“History is a treasury of our deeds, a witness to the past, an example and a lesson for the present, a warning for the future "- said the great Spanish writer and humanist of the Renaissance Miguel de Cervantes. And this statement fully reflects the creative heritage of the Soviet and Russian scientist Lev Nikolaevich Gumilyov (1912-1992), whose 100th anniversary we celebrated on October 1, 2012.

Gumilyov's works on the history of Ancient Rus, the Khazar Kaganate, the relations of the Russian state with Byzantium, the Polovtsian steppe and many others are now included in the golden fund of world scientific thought. In this article, I will focus on only one problem that the scientist touched upon - namely, the relationship between Russia and the steppe nomadic peoples.

Lev Nikolaevich Gumilev. Russia and the Great Steppe

Touching upon the theoretical legacy of L.N. Gumilyov, the feeling arises involuntarily that the history that is being taught to us today is far from the truth. This is especially evident in the study of the emergence and formation of ancient Russian civilization. The events described in "The Tale of Bygone Years", "The Lay of Igor's Regiment", "Zadonshchina", "History of the Russian State" by N.М. Karamzin, studies by S.M. Solovyova, N.I. Kostomarova, V.O. Klyuchevsky, many Soviet historians appear in a completely different light when reading the works of L.N. Gumilyov. The same can be said about the assessment of the ancient Russian princes by historians.

As for the relations of the Old Russian state with its neighbors, and above all, with the Khazar Kaganate and nomadic tribes, here too Gumilyov, with his inherent scientific perspicacity, criticizes the interpretations of events that have been established since the Tale of Bygone Years. The same applies to the story of the Golden Horde yoke. With regard to the relationship of the Russian state with the Mongol-Tatars, researcher V. Demin in his book "Lev Gumilev", referring to the works of the scientist himself, in particular, writes the following: " As a result of the Tatar-Mongol invasion and the subsequent so-called 300-year "yoke", in fact, the beginning of the formation of a symbiosis of two peoples - Tatar and Russian, was laid, which ultimately led to the formation of a Russian super-ethnos "... Thus, L.N. From this point of view, Gumilyov is an innovator, and his ideas provide not only food for thought, but also are the most important impetus for a true understanding of the significance of the Golden Horde yoke in the history of our country.

Gumilyov in his writings strove to show the complexity of the relationship between nomadic and sedentary peoples inhabiting Eurasia, the mutual influence of their cultures and traditions. And he completely succeeded, although for a long time official science did not recognize the obvious advantages of Gumilyov's theory. And only with the beginning of the democratization process, Gumilyov's works began to be published. And today we have the opportunity to get acquainted with the theoretical heritage of the scientist, whose works occupy a worthy place in modern science.

Already in the first, in fact, scientific work, Gumilev began to refute the established canons in relation to the history of the Turkic and other peoples of Eurasia. In his view, a completely different story loomed, especially about the relationship of the steppe, nomadic and sedentary peoples.

The problem raised by Gumilev in his Ph.D. thesis was continued by him in subsequent works, about which we knew nothing for a long time. And only recently, thanks to the democratization of our society, we got the opportunity to get in touch with the theories and concepts that were prohibited. One of them is the concept of Eurasianism, the ideas of which are reflected in numerous works of Gumilyov. It should be noted that Gumilev not only reflected the ideas of Eurasianism, but also largely contributed to the enrichment of its conceptual content. And here, first of all, it is necessary to introduce such works of the scientist as “Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe”, “From Russia to Russia. Essays on ethnic history ”,“ Khazaria and the Caspian ”, as well as works devoted to the history of the Turkic Kaganate and the Golden Horde.

In all these works, Gumilev defended the idea that the history of the ancient peoples of the steppe has not been fully studied, but in the available sources, their historical path is reflected in a distorted form. Therefore, he said, it is necessary to study history not only from the socio-economic and political positions, but, above all, from the point of view of ethnogenesis. What did Gumilyov understand by this term? The scientist answered this question himself in his fundamental work “Ethnogenesis and the Earth's Biosphere”. In his opinion, " Ethnogenesis is a natural process, therefore, independent of the situation, which has developed as a result of the formation of culture. It can start at any moment; and if on his way there is an obstacle from the acting - cultural integrity, he will break it or break about it. If it begins when “the land is fallow,” the emerging ethnos creates its own culture - as a way of its existence and development. In both cases, the impulse is a blind force of natural energy, not controlled by anyone's consciousness ”... In his subsequent works, Gumilyov preached the concept according to which the historical process is determined by the natural course of development of the peoples inhabiting our planet. And here Gumilyov comes to the fore time , space , ethnos , and most importantly - passionarity .

Speaking about space, Gumilev wrote: “ space is the first parameter that characterizes historical events” ... As for time, Gumilev believed that time is the second parameter in which the formation, development and decline of ethnic groups takes place. And from what these processes occur, Gumilev explained as follows: “ ... the beginning of ethnogenesis, we can also hypothetically connect with the mechanism of mutation, as a result of which an ethnic "push" arises, leading then to the formation of new ethnic groups. The process of ethnogenesis is associated with a well-defined genetic trait. Here we introduce into use a new parameter of ethnic history - passionarity.”. So we come to the main component of the principle of the historical process according to Gumilyov's theory - passionarity.All scientific activity of Gumilyov was associated with this concept. Through the prism of passionarity, he considered not only the history of ethnic groups, but also states.

“Passionarity is a sign that arises as a result of mutation (passionary impulse) and forms a certain number of people within the population who have an increased desire for action. We will call such people passionaries ”- this is how Gumilev himself wrote, explaining the term he himself invented in scientific circulation, which today has become one of the fundamental in solving the problems of ethnogenesis.

But not only the problems of ethnogenesis and Eurasianism interested Gumilyov. In his scientific activity, Gumilev did everything possible to get rid of the preconceived wrong opinion about the nomadic peoples, their connection with Russia. Gumilyov made a great contribution to rethinking the role and place of the Golden Horde in the history of medieval Eurasia. The idea rooted in historiography that the Golden Horde yoke threw Russia back many centuries, according to Gumilyov, does not correspond to the truth. " An alliance with the Tatars, - wrote Gumilyov, - turned out to be a blessing for Russia, from the point of view of establishing order within the country ”... Moreover, Gumilev believed that it was only thanks to the Tatar army that Russia was able to maintain its independence and the ability to develop further, without falling under the yoke of the Western crusaders. In support of this opinion, we will cite one more quote from the same work of the scientist: “Tam, where the Tatar troops entered the action, - said Gumilyov, - the crusading onslaught quickly stopped. Thus, for the tax that Alexander Nevsky undertook to pay to Sarai, the capital of the new state on the Volga, Russia received a reliable and strong army that defended not only Novgorod and Pskov. Indeed, in the same way, thanks to the Tatars in the 70s of the XIII century. retained its independence Smolensk, which was under the threat of capture by the Lithuanians ... ".

Gumilev also not trivially assessed the relationship between Russia and the Golden Horde. Here's what they wrote about the relationship: “ Moreover, the Russian principalities, which accepted an alliance with the Horde, fully retained their ideological independence and political independence. For example, after the victory of the Muslim party in the Horde in the person of Berke, no one demanded that the Russians convert to Islam. This alone shows that Russia was not a province of the Mongol ulus, but a country allied to the great khan, paying some tax on the upkeep of the army, which she herself needed ”.

Summing up the results of the study of the scientific activities of Gumilyov, I would like to say the following: Lev Nikolaevich was and remains an outstanding theorist, whose views, hypotheses and concepts have played and continue to play a key role in the study of the history of the Great Steppe, the Turkic Khaganate, Volga Bulgaria, the Golden Horde and the Russian state.

Today it is no longer possible to imagine history without Gumilyov's works, they have long been included in the golden fund of scientific thought not only in Russia, but throughout the world. Gumilyov's works are now published in many languages ​​of the world, are included in the collections of leading libraries and collections. At the same time, there are not so few controversial points in the presentation of the history of a scientist, and discussions around the theory of passionarity are ongoing today. This is yet another confirmation that Gumilyov's ideas are in demand by historical science.

Message
On the topic: “Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe.
Relationship problems ”.

Work completed
first year student
group GRM-12
Shipulina Anastasia.

Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe. Communication problems.
Description of the Khazar country. Landscapes, like ethnic groups, have their own history. Delta of the Volga until the III century. was not like the one that exists today. Then the clear waters of the Volga flowed across the dry steppe among the high Baer hillocks, flowing into the Caspian Sea much farther south than later. The Volga was still shallow at that time, flowed not along the modern channel, but to the east: through Akhtuba and Bu-zan and, possibly, flowed into the Ural depression, connected to the Caspian by a narrow channel. From this period there are monuments of the Sarmatian-Alan culture, that is, the Turanians. The Khazars then still huddled in the lower reaches of the Terek. The Volga carried all these muddy waters, but its channel in the lower reaches turned out to be narrow for such streams. Then a delta of the modern type was formed, stretching to the south almost to the Buzachi peninsula (north of Mangyshlak). The desalinated shallow waters began to feed huge schools of fish. The banks of the channels were overgrown with dense forest, and the valleys between the hillocks turned into green meadows. The steppe grasses, remaining only on the tops of the mounds (vertical zoning), retreated to the west and east (where the Bakh-Temir and Kigach channels are now), and in the core of the azonal landscape that has arisen, a lotus bloomed, frogs sang, herons and gulls began to nest. The country has changed its face.
Then the ethnic group that inhabited it changed as well. Steppe Sarmatians left the banks of the canals, where mosquitoes haunted the livestock, and wet grasses were unusual and even harmful for them. But the Khazars spread along the then coastline, now located 6 m below the level of the Caspian Sea. They acquired the richest fishing grounds, places for hunting for waterfowl and grazing for horses on the slopes of the berovsknh hillocks. The Khazars brought grape cuttings with them and bred it in their new homeland, which they inherited without bloodshed, by the accidental grace of nature. In very harsh winters, the grapes died, but they replenished again and again with Dagestan varieties, for the connection between the Tersk and Volga Khazaria was not interrupted. The warlike Alans and Huns, who dominated the Caspian steppes, were not dangerous for the Khazars. Life in the delta is concentrated around the channels, and they are a labyrinth in which any stranger gets lost. The current in the channels is fast, along the banks there are dense thickets of reeds, and it is not possible to get out on land everywhere. Any cavalry that tried to penetrate the Khazaria would not be able to quickly force the channels surrounded by thickets. Thus, the cavalry was deprived of its main advantage - maneuverability, while the locals, who knew how to understand the labyrinth of channels, could easily seize the initiative and deliver unexpected blows to the enemies, being themselves elusive.
It was even more difficult in winter. Ice on fast rivers is thin and rarely, in very cold winters, can withstand a horse and a man at arms. And to fall through the ice in winter, even in a shallow place, meant freezing in the wind. If the detachment stops and lights fires to dry up, then the pursued enemy manages to hide during this time and hit the pursuer again. Khazaria was a natural fortress, but, alas, surrounded by enemies. Strong at home, the Khazars did not risk going out into the steppe, which would be very useful to them. The more diverse the landscapes of the territory on which the economic system is created, the more prospects for the development of the economy. The Volga delta is by no means monotonous, but not suitable for nomadic cattle breeding, although the latter, as a form of extensive farming, is very beneficial to people, because it is not labor-intensive, and to nature, because the number of livestock is limited by the amount of grass. For nature, nomadic life is harmless.
The Khazars did not live in the steppes and, therefore, were not nomads. But they also took from nature only excess. The larger the target, the easier it is to hit it.
Therefore, we will enclose our plot - the tragedy of the Khazar ethnos - within the framework of the history of neighboring countries. Of course, this story will be presented "in total", because for our topic it has only an auxiliary meaning. But on the other hand, it will be possible to trace the global international ties that permeated small Khazaria through and through, and to catch the rhythm of natural phenomena in the biosphere, the ever-changing foremother of all living things. Then the history of culture will sparkle with all colors. Russian kaganate. At the turn of the VIII and IX centuries. the Khazars stopped at the border of the Rus land, the center of which was in the Crimea. Rus at this time showed significant activity, making sea raids on the shores of the Black Sea. About 790 they attacked the fortified city of Surozh (Sudak), and then spread to the southern coast and in 840 took and plundered Amastrida, a rich trading city in Paphlagonia (Asia Minor). But in 842, according to the contract, the Russians returned part of the booty and freed all the prisoners. “Everything lying on the shores of the Euxinus (Black Sea) and its coast was ravaged and devastated by the Ross fleet in raids (the people“ grew up ”- the Scythian, living near the Northern Taurus, rough and wild). And he put the very capital in terrible danger. " In 852 the Rus took the Slavic city of Kiev.
On June 18, 860, the Russians besieged Constantinople on 360 ships, but on June 25 they lifted the siege and went home. There was no more successful campaign of the Rus against Byzantium; all later ended in defeats (with the exception of the 907 campaign, which the Greeks themselves did not know about). The thought suggests itself that it was then that a trade agreement was concluded, which was later attributed to Oleg by the chronicler. But this is only an assumption, the verification of which is not part of our task. Further events did not turn out in favor of the Russians. Soon after 860, there was, apparently, not a very successful war with the Pechenegs, who this year could act only as mercenaries of the Khazar king. In Kiev, "there was a famine and great lamentation," and in 867 Orthodox missionaries, sent by Patriarch Photius, converted some of the Kievites to Christianity. This meant peace and union with Byzantium, but full conversion did not materialize due to the resistance of renewed paganism and aggressive Judaism. However, the Kiev Christian colony survived. For one hundred and twenty years she grew and strengthened in order to say the decisive word at the right moment, which she uttered in 988.
In the IX century. the Russian state had few friends and many enemies. One should not think that neighbors are necessarily the most dangerous enemies. Rather, on the contrary: constant petty skirmishes, vendetta, mutual raids for the purpose of robbery, of course, cause a lot of trouble to individual people, but, as a rule, they do not lead to wars of destruction, because both sides see people as opponents. On the other hand, foreigners, representatives of other super-ethnic groups, regard opponents as objects of direct action. For example, in the 19th century, Americans paid a premium for the scalp of an Indian. And in the X century. superethnic differences were not tempered even by the tone of humanity that took place in the 19th century. Therefore, wars between super-ethnic entities that adorned themselves with pompous confessional labels were fought mercilessly. Muslims declared "jihad" against sins and massacred men in the captured cities, while women and children were sold in slave bazaars. The Saxon and Danish knights without exception exterminated the lutichi and the vigorous, and the Anglo-Saxons also dealt with the Celts. But the conquerors could not expect mercy if military happiness turned away from them. At first, Russia was relatively lucky. For three quarters of the 9th century, exactly when the activity of the Western European super-ethnos was growing, the Bulgarians held back the Greeks, the Avars - the Germans, and vigorous - the Danes. Norwegian Vikings rushed to the west, because the paths "from the Varangians to the Greeks" and "from the Vikings to the Khazars" passed through the narrow rivers Lovat or Mologa, through the watersheds, where the boats had to be dragged by hand - "dragging", while being completely separated from homeland - Norway. Conditions for a war with the local population were extremely unfavorable.

With the resulting balance of political forces, the Khazar Jews won. They made peace with the Magyars, directing their warlike energy against the peoples of Western Europe, where the last Carolingians were least of all worried about the safety of their peasants and feudal lords, who were usually dissatisfied with the imperial regime. The Khazar government managed to make the Tivertsy its allies and was caught, thereby providing an important trade route for Jewish merchants from Itil to Spain. Finally, in 913, the Khazars, with the help of the Guzes, defeated those Pechenegs who lived on Yaik and Emba and controlled the section of the caravan route from Itil to China. The last unresolved task for the Khazar government was the Russian Khaganate with its center in Kiev. The war with the Rus was inevitable, and complete victory promised incalculable benefits for the Itil merchant organization, but, of course, not for the enslaved Khazars, who did not take part in this activity. The rulers held them tightly in subjection with the help of mercenary troops from Gurgan and forced them to pay huge taxes. Thus, they constantly expanded the exploited territory, increasing their incomes and increasingly breaking away from the peoples subordinate to them. Of course, the relationship between this merchant octopus and Russia could not be cloudless. Hints of clashes began in the 9th century, when the Khazarian government built the Sarkel fortress against Western enemies.
In 947 Olga went north and imposed a tribute on the graveyards along Mete and Luga. But the left bank of the Dnieper remained independent from Kiev and, apparently, in alliance with the Khazar government. It is unlikely that the Khazar Tsar Joseph was pleased with the transfer of power in Kiev from the hands of the Varangian king to the Russian prince, but he did not repeat the Passover campaign. The Khazar king Joseph considered it good to refrain from marching to Russia, but the delay did not go to his advantage. Olga went to Constantinople and was baptized there on September 9, 957, which meant the conclusion of a close alliance with Byzantium, the natural enemy of the Jewish Khazaria. An attempt to drag Olga to Catholicism, that is, to the side of Germany, undertaken by Bishop Adalbert, who arrived in Kiev in 961 on the instructions of Emperor Otgon, was unsuccessful. From that moment on, Tsar Joseph lost hope for peace with Russia, and this was natural. The war began, apparently, immediately after Olga's baptism.
The supporters of the Khazar king at that time were the Yases (Ossetians) and Kasogs (Circassians), who occupied in the 10th century. steppes of the North Caucasus. However, their loyalty to the Jewish government was questionable, and their zeal was close to zero. During the war, they behaved very sluggishly. The Vyatichi, the Khazar tributaries, behaved in about the same way, and the Bulgarians generally refused to help the Khazars and were friends with the Guzes, the enemies of the Khazar king. The latter could only hope for the help of the Central Asian Muslims.
The year 964 found Svyatoslav on the Oka, in the land of the Vyatichi. The war between the Rus and the Khazar Jews was already in full swing, but the Kiev prince did not dare to attack through the Don steppes, controlled by the Khazar cavalry. The power of the Russians of the 10th century was in boats, and the Volga was wide. Without unnecessary clashes with the Vyatichi, the Russians cut down and established boats, and in the spring of 965 they descended along the Oka and Volga to Itil, to the rear of the Khazar regular troops who were waiting for the enemy between the Don and the Dnieper. The trip was impeccably thought out. The Rus, choosing a convenient moment, went ashore, replenished food supplies, not disdaining plunder, returned to their boats and sailed along the Volga, not fearing a sudden attack by the Bulgarians, Burtases and Khazars. What happened next is anyone's guess.

At the confluence of the river. Sargsu Volga forms two channels: western - the Volga proper and eastern - Akhtuba. Between them lies the green island on which Itil stood, the heart of the Jewish Khazaria. The right bank of the Volga is a loamy plain; perhaps the Pechenegs came there. The left bank of the Akhtuba is sand dunes, where the guzes were the owners. If part of the Russian boats went down the Volga and Akhtuba below Itil, then the capital of Khazaria turned into a trap for the defenders with no hope of salvation. The advance of the Russians down the Volga went by auto-alloy. And therefore it is so slow that the local residents (Khazars) had time to escape into the impassable thickets of the delta, where the Russians could not find them, even if they decided to look. But the descendants of the Jews and Turks displayed ancient courage.
The resistance to the Rus was led not by Tsar Joseph, but by an unnamed kagan. The chronicler is laconic: "And having been fighting, Svyatoslav won the gozar and took their city." Hardly any of the defeated survived. And where the Jewish king and his confidants, fellow tribesmen fled, is unknown. This victory decided the fate of the war and the fate of Khazaria. The center of a complex system disappeared and the system disintegrated. Numerous Khazars did not put their heads under Russian swords. They didn't need it at all. They knew that the Russians had nothing to do in the Volga delta, and that the Russians had delivered them from oppressive power, they were only pleased. Therefore, the further campaign of Svyatoslav - along the well-worn road of the annual migrations of the Turkic-Khazar Khan, through the "black lands" to the middle Terek, that is, to Semender, then through the Kuban steppes to the Don and, after the capture of Sarkel, to Kiev - passed without hindrance. The Khazar Jews, who survived in 965, scattered along the outskirts of their former state. Some of them settled in Dagestan (Mountain Jews), others in Crimea (Karaites). Having lost contact with the leading community, these small ethnic groups turned into relics, getting along with numerous neighbors. The disintegration of the Judeo-Khazar chimera brought them, like the Khazars, peace. But besides them, there were Jews who did not lose the will to fight and win and found shelter in Western Europe.
The friendship between Kiev and Constantinople, established by Princess Olga, was useful for both sides. Back in 949, 600 Russian soldiers took part in the landing on Crete, and in 962 the Russians fought in the Greek troops in Syria against the Arabs. There Kalokir, who served in the troops of his country, made friends with them; and there he learned Russian from his comrades in arms.
The inhabitants of Chersonesos have long been famous for their love of freedom, which was expressed in eternal quarrels with their superiors. To scold the Constantinople government was a sign of good form for them and, perhaps, entered into a stereotype of behavior. But neither Chersonesos could live without the metropolis, nor Constantinople - without its Crimean outpost, from where grain, dried fish, honey, wax and other colonial goods were brought to the capital. Residents of both cities got used / to each other and did not pay attention to trifles. Therefore, when Nikifor Focke needed an intelligent diplomat with knowledge of the Russian language, he gave Kalokir the dignity of a patrician and sent him to Kiev. This need arose due to the fact that in 966 Nikifor Foka decided to stop paying tribute to the Bulgarians, which Byzantium undertook to pay under an agreement of 927, and instead demanded that the Bulgarians not let the Hungarians through the Danube to plunder the provinces of the empire. The Bulgarian Tsar Peter objected that he had made peace with the Hungarians and could not break it. Nikifor considered this a challenge and sent "the Yalokir to Kiev, giving him 15 centinarians of gold, so that he would induce the Rus to raid Bulgaria and thus force her to yield." In Kiev, the proposal was most welcome. Svyatoslav and his pagan companions have just returned from a campaign against the Vyatichi. Here again there was an opportunity to fuse him for a while. Olga's government was delighted.
Prince Svyatoslav was also pleased, for there were Christians in power in Kiev, who were by no means attractive to him. He felt much better on the hike. Therefore, in the spring of 968, Russian boats sailed to the mouth of the Danube and defeated the Bulgarians who were not expecting an attack. There were few Russian soldiers - about 8-10 thousand, but the Pechenezh cavalry came to their aid. In August of the same year, the Rus defeated the Bulgarians near Dorostol. Tsar Peter died, and Svyatoslav occupied Bulgaria up to Philippolis. This was done with the full approval of the Greeks who traded with Russia. Back in July 968, Russian ships were stationed in the harbor of Constantinople.
During the winter of 968-969, everything changed. Kalokir persuaded Svyatoslav, who settled in Pereyaslavets, or Malaya Preslav, on the banks of the river. Varna, put him on the throne of Byzantium. The chances for this were: Nikifor Foku was not loved, the Rus were brave, and the main forces of the regular army were far away, in Syria, and were connected with a tense war with the Arabs. After all, in 705 the Bulgarians managed to bring the noseless Justinian into the Blachernae Palace in a less favorable situation! So why not take a chance? And Svyatoslav thought about the senselessness of returning to Kiev, where his Christian enemies, at best, would have sent him somewhere else. Bulgaria adjoined the Russian land - the territory of the street. The accession to Russia of Eastern Bulgaria, which overlooked the Black Sea, gave the pagan prince a territory where he could be independent from his mother and her advisers.
In the spring of 969, the left-bank Pechenegs laid siege to Kiev. For Olga and the people of Kiev, this was completely unexpected, for they did not know the reason for breaking the peace. Kiev found itself in a desperate situation, and the troops that Voivode Pretich led along the left bank to the rescue of the elderly princess were clearly not enough to repel the enemy. But when the Pechenezh leader entered into negotiations with Pretich, it turned out that the war was based on a misunderstanding. The princess's party did not even think of a war with Byzantium, and "retreating from the hail of the pechenzi," otherwise it was impossible even to water the horses in the Lybedp River. However, Svyatoslav was uncomfortable in Kiev. Nestor attributes this to his quarrelsome character, but one must think that the situation was much more tragic. Olga died on July 11 and was buried according to the Orthodox rite, and her grave was not marked, although she was cried "... we all cry great people." In other words, Olga behaved like a secret Christian, and there were many Christians and pagans in Kiev. Passions ran high. What Svyatoslav did after the death of his mother, the chronicle does not report, or rather, is silent. But from subsequent events it is obvious that Svyatoslav not only left Kiev, but was forced to leave it and go into the Danube occupation army, which was commanded by his loyal companions:
Olga's grandchildren were planted on the princely tables: Yaropolk - in Kiev, Oleg - in the Drevlyansky land, and Vladimir, the son of the housekeeper Malusha, who was captured during the conquest of the Drevlyans. - in Novgorod, because no one wanted to go there because of the violent disposition of the Novgorodians. But for Svyatoslav himself there was no place in his native land. This is not speculation. If Svyatoslav in July 969 was going to fight the Greeks, he would not lose pace. If he felt firm ground under his feet, he would return the army from Bulgaria. But he did neither ... and a losing streak began.
The great schism of the churches in 1054 isolated the Russian Westernizers from the Catholic countries, for the conversion to Latinism began to be viewed in Kiev as apostasy. But Yaroslav, his son Izyaslav and grandson Svyatopolk, in need of money, patronized the Kiev colony of German Jews, who communicated the Kiev princes with Catholic Europe. The money that fell into the prince's treasury, the Jews received from the local population, grieving that the Jews "took away all the crafts of Christians and under Svyatopolk had great freedom and power, through which many merchants and artisans went bankrupt" 2. The same source reports that the Jews "deceived many into their law," 3 but how to interpret this information is unclear. Most likely this is a libel, but the very fact of religious disputes and discrediting Orthodoxy is confirmed by another author - Theodosius of Pechersky, who used to argue with Jews in private conversations, "since he wanted to be killed for confessing Christ." 4. That his hopes were not unfounded, we will see later, but his role in supporting Izyaslav and the respect of the people saved Theodosius from the crown of martyrdom. This whole split into several parties, under which sub-ethnic differences were covered, deserves attention, for it was only under Vladimir Monomakh that the triumph of Orthodoxy began in Russia. Orthodoxy united the ethnic groups of Eastern Europe, although this spiritual unity was accompanied by political disunity, which will be discussed below. Yaroslav the Wise died in 1054 as a Kiev kagan - the winner of the Poles, Yatvingians, Chudi and Pechenegs, a legislator, educator and liberator of the Russian Church from Greek dominance, but he did not leave the country in peace. On the contrary, both on the borders and inside the Russian land, events flowed along by no means foreseen channels. It was unexpected that, despite the grandeur of the territory subordinated to Kiev, Yaroslav could not defeat the small Polotsk principality. On the contrary, he yielded to the Polotsk prince Bryachislav, the grandson of Vladimir, Vitebsk and Usvyat, which did not give him the desired peace. Only in 1066 the children of Yaroslav - Izyaslav and his brothers - defeated Vseslav Bryachislavich of Polotsk on the river Nemige, and then, having invited him to negotiations in Smolensk, they seized and imprisoned him in a log house without a door, i.e. a prison) in Kiev. Liberated by the rebellious Kievites on September 15, 1068, Vseslav reigned in Kiev for seven months, and then, under pressure from the superior forces of the Polish king Boleslav, returned to Polotsk and, after several setbacks, defended the independence of his hometown. Equally unexpected was the appearance on the southern border of Russia in 1049. Guzes, or Torks, former allies of Svyatoslav, now enemies. The war with the Torks dragged on until 1060, when they were defeated by a coalition of Russian princes and driven back to the Danube. In 1064 the Torks tried to cross the Danube and gain a foothold in Thrace, but widespread diseases and the rivalry of their sworn enemies, the Pechenegs, forced the Torks to return and seek refuge from the Kiev prince. Settled along the southern border of Rus, on the right bank of the Dnieper, the Torks became loyal allies of the Volyn princes against the third nomadic ethnic group that followed in their footsteps - the Polovtsians. It is necessary to talk about these in more detail, but for now let us consider the internal political situation in Russia.
The government of Olga, Vladimir and Yaroslav, relying on the Slavic-Russian subethnos - the descendants of the Polyans, brought together a huge territory - from the Carpathians to the Upper Volga and from Ladoga to the Black Sea, subjugating all the ethnic groups that lived there. With the death of Yaroslav the Wise, it turned out that the Kiev ruling group could no longer rule alone and was forced to switch to the principle of federation, although power remained the privilege of the princes of Rurik's house. The princes-heirs settled in the cities of seniority: Izyaslav - in Kiev and Novgorod, Svyatoslav - in Chernigov and the Seversk land, Vsevolod - in Pereyaslavl with a "makeweight" from the Rostov-Suzdal land, Vyacheslav - in Smolensk, Igor - in Vladimir-Volynsky. The chronicle, conveying the public opinion of contemporaries about the capture of Vseslav, condemns Izyaslav for betrayal and considers the alliance with the Poles as a betrayal of the motherland called "Ryad Yaroslavl", the inheritance of the throne went from the elder brother to the next, and after the death of all brothers - to the elder nephew. The emergence of the Polovtsians. All Turkic ethnic groups of the XI century. were "old people." They appeared together with the Huns and Sarmatians in the 3rd century. BC. passed all phases of ethnogenesis and turned into homeostatic relics. It would seem that they were doomed, but the opposite happened. The Persian historian Ravandi wrote to the Seljuk Sultan Kai-Khusrau in 1192-1196: “... in the lands of the Arabs, Persians, Byzantines and Rus the word (in the sense of“ predominance ”belongs to the Turks, fear of whose swords lives firmly in the hearts of neighboring peoples As early as the middle of the century, the former Ghaznavid official Ibn-Hassul, in his treatise against the Deilemites, lists the "lion-like" qualities of the Turks: courage, loyalty, endurance, lack of hypocrisy, dislike of intrigue, immunity to flattery, passion for robbery and violence, pride, freedom from unnatural vices, refusal to do domestic manual work (which was not always observed) and the desire for command posts. "
All this was highly valued by the settled neighbors of the nomads, because among the listed qualities there were not those that are associated with increased passionarity: ambition, sacrificial patriotism, initiative, missionary work, upholding identity, creative imagination, striving to reorganize the world. All these qualities remained in the past, among the Hunnic and Türküt ancestors, and the descendants became plastic and therefore desirable in states that were exhausted from the excesses of their own subpassionaries. The moderate passionarity of the Turks seemed to the Arabs, Persians, Georgians, Greeks a panacea. But the Turkic ethnic groups did not get along with each other at all. The steppe vendetta carried away the heroes, without bringing victory, for grown-up youths stood up instead of the dead. Passionate ethnic groups could have won and retained their success, but centuries passed, and they were not and were not foreseen. But the situation was completely different on the western outskirts of the Great Steppe, for the Russians in the XI century. were in the inertial phase of ethnogenesis, that is, they were more passionate than the Turkic nomads who strove to the banks of the Don, Dnieper, Bug and Danube from the steppe, which was drying up throughout the 10th century.
As already noted, the steppe between Altai and the Caspian Sea was a field of constant clashes between three ethnic groups: Guzes (Torks), Kangls (Pechenegs) and Kumans (Polovtsians). Until the X century. forces were equal, and all rivals held their territories. When in the X century. Since a severe age-old drought struck the steppe zone, the Guzes and Kangly, who lived in the Ural dry steppes, suffered from it much more than the Cumans who lived in the foothills of Altai and on the banks of the high-water Irtysh. The streams falling from the mountains and the Irtysh allowed them to preserve the livestock and horses, that is, the basis of the military power of the nomadic society. When at the beginning of c. steppe vegetation (and pine forests) again began to spread to the south and south-west, the Cumans moved after it, easily breaking the resistance of the drought-exhausted Guzes and Pechenegs. The way to the south was blocked by the Betpak-Dala desert, and in the west they opened the road to Doi and the Dnieper, where the grass steppes are located, exactly the same as in their native Baraba. By 1055, the victorious Polovtsy reached the borders of Russia. First, the Polovtsians entered into an alliance with Vsevolod Yaroslavich, since they had a common enemy - Torki (1055). But after the victory over the Torks, the allies quarreled, and in 1061 the Polovtsian prince Iskal defeated Vsevolod. Presumably, both sides viewed the conflict as a border skirmish, but nevertheless the steppe roads became unsafe, communication between Tmutarakan 'and Russia became difficult, and this entailed a number of important events. The Polovtsi did not all migrate to the west. Their main settlements remained in Siberia and Kazakhstan, to the shores of Zaisan and Tengiz lakes. But as always happens, the most active part of the population left, which, after victories over the Guzes and Pechenegs, faced Russia. Mongols and Tatars in the XII century. The northeastern part of Mongolia and the adjacent regions of the steppe Transbaikalia were divided among themselves by the Tatars and Mongols. To understand the history of the Mongols, one should firmly remember that in Central Asia an ethnic name has a double meaning: 1) the direct name of an ethnic group (tribe or people) and 2) collective for a group of tribes that make up a certain cultural or political complex, even if the tribes included in it of different origins. This was noted by Rashid ad-Din: “Many clans supplied greatness and dignity in the fact that they considered themselves to be Tatars and became known under their name, just like the Naimans, Jalair, Onguts, Keraits and other tribes that each had their definite name, called themselves Mongols out of a desire to transfer the glory of the latter to themselves; the descendants of these clans imagined themselves from ancient times bearing this name, which in reality was not. " Based on the collective meaning of the term "Tatars", medieval historians considered the Mongols as part of the Tatars, since before the XII century. hegemony among the tribes of Eastern Mongolia belonged to the latter. In V. Tatars began to be considered as part of the Mongols in the same broad sense of the word, and the name "Tatars" in Asia disappeared, but the Volga Turks, subjects of the Golden Horde, began to call themselves that. At the beginning of c. the names "Tatars" and "Mongol" were synonyms because, firstly, the name "Tatars" was familiar and well-known, and the word "Mongol" was new, and secondly, because numerous Tatars (in the narrow sense of the word) made up the forward detachments of the Mongol army, since they were not spared and were placed in the most dangerous places. There their opponents faced them and got confused in their names: for example, Armenian historians called them Mungal Tatars, and the Novgorod chronicler in 1234. writes: “In the same summer, because of our sins, I didn’t know if I’m not aware of them, no one knows their good: who is the essence, and has worn out, and what is their language, and which tribe are, and what is their faith: but I am the Tatars ... "It was the Mongol army.
There is an opinion, apparently correct, that the strongest wins in a military clash, if there are no attendant circumstances. It is permissible to introduce an adjustment for the randomness of military happiness, but only within the limits of one battle or skirmish; for a big war, this is not essential, because zigzags on a long journey are mutually compensated.
But what about the Mongol conquests? The numerical superiority, the level of military equipment, the habit of local natural conditions, the enthusiasm of the troops were often higher among the opponents of the Mongols than among the Mongol troops themselves, and in the courage of the Jurchens, the Chinese, Khorezmians, Ku-Mans and Rusich were not inferior to the Mongols, but one swallow does not spring. In addition, a small number of Mongol troops fought simultaneously on three fronts - Chinese, Iranian and Polovtsian, which in 1241 became Western European. How could they win victories in c. and why did they begin to suffer defeat in the XIV century? In this regard, there are various assumptions and considerations, but the main reasons were considered some kind of special malice of the Mongols and their hypertrophied inclination to plunder.
The accusation is banal and, moreover, clearly tendentious, because it is presented at different times to different peoples. And not only ordinary people sin this, but also some historians. As you know, we live in a changeable world. The natural conditions of the regions of the earth's land are unstable. Sometimes the habitat of an ethnic group befalls a century-old drought, sometimes a flood, even more destructive. Then the biocenosis of the host region either dies or changes, adapting to new conditions. But people are the top link in the biocenosis. This means that everything noted applies to them. But this is not enough. Historical time, in which we live, act, love, hate, differs from linear, astronomical time in that we discover its existence due to the presence of events connected in causal chains. These chains are well known to everyone, they are called traditions. They arise in various regions of the planet, expand their ranges and break off, leaving monuments to descendants, thanks to which these logomics learn about extraordinary, "strange" people who lived before them.
Turning points of the era. The methodology we have adopted for distinguishing between levels of research allows us to make an important observation: ethnic history moves unevenly. In it, along with the smooth entropic processes of ascent, prosperity and gradual aging, moments of radical restructuring, breaking of old traditions are found, something new, unexpected suddenly arises, as if a powerful impetus shook the usual set of relations and mixed everything, like a deck of cards interfere. And after that everything is settled and for a thousand years it goes on as usual.
With too much detail on the move
etc.................

Southern Russia and the Steppe

Under the year 6653/1145 in the Novgorod first chronicle of the senior exodus, a campaign against Galich is mentioned: “Even in the summer the whole Russian land went to Galits, and the region of them wasted a lot, and the cities did not take a single one, and turned back, and went from Novgorod to help kyyanom, with the voivode Nerevinom, and returned with love. " The same campaign is described in the Ipatiev Chronicle, but in much more detail: “In the summer of 6654. Vsevolod swkopi to his brothers. Leave Igor and Svyatoslav in Kiev, and with Igor I go to Galich and from Davydovich, and with Volodymyr, and with Vyacheslav Volodymerich, Izyaslav and Rostislav Mstislalich, his son, and Svyatoslav's son, his son, and Boleslav Lyad, and the Polovets are all wild. And there were many many voi, going to Galich on Volodymyrka. " Comparison of the above texts allowed VA Kuchkin to quite reasonably conclude: "If the Novgorod chronicler had in mind all the participants in the campaign, then by his Russian land one should also mean Poles and Polovtsians." And if the presence of the Polish "prince" Boleslav among the representatives of the "Russian land" is somehow justified by the author of the news of the Ipatiev Chronicle (it is specified that he is Vsevolod's son-in-law), then the "wild Polovtsians" look really "wild" in the above list ... True, already in the so-called "ethnographic" introduction to the Tale of Bygone Years, the Polovtsians are on a par with the East Slavic tribes. The chronicler is not at all embarrassed by such a neighborhood. It is strange to us. We do not even notice how the stereotype works: the Polovtsians are the eternal enemies of Russia. The other, it seems, simply could not be.

Under the year 6569/1061 in the Tale of Bygone Years there is an entry: “In the summer of 6569. Polovtsi came first to the Rus land to fight. Vsevolod is against them, the month of February on the 2nd day. And those who fought them, defeated Vsevolod, and fought away. This is the first evil from the filthy and godless enemies. There is a prince of them Iskal. "

However, upon closer examination, it turns out that this is not at all the first appearance of the Polovtsians within the Russian land. Even under the year 6562/1054 in the annals there is a message about the events that immediately followed the death of Yaroslav Vladimirovich: "At the age of seven, Bolush came from Polovtsi, and Vsevolod peace with them, and Polovtsi returned, but they did not come at all."

The real danger posed by the Polovtsians became clear only a few years later, when at the beginning of autumn 1068 the combined forces of the Russian princes could not resist them in the battle of Alta: “In the summer of 6576. Foreigners came to Rus land, Polovtsi mnosi. Izyaslav, and Svyatoslav and Vsevolod izidosh against them on Lto. And the former nights, podidosha against myself. Sin for the sake of ours, let God let the filthy people on us, and the Rus princes defeated, and Polovtsi won. " The result of the defeat at Alta was, by the way, a coup in Kiev: the place of Izyaslav, expelled by the Kievites, was taken by the Polotsk prince Vseslav, who had been sitting in the "porch" before.

However, the triumph of the Polovtsians turned out to be short-lived: “Seven, the Polovtsi fighting on the land of Russt, Svyatoslav existing in Chernigov, and the Polovtsi fighting near Chernigov. Svyatoslav, on the other hand, gathered his squads nekoliko, izida nya to Snovsk. And seeing the Polovtsi, the regiment marching in front of the opposition. And I saw Svyatos lav a multitude of them, and in his speech to his squad: “Let’s pull it, we don’t care for children anymore.” And hit in the horse, and won over Svyatoslav in three thousand, and the Polovtsian was 12 thousand; and taco beat, and the friends of the flood in the Dream, and the prince of their yasha rukama, on the 1st day of November. And with victory, he returned to his city of Svyatoslav "...

In the following decades, written sources give us a huge number of more or less detailed descriptions of the clashes between the South Russian and Polovtsian troops. Apparently, it is precisely such stories, supplemented by the brilliant "Word about Igor's Campaign", that formed the stereotype of the perception of the Polovtsians in scientific and popular scientific historical literature, and even more so in the modern everyday consciousness: the image of "a black raven - a rotten half" became a kind of symbol of the pre-Horde Steppe ... It seems that the cherished dream of the Polovtsians was, as D. S. Likhachev writes, "to break through the defensive line of earth ramparts with which Russia fenced off its steppe borders from the south and southeast, and settle within the Kiev state" ...

However, contrary to popular belief, stories about Russian raids on the nomads' nomads are, perhaps, no less common than reports about the devastation of Russian lands by nomads. Suffice it to recall at least the most famous campaign of Igor Svyatoslavich, made in 1185 by the Novgorod-Seversky prince against the Polovtsian vezhes left without cover. There were frequent cases of joint campaigns of Russian princes with the Polovtsian khans. Moreover, the behavior of the “insidious”, “predatory”, “evil” and “greedy” (as our imagination usually depicts them) of the Polovtsians often causes bewilderment - precisely because it radically does not correspond to the clichéd image of the primordial enemy of the Russian land.

In other words, the relationship between Russia and the Steppe was not as tragic, and perhaps not even as dramatic as it might seem at first glance. Armed clashes gave way to peaceful years, quarrels - to weddings. Under the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Yaroslav the Wise, the Polovtsy were already “ours”. Many Russian princes: Yuri Dolgoruky, Andrei Bogolyubsky, Andrei Vladimirovich, Oleg Svyatoslavich, Svyatoslav Olgovich, Vladimir Igorevich, Rurik Rostislavich, Mstislav Udatnoy and others, as we recall, married Polovtsy, or were themselves half Polovtsy. Igor Svyatoslavich was no exception to this row: in his family, five generations of princes in a row were married to the daughters of the Polovtsian khans. By the way, it already follows from this that Igor's campaign was not a simple revenge or an attempt, in modern terms, to deliver a preemptive blow to a potential adversary ...

The reason for such uneven relations was, apparently, the specifics of the economy of a nomadic society. A selection of the main points of view on this score is given by N. Kradin: “probably the most intriguing question of the history of the Great Steppe is the reason that pushed the nomads into mass migrations and destructive campaigns against agricultural civilizations. On this occasion, a wide variety of judgments have been expressed. Briefly, they can be summarized as follows: 1) various global climatic changes (drying - according to A. Toynbee and G. Grumm-Grzhimailo, moisture - according to L.N. Gumilev); 2) the warlike and greedy nature of the nomads; 3) overpopulation of the steppe; 4) the growth of productive forces and class struggle, the weakening of agricultural societies due to feudal fragmentation (Marxist concepts); 5) the need to replenish the extensive pastoralist economy through forays into more stable agricultural societies; 6) reluctance on the part of the sedentary to trade with the nomads (there was nowhere to sell the surplus of cattle breeding); 7) personal qualities of the leaders of the steppe societies; 8) ethno-integrating impulses (passionarity - according to L.N. Gumilev). Most of these factors have their own rational points. However, the significance of some of them turned out to be exaggerated. "

Research in recent years (primarily the works of the outstanding American socioanthropologist O. Lattimore) made it possible to come close to solving this problem: “A 'pure' nomad may well manage only with the products of his herd, but in this case he remained poor. Nomads needed handicrafts, weapons, silk, exquisite adornments for their leaders, their wives and concubines, and finally, products produced by farmers. All this could be obtained in two ways: war and peaceful trade. The nomads used both methods. When they felt their superiority or invulnerability, then without hesitation they mounted their horses and went on a raid. But when a powerful state was a neighbor, pastoralists preferred to conduct peaceful trade with it. However, the governments of the sedentary states often impeded such trade, since it was out of state control. And then the nomads had to defend the right to trade by armed means. "

The nomads did not at all strive to conquer the territories of their northern neighbors. They preferred - as far as possible - together with the sedentary population of nearby agricultural regions to get the maximum benefit from the peaceful "exploitation" of the steppe. That is why, according to I. Konovalova's observation, “robbery in the steppe was a rather rare phenomenon that did not disrupt the course of the steppe trade. After all, both Russians and Polovtsians were equally interested in its stability. The Polovtsi received significant benefits by charging merchants with duties for the transit of goods from the steppe. ... It is obvious that both the Russian princes and the Polovtsian khans were interested in the "passability" of the steppe routes and jointly defended the safety of transshipment trade centers. Thanks to this interest, the Polovtsian steppe not only did not serve as a barrier separating Russia from the Black Sea and Transcaucasian countries, but itself was an arena of lively international trade relations. "

So, the relations of southern Russia with the Steppe were rather difficult - first of all, due to differences in the way of life, language, culture. Nevertheless, the stereotypes of the perception of the steppe people as the primordial enemies of Russia that have formed in the last two centuries do not fully correspond to the ideas about the southern neighbors that existed in Ancient Russia.

Therefore, the famous campaign of the Novgorod-Seversk prince Igor Svyatoslavich, given the origin of this prince, no longer looks like an inglorious adventure aimed at preventing the Polovtsian raids on Russian lands. The prince himself, for the most part, is a Polovtsian and, apparently, takes part in some clarifications of the relations between various Polovtsian nomads that are not quite clear to us. It is not for nothing that Konchak treats him with such attention and honor (who, by the way, after Igor's escape from "captivity" will strike a blow at the principalities that were at enmity with Novgorod-Seversky).

These family ties will play, in particular, a fatal role in the events on Kalka in 1224, when the southern Russian princes, responding to the call for help from their Polovtsian relatives, will suffer a crushing defeat from the advanced Mongol troops ...