The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211)

In 1206, after Daniil Romanovich fl ed from Galich, the Galicians invited the sons of Igor’ Svyatoslavich to be their princes. They welcomed all three Igorevichi suggesting that they wished to install the entire Igorevichi family as their new dynasty. Unfortunately for the brothers a faction...

Повний опис

Збережено в:

Бібліографічні деталі
Дата:	2010
Автор:	Dimnik, М.
Формат:	Стаття
Мова:	English
Опубліковано:	Центр пам’яткознавства НАН України і УТОПІК 2010
Назва видання:	Сіверщина в історії України
Теми:	Історія та культура давніх часів і Середньовіччя
Онлайн доступ:	http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/67709
Теги:	Додати тег Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
Назва журналу:	Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Цитувати:	The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211) / М.Dimnik // Сіверщина в історії України: Зб. наук. пр. — К.: Глухів, 2010. — Вип. 3. — С. 102-111. — Бібліогр.: 37 назв. — англ.

Репозитарії

Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

id	irk-123456789-67709
record_format	dspace
spelling	irk-123456789-677092015-01-29T14:46:52Z The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211) Dimnik, М. Історія та культура давніх часів і Середньовіччя In 1206, after Daniil Romanovich fl ed from Galich, the Galicians invited the sons of Igor’ Svyatoslavich to be their princes. They welcomed all three Igorevichi suggesting that they wished to install the entire Igorevichi family as their new dynasty. Unfortunately for the brothers a faction of Galician boyars, which was supported by the Hungarian king, opposed them and in 1211 successfully deposed them. Після втечі кн. Данила Романовича з Галича у 1206 р. галичани закликали синів Ігоря Святославича князювати над ними. Запрошення разом трьох Ігоревичів демонструвало їх бажання встановити цей князівський рід як нову династію в Галичі. На лихо для братів, фракція галицьких бояр, підтримана угорським королем, створила опозицію правлінню Ігоревичів і успішно скинула їх владу 1211 р. После бегства из Галича кн. Даниила Романовича в 1206 г. галичане призвали сыновей Игоря Святославича княжить над ними. Пригласив вместе троих Игоревичей, они тем выразили желание возвести весь Игорев род на престол Галича как новую династию. К несчастью для братьев, фракция галицких бояр, поддерживаемая венгерским королем, создала оппозицию правлению Игоревичей и в 1211 г. добилась их низложения. 2010 Article The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211) / М.Dimnik // Сіверщина в історії України: Зб. наук. пр. — К.: Глухів, 2010. — Вип. 3. — С. 102-111. — Бібліогр.: 37 назв. — англ. 2218-4805 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/67709 en Сіверщина в історії України Центр пам’яткознавства НАН України і УТОПІК
institution	Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
collection	DSpace DC
language	English
topic	Історія та культура давніх часів і Середньовіччя Історія та культура давніх часів і Середньовіччя
spellingShingle	Історія та культура давніх часів і Середньовіччя Історія та культура давніх часів і Середньовіччя Dimnik, М. The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211) Сіверщина в історії України
description	In 1206, after Daniil Romanovich fl ed from Galich, the Galicians invited the sons of Igor’ Svyatoslavich to be their princes. They welcomed all three Igorevichi suggesting that they wished to install the entire Igorevichi family as their new dynasty. Unfortunately for the brothers a faction of Galician boyars, which was supported by the Hungarian king, opposed them and in 1211 successfully deposed them.
format	Article
author	Dimnik, М.
author_facet	Dimnik, М.
author_sort	Dimnik, М.
title	The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211)
title_short	The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211)
title_full	The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211)
title_fullStr	The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211)
title_full_unstemmed	The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211)
title_sort	demise of igor’s sons (1206-1211)
publisher	Центр пам’яткознавства НАН України і УТОПІК
publishDate	2010
topic_facet	Історія та культура давніх часів і Середньовіччя
url	http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/67709
citation_txt	The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211) / М.Dimnik // Сіверщина в історії України: Зб. наук. пр. — К.: Глухів, 2010. — Вип. 3. — С. 102-111. — Бібліогр.: 37 назв. — англ.
series	Сіверщина в історії України
work_keys_str_mv	AT dimnikm thedemiseofigorssons12061211 AT dimnikm demiseofigorssons12061211
first_indexed	2025-07-05T17:43:28Z
last_indexed	2025-07-05T17:43:28Z
_version_	1836829804864733184
fulltext	Збірник наукових праць 102 чудовий довідник еллініста М. Рішара (Richard M. Rqrertoire des biblithequйs et des cataloques). Отже все, що було перекладене свв. Кирилом і Мефодієм, їхніми учнями та послідовниками останніх перейшли до Київської Русі і заклали підвалини давньоруської літератури. Утім, знання з проблеми, винесеної на розгляд, а також питання перекладів з грецької мови за часів Київської Русі, хоч як це дивно, досі не систематизовані, а це достойно і варто окремого наукового дослідження. І в будь-якому разі доцільність підготовки бібліографічного покажчика з цієї теми безперечна. Посилання 1. История русской литературы X-XVII веков [Текст] ; под ред. Д.С. Лихачева. – М., 1980. 2. Пыпин А.И. Начатки древнерусской письменности [Текст] / Пыпин А.И. // История русской литературы. – Т. 1 : Древняя письменность. – СПб., 1898. 3. Огієнко І. Костянтин і Мефодій : їх життя та діяльність : іст.- літ. моногр. [Текст] / І. Огієнко. – Ч. I. – Вінніпег – Канада, 1970. 4. Грушевський М.С. Історія української літератури [Текст] / М.С. Грушевський. – Т. 2. – К.-Л., 1923. 5. Владимиров П.В. Древнерусская литература киевского периода XI-XIII веков [Текст] / П.В. Владимиров. – К., 1900. 6. Харлампович К. «Alojzy Waczura Szkolnictwo w starey Rusi z porzdnoway prof d-ra Alles Bruchera [Текст] / К. Харлампович. – Lwуw-Warszawa-Krakуw, 1923. V–IX. 1–240. – Інститут рукопису Національної бібліотеки України імені В.І. Вернадського (далі – ІР НБУВ), ф. 10, спр. 18310-18311, 2 с. 7. ПСРЛ : Лаврентиевская летопись [Текст]. – Вып. 1 : ПВЛ. – 2-е изд. – Л., 1926. 8. Франко І. Нарис історії українського письменства [Текст] / І. Франко. – ІР НБУВ, ф. 10, спр. 12478, арк. 6, 7. 9. Франко І. Варлаам и Іосаф, старо-християнський духовний роман та его литературная история письменства [Текст] / І.Франко // ЗНТШ. – 1897. – Т. 17–20. 10. Максимович М. История древней русской словесності. – Книга первая [Текст] / М. Максимович. – К., 1839. 11. Єфремов С. Історія українського письменства [Текст] / С.Єфремов. 12. Мещерский Н.А. К вопросу о византийско-славянских литературных связях [Текст] / Н.А. Мещерський // Византийский временник. – Т. 17. 13. Лихачев Д.С. Развитие русской литературы X-XVII векав : эпохи и стили [Текст] / Д.С. Лихачев. – Л., 1973. 14. Тихомиров М.Н. Древнерусские города [Текст] / М.Н. Тихомиров. – М., 1956. – С. 170-271. 15. Котляр Н.Ф. Киев в истории восточных славян (до середины XIII века) [Текст] / Н. Ф. Котляр // Сов. славяноведение. – 1982. – № 5. – С. 35-46. 16. Кауфман С.А. Из истории Софии Константинопольской // Византийский временник [Текст] / С.А. Кауфман. – 1958. – Т. 14. 17. Удальцова З.В. Киев и Константинополь – культурные связи до XIII века [Текст] / З.В. Удальцова // Вопр. истории. – 1987. – № 4. 18. Толочко П.П. До історії будівництва города Ярослава та Софії Київської [Текст] / П.П. Толочко // Археологія. – К., 1969. – Т. 22. – С. 196-203. 19. Без автора. Киевские Золотые Ворота в прошлом и настоящем [Текст] / Без автора. – ІР НБУВ, ф. 10, спр. 11637. – 34 с. Солонская Н.Г. Книжная культура Киевской Руси и греческая перекладная литература Х-ХІІ ст. Християнство, образование из Греции распространялись в давние славянские страны еще задолго до крещения Руси. Под влиянием этого начала развиваться славянская письменность, центрами которой стали Болгария и Сербия. Преимущественно из Болгарии (конец X – начало XI в.) в Древнерусскую державу были привнесены переводы с греческого языка библейской, церковно-учительной, житийной, исторической литературы, произведений отцов церкви. Автор статьи рассматривает корпус греческой перекладной литературы не только как основу развития христианской культуры в Древнерусском государстве, но и как основу книжного фонда библиотек Киевской Руси, прежде всего Библиотеки Ярослава Мудрого, что осуществляется в украинской исторической науке впервые. Solons’ka N. H. Book’ cultural of Kievan Rus and Greece interpretive literature of the X-XII centuries Khristiyanstvo, education from Greece spread to the old slavonic countries yet zadovgo to christening, under infl uencing of this beginning to develop the slavonic written language, by the centers of which steel Bulgaria and Serbia Mainly from Bulgaria (end X – XI began in.) in Old Russian power translations were privneseno from Greek biblical,church-teaching, zhitiynoy, historical literature, works of fathers of church. The author considers the corpus of Greek literature as a chaise basis for the development of Christian culture in the ancient Russian state, as well as the basis for the book fund libraries Kievan Rus, the fi rst Library of Yaroslav the Wise, which is carried out in Ukrainian historiography for the fi rst time. M. Dimnik THE DEMISE OF IGOR’S SONS (1206-1211)* In 1206, after Daniil Romanovich fl ed from Galich, the Galicians invited the sons of Igor’ Svyatoslavich to be their princes. They welcomed all three Igorevichi suggesting that they wished to install the entire Igorevichi family as their new dynasty. Unfortunately for the brothers a faction of Galician boyars, which was supported by the Hungarian king, opposed them and in 1211 successfully deposed them. Roman Mstislavich the prince of Galich died on 19 June 1205 fi ghting the Poles. He was survived by two sons: Daniil was four years of age and Vasil’ko was two. The Galicians pledged their loyalty to the elder Daniil [1]. His succession was vulnerable, however, because in addition to his youth he had no genealogical claim to Galich. His father’s patrimony, and consequently his inheritance, was Vladimir in Volyn’. Of course, Daniil could defend his claim to Galich on the grounds that he had the traditional right to sit on the throne of his father. This right, however, would have carried little weight with ambitious challengers. One of the most powerful potential rivals was the prince of Kiev. According to custom, if the dynasty of a principality became extinct, as that of Galich had become in 1198 with the death of Vladimir Yaroslavich, its lands reverted to the prince of Kiev [2]. «Сіверщина в історії України» 103 What is more, it was unlikely that neighbouring princes would watch disinterestedly while Galician magnates manipulated the princeling Daniil. The Igorevichi were one such family of princes. They were the cadet or junior branch of the Ol’govichi of Chernigov whose patrimonial domains were in the Posem’e region. Although they were the sons of Igor’ Svyatoslavich of Novgorod Severskiy, the hero of «The Lay of Igor’s Campaign» (Slovo o polku Igoreve), they were also the grandsons of Yaroslav Osmomysl, the renowned ruler of Galich who had died in 1187. His daughter Evfrosinia had been Igor’s wife and the mother of his sons [3]. The purpose of this investigation is to examine the bid that Igor’s sons made to rule the Galician lands. * * * On learning of Roman’s death, Ryurik Rostislavich of Vruchiy, whom Roman had forced to enter a monastery, reoccupied the throne of Kiev. Soon after Vsevolod Svyatoslavich Chermnyy of Chernigov and the Ol’govichi marched to Kiev and made a deal with Ryurik to capture Galich [4]. We are not told if Vsevolod and Ryurik agreed to partition the principality. Nevertheless, the chronicler’s enigmatic statement that Vsevolod accomplished nothing after the campaign failed suggests that he evidently had intended to capture the town for himself. In exchange for Galich Vsevolod had most likely promised to defend Ryurik’s reinstatement as prince of Kiev. In the summer of 1206 Vsevolod Chermnyy summoned all the Ol’govichi to a general assembly (snem) in Chernigov. The chronicler explains that Vsevolod attended with his brothers, the senior branch, and that Vladimir Igorevich attended with his brothers, the cadet branch, thus informing the reader that the genealogical distinction within the Ol’govichi dynasty was signifi cant. We are not told why Vsevolod assembled his relatives and allies. Since in the previous year his major undertaking had been the attempt to capture Galich, he probably solicited their help for a second campaign. At that time he would also have declared to whom he intended to allocate Galician domains. After the attackers set out for Galicia, Ryurik and his forces joined them at Kiev. Vsevolod and the Ol’govichi had no rightful claim to the Galician lands but Ryurik’s participation gave Vsevolod’s expansionist policy legitimacy. As has already been observed, Ryurik as grand prince of Kiev had the right to appropriate the lands of an extinct dynasty. Consequently, as the princes of the original dynasty of Galicia had died out, and since Daniil’s father Roman had usurped control of Galich, Ryurik had the authority to seize it from Daniil and hand it over to a prince of his choosing. On learning that the Ol’govichi were approaching with a large force to attack Galich, the townspeople sought aid from King Andrew II of Hungary and allowed Daniil to return to his patrimony of Vladimir in Volyn’ for safe keeping. The Poles, however, came to the assistance of the Ol’govichi and marched against Daniil. On receiving this news the king diverted his attack against the Poles and invited Prince Yaroslav of Pereyaslavl’ to occupy Galich presumably as a stopgap measure until Daniil could return to Galich. He undoubtedly reasoned that if Yaroslav replaced Daniil in Galich the Ol’govichi could not evict him without drawing Yaroslav’s powerful father Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo of Suzdalia into the rivalry. Meanwhile, Vsevolod Chermnyy learnt that the Hungarian troops had arrived near Vladimir in Volyn’ to defend Daniil against a Polish attack so he delayed his advance against Galich to monitor their confl ict. The Hungarians and Poles, however, adopted delaying tactics and fi nally concluded peace. When Vsevolod Chermnyy learnt that the two sides had avoided a confrontation he withdrew his troops. The Galicians were thrown into great consternation when they discovered that the Hungarians had returned home. Fearing that the Ol’govichi would attack them because they had no prince, they secretly sent an invitation to Vladimir Igorevich of the cadet branch to be their prince. The chronicler reports that he stole away at night from the Ol’govichi camp and rode to Galich where the townspeople welcomed him. It is noteworthy that the Galicians and Vladimir acted clandestinely. The townspeople undoubtedly feared to proffer the invitation to Vsevolod Chermnyy, the commander-in-chief of the attacking force, for fear that he would come with his troops and pillage their lands before appointing a vassal prince of his choice to Galich. Vladimir most likely rode away secretly at night because in accepting the Galicians’ invitation he violated the agreement that the Ol’govichi had reached at the snem before the campaign. Namely, Vsevolod probably intended to appoint a different Ol’govich to Galich. As we shall see, at a later date he would evict Yaroslav from Pereyaslavl’ and give it to his son Mikhail. It is reasonable to assume that he had at fi rst wished to appoint his son Mikhail to Galich and that after failing to give him Galich he compensated Mikhail with Pereyaslavl’. Since Vladimir knew Vsevolod’s intentions for Galich he withdrew covertly from the camp so that Vsevolod would not learn his objective and prevent him from occupying Galich. Meanwhile, the chronicler informs us, Yaroslav of Pereyaslavl’ had not yet reached Galich when he discovered that Vladimir had already occupied it so he returned home. Vladimir’s brothers accompanied him to Galicia where they also obtained domains. Roman became prince of Zvenigorod and, to judge from later information, Svyatoslav got Peremyshl’. Never before had an entire branch of Ol’govichi vacated its patrimonies to occupy domains in another dynasty’s Збірник наукових праць 104 principality. Moreover, the Galicians’ invitation to Vladimir and his brothers suggests that their supporters were united in their resolve to be ruled by not just one prince, as was to be the case with Daniil, but by a number of princes. They seemingly wished to install Igor’s sons as their new dynasty. In addition to the consideration that the Igorevichi were descended from Yaroslav Osmomysl, the Galicians probably had three other reasons for inviting the brothers. First, they would have argued that three princes could defend Galicia more effectively against an invader than just one prince like Daniil could from Galich. Second, since the Igorevichi belonged to the junior branch of Ol’govichi their dynastic relationship to Vsevolod Chermnyy the senior prince of the entire Ol’govichi dynasty would, it was hoped, dissuade him from attacking Galicia in the future. And third, by inviting the Igorevichi of the cadet branch the Galicians probably hoped that Vsevolod would not be able to control them as closely as he would control a prince like his son of the senior branch. We are not told who occupied Novgorod Severskiy, the capital of the cadet branch, and the Igorevichi towns in the Posem’e region. As we shall see, later evidence suggests that the Igorevichi remained absentee landlords, as it were, of their patrimonial domains with the right to return to them from Galicia. During their absence, however, Vsevolod Chermnyy most likely appointed his posadniki to govern the Igorevichi towns [5]. This arrangement undoubtedly made him more willing to forgive Igor’s sons for seizing the Galician towns even though they had frustrated the plans that he had for his own son. Although Vsevolod Chermnyy failed to capture Galich on his second attempt, he nevertheless used his troops to achieve a great personal success. On his march home from Galicia, the chronicler reports that Vsevolod placed his hope in his military might, evicted Ryurik from Kiev, and forced him to fl ee to his patrimony of Vruchiy. After securing his hold of Kiev, Vsevolod evicted Yaroslav Vsevolodovich from Pereyaslavl’. He probably reasoned that as long as Yaroslav ruled Pereyaslavl’ he remained a rival for Galich. Since its citizens had been willing to accept him as their prince when the king of Hungary invited him, there was the possibility that the Galicians themselves might invite him again. If the Igorevichi were forced to return to their domains in the Posem’e region, Vsevolod would lose control of their lands. Therefore, it was probably in the main to prevent this possibility from occurring that Vsevolod decided to remove Yaroslav from Pereyaslavl’. Following the latter’s fl ight to his father in Suzdalia Vsevolod strengthened his personal power by appointing his son Mikhail to Pereyaslavl’ [6]. After Vsevolod had dispersed the troops that he had assembled for his attack on Galich and then used to capture Kiev, Ryurik had little diffi culty in driving him out of Kiev. He also ordered Vsevolod’s son Mikhail to depart from Pereyaslavl’. Ryurik, however, refused to hand back Pereyaslavl’ to Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo with whom he was at odds. Instead, he gave it to his own son Vladimir [7]. Meanwhile, Vsevolod refused to give up his bid for Kiev. At the beginning of 1207 he launched another attack but on this occasion his force, made up of only his brothers Gleb and Mstislav and their sons, was too small. What is more, Vsevolod had lost the advantage of surprise. Ryurik was prepared for the assault and successfully fended off the attackers. The chronicler reports that the Ol’govichi achieved nothing and returned home [8]. Meanwhile, the Igorevichi attempted to consolidate their control over Galicia. Vladimir Igorevich, his brothers, and Galician troops invaded the lands of Volyn’. Roman’s Greek wife Anna and her sons Daniil and Vasil’ko fl ed from Vladimir to the Poles for safety. While Daniil was in Vladimir he remained a threat to the Igorevichi rule in Galich as a rival candidate. Consequently, like Vsevolod Chermnyy who had removed Yaroslav from Pereyaslavl’, the Igorevichi drove out Daniil from neighbouring Vladimir in Volyn’. Vladimir Igorevich however did not follow Vsevolod’s example in making his appointment to the vacated town. Unlike Vsevolod who had given Pereyaslavl’ to his son Mikhail, Vladimir appointed his brother Svyatoslav to Daniil’s town. [9]. His action was a testimony to dynastic solidarity. Instead of augmenting his personal authority by giving the town to his son Izyaslav, Vladimir strengthened the power of Igor’s sons as a family by rewarding his brother with Daniil’s patrimony. Although the Igorevichi attained their objective by driving Daniil into exile, they misjudged the aspirations of Daniil’s cousin, Aleksandr Vsevolodovich of Belz. [10]. He was next in seniority among the Mstislavichi to succeed Daniil’s brother Vasil’ko to Vladimir. Following his cousins’ fl ight Aleksandr obtained the aid of Leszek of Cracow and with the Poles attacked Svyatoslav. To the latter’s chagrin, the Igorevichi had antagonized the townspeople of Vladimir when they forced the Romanovichi to fl ee. Consequently, when the besiegers attacked the town the townspeople turned against Svyatoslav and opened the town’s gates to Aleksandr and the Poles. Svyatoslav capitulated, Aleksandr occupied the town, and the Polish king took Svyatoslav captive. [11]. Nevertheless, fortune smiled on him in captivity. According to Polish sources he and Leszek formed a bond of friendship and sealed it with a family tie. They arranged for the marriage of Svyatoslav’s daughter Agafi a to Leszek’s brother Conrad of Mazovia [12]. On an unspecifi ed date Svyatoslav returned to Galicia. In the summer of 1207, Vsevolod Chermnyy «Сіверщина в історії України» 105 marshalled his brothers, nephews, the Polovtsy, and the princes of Turov and Pinsk to attack Ryurik. Noteworthy for our investigation is the information that Vladimir Igorevich also came with his troops from Galich. Vladimir’s participation in the campaign confi rms that Vsevolod held no animosity towards the Igorevichi for seizing the Galician towns against his wishes, and that they were still his subordinates who owed him allegiance as the senior prince of the Ol’govichi. On this occasion Vsevolod’s offensive evidently caught Ryurik by surprise. Moreover, Vsevolod’s forces were superior to his. Realizing that it would be futile to resist he fl ed to Vruchiy even before the invaders attacked Kiev. Following Ryurik’s fl ight and Vsevolod’s victories over Kiev’s outposts the Kievans capitulated and he occupied Kiev once again [13]. In the following year Galicia experienced great political unrest. As already noted, early in 1207 Igor’s sons had forced the Romanovichi to fl ee to the Poles. Leszek kept the younger Vasil’ko at his court but dispatched the elder Daniil to Andrew II requesting the king to install the princeling in Galich. The king however neglected to fulfi ll Leszek’s request because in the meantime Vladimir Igorevich had bribed both him and the Poles not to attack Galich. Thus, at the beginning of 1208 Vladimir’s rule in Galich was still seemingly secure [14]. Nevertheless, to his dismay an unexpected challenger presented himself from within his own family. We are told that Vladimir quarreled with his brother Roman who, with the help of the Hungarians, deposed his elder brother and seized control of Galich. Vladimir fl ed for safety to Putivl’ in the Posem’e region [15]. Although the chroniclers do not report the cause of the dispute it was undoubtedly over domains. Since their brother Svyatoslav had been taken captive by the Poles, Vladimir, as the senior prince of the cadet branch, most likely assumed control of Svyatoslav’s Galician territories. Roman would have looked upon Vladimir’s appropriation of Svyatoslav’s lands as unjust and demanded that he be given a fair portion. To judge from the news that they quarreled, Vladimir evidently refused to comply. It is noteworthy that after losing Galich Vladimir sought safety in the Igorevichi domains in the Chernigov lands. His action is testimony to the observation that he and his brothers retained possession of their dynastic towns in the Posem’e region and the right to return to them from Galicia. This right, it seems, carried with it the continued obligation of owing allegiance to Vsevolod Chermnyy as their genealogically senior prince. It is surprising, however, that Vladimir occupied Putivl’ rather than Novgorod Severskiy where, as the senior prince of the cadet branch, he had most likely been prince before moving to Galich. Although the chronicles are silent on this question the most likely answer is that Vsevolod Chermnyy had given the capital of the cadet branch to a member of his senior branch. Losing Novgorod Severskiy to the senior branch may have been a price Vladimir had to pay for seizing control of Galich against Vsevolod’s wishes. After we are told that Roman Igorevich seized control of Galich, the dating in the chronicles becomes very confusing. The correct order of events from 1208 to 1215 is especially diffi cult to establish owing to the confl icting dates given by various chronicle traditions. Keeping in mind that the historian must sift through signifi cant discrepancies of dating in the chronicles, it appears that events in Galicia occurred as follows. On 4 September, the townspeople drove out Roman Igorevich from Galich and gave it to Ryurik’s eldest son Rostislav. Soon after in the autumn, however, they evicted Rostislav and reinstalled Roman with his brother [16]. According to Tatishchev who alone gives this information, Ryurik sent Rostislav to Galich after convincing King Andrew II to persuade the Galicians to depose Roman [17]. This information is seemingly right. As noted above, Roman himself had replaced his brother Vladimir in Galich with Hungarian assistance and the backing of the Galicians. It is very unlikely that Rostislav, only a minor prince, could have evicted Roman without similar powerful backing. Rostislav’s father Ryurik as prince of Kiev probably played a signifi cant role in his son’s occupation of Galich. On the one hand, Ryurik’s high political status made Rostislav’s candidacy more desirable to the Galicians. On the other hand, given Ryurik’s high offi ce he was in a position to negotiate the assistance of the king of Hungary. The latter would have been amenable to evicting Igor’s sons and placing another prince in Galich as a stopgap measure until he was able to appoint his candidate, Daniil, to the Galician throne. Since, as we shall see, Ryurik evidently died in 1208, Rostislav must have occupied Galich in that year before his father’s death. The Galicians expelled Rostislav in the autumn of the same year that they had installed him as prince. The chronicles do not report why they removed him after seemingly only a few weeks. In our view Ryurik’s death which deprived Rostislav of his father’s backing probably prompted them to reinstate Roman Igorevich with an unidentifi ed brother. It is unlikely that the latter was Vladimir since Roman was the one who had evicted Vladimir. What is more, if Vladimir had been recalled to Galicia he, owing to his seniority among the Igorevichi, would have had the prior claim to ruling Galich ahead of Roman. It is reasonable to assume therefore, that the unidentifi ed brother was Svyatoslav whom Leszek had released from captivity. Thus, by the end of the eventful year 1208 the two younger Igorevichi, Roman and Svyatoslav, were back in power in Galicia while Vladimir, their senior prince, was relegated to distant Збірник наукових праць 106 Putivl’ in the Posem’e to bide his time. Meanwhile, fortune smiled on Vsevolod Chermnyy. Under the year 1208, two minor chronicles give important information: “In that year Ryurik prince of Kiev died and Vsevolod Chermnyy occupied Kiev” [18]. Since, as noted above, Ryurik helped his son Rostislav to become prince of Galich on 4 September, he must have died soon after that date and probably before the Galicians evicted Rostislav that autumn. Ryurik’s death allowed Vsevolod Chermnyy to enter Kiev uncontested for the fi rst time. In 1209 Roman Igorevichi suffered more setbacks. Whereas the Galicians had taken Ryurik’s death as the excuse for expelling his son Rostislav from their town, Andrew II in turn took their expulsion of Rostislav as the pretext for punishing them. After the king was informed of their ‘lawlessness and revolt’, he sent Palatine Benedict Bor to attack Galich. The Hungarians captured Roman Igorevich in the bathhouse and carted him away to Hungary. After occupying the town, we are told, they persecuted the inhabitants with countless atrocities [19]. The king’s response to Rostislav’s eviction suggests that according to his agreement with the Galicians, the latter had pledged to accept Rostislav as their prince. Instead they had expelled him in favour of the Igorevichi and therewith provoked Andrew II. Consequently, following Roman’s capture, he refused to give the Galicians another prince even though he had Daniil at his court. Instead he avenged himself by allowing Palatine Benedict Bor and his troops to infl ict all manner of violence on the Galicians for breaking their pledge to him. In the early part of 1210 Roman escaped from Hungary and returned to the Posem’e just as his brother Svyatoslav had done after Roman had been taken captive. On learning of Roman’s escape the Galicians sent messengers to Vladimir in Putivl’. They confessed that they had sinned against Igor’s sons and pleaded with him to free them from their oppressor. In response the three Igorevichi marshalled their troops and set out against Benedict [20]. Their joint action confi rms that Vladimir and Roman had settled their differences. We may assume that after Svyatoslav had returned from the Poles rivalry over his Galician domain ceased being an issue, if indeed that had been the bone of contention between Vladimir and Roman. Moreover, we see that the Galicians once again invited all three Igorevichi, and not solely Vladimir or not just Roman and Svyatoslav. Their action supports the view that they were attempting to adopt the entire Igorevichi family as their dynasty. It also suggests that the argument between Vladimir and Roman had been a family matter and not a dispute with the townspeople. The Galicians turned to the Igorevichi not only because they were descended from Yaroslav Osmomysl the former prince of Galich, but they probably reasoned, as in the past, that the three princes with their troops would have greater military success than a single prince in Galich would have. Their united rule would bring greater political stability to Galicia. The Igorevichi drove out Palatine Benedict Bor and the Hungarians from Galicia and presumably reoccupied the same domains that they had administered before Vladimir and Roman quarreled. Thus, Vladimir returned to Galich, Roman returned to Zvenigorod, and Svyatoslav, the chronicler tells us, got Peremyshl’. On this occasion Vladimir also gave his elder son Izyaslav the town of Terebovl’ and sent his younger son Vsevolod to Hungary with the tasks of appeasing the king and of persuading him to let Igor’s sons remain in Galicia. One chronicler adds that Vladimir sent Vsevolod laden with many gifts in the hope of bribing the king [21]. According to another Vladimir requested Andrew II to hand over Daniil to him but the king refused because he had arranged for the Romanovich to marry his daughter [22]. The failure of Vsevolod’s mission did not augur well for the future of the Igorevichi in Galicia. The year 1211 was catastrophic for the cadet branch. The chronicler reports that Igor’s sons plotted to eradicate the Galician boyars and over time executed some 500 of the magnates. One boyar reportedly accused the princes of perpetrating other atrocities. When instigating the townspeople of Peremyshl’ to revolt against Svyatoslav Igorevich, Volodislav Kormil’chich accused the Igorevichi of killing their fathers and brothers, of pillaging their lands, of forcing their daughters to marry slaves, and of handing over their Galician patrimonies to Igorevichi henchmen from the Chernigov lands. In light of such alleged outrages a delegation of Galician boyars rode to Hungary and beseeched the king to hand over Daniil to them to help them drive out Igor’s sons from their domains. According to another account the Galicians plotted to kill Roman Igorevich and his brothers. It was only after their attempts to poison him and to ambush him failed that they sent messengers to Andrew II asking him to help [23]. On this occasion the king thought that the time was right for his intervention and sent Daniil accompanied by a large force. How are we to interpret these biased reports? There can be no doubt that the Igorevichi executed certain Galician magnates in light of the evidence that we are given the names of a number of the more prominent victims. However, the chronicler’s claim that there were 500 casualties is most likely an exaggeration or, at best, a rounded off approximation [24]. Although Igor’s sons initiated a practice of exterminating Galician boyars did they, as the chronicler suggests, do so indiscriminately? The anti-Igorevichi biases of the chronicle reports are testifi ed to by the citizens of the towns ruled by the Igorevichi who demonstrated loyalty to their princes «Сіверщина в історії України» 107 in times of crisis. In Peremyshl’, for example, the townspeople defended Svyatoslav against Daniil’s forces until the hostile boyar Volodislav Kormil’chich incited a faction to take the prince captive. In like manner the Zvenigorodians helped Roman to defend their town against Daniil’s forces and refused to surrender until they learnt that Roman had been taken captive. According to circumstantial evidence Izyaslav also had the backing of the citizens of Terebovl’. The chronicler reports that, while fl eeing from Terebovl’, he successfully repulsed his pursuers at the river Nezda but lost his packhorses. Since he successfully fl ed from Terebovl’ with his valuables, and presumably with his family, this reveals that the citizens of the town let him depart without opposition. Their conduct suggests that they were not supporters of the anti-Igorevichi boyars or of Daniil. In like manner, Izyaslav’s father Vladimir was allowed to fl ee from Galich without being obstructed by hostile boyars or townspeople. To judge from this information we see that Igor’s sons had loyal supporters in the towns who were satisfi ed with their rule and that the princes did not pursue a policy of indiscriminate slaughter of magnates [25]. Indeed, it would have been absurd for the Igorevichi to alienate all the boyars since they seemingly intended to remain in the Galician towns permanently. Instead, we may assume that their objective was to eliminate the hostile boyars who supported Daniil and to replace them with their own Chernigov boyars and loyal Galicians. In other words, in order to consolidate their rule over the Galician towns and lands the Igorevichi declared war solely on Daniil’s supporters. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the attacking force accompanying Daniil was made up primarily of non-Galicians suggesting that many of the Galician boyars and townspeople did not wish to evict Igor’s sons. Aside from the hostile Galician boyars who initiated the campaign, the troops that joined them came from the Hungarians, the Poles, and the Mstislavichi of Volyn’. The latter included Daniil’s brother Vasil’ko from Belz, Mstislav Yaroslavich from Peresopnitsa [26], Aleksandr Vsevolodovich and his brother Vsevolod from Vladimir in Volyn’ [27], and Ingvar’ Yaroslavich’s son with troops from Lutsk, Dorogobuzh, and Shumsk [28]. Although the attacking army had the common objective of enthroning Daniil in Galich, its various participants had different motives for helping him. With his return to Galicia his boyar supporters no doubt hoped to manipulate the young prince and to recoup the privileges of which the Igorevichi had deprived them. In like manner, the Hungarians and the Poles also hoped to benefi t from Daniil’s rule in Galich. The Mstislavichi of Volyn’ treated the Igorevichi occupation of Vladimir as a warning bell. They considered it advisable to drive out the hostile princes from Galicia lest they lose their domains to the Igorevichi just as the two Romanovichi had lost Vladimir. Moreover, the Mstislavichi would have joined Daniil’s force because he commanded their allegiances as their senior prince. Finally, the campaign was of special signifi cance to Aleksandr Vsevolodovich because Daniil was the rightful ruler of Vladimir. By helping him to seize control of Galich Aleksandr could retain control of Vladimir. The objective of Daniil’s heterogeneous army was to evict the three Igorevichi from their towns, namely, Peremyshl’, Zvenigorod, and Galich. The invaders evidently ignored Izyaslav in Terebovl’ because they did not consider him to be important enough to merit attacking. Meanwhile, Izyaslav, whose mother was the daughter of the Polovtsian khan Konchak, rode to the steppe to recruit nomadic reinforcements. He brought the Polovtsy to Roman’s assistance and drove off the forces besieging Zvenigorod. Following this success the chronicler reports that Roman set off to seek help from the princes of Rus’, above all we may assume, from Vsevolod Chermnyy of Kiev, the senior prince of the Ol’govichi. When he attempted to bypass the town of Shumsk in Volyn’ owned by the hostile Mstislavichi, however, he was taken captive by enemy soldiers. They turned him over to Daniil. On learning that Roman had been taken captive, the citizens of Zvenigorod surrendered to Daniil’s forces. After Vladimir was informed that Svyatoslav and Roman had been taken captive, we are told that he fl ed from Galich with Izyaslav. The chroniclers tell us nothing about Vladimir’s second son, Vsevolod, whom he had sent to Andrew II in Hungary. Given the king’s hostile disposition towards the Igorevichi, however, he had most likely thrown Vsevolod into prison just as he had earlier incarcerated Roman. After occupying Galich the victorious boyars and the Hungarians installed the ten-year-old Daniil on the throne. The Hungarians then proposed to take the three captive princes – Roman, Svyatoslav, and Rostislav – to King Andrew II in Hungary. However, the Galician boyars hostile to Igor’s sons bribed the Hungarian commanders to hand over the princes to them. The Hungarians complied and in September, we are told, the Galicians hanged the three Igorevichi [29]. This report contains the fi rst reference to the prince named Rostislav. It is noteworthy that, under the year 1210, when the chroniclers named seemingly all the Igorevichi who were given towns in Galicia, they did not include Rostislav. This omission has created controversy among investigators concerning the prince’s identity. According to a number of them he was not a member of the Igorevichi family [30]. Most are of the opinion, however, that he was the brother of Vladimir, Roman, and Svyatoslav [31]. Is it possible to ascertain his identity? Збірник наукових праць 108 Let us examine the confl icting chronicle information about the executed princes in the order of the chronicles’ reliability beginning with the oldest. The report in the Hypatian Chronicle, which was probably written by a contemporary of the event, states: «the captured princes were Roman, Svyatoslav, [and] Rostislav» [32]. Thus, it simply gives the names of the princes but fails to mention their relationship to each other. The Gustinskiy Chronicle, which is younger but seemingly drew its data either from the Hypatian Chronicle or from their common source, states that «the Igorevichi, they were Roman, Svyatoslav, and Rostislav» [33]. It adds, therefore, that the three were Igorevichi. The Novgorod chronicler was much further removed from the events in Galicia but evidently still a contemporary. Under 1212 he reports that Vsevolod Chermnyy accused the Rostislavichi of Smolensk of hanging «two of my brothers in Galich» [34]. This account has baffl ed historians because all the other reports mention three Igorevichi. Let us fi rst note that even though Vsevolod called the princes his ‘brothers’ they were not his siblings. Therefore, he most likely referred to them as ‘brothers’ in the manner that chroniclers frequently use the term to refer to allies who had sworn an oath of allegiance. Why, however, does he refer to only two of the Igorevichi, presumably Roman and Svyatoslav, as his allies? Since they both belonged to his generation and were heads of their families they would have taken oaths on their own behalf and, if they had sons, also on their behalf. If this was the case, then it is reasonable to assume that Rostislav had not sworn an oath with Vsevolod because he was still a minor at that time. He would have been included in the oath that his father had made on behalf of his sons. If this reasoning is correct, Vsevolod was probably not stating that the Rostislavichi were accomplices in the hanging of only two Igorevichi, but rather, that only two of the princes hanged had a special relationship with him. They were not only members of the Ol’govichi dynasty but they were his ‘brothers’ because, by swearing on the Holy Cross, they had also formed moral and political relationships with him. Most chronicles represent the youngest and the least trustworthy chronicle information. According to them “three Igorevichi, Roman with his brothers” were hanged [35]. These are the only sources that identify Roman’s companions as his brothers. Since, as we know, Svyatoslav was Roman’s genealogical brother, this suggests that Rostislav also had the same father. As, however, the more reliable older chronicles do not recognize Rostislav as Roman’s brother, the claim that he was Roman’s brother is questionable. Indeed, assuming, as the Novgorod chronicler intimated, that Rostislav did not belong to the same generation as the other two, who was Rostislav? We know the following information about the prince for certain. Since Daniil’s army besieged only the towns of the most important Igorevichi, namely, Vladimir, Roman, and Svyatoslav, this implies that Rostislav was a minor political fi gure. Also, since as was the custom, the chronicles list the princes who were hanged in the order of political seniority, Rostislav was the least important. What is more, because he was not given a domain in 1210, he was of lesser importance than Vladimir’s son Izyaslav. Since he was not in command of a town, this suggests that he most likely lived with his father who was an Igorevich. Finally, as the Galician boyars believed that he deserved execution, we may assume that he had antagonized them in a manner similar to that of Roman and Svyatoslav. Circumstantial evidence corroborates the evidence of most chronicles that Rostislav was an Igorevich. According to the available written evidence only princes of the Igorevichi dynasty ruled in Galicia. Furthermore, as we have seen, under 1210 the chroniclers listed only fi ve Igorevichi: the three brothers and Vladimir’s two sons. Circumstantial evidence suggests, however, that this was an incomplete list of Igorevichi. The chronicler named only those who ruled domains and Vsevolod, who was assigned a diplomatic mission to Hungary. According to one source, as we shall see, Roman and Svyatoslav were executed with their entire families which, presumably, included sons. We may assume that the chronicler did not name any junior Igorevichi because they were still minors. Whose son was Rostislav, and if he was not yet politically active why did the Galician boyars execute him? As we have seen, the Hungarians besieged three towns. First they captured Peremyshl’ where they took Svyatoslav captive with his family. If he had a son or sons, in the opinion of the chronicler no one was important enough to be identifi ed by name. Soon after, Vladimir fl ed from Galich with his son Izyaslav. No other prince is reported as accompanying them. In light of this information we may conclude that Rostislav was neither Svyatoslav nor Vladimir’s son. According to this process of elimination it would seem that Rostislav was Roman’s son. When Daniil’s troops were besieging Zvenigorod, Izyaslav came to Roman’s assistance with the Polovtsy who routed the attackers. During the lull in the hostilities Roman rode out of the town to seek aid from the princes in Rus’. According to custom, he would have placed the town under the command of a lieutenant during his absence. Roman’s eldest son, although still a minor, was the logical candidate for the role of commander- in-chief while an experienced veteran boyar served as the acting commander [36]. Roman’s son in question, in our view, must have been Rostislav. Daniil’s troops would have taken him captive after Zvenigorod fell. The hostile Galician boyars undoubtedly executed him because he had commanded the defence of a «Сіверщина в історії України» 109 town against them just as his father Roman and his uncle Svyatoslav had done. Just the same, we lack suffi cient data to ascertain indisputably Rostislav’s full identity. The hostile Galician boyars expressed extreme arrogance in avenging themselves on Igor’s sons by executing them. Such conduct was the ultimate crime against the princely offi ce. According to a late chronicle, the pro-Daniil Galician boyars wished to eradicate the Igorevichi as a dynasty by executing Roman and Svyatoslav with their families [37]. They almost succeeded. After losing Galicia the Igorevichi in effect died out as a dynasty and ceased being an important political power. They were reduced to one family, that of Vladimir. After escaping from Galicia, he and his son Izyaslav returned to their domains in the Posem’e region. In the 1230s Izyaslav would continue to participate in the political life of Rus’ as an ally of Mikhail Vsevolodovich. The sources, however, never mention Vladimir again. * * * In conclusion let us make the following observations. The Galicians invited the Igorevichi of the cadet branch of Ol’govichi to be their princes as a compromise after their fi rst choice, Daniil Romanovich, fl ed from Galich before an attacking army. Consequently, the Igorevichi were not the preferred princes but were thrust upon the Galicians, so to speak, by the need for military defence in a time of crisis. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that the Galicians did not invite just one Igorevich to replace Daniil but welcomed all three brothers. This suggests that the Galicians wished to transplant the entire Igorevichi family to their lands. The brothers were a logical choice because they were the most direct surviving descendents of Yaroslav Osmomysl, the last major prince of the extinct dynasty of Galich. To increase the defensive potential of the Galician lands the Galicians had them rule the three most important towns in the principality. They evidently hoped that such an arrangement would create greater political stability than a single prince ruling only Galich could ensure. Although the Igorevichi abandoned their patrimonial domains to assume possession of the domains in Galicia, they neither renounced their right to the possession of their patrimonial towns in the Posem’e region nor severed their dynastic ties and political allegiances to the senior prince of the Ol’govichi. The fi rst is testifi ed to by the information that Vsevolod Chermnyy allowed them to return from Galicia to their domains in the Posem’e region. The second is confi rmed by the news that in 1207 Vladimir assisted Vsevolod in his campaign against Ryurik, and that in 1211, when Zvenigorod was under siege, Roman set out to obtain reinforcements from Vsevolod in Kiev. Finally, the strongest evidence in support of the argument that the Igorevichi remained loyal Ol’govichi under the authority of their senior prince Vsevolod Chermnyy was the evidence that, in 1212, he claimed that the Igorevichi were his ‘brothers’ at the time of their execution in Galich. Unfortunately for the Igorevichi, their main rival Daniil had faithful backing from a powerful faction of Galician boyars and from the king of Hungary. The latter was opposed to the Igorevichi rule in Galicia and invited two minor princes, Yaroslav of Pereyaslavl’ and Rostislav Ryurikovich, to rule Galich as stopgap measures. Yaroslav was not a serious claimant because his father Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo of Suzdalia showed no interest in appropriating Galicia. Rostislav became an insignifi cant candidate soon after his appointment to Galich because he lost the backing of his father Ryurik who died as prince of Kiev. As the king’s appointees each was evidently expected to rule Galich only until Andrew II considered it to be opportune to place his ward Daniil on the throne of Galich. The news that the hostile Galician boyars had to seek help from Andrew II suggests that the Igorevichi had considerable success in undermining their military might and in reducing their numbers. Nevertheless, in addition to local boyar opposition to their rule it could be argued that the Igorevichi were their own worst enemies. First, they provoked the Mstislavichi of Volyn’. They attempted to seize control of Vladimir, the hereditary domain of the Romanovichi. They therewith sought to assert their authority over a town that belonged to another dynasty. Their aggression forced the Romanovichi to seek safety with the Poles and the Hungarians who rose to their defence. The Igorevichi attack on Vladimir also antagonized the other princely families of Mstislavichi in Volyn’ by making them fear for the safety of their domains. In the end the Igorevichi not only lost Vladimir to the Mstislavichi but the Poles also captured Svyatoslav whom the Igorevichi had appointed to rule the town. Second, instead of living at peace with one another in the face of opposition from hostile boyars and foreign rules, Roman and Vladimir quarreled. On the one hand, the rift between them undermined their military effectiveness by reducing the number of Igorevichi in Galicia. On the other hand, it fueled the determination of the anti-Igorevichi faction to evict them. Third, in consolidating their authority the Igorevichi resorted to using extreme measures even to the extent of executing enemy boyars. These measures compelled survivours of the latter faction to ask Andrew II to help them to evict the Igorevichi and to install Daniil as their prince. Finally, of the three princes who were hanged, namely, Roman, Svyatoslav, and Rostislav, the latter may have been Roman’s son. Moreover, by executing two of the three Igorevichi families, the pro-Daniil Galicians eliminated the threat of the Igorevichi ever returning as a dynasty. Their removal made it Збірник наукових праць 110 possible for the king’s allied forces to reinstate the youthful Daniil, to whom the Galicians had initially pledged their allegiance in 1205 after his father’s death. Ultimately, the fi ve-year involvement of Igor’s sons in the politically volatile principality of Galicia proved to be a disaster. The only princely survivors, Vladimir and his son Izyaslav, returned to their patrimonial Posem’e region and gradually disappeared into the mists of history. Endnotes * This article is a revised and abbreviated version of material discussed in M. Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146-1246 (Cambridge, 2003), pp. 253-276. 1. “Lavrent’evskaya letopis’», (abbreviated Lav.) Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisey, (abbreviated PSRL) 1, second edition (Leningrad, 1926), column (abbreviated col.) 425; “Moskovskiy letopisnyy svod kontsa XV veka,” (abbreviated Mosk.) PSRL 25 (Moscow-Leningrad, 1949), p. 104. Concerning the date, see N. G. Berezhkov, Khronologiya russkogo letopisaniya (Moscow, 1963), p. 88. 2. N. de Baumgarten, Génealogies et mariages occidentaux des Rurikides Russes du Xe au XIIIe siècle (Orientalia Christiana), volume (abbreviated vol.) 9, number (abbreviated nr.) 35 (Rome, 1927), III, 17; Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146-1246, pp. 235-236. 3. Baumgarten, Génealogies, III, 13, 16. 4. Mosk., p. 104; Lav., columns (abbreviated cols.) 425-426. 5. In 1141 we learn that Vsevolod Ol’govich of Kiev, the senior prince of the Ol’govichi, assumed control of his brother Svyatoslav’s domains while the latter was living in Novgorod (M. Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov, 1054-1146 [Toronto, 1994], pp. 369-370). 6. Concerning the campaign against Galich, see Lav., cols. 426- 428; Mosk., pp. 104-105. Compare the Hypatian and Gustinskiy chronicles, which have corrupt texts («Ipat’evskaya letopis’», [abbreviated Ipat.] PSRL 2, second edition [St. Petersburg, 1908], col. 718; «Gustinskaya letopis’», [abbreviated Gust.], PSRL 2 [St. Petersburg, 1843], p. 329). Only a late chronicle identifi es Vsevolod’s son as Mikhail («Patriarshaya ili Nikonovskaya letopis’», [abbreviated Nikon.] PSRL vol. 10 [St. Petersburg, 1885], p. 51; see also V. N. Tatishchev, Istoriya Rossiyskaya, [abbreviated Tat.] vol. 4 [Moscow-Leningrad, 1964], p. 333, and Tat., vol. 3, [Moscow- Leningrad, 1964], p. 176). Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, pp. 99-100. 7. Concerning Ryurik’s occupation of Kiev, see Lav., col. 428; Mosk., p. 105. 8. Lav., col. 428; Mosk., p. 105. 9. Lav., col. 428; Mosk., p. 105; Gust., p. 330; compare Ipat., col. 718. Concerning the date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, p. 99. 10. Concerning Aleksandr, see Baumgarten, Génealogies, XIII, 1. 11. Concerning the attack on Vladimir in Volyn’, see Gust., p. 330; compare Ipat., col. 720. 12. A. Szymczakowa, «Ksiezniczki Ruskie w Polsce XIII wieku», Acta Universitatis Lodzensis, Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego, Nauki Humanistyczno-spoleczne, Folia Historica, Seria 1, zeszyt 29 (1978), pp. 32-36; B. Wlodarski, Polska i Rus’ 1194-1340 (Warszawa, 1966), p. 44. 13. Lav., col. 429; Mosk., p. 106. 14. Ipat., col. 719. 15. Ipat., cols. 719-720. The dating in the Hypatian Chronicle for the fi rst half of the thirteenth century is unreliable. In some instances, as is the case here, it is as many as fi ve years off the mark. Most sources place the information of Roman’s revolt under the March year 1208 or Ultra-March year 1209 (see under 1208: Mosk., p. 107; «L’vovskaya letopis’», [abbreviated L’vov] PSRL 20 [St. Petersburg., 1910], p. 146; and under 1209: Gust., p. 330 which alone identifi es Putivl’ as Vladimir’s patrimony). Therefore, the earliest possible date for the confl ict was March of 1208 and the latest possible date was February of 1209. 16. Mosk., p. 108: «Ermolinskaya letopis’», (abbreviated Erm.) PSRL 23 (St. Petersburg, 1910), p. 62; L’vov, p. 146; compare Nikon., which alone gives the date of Roman’s expulsion (p. 60). 17. Tat., vol. 4, p. 340; compare Tat., vol. 3, pp. 182-183. 18. «Tipografskaya letopis’», PSRL 24 (Petrograd, 1921), p. 85; «Piskarevskiy letopisets», PSRL 34 (Moscow, 1978), p. 81. Tatishchev says he died in 1211 in Kiev (Tat., vol. 4, p. 341; Tat., vol. 3, p. 184). According to others he died in Chernigov in 1215 (Lav., col. 438; Mosk., p. 110) or in 1216 (Troitskaya letopis’, rekonstruktsiya teksta, ed. M. D. Priselkov [Moscow-Leningrad, 1950], p. 301). Still another source gives 1219 as the date (Gust., p. 334). For an examination of the problem, see M. Dimnik, «The Place of Ryurik Rostislavich’s Death: Kiev or Chernigov?», Mediaeval Studies, vol. 44 (Toronto, 1982), pp. 371-393. Compare J. Fennell, who makes the unlikely suggestion that Ryurik died in 1215 in Chernigov as a prisoner of the Ol’govichi (“The Last Years of Riurik Rostislavich,” Essays in Honor of A. A. Zimin, D. C. Waugh [ed.], [Columbus, Ohio, 1985], p. 163). According to another view Ryurik probably died ‘as a monk’ (v chernech’stve) rather than ‘in Chernigov’ (v Chernigove), (O. P. Tolochko, «Shche raz pro mistse smerti Riuryka Rostyslavycha», Sviatyi kniaz’ Mykhailo Chernihivs’kyi ta ioho doba [Chernihiv, 1996], pp. 75-76). 19. See under the year 1205: Ipat., cols. 721-722; compare under the year 1210: Gust., p. 331. The Gustinskiy Chronicle uses the Ultra-March year system of dating for the years 1207 to 1209. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the information concerning Benedict’s seizure of Galich, which it has under the year 1210, is also reported according to the Ultra-March year, that is, for the January year 1209. Compare Makhnovets’, who suggests that the correct date is 1208 (Litopys rus’kyi [za Ipats’kym spyskom], translated by L. Ie. Makhnovets’, [Kiev, 1989], p. 371), and Perfecky, who suggests the correct date is 1210 (The Hypatian Codex, Part Two: The Galician-Volynian Chronicle, translated by G. E. Perfecky [Munich, 1973], p. 20). 20. The chronicler reports that at an earlier date the Galicians had invited Mstislav Yaroslavich of Peresopnitsa (Baumgarten, Génealogies, XIV, 2) to drive out Benedict, but he failed (Ipat., col. 722; Gust., p. 331). 21. Ipat., cols. 722-723. Although the Hypatian Chronicle gives wrong dates for these events, it places Benedict’s occupation of Galich under 1205 and Roman’s escape under 1206. This suggests that the events occurred in two different years, namely in 1209 and 1210. See also under the year 1210: Gust., p. 331. Compare Perfecky, who says Roman escaped in 1211 (The Hypatian Codex, p. 20) and Makhnovets’, who gives the year as 1209 (Litopys rus’kyi, p. 371). 22. See under the year 1210: Gust., p. 311; compare under the year 1206: Ipat., col. 723. 23. Nikon., p. 63. For a more detailed analysis of the boyar opposition to the Igorevichi, see A. V. Mayorov, Galitsko-Volynskaya Rus’ (Sank-Peterburg, 2001), pp. 370-407. 24. Concerning historians’ disagreements over the claim that the Igorevichi killed 500 boyars, see Mayorov, Galitsko-Volynskaya Rus’, pp. 389-391. 25. Compare Mayorov who argues that the Igorevichi were treated as ‘aliens’ (chuzhim) and as ‘newcomers’ (prishel’tsam) by the people of Galicia (Mayorov, Galitsko-Volynskaya Rus’, p. 393). 26. Baumgarten, Génealogies, XIV, 2. 27. Baumgarten, Génealogies, XIII, 1-2. 28. Baumgarten, Génealogies, XIV, 1. 29. For Daniil’s attack on the Igorevichi and their execution, see under the year 1208: Ipat., cols. 723-727; compare under the year 1211: Gust., pp. 331-332. According to the chronicles, «Сіверщина в історії України» 111 following the hangings in September, Vsevolod Chermnyy evicted the Rostislavichi of Smolensk from their Kievan domains for their alleged complicity with the Galicians in the execution of the Igorevichi. The Rostislavichi sought help from Mstislav of Novgorod, who attacked Vsevolod Chermnyy in Kiev in June of 1212 (under the year 1214: Novgorodskaya pervaya letopis’ starshego i mladshego izvodov [abbreviated NPL], edited by A. N. Nasonov [Moscow-Leningrad, 1950], pp. 53, 251-252. Concerning the correct date, see Berezhkov, Khronologiya, p. 257). Since the September in question occurred before June of 1212, the latest possible date for the hangings was the September of 1211. The Igorevichi, as we have seen, had returned to Galicia sometime in 1210. Accordingly, the hanging’s occurred in 1211. 30. See V. T. Pashuto, who claims that only two princes were hanged (Ocherki po istorii Galitsko-volynskoy Rusi [Moscow, 1950], p. 198). According to another view Rostislav was named in error and did not exist (Mayorov, Galitsko-Volynskaya Rus’, p. 392). 31. See, for example, Baumgarten, Génealogies, IV, 48; Perfecky, The Hypatian Codex, Table I; Makhnovets’, Litopys rus’kyi, p. 373. 32. Ipat., col. 727. 33. Gust., p. 332. 34. NPL, pp. 53, 251. 35. See, for example, Mosk., p. 108; L’vov, p. 147; Erm., p. 63. 36. According to chronicle evidence, a princeling who was still a youth could be offi cially in charge of the defence of a town. This was the case in 1238, when Vasil’ko, who was only twelve years of age, ‘commanded’ the defence of Kozel’sk against the Tatars (Ipat., cols. 780-781; Mosk., p. 130; Dimnik, The Dynasty of Chernigov 1146-1246, pp. 345-346). 37. Nikon., p. 63. Дімнік М. Повалення князівського правління Ігоревичів (1206-1211 рр.) Після втечі кн. Данила Романовича з Галича у 1206 р. галичани закликали синів Ігоря Святославича князювати над ними. Запрошення разом трьох Ігоревичів демонструвало їх бажання встановити цей князівський рід як нову династію в Галичі. На лихо для братів, фракція галицьких бояр, підтримана угорським королем, створила опозицію правлінню Ігоревичів і успішно скинула їх владу 1211 р. Димник М. Свержение с княжеского стола Игоревичей (1206-1211 гг.) После бегства из Галича кн. Даниила Романовича в 1206 г. галичане призвали сыновей Игоря Святославича княжить над ними. Пригласив вместе троих Игоревичей, они тем выразили желание возвести весь Игорев род на престол Галича как новую династию. К несчастью для братьев, фракция галицких бояр, поддерживаемая венгерским королем, создала оппозицию правлению Игоревичей и в 1211 г. добилась их низложения. Г.Ю. Стародубцев МОНЕТЫ ЗОЛОТОЙ ОРДЫ С ГОРОДИЩА «ЦАРСКИЙ ДВОРЕЦ» (ПО МАТЕРИАЛАМ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЙ 2007-2008 ГГ.) Статья посвящена находкам серебряных и медных монет Золотой Орды на городище «Царский Дворец», входящего в состав Гочевского археологического комплекса (Курская область, Беловский район). В тексте дается прочтение надписей и дат на монетах XIII в., их вес. Помимо этого автором высказываются предположения относительно причин и времени попадания находок на территорию крепости, а также о возможной дате гибели средневекового замка на р. Псёл. Комплекс средневековых археологических памятников, расположенный в 1,8 км к ССВ от с. Гочево на правобережной террасе р. Псёл, состоит из городища 1 («Крутой курган») и городища 2 («Царский Дворец»), примыкающего к ним селища 1 (посада), а также курганного и грунтового могильников. Все памятники комплекса взаимосвязаны и отражают этапы развития одного поселения в период с конца X в. по рубеж XIV – XV вв. Составляющие комплекс элементы указывают на наличие в этом месте древнерусского города XI – XIV вв. В данной работе представлены монеты последней трети XIII в., отчеканенные в Золотой Орде 1 и обнаруженные при проведении охранных исследований на городище «Царский Дворец» в последние годы. При этом необходимо отметить, что это первые нумизматические находки этого периода в Гочево2. При исследовании городища в 2007 г. в пласте 2 квадрата М 5 раскопа III (рис. 1) был обнаружен редкий тип серебряного джучидского ярмака, имеющего следы огня на лицевой стороне [7, 11]. Монета в хорошей сохранности с чётко читаемыми надписями: на аверсе – «Каан справедливы-//й Менгу-Тимур// чекан Крыма//(тамга дома Бату)»; на реверсе – «Нет бога кроме Аллаха//единого, нет ему сотовари-//ща. 665 год Хиджры», что соответствует 1266/1267 гг. (рис. 3, 2). Вес монеты составляет 1,99 г. По имеющимся данным по золотоордынской нумизматике в середине XIII в., когда Орда только начала обособляться из Монгольской империи в самостоятельное государство, монетные системы, существовавшие в разных ее частях (Нижнее Поволжье (бывшая Волжская Болгария), Хорезм, Крым), были достаточно автономны. Монеты, имевшиеся в обращении на этих территориях, имели различные названия и вес. В частности, в 1. Автор выражает признательность В.П. Лебедеву за по- мощь в определении монет. 2. Монеты второй половины XIII в. отчеканенные в Золо- той Орде впервые обнаружены на археологических памятни- ках Курской области.

The demise of Igor’s sons (1206-1211)

Репозитарії

Схожі ресурси