happen, it means the locals

princes, protecting their position in the tribe and striving for uniform

distribution of the Kyiv tribute, guaranteed the delivery of a fixed tribute to

polyudya camps.

Violation of the agreement with Kiev could lead to the fact that Polyudye

would turn into a campaign against one or another tribal union. That's why

polyudye should be imagined not as the primary form of collecting tribute, but as

the final phase of this process, which also included local tribal squads.

The most extensive tribal union was the Krivichi. The tribute coming from them

should have flocked to their capital - Smolensk. He was a crossroads between

Novgorod and Kiev and, as has already been clarified, the turning point of the great

polyudya. Because of this, we should not be surprised by the presence near Smolensk

a huge camp - a city of the 9th-10th centuries in Gnezdovo. Kurgan Cemetery IX--XI

Nasonov had every reason to say: “There is no doubt that in old Smolensk

IX-XI centuries had its own strong feudal nobility, the wealth of which

reveals the contents of the Gnezdov burials. She grew up with local roots:

the Gnezdovsky mounds for the most part belonged to the Krivichi, as everyone admits

archaeologists. One might think that the wealth and power of this nobility rested on

exploitation of a dependent and semi-dependent population." This one, who grew up on

local root tribal nobility and could be an intermediate link between

Krivichi village and the polyudie of the Kyiv prince, which in no way

could cover the entire vast territory of the Krivichi.

An interesting and full of colorful details story about Polyudye contains

Russian chronicle under 945. Prince Igor the Old has just committed two

campaign against Byzantium. During the first sea voyage of 941, Igor

led a squadron of 10 thousand ships. The figure is probably exaggerated, but

The Russian fleet nevertheless fought the entire southwestern coast of the Black Sea:

Bithynia, Paphlagonia, Heraclea Pontus and Nicomedia. Even the Bosphorus was damaged

("The whole court is burning"). Only the famous Greek flamethrowers, which fired like

same mlniya", drove the Russians away from Constantinople.

Immediately after the failure, Prince Igor began to prepare a new campaign. Kievsky

the prince hired overseas Varangians and steppe Pechenegs (they even

hostages were taken); distant northern squads of Slovenians were invited and

Krivichi and the southern troops of the Dniester Tivertsy. The army marched in 943 and

by land and by sea. The Chersonese Greeks informed Emperor Roman: “Behold

There are countless ships coming from Rus' - they have covered the essence of the sea with ships!

When Igor was already standing at the Danube, the emperor sent envoys to him for peace.

Igor began to confer with his squad, who were glad to receive

tribute from the empire: "...food [hardly] knows who to overcome - we, they

is it? Does anyone have any advice with the sea? We are not walking on earth, but in the depths of the seas

and death is common to all..." Having bribed the Greeks, Igor returned to Kyiv, and

the following year concluded an agreement with Roman and Konstantin Porphyrogenitus,

who allowed Rus' to send a ship to Constantinople for the sake of bargaining,

at least... come in peace." The agreement was approved in Kyiv at the cathedral

Church of St. Elijah on Podol and on the hill near the idol of Perun.

The double pressure on Byzantium in 941 and 943 may have been caused by

some obstacles that the Greeks caused to Russian trade, despite

Treaty of 911 concluded with the father of Roman and Constantine. A number of restrictions

contained in the treaty of 941, but the path for Russian ships to the shopping center

world - Constantinople - was opened. Kiev government, heavily spent

to organize two grandiose flotillas (of which one was badly damaged)

and export ones in particular.

The appearance in Kyiv of the Varangian detachments hired by Igor should be dated

the very end of the 930s, when the Varangian governor Sveneld is mentioned. For

the war of these tribal alliances with Kiev. Street city of Peresechen (near the Dnieper)

resisted Igor for three years, but he finally “tormented Ulichi, laid it on her

tribute and give to Svendeld."

This phrase is often understood as a grant, a transfer of the right to collect tribute, but

the grammatical form of the phrase allows us to understand it only in one sense: tribute,

received by Igor, he, Igor, gave to Sveneld in 940. Exclude participation

Varangian warriors are not allowed to collect Drevlyan or street tribute, but we are talking

about the legal side. When five years later Igor went to collect

the Drevlyan tribute himself, the chronicler did not show with a single hint that by this

Sveneld's rights are being trampled. The Varangian simply did not have them: he received

In 942, after the defeat of the Russian army by the Greeks, maybe how

compensation to the Varangians who participated in the ill-fated campaign, Varangian governor

received the Drevlyan tribute, which caused a murmur from the Kyiv squad: “Behold, you gave

one man has many." The people of Kiev began to envy the Varangians: "The boys of Svenelzhi

The essence of the weapons and pirts, and we are the Nazis. Yes, come with us to pay tribute to the prince

Yes, you will get it and we will."

After the conclusion of the treaty of 944, which strengthened the position of Rus',

the need for the Varangian mercenary army decreased significantly (Igor reigns

"having peace to all countries"), and in the fall of 945 the Kiev prince returned the land

Drevlyans into the previous system of their Kyiv polyudye, when the prince began his

a circular detour from the Drevlyans.

945 “And autumn arrived and began to think about the Drevlyans, although

more tribute... And listening to them [the combatants] Igor - went to Dereva for tribute and

contemplating the first tribute and forcing him and his men. And we'll take tribute, go to

your city As I walked back to him, having thought it over, I spoke to my squad: “Go with

giving to the house, and I will return [to the Drevlyans] and look like more." And, let the squad go

his house, but returned with a small squad, wanting more property."

The tribute, obviously, had been tariffed for a long time, since Igor increased it,

came up with new levies for the “first tribute”. When Igor appeared again,

“desiring more estates,” a curious thing is happening within Drevlyan society

consolidation of all layers: the Drevlyans and their

local princes led by the “prince of princes” Mal.

“When the Drevlyans heard that [Igor] was coming again, the Drevlyans thought

the prince of his Malm: “If you drive a wolf into a sheep, then carry out the whole flock,

If not kill him. That’s it - if we don’t kill him, then we’ll destroy everyone!”

And she sent to him, saying: “Why are you going again - you caught all

tribute." And Igor did not listen to them. And he left the city of Iskorosten against

The Drevlyans killed Igor and his squad, for they were few. And Igor was quickly buried;

and there is his grave at the Iskorosten city in the Trees to this day."

The Byzantine writer Leo the Deacon reports one detail about Igor's death:

"... having gone on a campaign against the Germans (?), he was captured by them and tied

to tree trunks and torn into two parts..."

The Drevlyans, who executed Igor by the verdict of the veche, considered themselves in their

right. Ambassadors who arrived in Kyiv to woo the widow of Igor for the Drevlyan prince

Olga, they told her:

“For your husband is like a wolf, plundering and robbing. And our princes are kind

the essence that destroyed the essence of the Derevsk land..."

Again, as in the case of the Vyatichi, we are faced with an alliance of tribes with

its hierarchy of local princes. There are many princes; in conflict with Kyiv they

somewhat idealized and described as good shepherds. At the head of the union

stands Prince Mal, corresponding to the “svet-malik”, “head of chapters” among the Vyatichi. He

feels almost equal to the Kyiv prince and boldly wooes him

widow. Archaeologists know his domain city in the Drevlyan land,

which still bears his name - Malin.

It is noteworthy that at the beginning of Igor's Polyudye none of these princes

protested against the collection of tribute, did not organize a rebuff to Igor, everything is obvious

was in order. The good princes killed Igor the lawless when he

became a violator of the established order, violated the norms of rent. It's one more time

convinces us that polyudye was not a simple chaotic journey, but

well-established most important state business, in the process of execution

which saw the consolidation of the feudal class and at the same time

a multi-level feudal hierarchy was established.

Local princes of various ranks (who themselves lived at the expense of the tribes they “fed”)

contributed to the collection of Polyudia by their overlord, the Grand Duke of Kyiv, and he, in

in turn, did not forget his vassals in diplomatic representations

Caesars of Byzantium. A year before his death, Igor sent an embassy to

Constantinople on behalf of the "Grand Duke of Russia and on behalf of all

principality and from all people of the Russian land." The Treaty of 944 provides

the usual for a society with a feudal hierarchy is the willfulness of vassals and

arrier-vassals: “Is anyone from a prince or from Russian people...

if he transgresses it, as it is written in this charter, he will be worthy of his weapon

die and be cursed by God and Perun!”

Polyudye existed in every tribal union; it signified

a departure from patriarchal tribal relations and traditions, when each member

The tribe knew its tribal prince by sight. Polyudye within the framework of a tribal union,

appearing, one must think, simultaneously with the formation of the union itself, was

already a transitional form to class society, to statehood. Power

"prince of princes" broke away from ancient local traditions and related

connections, became multi-stage (“prince of princes”, prince of the tribe,

"elders" of childbirth).

When did several tribal unions, willingly or unwillingly, become part of

Rus', the separation of the supreme power from the direct producers became

full. State power was completely abstracted, and the right to land,

which from time immemorial was associated in the minds of farmers with labor and

the hereditary right of his microscopic "world", was now associated

already with the right of supreme (alienated) power, with the right of military force.

The feudal hierarchy as a system to a certain extent cemented the new

society, forming a chain of links interconnected with each other: its highest links

("bright princes") were connected, on the one hand, With the Grand Duke, and with

the other - with the princes of individual tribes. Tribal princes were associated with

boyars. Vassalage, growing out of the microstructure of primitive society,

was a natural form for a feudal state.

The sum of sources dating back to the beginning of the 9th century allows us to give a summary

overview of the socio-political stratigraphy of Rus':

1. "Grand Duke of Russia". "Hakan-Rus" (a title equal to the imperial one).

2. “Heads of chapters”, “bright princes” (princes of tribal unions).

3. “Every prince” - princes of individual tribes.

4. "Great Boyars".

5. “Boyars”, “men”, “knights” (Persian “morovvat”).

6. Guests-merchants.

7. "People". Smerda.

8. Servants. Slaves.

The cumbersome and complex mechanism of polyudia could operate under the condition

coherence and subordination of all links. Violation of subordination

led to wars. The chronicle repeatedly says that one or another

the union of the tribes "zapatishasya", "name of the army" with the Kyiv prince. Statehood

Rus' as a whole was established in a difficult confrontation between different forces.

Konstantin Porphyrogenitus described the state of Rus' at the time when

Polyudye as the primary form of rent generation has already reached its last years.

tribes to super-unions-states, that is, the turn of the 8th-9th centuries. Absolutely

It is natural that precisely this time was the time of the birth of broad

trade relations between Rus' and the East and Byzantium: Polyudye was not only

feeding the prince and his squad, but also a way of enriching himself with those values

which the nascent Russian craft could not yet provide.

Polyudye fed the Kyiv squad and its servants for six months; throughout

Most likely, Polyudye guaranteed food supplies for the second,

summer, half of the year, when the most valuable part of the tribute was sold,

collected by black coons, beavers, silver foxes, and squirrels. WITH

polyhuman evidence is associated, the misunderstanding of which has sometimes led

researchers to the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe Rus' unfamiliarity with agriculture:

"Russians do not have arable land, but eat only what they bring from the land

Slavs" (Ibn-Ruste). "Always 100-200 of them (Russians) go to the Slavs and

they forcibly take from them for their maintenance while they are there" (Gardizi).

All this is perfectly explained by polyhumans. Export part of Polyudye

consisted of furs, wax and honey; to hunting and beekeeping products

servants and slaves were also added, willingly bought on international markets and in

Muslim Caliphate, and Christian Byzantium. Getting to know the system

the marketing of polyudye will show the state character with particular persuasiveness

actions of Kievan Rus of the 9th-10th centuries.

Sales of Polyudye

The center of international trade relations in Eastern Europe was undoubtedly

Kyiv. Kyiv and Russian merchants - "Ruzariev" were well known in Central and

Northern Europe, provided them with significant benefits, since they were armed

in their hands they made their way through the nomadic barriers of the Khazars, Magyars, Pechenegs,

internal Bulgarians and supplied Europeans with the luxury of oriental bazaars. Right up

before the Crusades, Kyiv did not lose its importance as an important trading center

center of Europe.

The well-worn path led from Kyiv west to Krakow and further to Regensburg

on the Danube. Through Kyiv (and thanks to Kyiv) there was a path “from the Greeks to the Varangians”,

connecting Byzantium with Scandinavia. Was important and well organized

way from Kyiv to Bulgar on the Volga. It was divided into 20 stations,

located approximately 70 kilometers apart. For

for the messengers who rode light, it was a day's journey, and for the merchants who walked "with

heavy burdens," two days of travel and a day of rest at the station.

Through the Russian lands to the east, the route went through the following city-stations: Kyiv

Fortification on Suloye - Priluk - Romen - Vyr (?) - Lipitskoe fortification -

Modern villages have retained the archaic name of ancient road stations

IX-XI centuries “Istobnoe” (from “istba” - warm room, “warm camp”);

they are exactly 70 kilometers from each other.

The tenth station, located in the middle of the route between Bulgar and Kiev,

was located somewhere near the Don, south of Voronezh. Here, according to eastern sources

(Jeykhani, Idrisi), was the eastern border of Rus'. Eastern

travelers moving from Bulgar to the west first overcame

deserted Mordovian forests and meadows, and then ended up on the Don, where this

the land road crossed the Don river route from Vyatichi to the Volga and

Itil. It was on this road that they made their observations about life and everyday life

Having reached, after two months of travel, the western end of his road at 1400

kilometers, Bulgar or other eastern merchants ended up in Kyiv, on

the banks of the Dnieper, which they called either the Duna River or the Rusa River. Here, in

In the Middle Dnieper region, near Kyiv, eastern authors indicate three

Russian cities that have become a bone of contention between several dozen

modern scientists. One of the most reliable sources, Hudud al-Alem,

reports:

"There is also the river Rusa (Duna), flowing from the depths of the land of the Slavs and

flowing in an easterly direction up to the Rus border. Then she passes

along the borders of Artab, Salab and Kuyaba (Kyiv), which are the cities of the Rus..."

Idrisi, who had a huge library of eastern geographical

literature of the 9th-11th centuries, the only one of all authors indicates the distance

between these three cities of the Rus, located on the same river: from the city

Artan to Kyiv - 4 days journey; the city of Slavia is also 4 days away.

Ignoring the precise guidelines given above, researchers

considered the notorious "three centers of Ancient Rus'" as some

state associations covering every large area. Kyiv

(Cuiaba, Quaifa, etc.) did not raise much doubt and was usually identified with

historical Kyiv, the center of Southern Rus'.

"Slavia", as a rule, was compared with the Novgorod Slovenes and

Novgorod, although not a single source - neither Russian, nor Scandinavian, nor

Greek - I didn’t call Novgorod more glorious. This was influenced

Normanism, which sought to artificially create some kind of state

center in the north. Such broad constructions were also facilitated by the fact that

Arabic texts often confused the concepts of “city” and “country”.

The definition of the third city turned out to be especially diverse, the name

which varies in two dozen forms. Searches are no less varied

Artania or Arsania (both forms are extremely conventional) on the geographical map IX--X

centuries. In Artania we saw Mordovian-Erzya, Tmutarakan, Ryazan, and Rostov...

Without going into the vast literature devoted to the "three

centers", we will try to outline the path of their search, based on the above

landmarks:

1) all three cities are on the same river as Kyiv, that is

on the Dnieper;

2) they are all located near Kyiv, at a distance that

ranges from 140 to 280 kilometers.

This constellation of Russian cities in the Middle Dnieper region is very good for us

known from documents of the 10th century, these are cities mentioned in treaties with the Greeks

Kyiv, Pereyaslavl and Chernigov. Distance from Kyiv to Chernigov -- 140

kilometers; to Pereyaslavl - about 100 kilometers; from Pereyaslavl to

Chernigov - 170 kilometers. This triad is constantly mentioned as

the main cities of the Russian land in the narrow sense. The city of Slavia is not to be found

in that north, about which eastern geographers had no idea.

Slavia - Pereyaslavl (or Pereslav), an ancient city located near the Dnieper and

closest to the “inner Bulgarians”. There is only one thing in attracting Chernigov

disagreement with the source - Chernigov is located not on the Dnieper, but on the Desna.

After familiarizing yourself with the characteristics of all three cities instead of Chernigov

another option for timing Artania may be proposed.

In Hudud al-Alem these three cities of Rus' are characterized as follows:

"Cuiaba is the city of Rus', closest to the countries of Islam, a pleasant place and

residence of the king. Various furs and valuable swords are taken out of it.

Slava is a pleasant city, and from it, when peace reigns, people go to trade

Bulgarian district.

Artab is a city where foreigners are killed when they get there. There

produce valuable sword blades and swords that can be bent in two,

but if you let them go, they return to their previous state."

Bulgar, noting that Kyiv is larger than Bulgar.

It is always very important for us to identify the point of view of informants.

Ibn-Haukal, one of the earliest writers, writes: “And people reach with

trading purposes of Cuiaba and its region." That is why Kyiv is considered the most

close to Islamic countries; that's why they compare him with Bulgar - they did it

merchants walking the familiar road of 20 stations, starting in Bulgar and

ended in Kyiv.

Merchants enter Kyiv through the city of Romen (modern Romny, near Idrisi -

"Armen"), actually located on this main road. City

Slavia is described by Idrisi as the most important. Perhaps this had an effect

understanding the name of the city - Preslav, “glorious”, or an analogy with

Bulgarian capital Preslav?

The most difficult situation is with the third city, conventionally called

Artania, or, as the Persian Anonymous calls him, Urtab. Additions to

to the above are as follows: having talked about the murder of foreigners, Idrisi adds,

that “no one is allowed to enter this city for the purpose of trade ... and they are taken out

from there (furs and lead) traders from Cuiaba." Ibn-Haukal also writes that

the inhabitants of Arsa do not allow strangers in, “they themselves go down the water to trade and

They do not report anything about their affairs and their goods and do not allow anyone

follow you and enter your country."

On the Dnieper, 120 kilometers (three and a half days of travel in a straight line) from

Kyiv, at the mouth of the Ros River there was a city of Roden (in the prepositional case in the chronicle “in

Rodnyi"), from which what now remains is a settlement on a high mountain - Knyazhya Gora.

The city was abandoned with the adoption of Christianity and throughout the XI-XIII centuries

is not mentioned once in the chronicles, although there were many events in its vicinity.

Judging by the location in the middle of the range of antiquities of the Rus of the 6th-7th centuries,

Roden could be the tribal center of the Rus and be called by the name of the most important

god of the ancient Slavs - Rod. He was compared to Osiris, Baad-Gad and

biblical Hosts. This was a deity more significant than the one who replaced him

friendly-princely Perun.

Such an assumption would fully explain the chronicle phrase (possibly taken

from Greek sources of the 9th century) “Give birth to those who are called Rus'...”. Name

union of tribes according to a common deity can also be traced in the name of the Krivichi, called

so according to the ancient native (Lithuanian) god Kriva - Krivite. Rus on the river

The Rosi could have gotten their name from the god Rod, whose place of worship was Roden

Under Svyatoslav there was obviously a princely domain here, since there

his “terem courtyard” was located during the struggle for the Kiev throne in 980

year, the prince took refuge here (perhaps counting on the sacredness of the place?)

Yaropolk, but after a long siege he was killed by mercenary Varangians. The town was

in all likelihood, is widely known in Rus', since after this difficult

sieges about him formed a saying that lasted more than a century: “and there is

the parable continues to this day - “trouble, like in Rodnya,” wrote a contemporary

Monomakh.

God Rod was the supreme deity of heaven and the universe. They brought him

thunder god), documented for the Slavs of the Rodnya region by the 4th century calendar

AD, and in 983 at this time a young Varangian was sacrificed,

lived in Kyiv. Sacrificing strangers, captives, to their gods

defeated enemies was common in ancient times among many peoples and was

special name (Greek) "xenoctonia". Obviously this custom

annual sacrifices and gave rise to those sections of them among foreign writers

works that speak too broadly about the murder of foreigners in general.

The ban on entry into the Urtaba region for the purpose of trade is quite understandable in that

case if we identify Urtab (Artania) with Rhodium. Here, near Vitichev

(cities mentioned by Constantine in connection with Polyud), accumulated

single-trees before sailing to Byzantium. Here in the last, protected by forest

the islands of the Dnieper section were apparently carrying out the final equipment

fleet and sorting of goods intended for sale in distant

international markets. Merchants and spies were not needed here. Urtab-Roden

was not excluded from trade, but the local trade was in charge of Kyiv, people “from Cuiaba”;

It was not for nothing that in this city, almost at the very border of Rus', there was a “temple courtyard”

Prince Svyatoslav.

The most logical seems to be this identification of the “three cities”

Cuiaba - Kyiv

Slava - Pereyaslavl

"Arta" - Roden at the mouth of the Ros.

All three cities are on the same river - the Dnieper.

Cuiabá, "the closest city to the countries of Islam", is so named because

informants got into it along the main road from Bulgar to Kyiv. Two

other cities were already located away from this highway: Artania is 4 days away

(down the river) from Kyiv, and Slavia is 4 days away from Artania, if you sail up

along the Dnieper from the mouth of the Ros to Pereyaslavl.

A story passed from essay to essay about the removal of flexible steel

swords from Kyiv and Urtab is confirmed in the legend of the Khazars about their attempt

lay tribute on the glades. In response to the demand for tribute

"The Glade thought and breathed in the smoke - a sword... And the elders decided

tricks: "the tribute is unkind, princes... and you have to impose tribute on us and on them

countries." And everything will come true."

The Kiev legend about the Khazars could also be known in the Khazar east.

Slavia trades with the Bulgarians. Pereyaslavl is located closer to other cities

to the “internal Bulgarians” of the Left Bank, who are constantly at war with the Rus; this and

explains the reservation regarding bargaining “when there is peace.”

Urtab-Roden. Here, to the place of concentration of the merchant fleet with Polyud,

to a city controlled by the Grand Duke of Kyiv himself (and still

called Prince's Mountain), foreign traders are not allowed in. Here, in

the sanctuary of Rod (after whom the city is named) sacrificed strangers.

All this together shrouded the Knyazhya Gora region with various legends, the creation

which Kyiv could promote purposefully. The name of this city is

varies in the Arabic script and such different cities are substituted when

deciphering that Urtab’s equation with relatives is, perhaps, one of

the most successful options.

Cuiaba, Slavia and Urtab are not three states, not three “centers of Rus'”,

but simply Kyiv and two neighboring cities that played an important role in life

Kievan Rus and was of interest to eastern merchants arriving in Kyiv from the Bulgars.

They took the governors of the princes (or their sons) for “kings” and repeated

legends about the most remote city of Rodna, where they were barred from going. Already by

at the beginning of the 10th century, Chernigov took the place of Kinfolk, entering the triad of the most important

Russian cities.

Every spring, Kievan Rus carried out its second state

task - export of a huge amount of goods received over six months

roundabout-polyudya. Tribute collectors turned into seafarers and

caravan bashes, warriors making their way through nomadic barriers, and

merchants who sold what they brought with them and bought everything that they produced

the rich East, which blinded the Europeans of that time with its luxury.

Boats filled with barrels of wax and honey, beaver and silver furs

foxes and other goods, were preparing to sail to distant seas in Kyiv itself and

neighboring cities on the Dnieper - Vyshgorod, Vitichev, where there was a signal

a tower that announced with fire the approach of the Pechenegs, Pereyaslavl Russian and

Rodney. The southernmost harbor-fortress on the border river Sula at 10

kilometers from the Dnieper there was the city of Zhelni (Voin settlement), a peculiar

a structure where ships leaving Rus' could, in case of unfavorable news

take refuge in a coastal fortification, into which the boats entered directly from

"In the month of June, moving along the Dnieper River, they (the same-treed Rus)

descend to Vitichev, a fortress subject to Rus'. After waiting there for two or three days,

until all the same poles arrive, they move on and descend along the named

the Dnieper River" (Konstantin Porphyrogenitus).

service) a difficult and dangerous passage of the flotilla through the Dnieper rapids.

He gives the names of the rapids in both Slavic and Russian, accepting

official position of contemporary Sveneld, who served Rus', for his

nationality.

"Russian" are the names of the rapids (valid in some cases

Scandinavian) - brought great joy to the Normans, but in fact

they do not prove anything more than the presence of Varangians in the service of the Kyiv

prince, which is already known from the treaty of Rus' with the same Constantine,

and from the chronicle information that Igor at that very time hired the Varangians

for the war with the Greeks.

"The first rapid is called Essupi, which in Russian and Slavic means

"Do not sleep!". This threshold is so narrow that it is no wider than the width of the racetrack.

In the middle of it there are steep and high rocks, like islands.

Striving towards them and rising, and from there falling down, the water produces

loud noise and instills fear."

The Russians had difficulty dragging their ships across each threshold, sometimes even

pulling out luggage from them and dragging the boats along the shore. So they got to

"Krari crossing" (Kichkas), which was used by Chersonese merchants,

went to Rus'. This entire route took place under fire from the Pechenegs.

Having passed the rapids, on the island of Khortitsa (near modern Zaporozhye)

"...the Russians perform their sacrifices because a huge

oak. They bring live roosters, stick arrows around, and others put pieces of

bread, meat..."

From Khortitsa the Russians sail to the island of Berezan near the mouth of the Dnieper and there

additionally equipped before sailing by sea. Next their path lies to

the mouth of the Dniester, and from there to the branch of the Danube to Selina.

“Until they pass the Selina River, the Pechenegs gallop along the shore after them. And

if the sea, which often happens, throws the same shafts onto land, then they will all

pulled ashore to resist the Pechenegs together."

Sailing along the western shore of the Black Sea (to which we still have

will have to return) ended in Constantinople, where the Russian "guests"

spent the whole summer returning to Rus' only for a new polyudia.

From the mouth of the Dnieper or from the island of Berezan the upcoming sea route

Rusov bifurcated: one direction was the indicated path to Tsaryrad, and

Caliphate, as we already know from the story of Ibn Hardadbeg in the mid-9th century.

"The Rus-merchants are one of the divisions of the Slavs. They carry squirrel furs,

silver foxes and swords from the extreme reaches of the Slavs to the Black

("Roman") sea, and the Byzantine ruler takes tithes from them. Otherwise they

depart along the Don ("Tanais"), the Slavic river, pass to (Khamlijas

(Khazar capital), and its ruler takes tithes from them."

An interesting option is the message of Ibn al-Faqih:

"...the ruler of Byzantium takes tithes from them. Then they go by sea to

Samkush the Jew, after which they turn to Slavonia. Then they take their way from

Slavic Sea (Azov), until they come to the Khazar Sleeve, where

the ruler of the Khazars takes tithes from them. Then they go to the Khazar Sea along that

river, which is called the Slavic River..."

It is important to note here, firstly, the passage of the Russian fleet through Kerch

strait, which belonged to the Khazars who converted to Judaism (“Samkush-Jew”), and

secondly, the abundance of “Slavic” definitions: Sea of ​​Azov - Slavic;

the lower reaches of the Tanais-Don - the Slavic River, the Northern Azov region - Slavonia (?) and

even the Lower Volga in its undoubtedly Khazar course is also a “river of the Slavs.”

Without trying to clarify these definitions, we only note that the Azov region and

The Lower Dnieper, obviously, was indeed flooded in that era by the Slavs.

Annual expeditions of the Rus through the Kerch Strait past Kerch and

Tmutarakan led to the emergence of new geographical names (if not

local residents, then from foreign geographers) associated with Russia:

Kerch - "city of Russia",

Kerch Strait - "Russia River"

section of the Black Sea near Tmutarakan (five days' sail from

Trebizond) - "Russian Sea".

It is not surprising that scientists often associated another

riddle of eastern geographical works - "Island of the Rus", in which

want to see Tmutarakan. There is no doubt that Kievan Rus under

the significant scope of its trading operations in the south were extremely necessary

some strongholds on the Black Sea, but Tmutarakan, which was located before

960s dominated by the Khazars, hardly fits the definition of "Islands"

Rusov" (although it was called an island).

Having made a difficult and expensive journey through Khazaria (300

kilometers along the Sea of ​​Azov, 400 kilometers up the Don and portages and 400

kilometers down the Volga), the Russian flotilla entered the Caspian Sea,

called either Khazar, or Khorezm (in the chronicle "Khvalissky"), then

Jurjan, then Khorasan.

Ibn Khordadbeg, continuing his story about the Rus, reports

interesting information about the distant sea and land routes of the Russians

From Khazaria "they go to the Dzhurdzhan Sea and land on

any shore. And the diameter of this sea is 500 farsangs. (Ibn Faqih saved

one more detail of this text: “...and they sell everything that they have with them; and

all this reaches Ray"). And sometimes they bring their goods on camels from

Jurjan to Baghdad, where Slavic slaves serve as translators for them. AND

they pretend to be Christians and pay a poll tax." Option: "...they go

to the Dzhurdzhan Sea, then to Balkh and Transoxiana, then to the nomadic camps

Toguz-Guzov, then to China."

We must fully trust the message of Ibn Khor-dadbeg, since he himself

was in Ray, and the path of Russian merchants from Ray to Baghdad (about 700

kilometers) passed through the Jebel region, over which Ibn Khordadbeg

was in charge as post office manager. Russian caravans annually

In addition to these long-distance roads associated with overseas trips, there was

another land trans-European route, one of the most important links

which was Kyiv. It began on the eastern edge of Europe, on the Volga, in

the capital of Volga Bulgaria, in the city of Bulgar. From Transoxiana and Khorasan

Caravan routes to Bulgar led through the “gate of the Guz” to the north. Brought here

northern merchants Volga river route. From Bulgar to Itil and further to the Caspian Sea

The Volga flowed.

Informants of eastern geographers very often took as a starting point

Bulgar. Numismatists believe that one of the most important points of distribution

Eastern coins of the 9th-10th centuries were Bulgar.

We have already seen what an important highway the well represented

well-trodden, carefully measured and equipped with "manzils" ("camps of messengers")

the route from Bulgar to Kyiv, according to Jeyhani. But this path did not end in

Kyiv; Kyiv was only the limit of knowledge of eastern geographers of the 10th century. Probably,

here, in the capital of Rus', the active role passed to Russian merchants, who in

Western Europe was called "Rusarii".

The route from Kyiv to the west was hardly just a route for selling the tribute collected from

Russian lands; in all likelihood, to Russian furs exported to the West,

the share of eastern goods brought by Muslim merchants from

Bulgars to Kyiv or purchased by the Rus during their overseas travels.

Historically, in Russia centuries are written in Roman numerals, although recently one can increasingly see the use of Arabic numerals to indicate centuries. This happens due to banal illiteracy and ignorance of how to correctly write a particular century in Roman numerals, and people are also increasingly asking questions, What century is this, the 19th century in numbers?

XIX what century is this

In order not to simply answer the question posed XIX is what century? and to get rid of such questions in the future, you need to understand how Roman numerals are read. In fact, there is nothing complicated here.
So, Roman numerals are designated as follows:
I – 1
II – 2
III – 3
IV – 4
V – 5
VI – 6
VII – 7
VIII – 8
IX – 9
X – 10
It turns out that only 5 Roman numerals have an individual style, the rest are obtained by substituting I. If I is in front of the main digit, this means minus 1, if after, then plus 1.
With this knowledge, you can easily answer the question - what century is the 19th century?

XIX what century is this

And yet, what century is this? Reading these simple numbers, many break them down into 3 values ​​- X, I, X and get some very strange century - 10 - 1 - 10, i.e. 10 thousand 110 centuries. Of course this is not the correct layout. The number XIX consists of 2 components - X and IX and is deciphered very simply - 1 and 9, i.e. it turns out 19.

Thus, the answer to the question, which century is the 19th century, will be the 19th century.

What will the remaining centuries look like written in Roman numerals?

XI – 11
XII – 12
XIII- 13
XIV – 14
XV – 15
XVI – 16
XVII – 17
XVIII – 18
XIX – 19
XX – 20

The century we live in now is referred to as XXI.

What century is this?

Many people wonder why in Russia centuries began to be denoted by Roman numerals, because everyone knows that in the same English language centuries are denoted by familiar Arabic numerals, which are known and understood by everyone, so why complicate your life?

In fact, everything is quite simple, the fact is that Roman numerals are not used exclusively in Russia and not only to indicate the century. It is believed that Roman numerals are more solemn and significant than the banal Arabic ones, known to everyone. Thus, Roman numerals have been used for centuries to indicate particularly significant events or to give some solemnity and highlight.

You will be convinced that not only the century is indicated by Roman numerals quite simply, just look at the book edition of the works in several volumes, where the volumes are probably numbered with Roman numerals. In all countries, royalty was numbered with Roman numerals: Peter I, Elizabeth II, Louis XIV, etc.

In some countries, Roman numerals even indicate years, which is much more difficult than learning what century it is in the 19th century, because when hundreds and thousands are added, Roman numerals also increase by several digits - L, C, V and M. Years marked with Roman numerals, unlike centuries, look really scary, so 1984 is written as MCMLXXXIV.

All Olympic Games are also designated by Roman numerals. Thus, in 2014 of the 21st century, the XXII Winter Olympic Games were held in Sochi.
Thus, we can say that without knowing what century the 19th century is, a person deprives himself of the opportunity to freely read about various events taking place in the world.

Most likely, in the near future centuries in Russia will still be designated by traditional Arabic numerals and questions like which century is the 19th century will disappear by themselves, because the nineteenth century will be written in a way that is understandable to everyone - the 19th century.

And yet, knowing at least the first hundred Roman numerals is simply necessary for a literate person, because not only centuries are designated by them.

In many educational and popular science materials, the idea is widespread that Kyiv became the capital in 882, after the city was captured by Prince Oleg. This statement, as a rule, is based on a story from the “Tale of Bygone Years”, in which, under the year 882, it is said: “And Oleg the prince sat in Kiev, and Oleg said: behold, be the mother of the Russian city.” At first glance, everything is obvious, but recent research by specialists in the history of Ancient Rus' shows that the formation of ideas about Kyiv as the capital was a much more complex and lengthy process.

Examples of using

In 882, Rurik's successor, the Novgorod prince Oleg the Prophet, captured Kyiv, which from that time became the capital of Rus'. (Wikipedia, Capitals of Russia)

In 882, Kyiv became the capital of Rus' and since then received the honorary name “mother of Russian cities”. (Material on the Potomu.Ru website)

V.M. Vasnetsov. Baptism of Rus'. 1885-1896.

Reality

A rather detailed analysis of how ideas about Kyiv as a capital were formed was given in his article “Was there a capital in Ancient Rus'” by A.V. Nazarenko.

The term “capital” itself, the researcher writes, is not recorded in the Old Russian language. Its analogue is known, “table”, or “capital city”. However, the “table” was not only Kyiv, but also a number of other cities of Rus', which were owned by representatives of the ancient Russian princely family, for example, Novgorod. Kyiv, being the capital, should at least be distinguished by some specific definition, or even be called something else.

Such epithets do appear in sources, but only in the 11th-12th centuries. One of them, the “oldest city,” is recorded in the “Tale of Bygone Years”, in the story about the events of 1096: about the invitation of the Kiev prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavovich and Pereyaslav, Vladimir Vsevolodovich (Monomakh), their cousin Oleg Svyatoslavovich, to Kiev for imprisonment agreement. In another text, the “Word on the Renewal of the Church of the Tithes,” dating from the mid-12th century, Kiev is called “the elder of the cities,” the Kiev prince is called the “elder of the princes,” and the local metropolitan is called the “elder of the saints.”

Another definition, the same “mother of cities,” is a direct copy of the Greek mHtropolis, from one of the epithets of Constantinople, and is used to “equalize” the status of Kiev with Constantinople, notes Nazarenko. According to him, this expression is no longer used so often; in addition to the chronicle story about the capture of Kyiv by Oleg, the only noteworthy thing is its use in the service in memory of the illumination of the Church of St. George in Kyiv in 1051/3; here the city is also called “first throne”.

The concept of an all-Russian capital developed in the 11th-13th centuries, notes the author of the article. The very idea of ​​a single, main “capital city,” according to A.V. Nazarenko, organically belongs to the complex of imperial political ideas; attempts to form and implement it were repeatedly made in the Western, Latin world. Plans for a unified capital were repeatedly undertaken by Frankish and later German rulers, he writes. Thus, Charlemagne tried to create a national center parallel to Rome with elements of sacralization in Aachen. Otto III tried to embody the same, essentially “Roman-centric” idea, trying to organize an empire centered in Rome according to the late antique model. Frederick I Barbarossa was also an apologist for the empire controlled from Rome. However, a number of such important factors as the fragmentation of the feudal period, political and church polycentricity (as well as the opposition of these centers) did not allow this idea to be realized in the West.

In Rus', where a similar concept could have developed based on the Constantinople rather than the Roman model, its formation was significantly facilitated by the era of autocracy of Vladimir the Saint and Yaroslav the Wise, during which a fairly developed metropolitan ideological complex managed to develop around Kiev, which, according to A. IN. Nazarenko, further, more distinct crystallization of the idea of ​​the eldership of Kyiv. In addition, the researcher notes, the fundamental connection that existed between the church-administrative unity of the country and the idea of ​​the political sovereignty of its ruler made the presence of an all-Russian Metropolis of Kiev the most important prerequisite for the establishment of the idea of ​​state unity of Rus' and its preservation in conditions of political particularism, which, in turn, , stabilized the idea of ​​Kiev as the capital of Rus' as a whole. All together, this formed a strong ideological complex, which determined the amazing historical survival of the idea and feeling of all-Russian unity, concludes A.V. Nazarenko.

Sources and literature

Nazarenko A.V. Was there a capital in Ancient Rus'? Some comparative historical and terminological observations // A.V. Nazarenko. Ancient Rus' and the Slavs (historical and philological studies). Ancient Rus' and the Slavs (The Ancient States of Eastern Europe, 2007). M., 2009. pp. 103-113.

INTRODUCTION

Throughout the VI-IX centuries. among the Eastern Slavs there was a process of class formation and the creation of the preconditions for feudalism. The territory where ancient Russian statehood began to take shape was located at the intersection of routes along which the migration of peoples and tribes took place, and nomadic routes ran. The South Russian steppes were the scene of endless struggle among moving tribes and peoples. Often Slavic tribes attacked the border regions of the Byzantine Empire.

In the 7th century In the steppes between the Lower Volga, Don and North Caucasus, a Khazar state was formed. The Slavic tribes in the regions of the Lower Don and Azov came under his rule, retaining, however, a certain autonomy. The territory of the Khazar kingdom extended to the Dnieper and the Black Sea. At the beginning of the 8th century. The Arabs inflicted a crushing defeat on the Khazars, and through the North Caucasus they deeply invaded the north, reaching the Don. A large number of Slavs - allies of the Khazars - were captured.

The Varangians (Normans, Vikings) penetrate into Russian lands from the north. At the beginning of the 8th century. they settled around Yaroslavl, Rostov and Suzdal, establishing control over the territory from Novgorod to Smolensk. Some of the northern colonists penetrated into southern Russia, where they mixed with the Rus, adopting their name. The capital of the Russian-Varangian Kaganate, which ousted the Khazar rulers, was formed in Tmutarakan. In their struggle, the opponents turned to the Emperor of Constantinople for an alliance.

In such a complex environment, the consolidation of Slavic tribes into political unions took place, which became the embryo of the formation of a unified East Slavic statehood.

In the 9th century. As a result of the centuries-long development of East Slavic society, the early feudal state of Rus' was formed with its center in Kyiv. Gradually, all the East Slavic tribes united in Kievan Rus.

The topic of the history of Kievan Rus considered in the work seems not only interesting, but also very relevant. Recent years have been marked by changes in many areas of Russian life. The lifestyle of many people has changed, the system of life values ​​has changed. Knowledge of the history of Russia, the spiritual traditions of the Russian people, is very important for increasing the national self-awareness of Russians. A sign of the revival of the nation is the ever-increasing interest in the historical past of the Russian people, in their spiritual values.

FORMATION OF THE ANCIENT RUSSIAN STATE IN THE 9th century

The time from the 6th to the 9th centuries is still the last stage of the primitive communal system, a time of class formation and an imperceptible, at first glance, but steady growth of the preconditions of feudalism. The most valuable monument containing information about the beginning of the Russian state is the chronicle “The Tale of Bygone Years, where the Russian land came from, and who began to reign first in Kiev and where the Russian land came from,” compiled by the Kiev monk Nestor around 1113.

Having begun his story, like all medieval historians, with the Flood, Nestor talks about the settlement of Western and Eastern Slavs in Europe in ancient times. He divides the East Slavic tribes into two groups, the level of development of which, according to his description, was not the same. Some of them lived, as he put it, in a “beastly manner,” preserving the features of the tribal system: blood feud, remnants of matriarchy, the absence of marriage prohibitions, “kidnapping” (kidnapping) of wives, etc. Nestor contrasts these tribes with the glades, in whose land Kiev was built. The Polyans are “sensible men”; they had already established a patriarchal monogamous family and, obviously, had overcome blood feud (they are “distinguished by their meek and quiet disposition”) History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 17th century. / A.P.Novoseltsev, A.N.Sakharov, V.I.Buganov, V.D.Nazarov; responsible editor A.N.Sakharov, A.P.Novoseltsev. - LLC Publishing House AST-LTD, 1997.p.216..

Next, Nestor talks about how the city of Kyiv was created. Prince Kiy, who reigned there, according to Nestor’s story, came to Constantinople to visit the Emperor of Byzantium, who received him with great honors. Returning from Constantinople, Kiy built a city on the banks of the Danube, intending to settle here for a long time. But the local residents were hostile to him, and Kiy returned to the banks of the Dnieper.

Nestor considered the formation of the principality of Polans in the Middle Dnieper region to be the first historical event on the path to the creation of the Old Russian states. The legend about Kiy and his two brothers spread far to the south, and was even brought to Armenia.

Byzantine writers of the 6th century paint the same picture. During the reign of Justinian, huge masses of Slavs advanced to the northern borders of the Byzantine Empire. Byzantine historians colorfully describe the invasion of the empire by Slavic troops, who took away prisoners and rich booty, and the settlement of the empire by Slavic colonists. The appearance of the Slavs, who dominated communal relations, on the territory of Byzantium contributed to the eradication of slave-owning orders here and the development of Byzantium along the path from the slave-owning system to feudalism.

The successes of the Slavs in the fight against the powerful Byzantium indicate a relatively high level of development of Slavic society for that time: the material prerequisites had already appeared for equipping significant military expeditions, and the system of military democracy made it possible to unite large masses of Slavs. Long-distance campaigns contributed to the strengthening of the power of the princes in the indigenous Slavic lands, where tribal principalities were created.

Archaeological data fully confirms the words of Nestor that the core of the future Kievan Rus began to take shape on the banks of the Dnieper when the Slavic princes made campaigns in Byzantium and the Danube, in the times preceding the attacks of the Khazars (7th century).

The creation of a significant tribal union in the southern forest-steppe regions facilitated the advance of Slavic colonists not only in the southwest (to the Balkans), but also in the southeast direction. True, the steppes were occupied by various nomads: Bulgarians, Avars, Khazars, but the Slavs of the Middle Dnieper region (Russian land) were obviously able to protect their possessions from their invasions and penetrate deep into the fertile black earth steppes. In the VII--IX centuries. The Slavs also lived in the eastern part of the Khazar lands, somewhere in the Azov region, participated together with the Khazars in military campaigns, and were hired to serve the Kagan (Khazar ruler). In the south, the Slavs apparently lived in islands among other tribes, gradually assimilating them, but at the same time absorbing elements of their culture.

Throughout the VI-IX centuries. Productive forces grew, tribal institutions changed, and the process of class formation began. As the most important phenomena in the life of the Eastern Slavs during the VI-IX centuries. The development of arable farming and the development of crafts should be noted; the collapse of the clan community as a labor collective and the separation from it of individual peasant farms, forming a neighboring community; the growth of private land ownership and the formation of classes; the transformation of the tribal army with its defensive functions into a squad that dominates its fellow tribesmen; seizure by princes and nobles of tribal land into personal hereditary property.

By the 9th century. Everywhere in the territory of settlement of the Eastern Slavs, a significant area of ​​arable land cleared from forest was formed, indicating the further development of productive forces under feudalism. An association of small clan communities, characterized by a certain unity of culture, was ancient Slavic tribe. Each of these tribes convened a popular assembly (evening) The power of the tribal princes gradually increased. The development of intertribal ties, defensive and offensive alliances, the organization of joint campaigns and, finally, the subjugation of their weaker neighbors by strong tribes - all this led to the consolidation of tribes, to their unification into larger groups.

Describing the time when the transition from tribal relations to the state took place, Nestor notes that various East Slavic regions had “their own reigns.” This is confirmed by archaeological data.

The formation of an early feudal state, which gradually subjugated all the East Slavic tribes, became possible only when the differences between the south and the north in terms of agricultural conditions were somewhat smoothed out, when in the north there was a sufficient amount of plowed land and the need for hard collective labor in cutting and forest uprooting has decreased significantly. As a result, the peasant family emerged as a new production team from the patriarchal community.

The decomposition of the primitive communal system among the Eastern Slavs occurred at a time when the slave system had already outlived its usefulness on a world-historical scale. In the process of class formation, Rus' came to feudalism, bypassing the slave-owning formation.

In the IX-X centuries. antagonistic classes of feudal society are formed. Everywhere the number of vigilantes is increasing, their differentiation is intensifying, and the nobility is being separated from their midst - boyars and princes.

An important question in the history of the emergence of feudalism is the question of the time of the appearance of cities in Rus'. In the conditions of the tribal system, there were certain centers where tribal councils met, a prince was chosen, trade was carried out, fortune telling was carried out, court cases were decided, sacrifices were made to the gods and the most important dates of the year were celebrated. Sometimes such a center became the focus of the most important types of production. Most of these ancient centers later turned into medieval cities.

In the IX-X centuries. feudal lords created a number of new cities that served both the purposes of defense against nomads and the purposes of domination over the enslaved population. Craft production was also concentrated in cities. The old name “grad”, “city”, denoting a fortification, began to be applied to a real feudal city with a detinets-kremlin (fortress) in the center and an extensive craft and trading area.

Despite the gradual and slow process of feudalization, one can still indicate a certain line, starting from which there is reason to talk about feudal relations in Rus'. This line is the 9th century, when the Eastern Slavs had already formed a feudal state.

The lands of the East Slavic tribes united into a single state received the name Rus. The arguments of “Norman” historians who tried to declare the Normans, who were then called Varangians in Rus', the creators of the Old Russian state, are unconvincing. These historians stated that the chronicles meant the Varangians by Rus. But as has already been shown, the prerequisites for the formation of states among the Slavs developed over many centuries and by the 9th century. gave noticeable results not only in the West Slavic lands, where the Normans never penetrated and where the Great Moravian state arose, but also in the East Slavic lands (in Kievan Rus), where the Normans appeared, robbed, destroyed representatives of local princely dynasties and sometimes became princes themselves. It is obvious that the Normans could neither promote nor seriously hinder the process of feudalization. The name Rus' began to be used in sources in relation to part of the Slavs 300 years before the appearance of the Varangians.

First mention of the people grew up found in the middle of the 6th century, when information about it had already reached Syria. The glades, called, according to the chronicler, Rus, become the basis of the future ancient Russian nation, and their land becomes the core of the territory of the future state - Kievan Rus.

Among the news belonging to Nestor, one passage has survived, which describes Rus' before the Varangians appeared there. “These are the Slavic regions,” writes Nestor, “which are part of Rus' - the Polyans, Drevlyans, Dregovichi, Polochans, Novgorod Slovenes, Northerners...” Reader on the history of Russia: In 4 volumes, - T 1. From ancient times to the 17th century. /Compiled by: I.V. Babich, V.N. Zakharov, I.E. Ukolova.-- M.: MIROS - International. relations, 1994. p. 121. This list includes only half of the East Slavic regions. Consequently, Rus' at that time did not yet include the Krivichi, Radimichi, Vyatichi, Croats, Ulichs and Tivertsy. At the center of the new state formation was the Polyan tribe. The Old Russian state became a kind of federation of tribes; in its form it was an early feudal monarchy Isaev I.A. History of state and law of Russia: Complete course of lectures. - 2nd ed. reworked and additional - M.: Lawyer, 1998.P.14..