Military Review

War Svyatoslav with Byzantium. Battle of Arkadiopol

23
War with the Byzantine Empire


Coup in Byzantium. 11 December 969, as a result of the coup, the Byzantine emperor Nikifor Fock was assassinated, and John Tzimisios was on the imperial throne. Nikifor Fock fell at the height of his glory: in October, the imperial army captured Antioch. Nikifor aroused strong opposition among the nobility and the clergy. He was a harsh and ascetic warrior, focused on restoring the power of the Byzantine Empire, giving all his strength to the struggle with the Arabs and the struggle for southern Italy. The wealthy estates did not like the abolition of luxury and ceremonies, thrift in the spending of public funds. At the same time, Basileus planned to conduct a series of internal reforms aimed at restoring social justice. Nikifor wanted to weaken the nobility in favor of the people and deprive the church of many privileges that made it the richest institution of the empire. As a result, a significant part of the Byzantine aristocracy, high clergy and monasticism hated the upstart. Nikifor was accused of not having come from the royal family and had no birth rights to the imperial throne. He did not have time to win the respect of ordinary people. The empire was engulfed by famine, and the relatives of the emperor were noted in embezzlement.

Nikifor was doomed. Even his wife came out against him. Queen Theophano, apparently, did not like the austerity and indifference to the joys of Nikifor’s life. The future queen began her career as a daughter of the Constantinople shinkar (the owner of the drinking house) and a prostitute. However, amazing beauty, ability, ambition and viciousness allowed her to become an empress. At first she seduced and subdued the young heir to the throne, Roman. During the life of Basileus, she struck up a relationship with a promising commander, Nikifor. After Nikifor Foca took the throne, she again became queen. Theophano made her lover a brilliant associate of Nikifor, John Tzimiskes. Theophano let Tzimisces and his people into the bedroom of the emperor, and Nikifor was brutally murdered. Before death, the emperor was tormented. It should also be said that Tzimiskes was the nephew of Nikifor Fochi, his mother was the sister of Fochi.

The coup d'état significantly weakened the Byzantine Empire that had just begun to collect stones. Nikifor's conquests in the East — in Cilicia, Phenicia, and Coelishiria — were almost completely lost. In Cappadocia, in Asia Minor, a nephew of the deceased emperor, commander Ward Fock, who raised a strong army at the expense of Fock, raised a powerful rebellion. He began to fight for the throne. The younger brother of Emperor Nikifor II Foki, Lev Fok tried to raise a rebellion against Tzimiskes in Thrace.

Under these conditions, Kalokir, who came to Bulgaria with Russian troops, got a chance to take the imperial throne. It was quite in the spirit of the times. More than once or twice over the course of long centuries, energetic aspirants to the Byzantine throne raised insurrections, turned their subordinate armies towards the capital, and led foreign troops into the Byzantine Empire. Others carried out successful or unsuccessful palace coups. The most successful and capable became new basileus.

Preparing for war, first skirmishes

Under John I Tzimiskhii, relations between Byzantium and Rus became frankly hostile. The Russian prince, according to Vasily Tatishchev, learned from the captured Bulgarians that the Bulgarian troops attacked Pereyaslavets at the instigation of Constantinople and that the Greeks promised help to the Bulgarian government. He also learned that the Greeks had long ago made an alliance with the Bulgarians against the Russian prince. In addition, Constantinople is now particularly and did not hide his intentions. Tzimisces sent an embassy to Pereyaslavets, which demanded from Svyatoslav that he, having received the award from Nikifor, return to his possessions. Since the departure of Svyatoslav to fight the Pechenegs, the Byzantine government stopped paying tribute to Russia.

The grand duke quickly replied: Russian forward detachments were sent to disturb the Byzantine frontier while conducting reconnaissance. An undeclared war began. John Tzimiskes, barely seized the throne, faced with the constant attacks of the Rus on Byzantine possessions. Thus, Svyatoslav Igorevich, having returned to Pereyaslavets, abruptly changed the restrained policy towards Byzantium. Open conflict erupted. The prince had a formal reason - Svyatoslav had an agreement with Nikifor Fock, not Tzimis. Nikifor - a formal ally of Svyatoslav, meanly killed. At the same time, the Hungarians, the allies of the Rus, became active. At that moment, when Svyatoslav rescued his capital from the Pechenegs, the Hungarians struck at Byzantium. They came to Thessaloniki. The Greeks had to mobilize significant forces to oust the enemy. As a result, Constantinople and Kiev exchanged blows. Pecheneg leaders, bought by the Byzantines, led troops to Kiev for the first time. And Svyatoslav, knowing or guessing who was to blame for the Pecheneg invasion, sent ambassadors to Buda and asked the Hungarian leaders to strike at Byzantium.

Now the masks have been reset. The Greeks, making sure that neither the Pechenegs' gold nor the raids did not shake Svyatoslav’s determination to remain on the Danube, presented an ultimatum, the Russian prince refused. Bulgarians made an alliance with Svyatoslav. Russ ruined border areas of the empire. It went to a big war. However, the time for a fight with Svyatoslav was inconvenient. The Arabs won back the territories occupied by Nicephorus Fock, tried to recapture Antioch. Warda Fock revolted. For the third year, the empire was tormented by hunger, especially aggravated by the spring of 970, causing discontent among the population. Split Bulgaria. The Western Bulgarian kingdom separated from Preslav, which began to pursue an anti-Byzantine policy.

In these extremely unfavorable conditions, the new Byzantine basileus proved to be a sophisticated politician and decided to win time from Svyatoslav to gather troops scattered around topics (military administrative districts of the Byzantine Empire). A new embassy was sent to the Russian prince in the spring of 970. The Russians demanded that the Greeks pay the tribute that Constantinople was obliged to pay according to the previous agreements. The Greeks, apparently, initially agreed. But time was pulled, they began to gather a powerful army. At the same time, the Greeks demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops from the Danube. Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich, according to the Byzantine chronicler Lev the Deacon, was ready to leave, but demanded a huge ransom for the cities left on the Danube. Otherwise, Svyatoslav declared, “may they (Greeks) move from Europe, which did not belong to them, to Asia; but they do not dream that the Tauroskifs (Ruses) without it will reconcile with them. ”

It is clear that Svyatoslav was not going to leave, making difficult demands for the Greeks. The Russian prince did not plan to leave the Danube, which he wanted to make the center of his state. But negotiations continued. Byzantines won time. Svyatoslav it was also necessary. While the Greek ambassadors tried to stifle and deceive Svyatoslav Igorevich in Pereyaslavets, the envoys of the Russian prince had already gone to the Pecheneg and Hungarian possessions. The Hungarians were the old allies of Russia and the constant enemies of Byzantium. Their troops regularly threatened the Byzantine Empire. Hungarian troops supported the troops of Svyatoslav in 967, and in 968, they attacked Byzantine lands at his request. And now Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich again called allies to fight with Byzantium. The Byzantine chronicler John Skilitsa knew about the ambassadors of Svyatoslav to the Ugrians. Reported about this union and Tatishchev. AT "Stories He said that when negotiations between the ambassadors of Tzimisces and Svyatoslav were going on, the Russian prince had only 20 thousand soldiers, as the Hungarians, the Poles and the reinforcements from Kiev had not yet come. Other sources do not report Poles, but at that time there was no hostility between Russia and Poland, so some Polish soldiers could well side with Svyatoslav. The baptism of Poland according to the Roman model was begun at the turn of the X - XI centuries and lasted until the XIII century, only then the Polish state became an implacable enemy of Russia.

There was a struggle for the Pechenezh leaders. In Constantinople, they knew very well the price and value of the union with them. Even the emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, the author of his work “On the management of the empire,” wrote that when the Roman emperor (in Constantinople considered themselves heirs of Rome) lived in peace with the Pechenegs, neither the Russians nor the Hungarians could attack the Romanian state. However, the Pechenegs, as their allies, were also viewed in Kiev. There is no information about the hostilities between Russia and the Pechenegs for the period from 920 to 968 year. And this in the conditions of constant clashes at the border of the “forest and steppe” at that period of history is a rather rare, one can even say unique phenomenon. Moreover, the Pechenegs (apparently the same fragment of the Scythian-Sarmatian world as Russia) regularly act as allies of the Rus. In 944, the Grand Duke Igor Rurikovich leads the Great Skuf (Scythia) to the Byzantine Empire, the Pechenegs are part of the allied army. When an honorable peace was concluded with Constantinople, Igor sent the Pechenegs to fight the hostile Bulgarians. The union of the Rus and the Pechenegs is also reported by Eastern authors. The 10th century Arab geographer and traveler Ibn Haukal calls the Pechenegs "the thorn of the Rus and their strength." In 968, the Byzantines were able to bribe part of the Pechenegian clans, and they approached Kiev. However, Svyatoslav punished impudent. By the beginning of the war with Byzantium, the Pecheneg detachments again joined the army of Svyatoslav Igorevich.

In preparation for the war with the Byzantine Empire, the Russian prince took care of the foreign policy of Bulgaria. The government of the king was tied to the policy of Svyatoslav. This is indicated by numerous facts. Bulgarians acted as guides, Bulgarian soldiers fought with the Greeks as part of the Russian army. Russ and Bulgarians together defended the city from the enemy. Bulgaria became an ally of Russia. It is quite possible that during this period, those nobles who had seen the catastrophic nature of the compromising, Greek philosophy of the Preslav policy prevailed in the circle of Tsar Boris. Bulgaria through the fault of the provisan party split and was on the verge of death. Byzantium twice substituted Bulgaria under the blow of Russia. And Svyatoslav Igorevich, when he made the second Danube campaign and again occupied Pereyaslavets, could easily capture Preslav. But the Russian prince generously ceased hostilities against the Bulgarians, although he could capture the whole country: the Bulgarian army was defeated, and the leadership was demoralized. Svetoslav Igorevich saw these doubts and hesitations; he tried to eliminate the “fifth column” in Bulgaria, which was oriented towards Byzantium. So, he destroyed the conspirators in Pereyaslavets, because of them the voivode Wolf was forced to leave the city. Already during the war with Byzantium, Svyatoslav would be cruelly punished with a part of the prisoners (apparently, by the Greeks and Bulgarians who were byzantine-minded) in the Philippopolis (Plovdiv), which was located on the border with Byzantium and was a stronghold of the Provisan party. At the second stage of the war, the conspiracy in Dorostol will be suppressed, during the siege by its Romans.

While negotiations were under way, the Russian troops disturbed the Greek lands and conducted reconnaissance in force. The Romanian commanders who commanded the troops in Macedonia and Thrace could not stop them. Allied Hungarian and Pecheneg detachments joined the army of Svyatoslav. At this point, both sides were ready for war. The commanders of Ward Skleer and Patric Peter — he defeated the Arabs at Antioch, received orders to speak out of the European possessions of Byzantium. The empire had the opportunity to transfer the main forces to the Balkan Peninsula. Emperor John Tzimiskes promised to come out with his guard against the "Scythians," since "he could no longer bear their unbridled impudence." The best Byzantine commanders received an order to guard the border and conduct reconnaissance, sending spies in a "Scythian dress" across the border. A fleet was prepared. In Adrianople began to concentrate stocks weaponsfood and fodder. The empire was preparing for a decisive offensive.

Negotiations were interrupted. On behalf of the Byzantine Basileus, the ambassadors of Tzimiskes began to threaten the Russian prince: in particular, they reminded Svyatoslav of the defeat of his father Igor in 941, when part of the Russian fleet was destroyed by the so-called. "Greek fire." The Romans threatened to destroy the Russian army. Svyatoslav immediately responded with a promise to break the tents at Constantinople and fight the enemy: “we will meet him bravely and show him in practice that we are not some craftsmen who earn their living by the labor of their hands, but men of blood who defeat the enemy with weapons ". The Russian chronicle also describes this moment. Svyatoslav sent people to the Greeks with the words: “I want you to go and take your city, like this one,” that is, Pereyaslavets.

War Svyatoslav with Byzantium. Battle of Arkadiopol

"Sword of Svyatoslav". The sword of the "Varangian" type discovered in the Dnieper River near the island of Khortytsya 7 November 2011 of the year. Weight about 1 kg, has a length of 96 cm. Dated from the middle of the X century.

The first stage of the war. Battle of Arkadiopol

In Constantinople, they wanted to strike the enemy in the spring, starting a campaign through the Balkans to northern Bulgaria, when the mountain passes freed from the snow and the roads began to dry out. However, the opposite happened, the Russian troops went on the offensive first. Prince Svyatoslav receiving information about the preparations of the enemy from the advanced forces, the scouting Bulgarians, warned the enemy strike. The prince-warrior himself set out on a campaign against Tsargrad-Constantinople. This news was for Tzimiskes and his generals like a thunderclap. Svyatoslav Igorevich intercepted a strategic initiative and mixed all the cards to the enemy, not allowing him to complete preparations for the campaign.

It soon became clear that the swift attack of the Russian soldiers and their allies was simply impossible to stop. In the spring of 970, the troops of Svyatoslav Igorevich with lightning throw passed from the lower reaches of the Danube through the Balkan Mountains. The Ruses, using the help of the Bulgarian guides, dispersed or bypassed the Roman outposts on the mountain passes and transferred the war to Thrace and Macedonia. Russian troops captured several border towns. Founded and captured earlier by the Greeks, a strategically important city in Thrace - Philippopol. According to the Byzantine historian Lev the Deacon, here the Russian prince executed thousands of "grekofilov." Also in Thrace, the troops of Patricia Peter were defeated, since the war the Byzantine chroniclers "forgot" about this commander.

Russian army swiftly marched on Constantinople. Having traveled about 400 kilometers, the troops of Svyatoslav approached the fortress Arkadiopol (modern Lüleburgaz), in this direction Vard Sklir kept the defense. According to other sources, the decisive battle of the first stage of the Russian-Byzantine war took place near the large Byzantine city of Adrianople (the current Edirne). According to Lev Deacon, Svyatoslav had 30 thousand soldiers, the number of Byzantine troops was 10 thousand people. The Russian chronicle speaks of the 10 of thousands of Russian soldiers (Svyatoslav's army was attacked by several detachments), and of the 100 thousand of Greek troops.

According to the Byzantine chronicler, both sides showed perseverance and valor, "the success of the battle tended in favor of one, then in favor of another army." The Greeks were able to defeat the Pecheneg detachment, turning it to flight. Russian troops also trembled. Here, Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich addressed his warriors with words that became legendary: “Do not disgrace the land of Ruski, but let down the bones, don't forget imam for dead shame. If we flee, shame imam. I’m not a refuge, but let us be strong, as before you will go: if my head is to lie down, then prude for yourself. " And the Russians fled, and there was a great slaughter, and defeated Svyatoslav.

According to Leo the Deacon, the Greek troops won a convincing victory. However, there is much evidence that the Byzantine chronicler distorts the historical truth, putting politics above objectivity. It must be said that information warfare is far from being a modern invention. Even the ancient chroniclers of Rome and Constantinople in every way humbled the "barbarians" from the east and north, attributing all the advantages and victories to the "highly developed" Greeks and Romans. Suffice to say about the inconsistency and frank lies of Leo the Deacon. The chronist says that huge masses of troops fought and “the success of the battle tended in favor of one, then in favor of another army”, that is, the battle was fierce, and then reports loss of 55 of killed Romanians (!) And 20 of thousands with odd (!!) dead Scythians. Apparently, the "Scythians" were shot with machine guns ?! The obvious lie.

In addition, there is evidence of a direct participant in the events - the Greek Bishop John. The church hierarch at the time of the approach of the Russian troops to Constantinople addressed with bitter words to the slain Emperor Nikifor Foke, expressing complete distrust of the successes of the commanders of Tsimishi: “... rise up now, the emperor, and gather troops, phalanxes and regiments. The Russian invasion rushes at us. ” It is necessary to think that the Tale of Bygone Years, although it describes the events of this war extremely sparingly, is more reliable when it reports that after this fierce battle, Svyatoslav went to Constantinople, fighting and smashing cities, which still stand empty.

In such a situation, when the victorious army of Svyatoslav stood about 100 kilometers from Constantinople, the Greeks asked for peace. In the chronicle tale, the Greeks again dodged, experienced Svyatoslav, sending him various gifts. The prince remained indifferent to gold and precious stones, but praised the weapon. The Byzantine advisers gave advice to pay tribute: “The Lut will be this man, for he neglects wealth, but takes the weapon.” This is another proof of the Greek deception about winning a decisive battle. The Romans could have scrambled up in one of the clashes, over an auxiliary detachment, but not in a decisive battle. Otherwise, why should they ask for peace. If the bulk of the Russian troops (20 thousand soldiers) were destroyed, and the rest were scattered, it is obvious that then Tzimshiy would have no need to search for peace talks and give tribute. In such a situation, the Emperor John Tzimisces was supposed to organize the pursuit of the enemy, the capture of his soldiers, the Balkan mountains, and on the shoulders of the soldiers of Svyatoslav break into Great Preslav and then Pereyaslavets. And here the Greeks beg Svyatoslav Igorevich about the world.

The first stage of the war with the Byzantine Empire ended in victory for Svyatoslav. But Prince Svyatoslav did not have the strength to continue the campaign and storm the great Constantinople. The army suffered heavy losses and needed replenishment and rest. Therefore, the prince agreed to peace. Constantinople was forced to pay tribute and agree with the consolidation of Svyatoslav on the Danube. Svyatoslav "... go to Pereyaslavets with great praise." Russ, Bulgarians, Hungarians and Pechenegs left Thrace and Macedonia. In fact, Russia and Byzantium returned to the state of the 967 agreement of the year concluded between Svyatoslav and Nikifor Fock. The Byzantine Empire renewed the payment of the annual tribute to Kiev, agreed with the presence of the Rus in the Danube. Rus refused claims to the Northern Black Sea and Crimean possessions of Byzantium. For the rest, the norms of the Russian-Byzantine Treaty of 944 of the year were preserved.

Byzantine sources do not report on this agreement, which is understandable. The Byzantine Empire suffered a heavy defeat from the "barbarians", but will soon take revenge. And the history, as is known, is written by the winners. Romes did not need the truth about the defeats of their powerful army from the "Scythian" prince. Constantinople went to the world to prepare for a new war.

There is no reason not to trust the information of the Russian chronicles, since the same Byzantine sources report that the hostilities were halted, and Ward Sklir was recalled from the Balkan front to Asia Minor to suppress the revolt of Warda Foki. In Constantinople, a peace agreement was regarded as a pause in hostilities, military cunning, and not a long-term peace. The Byzantine command tried to restore order in the rear, regroup forces and prepare a surprise attack in 971. Apparently, Svyatoslav decided that the campaign was won and that in the near future there would be no active hostilities. Allied - auxiliary Pecheneg and Hungarian troops, the Russian prince released. The main Russian forces led to Pereyaslavets, leaving a small detachment in the Bulgarian capital - Preslav. There were no Russian troops in any other Bulgarian cities. Pliska and other centers lived their lives. The war did not affect the Western Bulgarian kingdom, hostile to Byzantium. Although Svyatoslav could conclude an alliance with the Western Bulgarian kingdom. If Svyatoslav were defeated and retreated, he would have behaved differently. I would not let go of the Allies, on the contrary, strengthened their ranks, called for reinforcements from the lands of the Pechenegs, Hungarians and Kiev. The main forces concentrated in mountain passes to fight off the enemy offensive. Having received reinforcements, I would launch a counteroffensive. Svyatoslav behaved like a winner, not waiting for a traitorous blow from the defeated enemy, who himself asked for peace.



To be continued ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
"Coming on you!" Educating the hero and his first victory
Saber kick of Svyatoslav on the Khazar "miracle-yuda"
Bulgarian campaign Svyatoslav
Bulgarian campaign Svyatoslav. 2 part
War Svyatoslav with Byzantium. Battle of Arkadiopol
War Svyatoslav with Byzantium. Battle for Preslav and the heroic defense of Dorostol
The mystery of the death of Svyatoslav. Great Russia Construction Strategy
23 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Hort
    Hort 25 November 2013 08: 21 New
    +13
    informatively, author and article +
  2. Peter76
    Peter76 25 November 2013 09: 08 New
    +7
    Thank you for the article
  3. mamba
    mamba 25 November 2013 09: 12 New
    +11
    Byzantium, mired in luxury, debauchery, intrigue and internal conflicts, overlooked a promising ally - Russia. And from the south the Arabs were already pushing. Instead of attracting Russians to the allies, and not as "cannon fodder", she began to intrigue and quarrel with Russia, setting anyone on it. Subsequently, Russia had to force Byzantium to cultural rapprochement through Baptism already under Vladimir. And Russia could already become the Third Rome, the cultural heiress of Byzantium, itself, but much later. And there is no merit of Byzantium.
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 25 November 2013 10: 54 New
      +3
      Quote: mamba
      ... Rus subsequently had to force Byzantium to cultural rapprochement through Baptism already under Vladimir ...

      Rather, a turn ... At the first - third priority of management, our priesthood lost ...
    2. Corneli
      Corneli 25 November 2013 11: 26 New
      +6
      Quote: mamba
      Byzantium, mired in luxury, debauchery, intrigue and internal conflicts, overlooked a promising ally - Russia. And from the south the Arabs were already pushing. Instead of attracting Russians to the allies, and not as "cannon fodder", she began to intrigue and quarrel with Russia, setting anyone on it. Subsequently, Russia had to force Byzantium to cultural rapprochement through Baptism already under Vladimir. And Russia could already become the Third Rome, the cultural heiress of Byzantium, itself, but much later. And there is no merit of Byzantium.

      That's what you twisted! belay
      For your information, the Byzantines were just striving for a union since the time of Oleg. Since they did not need to conquer Russia or do any kind of nasty things. Russia, by their standards, was far away ... to seize it (if such a thought occurred to someone) was unrealistic and unpromising. But to use as an ally against the nomads who threatened both countries a very good idea. In addition, the Slavic states were trading partners and supplied excellent warriors. Therefore, Byzantium several times concluded peace treaties with Oleg, Igor, Svyatoslav and Vladimir. She needed a calm and allied north, all the more so because there were hostile Bulgarians and Hungarians, and the main territorial interests of Byzantium were in Italy and Asia Minor. So the awl in ... was just with the Kiev princes, it’s just not accepted to write about it, the Slavs are a peaceful nation)
      Well, the "compulsion to cultural rapprochement" ... generally pearl!
      P.S. Arabs have been pushing for 300 years! And actually their "pushing", during the time of Svyatoslav, was a little exhausted and Byzantium from a desperate defense went on to recover the lost ...
      1. mamba
        mamba 25 November 2013 15: 06 New
        +1
        Quote: Corneli
        the Byzantines then precisely aspired to the union since the time of Oleg.

        The growth of the power of Russia in the 9th century greatly disturbed Byzantium. For the sake of border security, the empire was even ready to curtail trade with the "pagan barbarians." Byzantine Kherson became a military outpost that impeded the advance of Russians to the southern shores of the Black Sea. Russia became the initiator in the development of relations with Byzantium. Extremely interested in establishing regular relations with Constantinople, she overcame the obstacles created by the efforts of Byzantine diplomacy step by step by force of arms. Remember Oleg’s campaign and the agreement concluded on its results from the 907th year, which served as the basis for the next contract of the 911th year.
        Quote: Corneli
        Well, the "compulsion to cultural rapprochement" ... generally pearl!

        Emperor Vasily, taking advantage of the help of the Russians in the fight against Foca, was in no hurry to fulfill the agreement reached - Anna was not sent to Russia. To force Vasily to fulfill his promise, Vladimir in the spring of 989 besieged Kherson, which was taken in early summer. Fearing the conflict would deepen and wishing to return the Crimean colonies, the emperor ordered the porphyrogenic sister to be sent to Vladimir. The marriage, which was preceded by the adoption of Christianity by Vladimir, apparently took place in the summer of 989.
        1. Papakiko
          Papakiko 25 November 2013 15: 32 New
          0
          Quote: mamba
          the emperor ordered to send porphyritic sister to Vladimir.

          This, what kind of sister because of which the city take and then give?
        2. Corneli
          Corneli 25 November 2013 18: 46 New
          +1
          Quote: mamba
          Byzantine Kherson became a military outpost that impeded the advance of Russians to the southern shores of the Black Sea.

          Hersonissos was an outpost hundreds of years before, and the Russian princes or their reinforcement had nothing to do with it, but the steppe and nomads walking along it towards the European side played the main role in the "outpost" of Chersonesos.
          Quote: mamba
          Russia became the initiator in the development of relations with Byzantium. Extremely interested in establishing regular relations with Constantinople, she overcame the obstacles created by the efforts of Byzantine diplomacy step by step by force of arms. Remember Oleg’s campaign and the agreement concluded on its results from the 907th year, which served as the basis for the next contract of the 911th year.

          DO YOU REALLY believe in what you wrote?) What are the “barriers”, more specifically pliz?) Oleg went on a raid on Byzantium with the goal of robbery robbing and not for “lobbying” the peace treaty.
          In the future, Igor tried to do the same trick, moreover, twice, and insolently violating this very contract (which he was reminded of) and calmed down only when he scooped up ... the contract was restored.
          Now let’s estimate if Svyatoslav simply infringed Bulgaria (as requested, and not for free) and went back to Kiev to do his own business, would Byzantium do anything to Kievan Rus? I am personally sure that NO! But he wanted to settle down in Bulgaria (again, a side contract) and he started the first hostilities against Byzantium ... He buried, died.
          Vladimir turned out to be much more peaceful and yes, he really wanted an alliance and ties, hence the dynastic marriage and baptism
          So of the 4 princes, “compulsion to cultural rapprochement,” or rather, only Vladimir did the actions to fulfill Vasily’s promise. The rest did not think much about the union or trade agreements, they were mostly given military glory and commonplace robbery.
      2. Papakiko
        Papakiko 25 November 2013 15: 39 New
        +2
        Quote: Corneli
        But to use as an ally against the nomads who threatened both countries a very good idea.

        Accurate! belay
        Quote: Corneli
        Since they did not need to conquer Russia or do any kind of nasty things.

        The main thing and now everything is the same, you don’t need to fix!
        Quote: Corneli
        Therefore, Byzantium several times concluded peace treaties with Oleg, Igor, Svyatoslav and Vladimir.

        great!
        As in the teeth receive, so immediately a new contract.
        Quote: Corneli
        and the main territorial interests of Byzantium were in Italy and Asia Minor.

        The State Department has officially recognized the Caspian Sea region as the area of ​​its strategic state interests.
        Parallels not to see?
        Quote: Corneli
        She needed a calm and allied north

        Commenting on is no further sense. Complete loser. hi
        1. Corneli
          Corneli 25 November 2013 19: 01 New
          +2
          Quote: Papakiko
          great!
          As in the teeth receive, so immediately a new contract.

          Ahem ... and from which of the princes did they get "in the teeth"? I imagine the "receipt" came the prince, with far-reaching plans, beat those who interfere with him, implemented plans. Only Vladimir could be suitable for this definition, the rest just ditched a bunch of people in their adventures and the fact that they had mugged or bought Byzantine mercenaries (for example, I’m sure that they’re not very big), it doesn’t pull on a normal plan. And yes, the Byzantines were the initiators of the trade / peace treaties, I repeat ... Russia, as an ally and trading partner, were FAVORABLE! And to do something byaky, just like that, there was no reason for the Byzantines.
          Quote: Papakiko
          The State Department has officially recognized the Caspian Sea region as the area of ​​its strategic state interests.
          Parallels not to see?

          Italy and Asia Minor were the provinces of Rome and then Byzantium for hundreds of years, and the fact that they did not want to give them to the Arabs, but that they conceded, they tried to recapture them not so closely related to the USA) Here, the princes of Kiev are more like trying to settle in Bulgaria (fraternal assistance, just like the USA to Iraq or Yugoslavia) or the foundation of Tmutarakan in the place of the Khazars (well, it’s also clear, Jews, slave owners and parasites, the axis of evil)
          And in the last punk, I can not agree. When you start to write essentially, and not modern propaganda with inappropriate banter, then you can talk, but for now ...
          Quote: Papakiko
          There is no point in commenting on further. Complete loser. hi
      3. poquello
        poquello 26 November 2013 02: 22 New
        +2
        Quote: Corneli

        For your information, the Byzantines were just striving for a union since the time of Oleg. Since they did not need to conquer Russia or do any kind of nasty things.


        What? They picked up Lyuli from Prophetic Oleg and requested the world, and they were taxed.
        "And Oleg commanded his soldiers to make the wheels and put the ships on the wheels. And when the tailwind blew, they raised the sails in the field and went to the city. But the Greeks, seeing this, got scared and said, sending to Oleg:" Do not destroy the city, we will give tribute to you, whatever you want. "And Oleg stopped the soldiers, and brought him food and wine, but did not accept it, because it was poisoned. And the Greeks were afraid, and said:" This is not Oleg, but Saint Dmitry sent to us by God ". And Oleg ordered to give tribute for 2000 ships: 12 hryvnias per person, and there were 40 husbands in each ship.

        And the Greeks agreed to this, and the Greeks began to ask the world not to fight "
        Radzivilovskaya manuscript (although I don’t really trust her)
        http://radzivilovskaya-letopis.ru
    3. Bagatur
      Bagatur 25 November 2013 18: 39 New
      +2
      Subsequently, Russia had to force Byzantium to cultural rapprochement through Baptism

      Wow! I did not know that cultural rapprochement with the sword walks recourse
      1. Corneli
        Corneli 25 November 2013 19: 04 New
        +1
        Quote: bagatura
        Subsequently, Russia had to force Byzantium to cultural rapprochement through Baptism

        Wow! Did not know that cultural rapprochement with the sword walks recourse

        And what to do to the "peaceful princes" by whom the "vile Greeks" did all kinds of mischief at the time. I had to use "non-standard approaches." laughing
  4. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 25 November 2013 11: 10 New
    +3
    An example of the strength of the deers, not that modern Orthodox, claiming that before baptism Russia was wild, fragmented, lived in a dugout, fled in the shoes. Christians have been mean-spirited since their appearance. Although of course Svyatoslav relaxed.
    1. Papakiko
      Papakiko 25 November 2013 11: 28 New
      +3
      Quote: vladsolo56
      Although of course Svyatoslav relaxed.

      I do not agree with this.
      It was difficult and difficult to get involved on several fronts, and internal strife incited from outside also added “raisins”.
      “Pleased” is the 2nd picture with a forelock and Romans in lats in the background and an ambassador in a block of wood (oil-butter, marvelous and wondrous).
      Thanks to the author. So the real story is closer to reality than the school one.
      55 killed Romans (!) And 20 thousand-plus (!!) dead Scythians. Apparently, the "Scythians" were shot from machine guns ?! Obvious lies.
      Paper endures everything.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 26 November 2013 10: 45 New
        +1
        “Pleased” is the 2nd picture with a forelock and Romans in lats in the background and an ambassador in a block of wood (oil-butter, marvelous and wondrous).
        Chub is quite a topic.
        Lorica of the segment in the 10th century is a clear joke. As well as the location of the armed Romaic escort almost behind the backs of the host country. This would be possible only if they tie their hands. In order not to be awakened by accident.
        The ambassador stands nearby in the mantle and does not bow. That he is not on the protocol. That's quite possible. In the "block" is not an ambassador but his assistant. Given the multinational nature of Byzantium and the abundance of an eastern element in it, there is nothing seditious in such a situation.
        I’m not quite sure of the short haircut and shaved neck of the ambassador according to the classical ancient Roman (not Byzantine) model. Was it as fashionable in the 10th century in Byzantium as it was in the Caesar era in Rome?
        Paper endures everything.
        Parchment in this case wink
  5. ed65b
    ed65b 25 November 2013 11: 20 New
    +1
    always plotted against Russia always. Sincerely sorry Poland pulled away from the Slavic world.
  6. Corneli
    Corneli 25 November 2013 12: 36 New
    +2
    Here is an interesting author, like the correct information gives out, but hangs them out in such a way that the meaning changes completely!
    Battle of Arkadiopol. So who won? The author definitely won Svyatoslav, but there is no evidence for that! If he defeated Varda Sklir, with what kind of army did this Vard quickly dart to suppress (and suppress) the uprising of Varda Foki in Asia Minor? And why Svyatoslav limited himself to a tribute after the victory, before that his plans were much more abrupt:
    Svyatoslav came to Pereyaslavets, and the Bulgarians closed in the city. And the Bulgarians went to the battle with Svyatoslav, and the slaughter was great, and the Bulgarians began to prevail. And Svyatoslav said to his soldiers: "Here we are to die; we stand bravely, brothers and squad!" And in the evening Svyatoslav defeated, and took the city by attack, and sent to the Greeks with the words: "I want to go to you and take your capital, like this city"
    PVL I note the author for some reason does not mention this statement of the "good" Svyatoslav)
    According to the main version, Sklir defeated part of the Allied army (Svyatoslav’s army was marching in 3 units), while the remaining Slavic troops defeated Peter’s army. Thus we obtain pat. Some of Svyatoslav’s troops were destroyed, he has no forces to attack Constantinople. The Byzantines had a serious uprising in Asia Minor and also losses in the troops, which were clearly not enough to defeat Svyatoslav. Both sides parted for regrouping, the Byzantines chose to pay off (since their lands were ruined)
    P.S. Leo Deacon writes about that battle not as the author:
    12. Having learned about the campaign [of the Romans], the Tavroskifs separated one part from their army, added a large number of Huns [80] and Mysians to it, and sent them against the Romans [81].

    Sklir actually broke this part ...
    P.P.S.
    Quote: Papakiko
    55 killed Romans (!) And 20 thousand-plus (!!) dead Scythians. Apparently, the "Scythians" were shot from machine guns ?! Obvious lies.
    Paper endures everything.

    When in the PVL the army of the Greeks totals 100 thousand (and such a number of troops in the whole of Byzantium was not even close) does this bother you? ”Does the Byzantine chroniclers distort the currents?)
    1. Bagatur
      Bagatur 25 November 2013 18: 35 New
      +1
      When in the PVL the army of the Greeks totals 100 thousand (and such a number of troops in the whole of Byzantium was not even close) does this bother you? ”Does the Byzantine chroniclers distort the currents?)

      Of course not! not over the fact that nobody canceled the war with the Arab ... Byzantium fought with what is at hand. Even in 971. Yoan Tzimiskhi crossed the Balkan pass with a 13 army of cavalry, 000 infantry and the so-called Guards. "immortal" (Leo Dyakon), Skylitsa is still modest, only 15 infantry and 000 horsemen ... The truth seems to be somewhere in the middle ..
  7. demonuga
    demonuga 25 November 2013 12: 46 New
    +1
    Quote: Corneli
    So the awl in ... was just with the Kiev princes, it’s just not accepted to write about it, the Slavs are a peaceful nation)

    We must not forget about the intrigues of the Khazar-Jews, they did not need not a strong Byzantium (they had old scores with them), not even a strong Russia.
    1. Sour
      Sour 25 November 2013 14: 51 New
      +2
      Quote: demonuga
      Do not forget about the intrigues of the Khazar-Jews

      Yes, what intrigues ????
      Lost in the steppes, weakened and dying out, with difficulty struggling against nomads, actually cut off from the rest of the world — this is what Khazaria of the times of Svyatoslav is. It could be some kind of counterbalance to the Pechenegs, at least somehow neutralizing them. But Svyatoslav in alliance with the Pechenegs (also found allies) destroyed Khazaria. And then the allies thanked him well, made a cup from the skull. For what the brave prince fought, he ran into something. Because you had to think, and not just wave your sword. In fact, Russia had a prince with the horizon of an ordinary combatant.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre 26 November 2013 10: 50 New
        0
        Because you had to think, and not just wave your sword. In fact, Russia had a prince with the horizon of an ordinary combatant.
        So no one denies that Svyatoslav became famous exclusively for war. And not domestic or foreign policy, urban planning or lawmaking.
        smile
        1. Hort
          Hort 27 November 2013 07: 46 New
          0
          yeah, Svyatoslav had to send ambassadors to the Arabs so that joint military operations against the Greeks would be waged, or not even go further than Bulgaria, and instead of Byzantium would look towards the Baltic.

          A little away from the topic, but I was always interested in the question: why, when "Drang nakh Osten" began and the knights began to nag the Baltic Slavs, the same Arkona, for example, did not turn to Kiev or Novgorod for help? Have you lost contact with each other by this time?
          1. abrakadabre
            abrakadabre 27 November 2013 12: 21 New
            0
            And you just remember what happened at that moment in Russia. All enthusiastically slaughtered everyone. The civil strife was utter. Who was there to contact? And then came the "brothers" from Mongolia. And it became even more so.
  8. Sour
    Sour 25 November 2013 14: 43 New
    +2
    Quote: mamba
    Byzantium, mired in luxury, debauchery, intrigue and internal conflicts, overlooked a promising ally - Russia. And from the south the Arabs were already pushing

    For Byzantium, Russia was no less a problem than the Arabs. If anything, Byzantium did not attack Russia. And the campaign of Svyatoslav in the Balkans, with all the desire, can not be called a defensive war. It is foolish and biased to blame Byzantium for something. She fought back both in the south and in the north, as best she could. Svyatoslav must be blamed for the fact that he attacked Byzantium, the main trading partner, with all his strength, and not the Pecheneg robbers who really threatened Russia. He clearly did not think about national interests, but about the robbery of rich countries. A good commander is often a bad politician and a bad statesman.
    1. mamba
      mamba 25 November 2013 15: 28 New
      0
      Quote: Sour
      Byzantium did not attack Russia

      And I did not say that.
      Quote: Sour
      Svyatoslav must be blamed for the fact that he attacked Byzantium, the main trading partner, with all his strength, and not the Pecheneg robbers who really threatened Russia.

      Significant changes in the nature of relations with the Russians were made by the strengthening of the Byzantine Empire in the 20-30s of the 10th century and the invasion of the Pecheneg hordes in the Black Sea steppes. Since that time, the Pecheneg threat has become the most important factor in the anti-Russian policy of the empire. Byzantium no longer wanted to comply with the terms of the treaties of 907th and 911th. The empire was also alarmed by the gradual strengthening of the Russians on the shores of the Black Sea. The Russians tried to settle at the mouth of the Dnieper, staying there for the winter as well, to use the Dnieper estuary and other areas of the Black Sea coast as a springboard for preparing spring and summer military expeditions in the Black Sea basin.
      Quote: Sour
      He clearly did not think about national interests, but about the robbery of rich countries.

      This was so typical of his contemporaries. It was such a time. To the triumph of tolerance and democracy was still far away.
      Quote: Sour
      A good commander is often a bad politician and a bad statesman.

      Not everyone can be born Julius Caesar.
      1. Corneli
        Corneli 25 November 2013 19: 11 New
        0
        Quote: mamba
        Since that time, the Pecheneg threat has become the most important factor in the anti-Russian policy of the empire. Byzantium no longer wanted to comply with the terms of the treaties of 907th and 911th.

        On the basis of what you draw such high-profile conclusions, share the sources of what Byzantium violated there ...
        Quote: mamba
        The empire was alarmed and gradual strengthening Russians on the shores of the Black Sea. The Russians tried to settle at the mouth of the Dnieper, staying there for the winter, to use Dnieper mouth and other areas of the Black Sea as a bridgehead for the preparation of spring and summer military expeditions in the Black Sea basin.

        It would be strange if it weren’t alarmed (especially after Oleg and Igor) And where were the "peaceful Slavs" in the Black Sea going to swim in the "military expeditions"? repeat
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. Ross
    Ross 25 November 2013 17: 05 New
    +2
    Quote: mamba
    Subsequently, Russia had to force Byzantium to cultural rapprochement through Baptism already under Vladimir.

    Debauchery and fornication of the Byzantine nobility you call culture? It was this fornication that they brought to Russia after forced baptism, remember the behavior of the specific princes of the 10-13 centuries. And Vladimir, with his numerous harem, is still that lover of a sweet life, in the Byzantine style.
  11. Simon
    Simon 25 November 2013 17: 23 New
    +1
    Yes! good article. This is what it says that you need to be friends with the Russians, but not to fight, otherwise they will always get their teeth.
    1. vahatak
      vahatak 25 November 2013 19: 07 New
      +1
      Actually, the article has a continuation, from which a slightly different conclusion follows.
  12. Bagatur
    Bagatur 25 November 2013 18: 25 New
    0
    he tried to eliminate the “fifth column” in Bulgaria, which was oriented towards Byzantium

    Yeah ... what a care for the unfortunate blgar! Yes, Dobri Svetoslav came and opened their eyes to them, their real enemy! I won’t call Romey friends, but ... and skzat I won’t say good words about Svetoslav. For us, he is such an invader as Bati for Rus in 1241-1243. The Romans found a boy who would do the dirty work, beaten the Bulgarians ... It is no coincidence that they don’t even think about 150 years after the defeat in 811. He walks in the Bulgarian mountains. But they did not expect what he wanted and Constantinople ...
  13. Bagatur
    Bagatur 25 November 2013 19: 07 New
    +2
    Tzimiskes sent an embassy to Pereyaslavets, which demanded from Svyatoslav that he, having received a reward from Nicephorus, return to his possessions Correctly! He was paid for the services, he did his thing, Bulgarians categorically did not want to share the Romans with anyone!

    The Russian prince, according to Vasily Tatishchev, learned from the captured Bulgarian that the attack of the Bulgarian troops on Pereyaslavets was carried out at the instigation of Constantinople and that the Greeks promised help to the Bulgarian government. He also learned that the Greeks had long ago made an alliance with the Bulgarians against the Russian prince.
    For the Bulgarians, the union with Byzantium is a pact with the devil for the exile of Satan! Not seen another useful move. The identity that reshelis on UTB speaks only about the bottom of the Nikaks; the union of the Bulgarian Russians was not beat! True, if they were ready, they would go to meet a strong but ... people, a huge part of the aristocracy did not consider the Russian prince an ally. When UTB Joan Tzimiskhi sumil will present a Romanian politician-military aid against the pagans rus ... Svetoslav himself has a cruelty to the Bulgarian population favored UTB ... Extermination Firlopol (Plovdiv) where even without putting on a stake 20 000 anyway, in 1114 Anna Komnina sent that the city had not yet recovered, executed 300 Bulgarian boyars in Drast ... etc. It is not surprising that there were not many friends between Svetoslav among the Bulgarians.


    Preparing for war with the Byzantine Empire, the Russian prince took care of the foreign policy of Bulgaria. The tsar’s government was tied to Svyatoslav’s policies. This is evidenced by numerous facts. The Bulgarians acted as guides, the Bulgarian soldiers fought with the Greeks in the Russian army. Rus and Bulgarians together defended the city from the enemy. Bulgaria became an ally of Russia. Ooh! This is great! the fact that often the country itself was attacked by Praslav under the Russian occupation is an undeniable fact. The fact that the Bulgarians were in the ranks of Svetoslav is yes, but speaks of allied relations .... too boldly! Tsar Boris II was practically a hostage along with a large part of the elite .... that’s all! In the end, I don’t know which of the Bulgarians called Svetoslav for what he would conclude with his alliance after drinking anyone ...

    The West Bulgarian kingdom hostile to Byzantium did not affect the war. Although Svyatoslav could make an alliance with the Western Bulgarian kingdom.

    A complete stupor! Such a state is not simpler! These are Bulgarian territories outside the Russian occupation. At the head of the local Bulgarians stood the so-called. Komitopul-blue commits of Nikola, ruler of the Sredets committee (Sredets-Sofia). They remained faithful Boris II and the fact that they didn’t go to the rescue Svetoslav (if he was a union) says he is not an ally for him!
  14. Tsar Simeon
    Tsar Simeon 26 November 2013 04: 13 New
    +2
    Russian history for that period was inaccurate, the Bulgarian state at that time was the most powerful state in the region, and the Russian leader was most likely missed by the Bulgarians for the sake of common interest.
  15. Cristall
    Cristall 27 November 2013 03: 19 New
    0
    Well, this story does not pretend to be the ultimate truth. Only Time Machines can give 100% of the answer. And just guesses.
    So to speak. Who was Byzantium at that time? Yes, the most developed country in Europe (although for the most part was located between the continents) is the most advanced in science, trade and military affairs.
    Of course, a war with such an enemy brought far more dividends than with the same Pechenegs. What to take from the nomads
    "Now the Prophetic Oleg is going to take revenge on the unreasonable Khazars, he exposed their villages to the swords and fires of the fields" ..
    that’s it ... no fame, no deed, no booty ... nomads ...
    The war with the city-state (I recall that all the greatest empires are almost all city-states, Greece, Rome, Egypt, Byzantium, etc.)
    war with rural empires is inconclusive ...
    Therefore, the choice for raids, wars of clashes between Oleg, Igor, Svyatoslav is quite reasonable - the richest and not very protected neighbor from the north (for Byzantium). / Which could and gave in the teeth, but could lose.
    Well, Kievan Rus did not have a more worthy competitor nearby ... City state versus City of state, and not some Pechenegs ... there was nothing to take from them.
    Generally I love Byzantium. They preserved antiquity, preserved much ... if not for the barbarians from the west and from the east ... oh maybe they could defend the library ... forever these barbarians are destroyed ... then in Alexandria, then in Constantinople ...
    Something bore me ... sorry.
    I note that the desire to go to this greatest city of all time between 2 continents and the key to the straits has been poured in us since ancient times ... and put up a cross on the NE. Sofia .....
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 27 November 2013 12: 23 New
      +1
      The only thing I disagree with is the definition of Byzantium, Rome and Kievan Rus as a city-state.

      Rome under such a definition can only be brought under the kings. Any Tarquinia there. Even with the early republic it is already very, very doubtful.

      Byzantium - only in the first centuries after the foundation by immigrants from Megar and in the 15th century before the storming of the Turks.

      In Kiev there are no such data at all.
  16. Classic
    Classic 31 May 2014 11: 58 New
    0
    Can a sword lie in the waters of the Dnieper for 1000 years and so it will survive?
    But are not the Türks Pirks?