The chronicle reported the conclusion of four treaties with Byzantium by the Russian princes in 907, 911, 944 (945) and 971. The first agreement has come down to us not in the original text, but in the retelling of the chronicler.

Byzantine sources do not contain any information about these agreements, and therefore the question of their origin and sources, their relationship has long been the subject of lively debate.

Some researchers, in particular Normanists, believed that the Russian-Byzantine treaties were later forgeries. Initially, the opinion about the forgery of the treaties of 911 and 945 (944) was expressed by the German historian A. Schlozer in his study “Nestor*. Schletser relied on the fact that the treaty of 911 was written on behalf of three Byzantine emperors: Leo, Alexander and Constantine. He argued that such three emperors did not exist at the same time either in 911 or at any other time. According to Schletser, proof of the falsity of the treaties was that Byzantine sources did not mention such treaties. It was also considered proof that the story about Prince Oleg’s campaign against Constantinople in Byzantine sources was of a fabulous nature (Shletser A.L. Nestor. Russian Chronicles in the Old Slavic Language. St. Petersburg, 1816. - T.I.S. 694, 751, 758- 759; T. P. 90, 208-209, etc.). Representatives of the so-called skeptical school in Russian also spoke about the falsity of Russian-Byzantine treaties. historical science- M. T. Kachenovsky and V. Vinogradov.

However, over time, the opinion about the falsity of Russian-Byzantine treaties was criticized. Thus, in studies devoted to Byzantine chronology, it was established that Alexander was called emperor during Leo’s life; Constantine, while still a baby, had already been crowned - therefore, the mention in the treaty of 911 of three Byzantine emperors at once is not at all an anachronism, the treaty could have been signed on their behalf (Krug P. Kritischer Versuch zur

Aufklarurig der Byrantischen Chronologie mil besonderer Riichsiht auf die fiuhre GescUihte Russlands. S.P., 1810). Then it was exhaustively proven that the text of the Russian-Byzantine treaties was translated into Russian from the Byzantine (Greek) language, and by substituting Greek words, many figures of speech and the meaning of individual phrases could be easily understood. It is necessary to note the merits of N. A. Lavrovsky, who devoted a special study to these issues (Lavrovsky N. About the Byzantine element in the language of treaties between Russians and Greeks. SP6D853). After Lambin’s work, which basically proved the historicity of Prince Oleg’s campaign against Byzantium in 907, the last doubts about the authenticity of the treaties should have disappeared - (Lambin. Is Oleg’s campaign near Constantinople really a fairy tale // Journal of the Min. people, enlightenment 1873, VII ).

At present, the views about the falsity of Russian-Byzantine treaties can be considered completely refuted. A number of works have proven that there are no inconsistencies in their text. And the silence of Byzantine sources about Russian-Byzantine treaties is explained by the fact that the Byzantine chronicles contain gaps regarding the years when the treaties were concluded.

However, denying the falsity of the Russian-Byzantine treaties, it is difficult to insist that their text has reached us without any changes. There is no doubt that during the three hundred to four hundred years of their copying by copyists of the chronicles, their text could have undergone more or less significant changes. It is possible that there are omissions in the text.

If the question is about authenticity or falsification Russian-Byzantine treaties is considered to be finally resolved, the origin of some treaties is still not clear.

The greatest difficulty is posed by the question of the origin of the treaty of 907. Thus, N.M. Karamzin and K.N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin believed that a completely independent treaty was concluded in 907. G. Evers, Tobin, A.V. Longinov did not agree with Karamzin and recognized the treaty of 907 only as a preliminary agreement, on the basis of which later (in 911) a formal peace treaty was concluded. A. A. Shakhmatov generally denied the existence of the treaty of 907 and considered the text of the chronicle about this treaty to be a conscious interpolation of the chronicler.

A later researcher M.D. Priselkov gave his explanation for the fact that the treaty of 907 contains brief retelling the same decrees that received detailed regulation in the treaty of 911. He suggested that Prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavovich provided Nestor with the opportunity to use the princely treasury, where the treaties between the Russians and the Greeks were kept, for compiling the “Tale of Bygone Years”, and these treaties were not in proper condition: Some of the texts were lost, the texts were scattered. In particular, part of the treaty of 911 was torn off from the rest of the text, which gave Nestor reason to consider the torn piece as the remainder of the text of an earlier treaty with Byzantium. Moreover, among the documents there was another, complete copy of the treaty of 911, which Nestor cited in its entirety in his chronicle. The view of M.D. Priselkov was also accepted by the largest researcher of Ancient Russia V.V. Mavrodin.

But it should be noted that M.D. Priselkov’s assumptions are unconvincing. The story about Nestor writing “The Tale of Bygone Years” and Prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, who allegedly allowed the chronicler to use the treasury, where there was an incomplete text with a piece torn off and a complete text, is not confirmed by anything.

More justified is the opinion of A. A. Shakhmatov that no special agreement was concluded in 907 or, rather, only an agreement on peace and indemnity was concluded. V.I. Sergeevich, in our opinion, also correctly pointed out that the Greeks should have sought the speedy removal of Prince Oleg’s soldiers from their territory and that for this purpose they should have rushed to give the ransom that Oleg demanded of them, and not initiate negotiations, which could only slow down the cleansing of their land.

An analysis of the chronicle story about the treaty of 907 shows that in this story there are obvious repetitions and insertions that interrupted the consistent flow of thought. The compiler undoubtedly had a variety of material in his hands, from which he tried to build something whole, but he failed. In any case, there are traces of the chronicler’s use of the texts of the treaties of 911 and 944. (restrictive clauses) are undeniable.

The Treaty of 911 was considered by researchers as a completely reliable document. It was divided by publishers, in particular M. F. Vladimirsky-Budanov, into 15 articles. At the beginning of the agreement it is stated that the envoys of Oleg, the Grand Duke of Russia, listed by name, to the emperors Leo, Alexander and Constantine, in order to strengthen the love that had long existed between Christians (Greeks) and Russia, concluded this agreement. Next comes a declaration on the inviolability of the peace treaty.

Most of the content of the 911 treaty is devoted to criminal law, and the articles related to this section are mixed with articles of other content.

Articles 9, 10 and 11 concerned the situation of captives sold to Rus' or Greece. These articles established a mutual obligation and the right to ransom and return prisoners to their homeland, as well as a mutual obligation to release prisoners of war to their homeland. According to this agreement, if Russian polyanyniks arrived for sale to Christians (i.e., Greeks) from some other country, and Christian (i.e., Greek) polyanyniks ended up in Russia in the same way, then they were sold at 20 gold and were sent home. Those of the released prisoners or prisoners of war who wished to serve the Byzantine emperor could do so.

One of the articles of the 911 treaty talks about mutual assistance in case of shipwreck (Article 8). The article meant the abolition of the so-called coastal law. Instead of seizing the ship that had suffered an accident and its property, the contracting parties pledged to mutually assist in rescuing the ship and property and in delivering it to the borders of the earth (Rus or Byzantium). In the event of any violence and murder, the perpetrators had to be punished in accordance with those articles of the treaty that provided for punishment for these crimes.

The question of the relationship between the treaty of 911 and the treaty of 944 has long been raised in the literature. The circumstances in which the 944 treaty was drawn up influenced its content. The position of Prince Igor was different from that of Prince Oleg. Igor was defeated in the previous campaign, and although the Greeks found it expedient to make peace when organizing his second campaign, he was nevertheless forced to accept a number of restrictions in comparison with the treaty of 911 and to accept a number of obligations.

The treaty of 944 was not a repetition of the treaty of 911. The Ero articles had the nature of clarifying and developing the articles of the previous treaty. And most importantly, it contained quite a significant new text. As in the 911 treaty, most of the articles of the 944 treaty are devoted to criminal law. There are no articles in it devoted to the military service of Russians with the Greeks, articles about inheritance, or about the extradition of criminals. But in the treaty of 944 there were articles that defined the trade rights of Russians in Byzantium, clarified the position of Russian merchants in Constantinople, and most importantly, articles related to the foreign policy of Russia and Byzantium.

At the beginning of the agreement, it was reported that it was concluded by the ambassador of Grand Duke Igor Ivor, ambassadors from the grand ducal house, ambassadors of other princes, ambassadors of the boyars, as well as merchants sent to “renew the old world” and “establish love between the Greeks and Russia.”

The first point of this agreement established the right on the part of the Russians, in particular on the part of the Grand Duke and his boyars, to send ships to Greece in the number they desired with ambassadors and guests. The sending of ships should have been notified to the Greeks with a special letter. If the Russians arrived without a letter, they were delayed and the Grand Duke was informed of their arrival. If the Russians, who arrived in Greece without a letter, resist, they will be killed. Grand Duke pledged to prohibit his ambassadors and Russian guests (merchants) from committing atrocities in Byzantium.

Russian ambassadors and guests who came for trade, according to the agreement, settled in a special suburb of Constantinople, near the Church of St. Mother. Their names were written down and after that they received a month's allowance (ambassadors - "slebnoe", and guests - "monthly"), food ("brew") and boats for the return journey. For production trading operations Russians were allowed into Constantinople in groups of no more than 50 people at once, without weapons, accompanied by a “royal husband” who was supposed to guard them and sort out disputes between them and the Greeks. It was also established that the Russians who entered the city did not have the right to purchase pavolok (precious silk fabrics) in excess of the permitted norm, i.e. over 50 spools. Russian ambassadors and merchants also did not have the right to winter on the outskirts of Constantinople, near the Church of St. Mother.

The foreign policy obligations of Rus' were set out in the following articles concerning the Kherson (Kopsun) country. According to Article 8, the Russian princes renounced their claims to this territory. When fulfilling this point (“and then even”), the Russian prince had the right, if necessary, to ask the Byzantine emperor for an auxiliary army. According to Article 10, Rus' assumed the obligation not to do any harm to the Korsun (Chersonese) people fishing at the mouth of the Dnieper. Rus' also took upon itself the obligation not to winter at the mouth of the Dnieper, in “Belberezh and near St. Elfer”. According to Article 11, the Russian prince also assumed the obligation to defend the Korsun country from attacks on it by the “black” Bulgarians.

The article on assistance in case of a shipwreck in the treaty of 944 was given in a different wording than in 911. This article (Article 9) only said the following: “If the Russians find the ship, castaway, then they pledged not to cause him any harm. If, nevertheless, they robbed this ship or enslaved or killed people from this ship, then they had to be punished according to Russian and Greek law*.

The treaty of 944 also had an article on the ransom of prisoners, and there was a difference in relation to the provisions on this issue of the treaty of 911. The difference was that the price of ransoming prisoners was lowered from 20 spools to 10 spools and lower (depending on age captives) and a difference was established in the price of the purchased captive. If the captive was Russian and, therefore, bought by the Greeks, then the price varied depending on age (10, 8 and 5 spools). If the prisoner was Greek and was ransomed by the Russians, then 10 spools were paid for him, regardless of his age.

Researchers have repeatedly expressed the idea that the treaty of 944 was only additional to the treaty of 911, and therefore contained only additional articles that supplemented or changed the articles of Oleg’s treaty. From this point of view, the articles of the 911 treaty, not changed by the 944 treaty, continued to be in force, although they were not repeated. But V.I. Sergeevich correctly, in our opinion, rejected these considerations. He pointed out that both treaties contain provisions in which no difference can be discerned. If in one case they found it necessary to repeat the old rule, why was this not done in the other? “In addition,” said Sergeevich, the treaty of 944 sometimes refers to the previous world, directly confirming its articles. If there is no such confirmatory reference, this means that the drafters of the new treaty did not find it necessary to insist on preserving this or that article of the first world” (Sergeevich V.I. Lectures and Research. pp. 622-623). Undoubtedly, it was not about adding to the previous 911 Treaty, but about updating it.

As for the treaty of 972, no doubts are currently being expressed about its origin.

Let us now turn to the question of what law underlies the Russian-Byzantine treaties. Much has been said on this issue different opinions Thus, V. Nikolsky believed that the Russian-Byzantine treaties reflected Varangian-Byzantine law, K. G. Stefanovsky - that it was a reflection of Slavic-Greek law, V. I. Sergeevich saw purely Greek law in them, D. . Y. Samokvasov - purely Slavic law. A number of researchers, for example, P. Tsitovich and G.F. Shershenevich, refused to recognize in these treaties the elements of one or another national law and saw in them the presence of a special treaty international law.

Undoubtedly, V.I. Sergeevich’s opinion that the agreements were based on Greek law cannot be accepted, since the text itself speaks of the application of the norms of the “Russian Law* (on collecting from the thief three times the value of the thing, blows with a sword etc.). In addition, the sanction for some crimes was not specific to Greek law (for example, the death penalty for murder).

It is also impossible to accept the opinion that the treaties reflected purely Slavic law. First of all, the very concept of “Slavic law” is a mere abstraction, since the system of law of individual Slavic peoples in the 9th-10th centuries. varied significantly. But if we compare the provisions of the Russian Pravda with the treaties, which is a monument that most fully reflected the system of law of the Eastern Slavs, then it turns out that there is a big difference between the norms of the Russian Pravda and the norms of the Russian-Byzantine treaties (for example, for theft it was not remuneration in the amount of three times the cost of the item, but pre-established lessons).

It is also impossible to accept the view that the Russian-Byzantine treaties reflected “contractual” international law, which was neither Slavic nor Byzantine. The fact is that it is difficult to imagine that in the 10th century. such an abstract system of law could have developed, divorced from national basis. And most importantly, in ca-mom The text contains norms that should be considered norms of Russian law (references to “Russian Law”) or norms in which the main provisions of Greek law were manifested.

The refusal to see in the Russian-Byzantine treaties either purely Greek or purely Slavic or the so-called “contractual”, “international” law should entail the recognition of the presence in them of mixed law, the norms of which were established as a result of a compromise between the contracting parties. The drafters of the treaties made, in our opinion, a rather skillful attempt to adapt Greek (Byzantine) law, characteristic of developed feudal society, to Russian law (“Russian Law”).

But what was this Russian law - “Russian Law”? Is it “Slavic” law, i.e. some kind of abstraction, or the right of the Eastern Slavs? We have already indicated that the idea of ​​“Slavic”, or rather “common Slavic” law cannot be accepted, since the Slavs in the 10th century. were at different stages of socio-economic development, and, therefore, there should have been great differences in their legal systems. But the Eastern Slavs were also not homogeneous in their socio-economic development. Suffice it to recall the existence of such a tribe as the Vyatichi, who even by the 12th century. have not yet left the stage of tribal relations. Consequently, there could not be any single system of law for the tribes of the Eastern Slavs. Probably, “Russian Law” means the system of law that developed in the main centers of Rus'. Undoubtedly, there were no major differences between the individual centers of Russia, and, therefore, a one system Russian law, which can be contrasted with the system of Greek law.

Among the authors of the first commentaries on the text of Russian-Byzantine treaties were V. I. Sergeevich, M. F. Vladimirsky-Budanov, A. V. Longinov. The study of the language of Russian-Byzantine treaties was carried out by S.P. Obnorsky, who provided in a special article devoted to this issue, comprehensive evidence that the translation of Russian-Byzantine treaties was originally made from Greek into Bulgarian (i.e. the translation was made by a Bulgarian) , and then was corrected by the scribes.

Russian-Byzantine treaties are of great importance in the history of Russian law. They are not only indisputable monuments of strong economic, political and cultural ties between the Kievan state and Byzantium, but also provide an opportunity to establish the level of legal consciousness and legal thought in the 9th-10th centuries. And most importantly, they show that they are already early period existed relatively complete system Russian law (“Russian Law”), which preceded the Russian Pravda system of law.

Russian-Byzantine Treaty was concluded after the successful campaign of the Kyiv prince Oleg and his squad against the Byzantine Empire in 907. The contract was originally drawn up for Greek, but only survived. The articles of the Russian-Byzantine treaty of 911 are devoted mainly to the consideration of various offenses and penalties for them. It's about on liability for murder, for intentional beatings, for theft and robbery; on the procedure for assisting merchants of both countries during their voyages with goods; the rules for the ransom of prisoners are regulated; there are clauses about allied assistance to the Greeks from Rus' and about the order of service of the Russians in the imperial army; about the procedure for returning escaped or kidnapped servants; the procedure for inheriting the property of Russians who died in Byzantium is described; regulated Russian trade in Byzantium.

Relations with the Byzantine Empire since the 9th century. were essential element foreign policy Old Russian state. Probably already in the 30s or very early 40s. 9th century The Russian fleet raided the Byzantine city of Amastris on south coast Black Sea (modern city of Amasra in Turkey). Greek sources talk in sufficient detail about the attack of the “Rus people” on the Byzantine capital - Constantinople. In the Tale of Bygone Years, this campaign is erroneously dated to 866 and is associated with the names of the semi-mythical Kyiv princes Askold and Dir.

News of the first diplomatic contacts between Rus' and its southern neighbor also date back to this time. As part of the embassy of the Byzantine emperor Theophilus (829-842), who arrived in 839 at the court of the Frankish emperor Louis the Pious, there were certain “suppliers for peace” from the “people of Ros”. They had been sent by their Khakan ruler to the Byzantine court, and were now returning to their homeland. Peaceful and even allied relations between Byzantium and Russia are attested by sources of the 2nd half of the 860s, primarily by the messages of the Patriarch of Constantinople Photius (858-867 and 877-886). During this period, through the efforts of Greek missionaries (their names have not reached us), the process of Christianization of Rus' began. However, this so-called “first baptism” of Rus' did not have significant consequences: its results were destroyed after the capture of Kyiv by the troops of Prince Oleg who came from Northern Rus'.

This event marked the consolidation under the rule of the northern, Scandinavian in origin, Rurik dynasty of lands along the transit Volkhov-Dnieper trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.” Oleg, new ruler Rus (his name is a variant of the Old Norse Helga - sacred) primarily sought to establish its status in the confrontation with powerful neighbors - the Khazar Khaganate and the Byzantine Empire. It can be assumed that initially Oleg tried to maintain partnerships with Byzantium on the basis of a treaty in the 860s. However, his anti-Christian policies led to confrontation.

The story of Oleg's campaign against Constantinople in 907 is preserved in the Tale of Bygone Years. It contains a number of elements clearly of folkloric origin, and therefore many researchers have expressed doubts about its reliability. In addition, Greek sources report practically nothing about this military campaign. There are only isolated mentions of the “Ros” in documents from the time of Emperor Leo VI the Wise (886-912), as well as an unclear passage in the chronicle of pseudo-Simeon (late 10th century) about the participation of the “Ros” in the Byzantine war against the Arab fleet. The main argument in favor of the reality of the campaign of 907 should be considered the Russian-Byzantine treaty of 911. The authenticity of this document does not raise any doubts, and the conditions contained therein, extremely beneficial for Rus', could hardly have been achieved without military pressure on Byzantium.

In addition, the description in the Tale of Bygone Years of the negotiations between Oleg and the Byzantine emperors, co-rulers Leo and Alexander, is fully consistent with the well-known principles of Byzantine diplomatic practice. After Prince Oleg and his army appeared under the walls of Constantinople and ravaged the outskirts of the city, Emperor Leo VI and his co-ruler Alexander were forced to enter into negotiations with him. Oleg sent five ambassadors to the Byzantine emperors with his demands. The Greeks expressed their readiness to pay a one-time tribute to the Rus and allowed them duty-free trade in Constantinople. The agreement reached was secured by both parties through an oath: the emperors kissed the cross, and the Rus swore on their weapons and their deities Perun and Volos. The taking of the oath was apparently preceded by an agreement, since the oath was supposed to relate precisely to the practical articles of the contract that it was intended to confirm. We do not know what exactly the parties agreed on. It is clear, however, that the Rus demanded some kind of payments and benefits from the Greeks and that they received this in order to then leave the area of ​​​​Constantinople.

The formal agreement between Rus' and Byzantium was apparently concluded in two stages: negotiations took place in 907, then the agreements reached were sealed with an oath. But the attestation of the text of the treaty was delayed in time and occurred only in 911. It is worth noting that the most beneficial articles of the treaty for the Rus - on the payment of indemnities (“ukladov”) by the Greeks and on the exemption of Russian merchants in Constantinople from paying duties - are only among the preliminary articles 907, but not in the main text of the treaty of 911. According to one version, the mention of duties was deliberately removed from the article “On Russian traders”, which was preserved only as a title. Perhaps the desire of the Byzantine rulers to conclude an agreement with Russia was also caused by the desire to gain an ally in the ongoing war against the Arabs. It is known that in the summer of the same year 911, 700 Russian soldiers took part in the Byzantine campaign against the Arab-occupied island of Crete. Perhaps they remained in the empire, enrolling there military service, after Oleg’s campaigns, and did not return to their homeland.

Detailed textual, diplomatic and legal analysis showed that the texts of the diplomatic protocol, acts and legal formulas preserved in the Old Russian text of the treaty of 911 are either translations of well-known Byzantine clerical formulas, attested in many surviving Greek authentic acts, or paraphrases of Byzantine monuments rights. Nestor included in the “Tale of Bygone Years” a Russian translation made from an authentic (that is, possessing the force of the original) copy of the act from a special copy book. Unfortunately, it has not yet been established when and by whom the translation was carried out, and under no circumstances did extracts from the copy books reach Rus'.

During the X–XI centuries. wars between Russia and Byzantium alternated with peaceful ones, and rather long pauses. These periods were marked by increased diplomatic actions between the two states - exchange of embassies, active trade. Clergymen, architects, and artists came to Rus' from Byzantium. After the Christianization of Rus', pilgrims began to travel in the opposite direction to holy places. The Tale of Bygone Years includes two more Russian-Byzantine treaties: between Prince Igor and Emperor Roman I Lekapin (944) and between Prince Svyatoslav and Emperor John I Tzimiskes (971). As with the 911 agreement, they are translations from the Greek originals. Most likely, all three texts fell into the hands of the compiler of The Tale of Bygone Years in the form of a single collection. At the same time, the text of the agreement of 1046 between Yaroslav the Wise and Emperor Constantine IX Monomakh is not in the Tale of Bygone Years.

Treaties with Byzantium are among the oldest written sources of Russian statehood. As international treaty acts, they fixed the norms of international law, as well as legal norms of the contracting parties, which thus found itself drawn into the orbit of another cultural and legal tradition.

The norms of international law include those articles of the treaty of 911 and other Russian-Byzantine agreements, analogues of which are present in the texts of a number of other treaties of Byzantium. This applies to the limitation of the period of stay of foreigners in Constantinople, as well as to the norms of coastal law reflected in the treaty of 911. An analogue of the provisions of the same text on fugitive slaves may be clauses of some Byzantine-Bulgarian agreements. Byzantine diplomatic agreements included clauses on baths similar to the corresponding terms of the treaty of 907. Documenting Russian-Byzantine treaties, as researchers have repeatedly noted, owe much to the Byzantine clerical protocol. Therefore, they reflected Greek protocol and legal norms, clerical and diplomatic stereotypes, norms, and institutions. This, in particular, is the usual mention for Byzantine acts of co-rulers along with the ruling monarch: Leo, Alexander and Constantine in the treaty of 911, Romanus, Constantine and Stephen in the treaty of 944, John Tzimiskes, Basil and Constantine in the treaty of 971. Such there were usually no mentions either in Russian chronicles or in short Byzantine chronicles; on the contrary, in the form of Byzantine official documents it was a common element. The determining influence of Byzantine norms was reflected in the use of Greek measures of weight, monetary measures, as well as the Byzantine system of chronology and dating: indicating the year from the Creation of the world and indict (the serial number of the year in a 15-year cycle tax reporting). The price of a slave in a contract like 911, as studies have shown, is close to a fork average price slave in Byzantium at that time.

It is important that the treaty of 911, as well as subsequent agreements, testified to the complete legal equality of both parties. The subjects of law were the subjects of the Russian prince and the Byzantine emperor, regardless of their place of residence, social status and religion. At the same time, the norms regulating crimes against the person were based mainly on the “Russian law”. This probably means a set of legal norms of customary law that were in force in Rus' by the beginning of the 10th century, that is, long before the adoption of Christianity.

© Library Russian Academy sciences

Bibikov M.V. Rus' in Byzantine diplomacy: treaties between Rus' and the Greeks of the 10th century. // Ancient Rus'. Questions of medieval studies. 2005. No. 1 (19).

Litavrin G.G. Byzantium, Bulgaria, etc. Rus' (IX – early 12th century). St. Petersburg, 2000.

Nazarenko A.V. Ancient Rus' on international routes. M., 2001.

Novoseltsev A.P. The formation of the Old Russian state and its first ruler // The most ancient states of Eastern Europe. 1998 M., 2000.

The Tale of Bygone Years / Ed. V. P. Adrianova-Peretz. M.; L, 1950.

In the year 6420 [from the Creation of the world]

Oleg sent his men to make peace and establish an agreement between the Greeks and Russians, saying this: “A list from the agreement concluded under the same kings Leo and Alexander. We are from the Russian family - Karla, Inegeld, Farlaf, Veremud, Rulav, Gudy, Ruald, Karn, Frelav, Ruar, Aktevu, Truan, Lidul, Fost, Stemid - sent from Oleg, the Grand Duke of Russia, and from everyone who is at hand him, - the bright and great princes, and his great boyars, to you, Leo, Alexander and Constantine, the great autocrats in God, the Greek kings, to strengthen and certify the long-term friendship that existed between Christians and Russians, at the request of our great princes and by command, from all the Russians under his hand. Our Lordship, desiring above all in God to strengthen and certify the friendship that constantly existed between Christians and Russians, decided fairly, not only in words, but also in writing, and with a firm oath, swearing with their weapons, to confirm such friendship and certify it by faith and according to our law.

These are the essence of the chapters of the agreement regarding which we have committed ourselves by God's faith and friendship. With the first words of our agreement, we will make peace with you, Greeks, and we will begin to love each other with all our souls and with all our good will, and we will not allow any deception or crime to occur from those under the hands of our bright princes, since this is in our power; but we will try, as much as we can, to maintain with you, Greeks, in future years and forever an unchangeable and unchanging friendship, expressed and committed to a letter with confirmation, certified by an oath. Likewise, you, Greeks, maintain the same unshakable and unchanging friendship for our bright Russian princes and for everyone who is under the hand of our the bright prince always and in all years.

And about the chapters concerning possible atrocities, we will agree as follows: let those atrocities that are clearly certified be considered indisputably committed; and whichever they do not believe, let the party that seeks to swear that this crime will not be believed; and when that party swears, let the punishment be whatever the crime turns out to be.

About this: if anyone kills a Russian Christian or a Russian Christian, let him die at the scene of the murder. If the murderer runs away and turns out to be a rich man, then let the relative of the murdered man take that part of his property that is due by law, but let the murderer’s wife also keep what is due to her by law. If the escaped murderer turns out to be indigent, then let him remain on trial until he is found, and then let him die.

If someone strikes with a sword or beats with any other weapon, then for that blow or beating let him give 5 liters of silver according to Russian law; If the one who committed this offense is poor, then let him give as much as he can, so that let him take off the very clothes in which he walks, and about the remaining unpaid amount, let him swear by his faith that no one can help him, and let him not this balance is collected from him.

About this: if a Russian steals something from a Christian or, on the contrary, a Christian from a Russian, and the thief is caught by the victim at the very time when he commits the theft, or if the thief prepares to steal and is killed, then his death will not be exacted from either Christians or from Russians; but let the victim take back what he lost. If the thief gives himself up voluntarily, then let him be taken by the one from whom he stole, and let him be bound, and give back what he stole in triple the amount.

About this: if one of the Christians or one of the Russians attempts [robbery] through beatings and clearly takes by force something belonging to another, then let him return it in triple amount.

If the rook is thrown out strong wind to a foreign land and one of us Russians will be there and help preserve the boat with its cargo and send it back to Greek land, then we will carry it through all sorts of dangerous place until he comes to a safe place; If this boat is delayed by a storm or has run aground and cannot return to its place, then we, Russians, will help the rowers of that boat and see them off with their goods in good health. If the same misfortune happens to a Russian boat near the Greek land, then we will take it to the Russian land and let them sell the goods of that boat, so if it is possible to sell anything from that boat, then let us, the Russians, take it [to the Greek shore]. And when [we, Russians] come to the Greek land for trade or as an embassy to your king, then [we, Greeks] will honor the sold goods of their boat. If any of us Russians who arrived with the boat happen to be killed or something is taken from the boat, then let the culprits be sentenced to the above punishment.

About these: if a captive of one side or another is forcibly held by Russians or Greeks, having been sold into their country, and if, in fact, he turns out to be Russian or Greek, then let them redeem and return the ransomed person to his country and take the price of those who bought him, or let it be The price offered for it was that of servants. Also, if he is taken by those Greeks in war, still let him return to his country and let it be given for him. common price him, as mentioned above.

If there is a recruitment for the army and these [Russians] want to honor your king, and no matter how many of them come at what time, and want to stay with your king of their own free will, then so be it.

More about the Russians, about the prisoners. Those [captive Christians] who came from any country to Rus' and were sold [by the Russians] back to Greece, or captive Christians brought to Rus' from any country - all of these must be sold for 20 zlatnikov and returned to the Greek land.

About this: if a Russian servant is stolen, either runs away, or is forcibly sold and the Russians begin to complain, let them prove this about their servants and take him to Rus', but the merchants, if they lose the servant and appeal, let them demand it in court and, when they find , - they will take it. If someone does not allow an inquiry to be carried out, he will not be recognized as right.

And about the Russians serving in the Greek land with the Greek king. If someone dies without disposing of his property, and he does not have his own [in Greece], then let his property return to Rus' to his closest younger relatives. If he makes a will, then the one to whom he wrote to inherit his property will take what was bequeathed to him, and let him inherit it.

About Russian traders.

ABOUT different people who go to the Greek land and remain in debt. If the villain does not return to Rus', then let the Russians complain to the Greek kingdom, and he will be captured and returned by force to Rus'. Let the Russians do the same to the Greeks if the same thing happens.

As a sign of the strength and immutability that should be between you, Christians, and Russians, we created this peace treaty with Ivan’s writing on two charters - your Tsar’s and with our own hand - and sealed it with an oath to the present with an honest cross and the holy consubstantial Trinity of your one true God and gave it to our ambassadors. We swore to your king, appointed by God, as a divine creation, according to our faith and custom, not to violate for us and anyone from our country any of the established chapters of the peace treaty and friendship. And this writing was given to your kings for approval, so that this agreement would become the basis for the approval and certification of the peace existing between us. The month of September 2, index 15, in the year from the creation of the world 6420.”

Tsar Leon honored the Russian ambassadors with gifts - gold, and silks, and precious fabrics - and sent his husbands to show them the church beauty, the golden chambers and the wealth stored in them: a lot of gold, pavolok, gems and the passion of the Lord - the crown, nails, scarlet robe and relics of the saints, teaching them their faith and showing them the true faith. And so he released them to his land with great honor. The ambassadors sent by Oleg returned to him and told him all the speeches of both kings, how they concluded peace and established an agreement between the Greek and Russian lands and established not to break the oath - neither to the Greeks nor to Rus'.

Translation by D. S. Likhachev. Library of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Russian History

Russian-Byzantine Treaty of 911

Its general political part repeated the provisions of the treaties of 860 and 907. Unlike previous treaties, where its content was communicated as an “imperial grant” to the Russian prince, now it was an equal treaty in its entire form between two equal participants in the negotiation process. The first article talked about ways to deal with various atrocities and penalties for them. The second is about responsibility for murder. The third is about liability for intentional beatings. The fourth is about responsibility for theft and the corresponding punishments for it. The fifth is about responsibility for robbery. The sixth is about the procedure for helping merchants of both countries during their voyages with goods. The seventh is about the procedure for ransoming prisoners. The eighth is about allied assistance to the Greeks from Rus' and about the order of service of the Rus in the imperial army. The ninth is about the practice of ransoming any other captives. The tenth is about the procedure for returning escaped or kidnapped servants. The eleventh is about the practice of inheriting the property of Rus who died in Byzantium. The twelfth is about the order of Russian trade in Byzantium. The thirteenth is about responsibility for the debt taken and about punishment for non-payment of the debt.

The Tale of Bygone Years says about this agreement:

Per year 6420 (912). Oleg sent his men to make peace and establish an agreement between the Greeks and Russians, saying this: “A list from the agreement concluded under the same kings Leo and Alexander. We are from the Russian family - Karla, Inegeld, Farlaf, Veremud, Rulav, Gudy, Ruald, Karn, Frelav, Ruar, Aktevu, Truan, Lidul, Fost, Stemid - sent from Oleg, the Grand Duke of Russia, and from everyone who is under his hand - the bright and great princes, and his great boyars, to you, Leo, Alexander and to Constantine, the great autocrats in God, the kings of the Greeks, to strengthen and certify the long-term friendship that existed between Christians and Russians, at the request of our great princes and by order, from all the Russians under his hand, Our Lordship, desiring above all in God. to strengthen and certify the friendship that constantly existed between Christians and Russians, they decided fairly, not only in words, but also in writing, and with a firm oath, swearing with their weapons, to confirm such friendship and certify it according to faith and according to our law.

These are the essence of the chapters of the agreement regarding which we have committed ourselves by God's faith and friendship. With the first words of our agreement, we will make peace with you, Greeks, and we will begin to love each other with all our souls and with all our good will, and we will not allow any deception or crime to occur from those under the hands of our bright princes, since this is in our power; but we will try, as much as we can, to maintain with you, Greeks, in future years and forever an unchangeable and unchanging friendship, expressed and committed to a letter with confirmation, certified by an oath. Likewise, you, Greeks, maintain the same unshakable and unchanging friendship for our bright Russian princes and for everyone who is under the hand of our bright prince always and in all years.

And about the chapters concerning possible atrocities, we will agree as follows: let those atrocities that are clearly certified be considered indisputably committed; and whichever they do not believe, let the party that seeks to swear that this crime will not be believed; and when that party swears, let the punishment be whatever the crime turns out to be.

About this: if anyone kills a Russian Christian or a Russian Christian, let him die at the scene of the murder. If the murderer runs away and turns out to be a rich man, then let the relative of the murdered man take that part of his property that is due by law, but let the murderer’s wife also keep what is due to her by law. If the escaped murderer turns out to be indigent, then let him remain on trial until he is found, and then let him die.

If someone strikes with a sword or beats with any other weapon, then for that blow or beating let him give 5 liters of silver according to Russian law; If the one who committed this offense is poor, then let him give as much as he can, so that let him take off the very clothes in which he walks, and about the remaining unpaid amount, let him swear by his faith that no one can help him, and let him not this balance is collected from him.
About this: if a Russian steals something from a Christian or, on the contrary, a Christian from a Russian, and the thief is caught by the victim at the very time when he commits the theft, or if the thief prepares to steal and is killed, then his death will not be exacted from either Christians or from Russians; but let the victim take back what he lost. If the thief gives himself up voluntarily, then let him be taken by the one from whom he stole, and let him be bound, and give back what he stole in triple the amount.

About this: if one of the Christians or one of the Russians attempts (robbery) through beatings and clearly takes by force something belonging to another, then let him return it in triple amount.

If a boat is thrown by a strong wind onto a foreign land and one of us Russians is there and helps save the boat with its cargo and send it back to the Greek land, then we carry it through every dangerous place until it comes to a safe place; If this boat is delayed by a storm or has run aground and cannot return to its place, then we, Russians, will help the rowers of that boat and see them off with their goods in good health. If the same misfortune happens to a Russian boat near the Greek land, then we will take it to the Russian land and let them sell the goods of that boat, so if it is possible to sell anything from that boat, then let us, the Russians, take it (to the Greek shore). And when we (we, Russians) come to the Greek land for trade or as an embassy to your king, then (we, Greeks) will honor the sold goods of their boat. If any of us Russians who arrived with the boat happen to be killed or something is taken from the boat, then let the culprits be sentenced to the above punishment.

About these: if a captive of one side or another is forcibly held by Russians or Greeks, having been sold into their country, and if, in fact, he turns out to be Russian or Greek, then let them redeem and return the ransomed person to his country and take the price of those who bought him, or let it be The price offered for it was that of servants. Also, if he is captured by those Greeks in the war, still let him return to his country and his usual price will be given for him, as already said above.

If there is a recruitment into the army and these (Russians) want to honor your king, no matter how many of them come at what time, and want to stay with your king of their own free will, then so be it.

More about the Russians, about the prisoners. Those who came from any country (captive Christians) to Rus' and were sold (by the Russians) back to Greece or captive Christians brought to Rus' from any country - all of these must be sold for 20 zlatnikov and returned to Greek land.

About this: if a Russian servant is stolen, either runs away, or is forcibly sold and the Russians begin to complain, let them prove this about their servants and take him to Rus', but the merchants, if they lose the servant and appeal, let them demand it in court and, when they find , - they will take it. If someone does not allow an inquiry to be carried out, he will not be recognized as right.

And about the Russians serving in the Greek land with the Greek king. If someone dies without disposing of his property, and he does not have his own (in Greece), then let his property return to Rus' to his closest younger relatives. If he makes a will, then the one to whom he wrote to inherit his property will take what was bequeathed to him, and let him inherit it.

About Russian traders.
About various people going to the Greek land and remaining in debt. If the villain does not return to Rus', then let the Russians complain to the Greek kingdom, and he will be captured and returned by force to Rus'. Let the Russians do the same to the Greeks if the same thing happens.

As a sign of the strength and immutability that should be between you, Christians, and Russians, we created this peace treaty with Ivan’s writing on two charters - your Tsar and with our own hand - we sealed it with an oath of the honorable cross and the holy consubstantial Trinity of your one true God and given to our ambassadors. We swore to your king, appointed by God, as a divine creation, according to our faith and custom, not to violate for us and anyone from our country any of the established chapters of the peace treaty and friendship. And this writing was given to your kings for approval, so that this agreement would become the basis for the approval and certification of the peace existing between us. The month of September is 2, index 15, in the year from the creation of the world 6420."

Tsar Leon honored the Russian ambassadors with gifts - gold, and silks, and precious fabrics - and assigned his husbands to show them the church beauty, the golden chambers and the wealth stored in them: a lot of gold, pavoloks, precious stones and the passion of the Lord - a crown, nails , scarlet and the relics of the saints, teaching them their faith and showing them the true faith. And so he released them to his land with great honor. The ambassadors sent by Oleg returned to him and told him all the speeches of both kings, how they concluded peace and established an agreement between the Greek and Russian lands and established not to break the oath - neither to the Greeks nor to Rus'.

Russian-Byzantine Treaty of 911

Its general political part repeated the provisions of the treaties of 860 and 907. Unlike previous treaties in 911. between Russia and Byzantine Empire was concluded equal bilateral writing agreement on the ancient international form of "peace and love", which settled all the main issues of interstate relations of that time.

Prince Oleg reigned for 33 years, from 879 to 912. In 911 Prince Oleg did a good deed, confirming all previous agreements with Byzantium, this allowed long years Russian merchants have good trading conditions. Kievsky's burial place Prince Oleg not really known. Into the history of our country Prince Oleg logged in as:

· builder of Russian cities;

· collector of Slavic tribes;

· talented commander.

Death of Prince Oleg covered in legend. The chronicle says that the Magi predicted that Oleg would die by horse. Prince Oleg trusted their predictions and abandoned his beloved horse. Remembering a few years later about the predictions of the Magi, Oleg asked his associates about the fate of the horse. The horse died, they answered. Oleg wanted to come to the place where the remains of his pet lay. Arriving there, Prince Oleg stepped on his skull and said: “Should I be afraid of him?” It turned out that in the skull of the dead horse lived poisonous snake, which fatally stung the prince.

Russian Prince Igor End of form

Igor is the Prince of Kiev, the first of the Russian princes mentioned by foreign historians. The main focus of his activities was:

· defense of the country from Pecheneg raids

· maintaining the unity of the state.

Reigned in Kyiv after the death of his predecessor Oleg from 912, conquering the rebel tribes Drevlyans and Uglichs, forcing them to pay tribute.

Igor gathered a squad for a new campaign: the territory of the Russians was attacked for the first time Pechenegs. They came from the east , they led a nomadic lifestyle. Having met Igor's strong army, the Pechenegs were forced to retire to Bessarabia. Having made peace with Igor in 915 year, they did not disturb the Russians for five years.

In 941, Prince Igor undertook a campaign against Constantinople “on ten thousand ships” (an exaggeration of the Byzantine chronicler). However, the campaign ended sadly for the Russian army: the Byzantines responded to Igor with the so-called “Greek fire.” Most of the Russian army was destroyed.

Igor retreated and attacked the Greeks again in 943. Warned by the Bulgarians and Khazars “about Russians without number,” the Byzantines offered peace on terms favorable to Prince Igor. After consulting with wise warriors, the Russian ruler accepted the offer of the Byzantine emperor. The following year, Kyiv and Constantinople exchanged embassies and concluded new peace treaty, third in a row(after the treaties of 907 and 911) in Russian history. The treaty of 944 established “eternal peace”, stipulated more favorable conditions than before for trade between Russians and Byzantium. This was the first international document to mention the country under the name Russian Land. After the campaign of 944, Prince Igor did not fight again.

In 945, Prince Igor went with his squad to Drevlyan land for tribute. Considering the collected polyudye insufficient, the prince and his warriors returned to collect tribute again. Outraged by such arbitrariness, the Drevlyans from Iskoresten decided: “The wolf got into the habit of going to the sheep and dragging the whole flock around. It's better for us to kill him! Small squad Igor was defeated by the Drevlyan prince Mal, Igor himself was killed, tied to the bowed tops of two neighboring trees. After Igor's death, the leader of the Drevlyans, Mal, made an attempt to woo the prince's widow, Princess Olga, but she, driven by a sense of revenge, deceitfully killed Mal and his matchmaking embassy, ​​burying him alive in the ground.