Small silver coin in Russia. Coins of ancient Russia

If you ask yourself what the most ancient coins of Russia will be, then the answer may be quite surprising. It turns out that the most ancient coins that archaeologists have found where the lands of the Kiev principality stretched were Roman denarii, issued in the period from four hundred to a hundred years BC. However, it is not at all a fact that they were used for buying or selling. Most likely, metal mugs with intricate designs were much more popular as components of jewelry. This fact will not seem surprising to those who represent the nature of commodity relations of that time. At a time when ships and caravans of merchants followed busy trade routes, Russia was away from these routes. Natural exchange flourished on her lands. Only from the moment of the enlargement of settlements and the emergence of cities did it become necessary to have a certain universal equivalent of the value of any commodity, facilitating most exchange operations.

As the tree has its origin in the roots, so the genealogy of the coins of Ancient Russia can be extended from the hryvnia. The original hryvnia can hardly be called a coin we are used to. In the tales of different peoples, we often come across the fact that the wealth of a person was measured in the number of herds of his horses. It turns out that the herd was a purse, and the horse from it was a bargaining chip. The amount of silver sufficient to purchase a horse ("buying a mane") was called "hryvnia". According to another version, the etymology of this word is not associated with a horse's mane, but originates from a female neck jewelry, but turned into a certain measure of weight in the form of an ingot. Over time, they began to give it the characteristic shape that the National Bank of Ukraine likes to depict on its collection sets. After the start of minting of coins, the name "hryvnia" passed to them.

Goldsmiths and silver coins

When did the first money appear in Russia? Historians say that the most likely period for this came at the end of the tenth century. For their manufacture, precious metals were used - gold and silver. This gave rise to their names "goldsmiths" and "silver coins", but this does not mean that they were called so in princely times. It was just that it was more convenient to describe them when studying ancient coins. However, the names given later are not so far from the truth. For example, coins dated from 980 to 1015 bear the inscription "Vladimir is on the table, and all his silver." Of course, the Grand Duke does not dance on the table, but this word denotes a more befitting "throne". If on one side of the coin there was a princely portrait, then on the other we can see the coat of arms of the principality, which has the shape of a trident or bident (later copies), or Jesus Christ (early copies). The patrimonial mark of Rurik over the shoulder of the prince was not a constant, but carried changes associated with the one who was currently on the throne. The weight of the gold coin was slightly lighter than four and a half grams. And the silver coins had a whole series of coins, where the weight varied from 1.7 to 4.68 grams. After the reign of Vladimir, gold was no longer used to issue coins. Silver money was entrenched in circulation, they were accepted for payment even outside of Kievan Rus, which significantly facilitated the merchant's life.

The princely portrait disappears during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, being replaced by the image of St. George. So the prototype of modern penny denominations was born already in those ancient times. True, here George, as we see above, is not yet riding a horse and does not strike a snake. The inscription on the reverse, the center of which is occupied by the patrimonial mark of the Rurikovichs, is also modified ("Silver Yaroslavl" is in place, but "on the table" is absent, therefore historians say that here we are talking about the reign of Yaroslav in Novgorod).

The first known copy of "Yaroslav's Silver" from the collection of A. I. Musin-Pushkin was found as a pendant on an icon in one of Kiev's churches. However, for some reason, the coins did not suit the Grand Duke, their issue gradually ceased. The last surge is characterized by the banknotes of Oleg Svyatoslavovich 1083-1094. After that, the coins cease to be a means of payment and do not participate in circulation, and the period of history corresponding to this time is called "Coinless".

Hryvnia of ancient Russian principalities

The hryvnia again becomes the means of payment, but (as we mentioned earlier) of the characteristic shape in the form of a rhombus with truncated ends. The Kiev hryvnia weighed about one hundred and sixty grams. The hryvnias of other principalities were more solid. For example, in Chernigov, the hryvnia lacked only five grams to two hundred, and it differed from Kiev's regular diamond shape. In the Volga region and Novgorod, flat two-hundred-gram silver bars were in use. And the Lithuanian hryvnia was a bar with notches. The hryvnia was a large amount of money. For small trade operations, small coins were used that ended up in Russia when they were exported by merchants from neighboring countries or Europe.

Other popular coins of Ancient Russia

This foreign trifle was sometimes called the words "kuna", "veksha", "nogata" (or "nagata" if we consider the origin from the Arabic "nagd" - "selected coin" or "nakada" - "select good coins"), understandable to the Russian ear. ... It will not be difficult for a modern person to determine the similarity of the sound of "kuna" and "marten". Indeed, the valuable fur of martens was not only a commodity, but also an exchange equivalent, which was reflected in the name of money. The "veveritsa" and "vekshi", derived from the local names of squirrel skins, have a similar origin (the silver veksha weighed one third of a gram). And "nogata" is direct designation fur skins with legs. An interesting fact is the existence of leather money. Of course, they were not directly equated with gold or silver, but rather fulfilled the role of financial obligations. The meaning hidden in the name is "cut". This is the predecessor of the "kuna". Rezanu was produced in a way that was barbaric for numismatists. They took the dirhams of the Abbasid Caliphate and cut them into pieces. But the caliphate stopped issuing dirhams, and therefore the rezans gradually left circulation. The need for a bargaining chip was covered by the advent of the kuna.

Rezana is symbolically combined with the ruble, which was "cut" from the silver hryvnia. The ruble was a large monetary unit, therefore it had to be cut in half, which received the name "poltina". The name "hryvnia" is gradually disappearing from the language, being replaced by the word "ruble". Of course, then the concept of "dime" is still destined to emerge, but this will already be just an integral part of the ruble. But the pennies familiar to us appeared much later, already in the Middle Ages, therefore, it is groundless to attribute them to the coins of Ancient Russia.

We can contemplate one of Vladimir's gold coins on the reverse of a commemorative coin of the State Bank of the USSR in 1988. The golden one hundred ruble note is dedicated to the millennium anniversary of Old Russian coinage. It is worth recalling here that in 1988, practically at the state level, the millennium of the baptism of Rus was celebrated. Festive events took place in the main cities of the USSR (Leningrad and Moscow), as well as in the ancient princely capitals (for example, Kiev and Vladimir). After June 18, all dioceses of the Russian Orthodox Church joined the celebrations. In this regard, the State Bank of the USSR issues an extended series of coins, where Baptism was not always directly mentioned, but the historical monuments of that time were reflected ("1000 years of Russian literature" or "1000 years of Russian architecture"). A three-ruble denomination was set aside for the silver coin, minted in silver of the 900th test.

How many original coins of Kievan Rus have survived? Quite a bit. So there are only eleven gold coins of Prince Vladimir, and two and a half hundred silver coins. The number of famous pieces of silver of Prince Svyatopolk does not exceed fifty. But least of all, the coins of Yaroslav the Wise have survived to our times - seven copies. It is clear that it is they, together with the gold coins of Prince Vladimir, that are the rarest coins of Ancient Rus. For those who are interested in the topic and wish to study it in detail, we highly recommend the book by Ivan Georgievich Spassky "Russian Monetary System". It fully and reliably describes the monetary circulation of Ancient Rus.

For two centuries, the oldest Russian coins have been "in development" by scientists. A consolidated catalog of the first Russian coins was created, a detailed classification of "gold coins" and "silver coins" was made, the chronological framework of their issue was determined. Many questions concerning the first Russian coinage can be considered closed. In a generalizing work that appeared for the millennium anniversary of the beginning of Russian coinage, the results of the study of ancient Russian gold and silver coins of the 10th - early 11th centuries are summed up. and determined their multidimensional significance in the history of national statehood (1).

Nevertheless, white spots remain on the seemingly completely woven fabric of the history of the initial Russian coinage. Primarily it comes about the "mysterious sign", placed first on the obverse (according to I.G. Spassky and M.P. Sotnikova), and then took a firm place on the reverse side of ancient Russian silver coins (Fig. 1).

With the light hand of N.M. Karamzin, who described Yaroslav Vladimirovich's silver coins and noted on the reverse side "in the middle of the inscription a sign like a trident" (2), the sign under this name went down in history. At present, the emblem, called the "trident", has acquired a truly global political significance, since it is used as the coat of arms of a sovereign state - the Republic of Ukraine. Naturally, the new status of the trident caused and new wave interest in it, primarily as a political sign that symbolized the independence of the Ukrainian state back in 1917. Then the chairman of the Central Rada, the largest Ukrainian historian M.S. Hrushevsky suggested using the trident of Kievan Rus as the coat of arms of the Ukrainian People's Republic. This "coat of arms of Vladimir the Great" in early 1918 was approved by the Rada. And although a year later it was replaced by the coat of arms Soviet Ukraine with a hammer and sickle, according to many Ukrainians, only the trident symbolizes the statehood of their lands. It is no coincidence that the political magazine of the Ukrainian emigration, published in the 1920s, was called "Trident". XX century in Paris, on the pages of which one of the latest versions of the historical significance of the figure depicted on ancient Russian coins, seals and other objects that existed not only in ancient times, but also for many centuries in Ukraine and Russia was presented (3). The politicization of the "trident" in modern times, as well as in the first decades of the 20th century, gives rise to more and more original research constructions, in which, along with fantastic decipherments of the trident - the "sign of the Rurikids" - its verbal change is also proposed: instead of " trident "-" anchor-cross "(4). Unfortunately, even in the newest works, this emblem is called the "old-fashioned" emblem and is interpreted in the context of the "heraldry of Kievan Rus X-XI centuries." foreign "(5).

Perhaps not one of the researchers of the first Russian coins, namely, they belonged to the initial definitions and characteristics of the "mysterious sign", left the latter without attention. Moreover, the classification of coins, their dating have always been the most important for those who studied them, the question of deciphering the sign played, as it were, a secondary role. In some works, from time to time, various opinions were generalized about the essence of an incomprehensible sign. One of the first to undertake such an attempt was the author of a major work on the oldest Russian coins, I.I. Tolstoy, who devoted an entire chapter to "various explanations of the mysterious figure on the coins of the great princes of Kiev" (6). He listed a dozen authors, detailing the arguments of each in relation to their proposed interpretation (trident, lamp, gonfalon, church portal, anchor, raven bird, dove as the Holy Spirit, upper part of the Byzantine scepter, type of weapon) (7).

In the appendix to chapter I.I. Tolstoy publishes the changed opinion of A.A. Kunik on the origin of the "enigmatic figure", who noted: "I am now more than in 1861 inclined to think that the figure may be of Norman origin" (8). However, Kunik's remark about the essence of the sign itself is much more important: he defines it as "the patrimonial banner of Vladimir", which grew out of the sign of ownership.

Tolstoy also agreed with the last conclusion of Kunik, adding that the original form of ownership marks changes when passing from one person to another. The further development of this idea by I.I. Tolstoy: "These changes consist either in the trimming of some part of the main figure, or in the addition of some decorations; especially often the addition of crosses to some part of the figure is noticed, and the crosses are of the most varied forms. We also notice the same phenomenon. in our mysterious figure "(9).

The last position of Tolstoy was picked up and interpreted by the authors who wrote about the first Russian coins and the "mysterious signs" on them. First of all, we can talk about A.V. Oreshnikov.

Back in 1915, V.K.Trutovsky in an article written for the 60th anniversary of Oreshnikov, along with the highest assessment of the latter's works in the field of antique, Russian numismatics, applied art, noted Oreshnikov's special merits in the study of the "mysterious sign" of goldsmiths and silver coins , proving its use on coins as a generic princely sign, identical at that time to the sign of ownership, but different from the latter in that with minor changes it is inherited, developing from the simplest form to a more complex one (10).

A few decades later, on the 100th anniversary of A.V. Oreshnikov, the famous archaeologist A.V. Artsikhovsky also credited A.V. Oreshnikov - "the largest of Russian numismatists" - the significance of his classification of generic princely signs, "linking" them to a certain prince, compiling a table of their variants from St. Vladimir to Vsevolod III and involving archaeological material. The latter, as A.V. Artsikhovsky emphasized, took Oreshnikov's works beyond the framework of numismatics: they became a necessary manual for all Russian historians and archaeologists (11).

A.V. Oreshnikov wrote about the signs of the most ancient Russian coins that interested him practically throughout his entire scientific career. In 1894. (12) he summarized the opinions existing in the literature on the essence of the "mysterious sign", having included in the literature review a little-known article by P.N. Milyukov "The Norman sign on the coins of the Grand Duchy of Kiev" from the "Yearbook of the French Numismatic Society", which saw the Norman head headdress. Oreshnikov also mentions the statement of D.Ya. Samokvasov, who characterized the coinage as a sign of power and found analogies in the tops of sceptres from the Scythian royal burial mounds.

Oreshnikov's obvious rejection, perhaps, causes only a new look at the trident of I. I. Tolstoy, who suggested looking for analogies in the East: very possibly, they are closely related to the first Russian coat of arms, borrowed in this case from the east "(13).

On the contrary, the assumption of the Vyatka statistician P.M. Sorokin turned out to be close to his approach. The latter transferred his observations of the signs of customary law among the Votyaks of the time who preserved the ancestral life of his contemporary, in which the sons, by adding an additional element, transformed the original paternal simple form of the generic mark-mark into a more complex sign, to the signs of the first Russian coins. Oreshnikov supplemented the ethnographic observations of Sorokin with information about similar generic signs of other peoples: Zyryans, Lapps, Voguls, etc.

The "ethnographic" diagram of the evolution of the "Rurik family signs", which Oreshnikov mentions in all his subsequent works, was founded on material objects equipped with similar figures from archaeological excavations, primarily rings, pendants, and bull seals (14). As a result, A.V. Oreshnikov, on the basis of the scheme of evolution of the signs of the first Russian coins, developed by him, presented the chronology of their issue, different from that previously proposed by I.I.Tolstoy. It did not receive the support of a number of numismatists, in particular N.P. Bauer, who believed that Oreshnikov's dating of the oldest Russian coins by signs was not as effective as their correlation with other coins of treasure complexes, which included early Russian coins, analysis of re-minting and other (15).

The ambiguity of the numismatists' assessment of the chronology of the most ancient Russian coins proposed by Oreshnikov did not affect the perception of the "mysterious sign" as a generic emblem of the Rurikids, which was established in the scientific world, largely thanks to his works. In the book of N.P. Likhachev, which A.V. Oreshnikov was able to see (2nd issue, 1930) published, the author emphasized: “We see that the theory of the generic sign has completely strengthened, only the interpretations of its origin are diverse (16).

Baron M.A. Taube, who published in the late 1920s and 1930s, agreed with a similar approach to the question of the "mysterious sign". several works on the topic of the trident in foreign publications (17). A former professor at St. Petersburg University, and in exile - an employee of the Institute of International Law in The Hague, M. Taube reasonably believed that the solution to the "sphinx", as I. I. Tolstoy called the sign, could be important not only for numismatics and archeology, but and contribute to the solution of general historical problems related to the early period of the existence of the Old Russian state.

Taube identified two problems that were not so obvious at the beginning of the study of the "mysterious sign", but by the end of the 1930s. finally clarified, namely: its meaning (in genere) and its image (in specie).

In relation to the first, there were no special disagreements: the "mysterious sign" was perceived as a generic sign, the house of Rurikovich. Taube joined this opinion: "On the question of what its meaning was, ie, to which category of signs it belongs, we can definitely say that he really represented a generic sign of the Varangian princely house that settled in Russia, the family of the" old Igor "(18), which arose in simplest form back in pagan times. "

The author did not find the answers to the "objective" prototype of the sign so definite. He counted at least 40 scientists who gave very different interpretations of the "subject", and as a result identified 6 thematic sections, each of which included a list of proposed definitions (with attribution).

We will present them in an abbreviated form: A. Sign as a symbol of state power (trident, top of the Byzantine scepter, Scythian scepter, crown). B. The sign as a church-Christian emblem (trikiry, labarum, gonfalon, dove of the Holy Spirit, akaki). V. Badge as a secular military emblem (anchor, head "Francis", bow and arrow, Norman helmet, ax). G. Sign as a heraldic-numismatic image (Norman raven, Genoese-Lithuanian "portal"). E. Sign as a geometric ornament (of Byzantine origin, Eastern type, Slavic, Varangian) (19). Taube himself believed that the sign "in specie" does not represent any object of the real world, and he did not agree with the interpretation of the sign as a monogram. The only acceptable option, in his opinion, was to define it as a conditional geometric figure, ornament. "But," reasoned Taube, "if the sign of Vladimirov's house was nothing more than a well-known pattern, an ornament, then it is quite clear that the question of its origin boils down to finding the artistic environment in which a similar ornament was used or could arise." (twenty). The author discovered the artistic environment in Scandinavia and had no doubts, finding an analogy for the "sign of the Rurikovich" on the "runestones of medieval Sweden", in its Swedish origin. Investigating the figurative form of the "mysterious sign", Taube discovered in it the presence of a lily "knot" that had the magical meaning of a "conspiracy", bewitching happiness and spells of evil. On the other hand, the author admitted that the "sign of the Rurikids" still differs from the Scandinavian runes, retaining, in principle, the shape of a trident - "one of the oldest emblems of power widespread in Europe and Asia", as well as - "a cherished symbol ... known in the vast region of the ancient Scandinavian Vikings ".

As a result, M.A. Taube suggested interpreting the "mysterious figure" widespread in ancient Russian life as a stylized image of a sea trident - the most ancient emblem of power, designed "in the forms of runic ornament familiar to the Varangians who came to Russia," reflecting the magical ideas of the Scandinavians (21). According to Taube, the original characteristics of the sign have not remained unchanged. From a symbol of power and property of the prince, he quickly turned into a symbol of social and state significance, personifying the unity of the princely family, the unity of the Russian land, cultural unity (this sign is meant to go beyond the boundaries of the Russian state) (22).

Taube "consolidated" the opinion already existing in historiography about the Scandinavian roots of the "mysterious sign". Along with this interpretation, the idea of ​​a complete borrowing of all the components of the initial Russian coinage (and, consequently, the "mysterious sign") from Byzantium was not rejected. A.V. Oreshnikov, although he did not emphasize the "objectivity" of the sign, repeatedly spoke out in favor of its local, i.e. of domestic origin (23). It was followed by some Soviet historians, for example, O.M. Rapov (24).

One gets the impression that the works of A.V. Oreshnikov on the signs of the Rurikovich were the impetus for studying them in a broader context. In any case, four years after the publication of Oreshnikov's book "Banknotes pre-Mongol Rus"a large article by the future academician BA Rybakov appeared, devoted to princely property marks (25), which became a reference book for many generations of archaeologists and historians studying the early history of the Russian state Rybakov attracted a huge, primarily archaeological material bearing the property marks of Russian princes, on the basis of which he proposed a new classification, outlined the territorial and chronological framework of the existence of signs, analyzing the scope of their use.

BA Rybakov spoke only in general terms on the topic of interest to us, noting that "the origin of the designs of these signs has not yet been clarified, despite the large number of proposed solutions" (26). At the same time, the author noted the similarity both in form and in essence of the signs of the Dnieper region and the Bosporan royal signs, describing this phenomenon as "two phenomena, parallel in meaning, separated by seven centuries." " Genetic connection, due to the absence of intermediate elements, it is impossible to notice, - the scientist writes further, - but the semantic one is there. Both here and there these signs are the property of the ruling clan, dynasty, and here and there they are modified, preserving the general scheme, and here and there they coexist with phonemic writing as a surviving remnant of earlier forms of writing ... "(27).

Two assumptions of B.A. Rybakov are important for our further construction. The first concerns a find on the upper Oka and in the Dnieper region of two pendants of the 6th-7th centuries. with signs close to the later signs of the Rurikovich. The scientist called these signs tamgas, suggesting that they were signs of the Slavic (Ant) leaders. However, he cautiously noticed that to display the system of signs of the X-XII centuries. of these tamgas, although seductive, but "so far unjustified."

Rybakov's second remark refers to the Bosporan royal signs, also tamga-like. The tops of some of these signs resemble a person with raised arms or the heads of horned animals. “Perhaps,” the scientist writes, “with further development of this hypothesis, it will be possible to indicate a prototype for these signs, a schematized image of some ritual scene with the indispensable participation of horses, a scene reminiscent of the well-known“ Dakosarmatian elements in Russian folk art ”(28).

The study of the signs of Rurikovich was continued by a number of archaeologists, primarily V.L. Yanin (29), however, almost all of them (A.V. Kuza, A.A. Molchanov, T.I. Makarova, etc.) or made amendments to the initial classification of signs, tracing the change in their structure (the study of "spots"), or thoroughly analyzing the scope of their application in Ancient Russia, i.e. developed the direction proposed by BA Rybakov.

Without touching upon the issues of the classification of the signs of the Rurikids, their transformation, the degree of use, the boundaries of distribution and application (all these questions were raised and, to one degree or another, investigated in the works of archaeologists), I will return to the original subject of this article - to the "mysterious signs" on the first Russian coins ...

As already noted, numerous "interpreters" of the emblem were looking for its prototype in Byzantium, among the Vikings, in Russian history. However, there were also those who showed the original eastern influence on its formation. Among them, in particular, was N.P. Kondakov, who published together with II Tolstoy "Russian Antiquities in the Monuments of Art" (see above). The well-known numismatist A.A. Ilyin also assumed that the minting of the first Russian coins "noticeably the influence of the East." In his opinion, a person engaged in the manufacture of coins should have had before their eyes the Sassanian lunettes, on the reverse side of which there is "a state emblem in the form of an altar with a burning fire between two guards. The use of a" mysterious sign "on the coins of ancient Russian princes is a phenomenon of the same order, and this indicates the influence of the Sassanian coins "(30).

An outstanding specialist in the field of auxiliary historical disciplines, N.P. Likhachev, having encountered various variants of the "mysterious sign" on seals, seals and other similar materials during many years of sphragistic research, could not pass by this "sphinx". N.P. Likhachev included his reflections on the signs of the Rurikovich in context great work"Seals with the image of a tamga or generic mark", published in the 2nd issue of "Materials for the history of Russian and Byzantine sphragistics", which, unfortunately, is little used by researchers. Having carefully analyzed the attempts to interpret the sign by numismatists and did not support any of the versions, he limited himself to a rhetorical question at the very end of the work: “Another question may be asked, which we will not dare to answer either in a positive or in a negative sense. whether the so-called "banner of the Rurik" (and with it the same type of signs on the seals) from the east; it is appropriate, because according to its outlines the sign of the Rurik is of the same type with some, for example, the tamgas of the Golden Horde, but basically, representing, as it were, a pitchfork about two teeth, completely similar to the late Golden Horde tamga of the 15th century. " (31).

In order to raise this question, the scientist undertook a comparative analysis of a huge number of seals, seals, coins, which depict signs identical in configuration to those of Rurikovich. The mass of analogies in material varied in time and territory made him not only conclude: "All this shows how at different times and in different places signs of the same pattern can be formed "(32), but also warn:" Review and research of property signs and so-called symbols, especially in this case the tamgas of the Turkic tribes, is of great importance, but the very touch of generic signs can lead to the Scythians and the Indo-Scythian kings and even further, and next to this, extreme caution is needed on the issue of origin, borrowing and influences, otherwise in the marks of the Finnish village, to us today, you can find signs visible on our ancient seals and seals "(33) ...

N.P. Likhachev himself, as if outlining the time and territory of existence of the tamga signs that interested him, marking "ancestry, property, production", which in Ancient Russia were in use, and falling on the monuments of "social significance", "turns his gaze "to the problem of the Russian kaganate expressed in the literature of that time. However, not being sure that this problem will solve his own problem with respect to the Russian tamga sign, he cautiously notes: "The proximity of the" Rus "with the peoples of Turkic origin (above - Khazars, Avars - N.S.), with the nomads, among whom there were tribal tamgas in such a distribution, undoubtedly - and apart from the question of the kaganate "(34).

N.P. Likhachev did not have to get acquainted either with the fundamental works on the history of the Khazar state by M.I. Artamonov, A.P. Novoseltsev, or with the archaeological research of Khazaria, reflected in the works of M.I. Artamonova, S.A. Pletneva, their colleagues and students, or with a variety of articles and monographs, which contain numerous outlines of signs similar to those of the Rurikovichs, covering a vast territory - from Mongolia to the Danube in particular, with truly innovative works by V.E. Flerova dedicated to the signs of Khazaria, and even less so with the works of Bulgarian scientists of the last decades of the 20th century, where a search for analogies of the signs-tamgas of the pre-Bolgar is carried out, their deciphering is proposed, etc. However, the scientist's intuition led him to very important observations and conclusions, which can be guided even now when understanding the signs of Rurikovich. So, Likhachev believed that "changes in signs do not lend themselves to explanation by any one law, for example, a gradual complication. In different places, under different, perhaps, circumstances, peculiar customs operate." He cites as an example the conclusion of A.A. Sidorov, who conducted ethnological research in some areas of the Arkhangelsk region, who noted the difference in origin, rules of inheritance and the image of tamga as a sign of men's property, and tamga used by women on pottery. While male tamgas pass through the male line from father to son, gradually changing according to certain rules, female tamgas pass through the female line from mother to daughter without any changes (35). Likhachev did not put an equal sign between the conventional sign-tamga (property sign) and the totem, no matter how tamga-like in configuration form it was. At the same time, he could not fail to note the fact that he met in his work on the Buryat signs of property, the presence in the design of one of the types of tamgas of local khans traces of the sign "borrowed from the Lamai cult" (36). The remark of N.P. Likhachev that "generic signs, and especially property signs, are not at all the same as" symbols ", which, thanks to the sacred cult meaning given to them for some reason, migrate, retaining their shape" (37).

The extremely constructive ideas of N.P. Likhachev, already developed by modern researchers in various auxiliary historical disciplines, primarily in sphragistics, will undoubtedly contribute to a thorough study of the "mysterious sign" of the first Russian coins. Its interpretation is conditioned by new trends that characterize the development of Russian historical knowledge at the present stage. With regard to our plot, this is the transformation of the prevailing ideas about the emergence of the Old Russian state, the persistent search for autochthonous Rus, the concept of the Russian Kaganate that existed in the 9th century, the problem of Khazaria and its relationship with the Slavs, a kind of recreation of the Eurasian idea, etc. .d. In historiography, on the basis of new data and rethinking of already known facts, hypotheses are expressed that are alternative to the traditional ones, in particular, about the emergence of Kiev (chronology, name, its original "Khazar" - the Khazar-Jewish foundation of Kiev) (38), about the existence of the early state formation of the Rus - Russian Kaganate, its location. The territories of the location of the Russian Kaganate - from the northeastern part of Eastern Europe to the Dnieper-Don region (39) - are substantiated with varying degrees of argumentation. In the latter case, only Kiev could be the administrative center of the kaganate. The posing of such global problems, coupled with significant archaeological discoveries of recent years, provides an opportunity, without going into a fundamental assessment of new ideas, to rethink more modest in scale, but extremely scientifically significant issues, in particular the question of the early symbol of the ancient Russian statehood, including the "trident" and objects , "marked" by him, in a civilizational context related to the characteristics of the origins of "initial" Russia. At present, the opinion is firmly established in the scientific world that the sign on ancient Russian coins is tamga (a word of Turkic origin).

At the same time, assessing the significance of the coins as a monument to Russian statehood, modern researchers emphasize that not only their issue is a political declaration, but the images also meet the needs of an ideological nature, and the "outstanding ideological role of the princely sign" is recognized (40). Rejecting speculation about the "coat of arms of the state", which supposedly was embodied in this sign, we agree that this sign really expressed a certain idea (which did not prevent it from becoming the patrimonial mark of the Rurikovichs with subsequent changes, "spots", etc.).

Since the minting of a coin was the prerogative of the supreme power, the choice of coin images was also its privilege. Symbolic thinking in the full sense of the word (similar to the "heraldic" era, the beginning of which in Western Europe is usually attributed to the end of the 12th century) hardly played a role in the choice of subjects. Although the first Russian coins belong to the works of medieval art, which "up to the 13th century was enriched by borrowings, combining elements of different origins" (41), specific borrowing can only be spoken of in relation to the composition of gold coins and silver coins of the first type by Vladimir Svyatoslavich (42). In general, the borrowing is of a relative nature, for the figure of the obverse has features of "portrait resemblance" to the Russian ruler, while the image of the emperor on Byzantine coins is conditional, with some exceptions, i.e. not individualized, unlike, for example, Roman portraits on coins.

The correct, in our opinion, explanation of this phenomenon is contained in the article by M.N. Butyrekiy, who notes that "the Christian understanding of the earthly world order has interpreted the concealment of the identity of the individual holder of power as the likelihood of its belonging to the true king - God, Christ" (43). At the same time, "the importance and almost sacrality (significance) of the royal image on the coins is beyond doubt." The main exponent of this significance is the diadem or crown.

The crown also adorns the head of the ruler on the first Russian coins, testifying to the identity of the power of the Russian and Byzantine rulers, although in reality (Vladimir was not crowned) this form of the image is nothing more than a claim to identity. However, the main difference between the Russian ruler on gold and silver coins is in the individualization of the image, which is enhanced by the presence of a "mysterious sign". Without him, apparently, this image was not conceived, and it is unlikely that the main role here is played by the carver's plan.

Modern researchers of the first Russian coins, assessing their correlation with the one-time Byzantine ones, write: “The most common in Russian gold hoards of the late 10th and first half of the 11th century, the gold coins of Basil II and Constantine VIII transferred the canonical image of the eldest of the gods of the new faith to the new type of coin. , to whose patronage the baptized prince entrusted himself "(44). However, almost immediately this image gave way to another image, equal to it in importance in the eyes of the "owner" of the miner, Vladimir Svyatoslavich (Fig. 2) (originally, the sign accompanied the crowned figure on the obverse of the coin). It is unlikely that we are talking about an artistic device or a desire to oppose the Byzantines by changing the type of coin. Rather, the main role was played by the worldview choice, the association of this sign with other ideas about the universe and its place in it deeply rooted in consciousness, which differ from the still little familiar Christian ideas.

The very fact of the use in coinage of signs associated with earlier beliefs or pictorial subjects of the previous period is not something special. In the early mints of the Germanic peoples (for example, among the Vandals), coin types, usually imitating Rome (a bust image of a ruler in a wreath, Victoria holding a crown, etc.), on the reverse side may carry an image of a horse's head. The early Anglo-Saxon coins contain a dragon or a snake, which is explained by the influence of local ancient beliefs, in which the Germanic god, the monstrous Wotan (Wodan - Odin), the bearer of magical power (45), played an important role (46) (Fig. 4 "b") ...

The sign placed instead of Jesus Christ on the most important power attribute, as already noted in the literature, can hardly be linked exclusively with the princely economy (a sign of ownership). It is believed that pagan and cult symbols, the magical nature of which are undoubted, were adopted as the sign of the Rurikids (47). Such conclusions are based on the results of the study of the ideology of ancient societies, which made it possible to reconstruct the threefoldness of social phenomena, perceived by people in the era of the folding of states (48). In particular, the Indo-European peoples distinguished phenomena related to domination and control, physical strength, fertility and wealth. Accordingly, the activities of the ruler could be expressed in the implementation of three functions: magical-legal, military, economic. Moreover, the first function could be divided into actually magical and legal.

Perhaps the disclosure of the "semantic content" of a sign, inextricably linked with such a powerful action as the issue of a coin, will expand our understanding of the mentality of the ancient Russian society in the early stages of its existence.

Significant help in the interpretation of the coin "trident" could be provided by analogies - after all, signs identical in shape are spread over a vast area. In some regions, peculiar catalogs of various signs are compiled, including tamgas, the graphic interpretation of which is similar - in Mongolia, South Siberia, the Volga region, in the North Caucasus, in the Dnieper-Don region and in modern Bulgaria. However, observing territories with "similar" signs, you recognize the correctness of P.P. Likhachev, who emphasized that signs of the same pattern may appear at different times and in different places. And yet, against the background of the same style, including bident and trident, scientists in different regions distinguish varieties of tamga, which have a certain symbolic meaning.

The study of property marks in Mongolia allowed its author to distinguish two groups of similar signs: "simple" signs-designs and tamgas, which have a magical meaning. The author singles out a special tamga, which denotes the throne, the place of the ruler, the altar and has a specific name. In written texts (with the inclusion of the name of this tamga) it is noted that they are talking about "khans on the throne, rulers who occupy the throne." The researcher emphasizes that there are reasons to attribute a tamga with a similar name to the privileges of ruling families (50). Graphically, a verbal expression, including the designation of this tamga, corresponds to a trident in various versions (see Nos. 94–97; Fig. 2).

Burial Yenisei steles (Tuva, VIII - early IX centuries), the text of which contains epitaphs, bear the image of "heraldic signs", as the author calls them (51). This is a tamga in the form of a trident (Fig. 3).

According to I.A. Kyzlasov, who researched the monuments, the construction of such steles was determined by the belonging of a representative of a particular people (we are talking about a multiethnic Ancient Khakass state) "to the aristocratic circle of the state, his presence in the civil service of the appropriate level" (52).

Signs in the form of a bident and a trident were identified during the study of the ceramics of Bilyar, the largest settlement in the Volga Bulgaria (53). The researcher believes that there can be no unambiguous semantic interpretation of these signs, but emphasizes their greater social conditioning in comparison, for example, with pottery stamps. The author explains the presence of such signs on vessels by the existence of a special "commercial language, possibly dating back to tamgas," widespread "in international trade and industrial circles within the Middle Ages, at least in the regions of strongest interaction" (54).

An enormous amount of work was undertaken by M.D. Poluboyarinova (55). Among them are two groups of signs of interest to us - two-teeth and tridents. Having included them in the context of the Golden Horde ceramic signs of a different form, the author comes to the conclusion that the signs "were placed somewhere at an intermediate stage between the master and the owner," that is, in the process of using finished products, being, most likely, signs of the property of merchants (56 ).

At the same time, the researcher could not fail to note the fact of using signs similar in shape on the Golden Horde coins of the 13th-14th centuries. emphasizing that among the Tatar-Mongols, as well as among some other peoples of Eurasia, the bident and trident were tamgas of the reigning clan: "the belonging of the bident and trident to the ruling clan is confirmed for the Golden Horde by ethnographic data on the Turkic peoples that were once part of this state" (57 ).

As an analogue (in significance) to the tridents of the Juchid coins belonging to the rulers of this clan, Poluboyarinova mentions the Nogai trident, which was called the "khan tamga", almost identical in design is the "sultan tamga" among the Kazakhs of the Small Zhuz and among the Bashkirs. The Kirghiz of northwestern Mongolia called the trident a "sultan" or "noble" tamga (Fig. 9,13)

and completely similar to the form that is known from the coins of the Bulgarian kings Shishmanov (see below).

The complex of tamga-like signs, among which groups of bident and trident are distinguished, was introduced into scientific circulation as a result of excavations of the Khumarinsky settlement in Karachay-Cherkessia (58). The signs are applied to the fortress walls and belong, according to the researchers, to the Bulgarian-Khazar period of the settlement's existence - to the VIII-IX centuries. According to the outline, they are typical of the Turkic-speaking peoples who inhabited the earth during this period. North Caucasus and the steppes of Eastern Europe. However, the closest analogies to bident and trident can be traced in Khazarin, Volga and Danube Bulgaria (Fig. 5).

Kh.Kh. Bidzhiev, the author of the work on the Khumarin settlement, having carefully analyzed the domestic literature on the study of tamga-like signs, came to the conclusion that there is still no consensus on their meaning. He puts forward his "generalized" version, suggesting that the meaning of the tamga sign changed depending on the purpose of the object on which it was applied: signs on ceramics could be marks of artisans or workshop owners, on stone blocks of fortress walls - signs of accounting for materials brought in or made works, and the signs applied to various objects inside the settlement can be considered as ancestral or personal tamgas of the population of the medieval settlement, which was exceptionally variegated in linguistic and ethnic terms. After the completion of construction, tamgas of the dominant clans could be applied to the wall of the Khumarinsky settlement. Finally, the author singles out the religious and magical function of signs, which was performed by those of them that were found in burial grounds or burial chambers, on the stones of the sanctuary (59).

Studies of tamga-like signs in the Khazar Kaganate, the closest neighbor of the Dnieper Slavs, are extremely important for our problems. M.I. Artamonov drew attention to such signs, digging in the thirties of the XX century. settlements on the Lower Don. He compared the signs found on the Sarkelian bricks with the signs inscribed on the stones and bricks of the Pliska fortress, the medieval capital of the Danube Bulgarians (60). At the beginning of the XX century. signs on building material from Aboba - Pliska were published by K.V. Shkorpil (61), whose archaeological finds have long served as a material for comparison to researchers of the signs of the Khazar Kaganate (62).

The formal typological study of signs, which has been and is being carried out at the present time by the majority of scientists, makes it possible to note, with all the apparent identity of their outline, not only the heterogeneity of signs, but also to associate this heterogeneity with different ethnic groups, different territories, and different chronology. A similar approach at the initial stage of study, when, as a rule, a corpus of signs is compiled, has been successfully used for half a century by a number of domestic and foreign scientists, and it is still practiced (63). However, in recent years, searches have been undertaken for new methods of analysis, which are based on the study of a complex of signs, due to the uniformity of their carrier (by purpose, by material, by chronology, etc.), which reveals patterns in the use of one form or another of a group of signs or further of one sign, allows us to more specifically raise the question of the semantics of the latter (64).

VE Flerova carried out phenomenal work in this direction. Having undertaken initially a formal-typological study of Khazar graffiti, among which tamga-like signs constituted the majority (65) (Fig. 6),

Later, she largely modified her research, using systematized graffiti in the reconstruction of religious ideas and worldview of the peoples inhabiting Khazaria (66). Amulets were the fundamental material for the study, but she also considers torevetika, graffiti on bone products, on bricks, stone blocks, and ceramics. The picture of symbolic thinking is expressed, according to the author, in images and signs, and it is absolutely acceptable for Flerova to transfer an image into a sign, which is conventional by nature, but does not lose from this symbolic meaning.

With regard to the topic declared in this article, we are primarily interested in the signs in the form of a bident and a trident, "which are a characteristic feature of the sign system of Khazaria" (67),

Emphasizing that bident and trident are most widespread on various objects of the Saltov-Mayak culture (in Khazaria) - on building remains, ceramics, bone products, buckles, pendants, etc., Flerova does not exclude that they could serve "as a tamga , especially tribal or "official" associated with a certain status of the owner, often associated with his family affiliation ... "(68). However, she, not leaving aside the semantic nature of these signs, asks the question: is their popularity due to the semantic load, for example, do they personify the supreme deity with whom they could relate?

In V. Beshevliev's fundamental work on the ancient Bulgarians, the sign "upsilon" is included in the section of magic signs (in different versions it is shown in Fig. 10), which is widespread in various areas of settlement of the Danube Bulgarians and found in almost all large centers - Pliska, Madara, Preslav etc. The sign was applied to the walls of fortresses, on tiles, depicted on metal products, ceramics, amulets, rings and other things. It had an apotropic, protective, meaning, evidence of which, for example, is the carved sign "U" on a gold ring found in Vidin (Beshevliev notes that such rings had the Greek inscription "God help"); acted as an analogue of the cross, accompanying one of the ancient Bulgarian inscriptions (69). Specifying his thought, prof. Beshevliev emphasized that among the ancient Bulgarians the sign "iyi" corresponds to the concept of "sky", which is equivalent to "Tengri" - the supreme deity.

In all subsequent works of Bulgarian scientists writing about the ancient Bulgarian signs, about the religion of the Proto-Bulgarians, the divine meaning is embedded in the sign "upsilon" with or without its accompanying lateral vertical lines

The article by P. Petrova (70) has a serious scientific significance, in which much attention is paid to the disclosure of the semantics of the sign, cases of its use in the attributes of the First Bulgarian Kingdom (681-1018), as well as options for the outline of the sign are proposed, and the figurative basis of this outline is revealed. The author proceeds from the established fact that in proto-Indian writing the sign "upsilon" embodies the image of the divine twin progenitors holding onto the trunk of the sacred world tree. Petrova emphasizes that the geographical proximity, cultural and economic ties, the linguistic proximity of the Altai and proto-Indian groups influenced a number of pictorial phenomena, including the figurative expression of magical and religious concepts. Similar concept-images passed a long geographical and chronological path and were embodied by the Proto-Bulgarians on the Danube in similar signs, which turned out to be consonant with their beliefs. (Ethnographers have proved that even in the 20th century in Bulgaria a ritual associated with the cult of twins was recorded.) Slavic mythology there are two solar twins Dazhdbog and Svarozhich, sons of the sun god Svarog, on whom human existence depends); together with "upsilon" they form the concept of "leader", "king".

In Bulgaria, as Petrova emphasizes, the "upsilon" sign, which exists in several versions (Fig. 10),

pagan, runic sign, extremely common in combination with a cross - a Christian symbol. The author gives examples of such a combination. In Preslav and in another area, two medallions were found with the image of an "upsilon" with lateral vertical lines and a patriarchal cross with the ends in the form of an "upsilon" (Fig. 12).

The find testifies that "upsilon" was used not only during the pagan period of the Bulgarian state, but also after the adoption of Christianity.

Other Bulgarian researchers agree with Petrova, for example D. Ovcharov. He writes that various monuments, which combine magic pre-Christian signs with the Christian cross, reflect complex and contradictory changes in the worldview of medieval Bulgaria on the border of two eras: the Christian religion slowly entered the consciousness of the Bulgarian population for a long time, coexisting with the remnants of pagan beliefs (71) ... Professor Beshevliev gives an example of the image of the early Bulgarian pagan sign "iprsilon" on the wall of the church of the Mother of God Eleusa of the 14th century. (72) . Many crosses with ends in the form of trident signs similar to "upsilon" were carved in Christian times on stone walls, bricks, and tiles.

Comparing these options, the author comes to the conclusion that "upsilon" with two vertical lines on the sides during the period of the First Bulgarian Kingdom can be interpreted: 1) as an ideogram of divine twins (progenitors); 2) as a graphic designation of God; 3) as a graphic designation of divine power (whatever it may be - heavenly or khan (royal) (73).

Some Bulgarian researchers attributed the sign "upsilon" with two vertical lines on the sides to Prince Boris, who introduced Christianity to Bulgaria in 864 according to the Orthodox model. It was believed that in the first years after baptism, in order to oppose himself to Byzantium, he used his ancestral sign. In Veliky Preslav, not so long ago, a pewter seal with rune signs of the "upsilon" type with vertical lines on the sides was discovered, which researchers attribute "to the representative of the highest power in the state, that is, the khan or, in his person, the high priest" (74). It was in Veliky Preslav that the "administrative building" or "state chancellery" of the 10th-11th centuries was discovered, on the bricks of the walls of which the sign "upsilon" with two vertical lines (a symbol of pagan religion) was carved. It is believed to be used here as a royal sign (75). (fig. 10).

Petrova proposed another version of the reconstruction of the Proto-Bulgarian signs: she compared the images of bident and trident with images of high priests or shamans, emphasizing that various geometric and stylized forms of "upsilon" embody the most important ritual gestures of shamans during their action (76). Shamanism, according to the Bulgarian scholars, is "one of the very characteristic aspects of the structure of the pagan beliefs of the Proto-Bulgarians" (77). In Bulgaria, numerous images of human figures were found with objects characteristic of the shamanic cult - a tambourine, a mallet, in three-horned headdresses (crowns), often in masks, dancing, with arms raised or outstretched. Both in the figurative and in the symbolic embodiment, the Bulgarian figures of shamans are identical to the images known in the ancestral home of the Turkic-Bulgarian rituals - in Central Asia and Siberia (78). (fig. 11).

As P. Petrova's observations showed, the worldview of the pagan Bulgarians was influenced not only by the early Turkic cults, but also by others, in particular, Indo-European. The Iranian deities among the Danube Bulgarians were embodied in signs, in specific female images (79), moreover, scientists emphasize that the Iranian culture could be reflected in the Proto-Bulgarian beliefs not only through the neighborhood with the Iranian-cultural Alans in the Black Sea steppes, but also much earlier - back in Asia, where the great-Bulgarians felt the influence of such centers of Iranian culture as Khorezm, Sogdiana, Bactria (80). Hence the combination of Turkic cults and pictorial traditions with Iranian mythology and iconography observed in Danube Bulgaria already at the first stages of the state's existence.

A detailed study of the sign "upsilon", popular among the Proto-Bulgarians, in its various variants led Petrov to the conclusion that it contains the idea of ​​divine power and its subjects: God, shaman, earthly ruler, and vertical lines on the sides ("twins") enhance divinity authorities. The seal from Preslav depicts a sign that combines the concept of divinity and earthly power (unfortunately, it was not possible to get acquainted with the publications of the press). Moreover, as can be judged by both the seal and the signs depicted on the bricks of the "state chancellery" of the Velikiy Preslav palace complex, it can pass from the pagan era to the Christian one, being used in this case as a royal sign (81).

Researchers of the Proto-Bulgarian signs distinguish three periods of their existence, including the XIV century. (82). It can be assumed that not only "upsilon", but also other signs were also used in the Second Bulgarian Kingdom (1187-1396). In particular, signs in the form of letters of the Greek or Latin alphabet, which arose "on local soil" during the period of the First Bulgarian Kingdom (83). A similar sign can be seen on the copper coins of the Bulgarian kings (Mikhail Shishman, along with his son Ivan). Their front side is occupied by the figures of a mounted or foot king in the appropriate dress and the monogram "CR" (the type shows Byzantine influence); the reverse side is equipped with a ligature, which is interpreted as Shishman's monogram (84) (Fig. 14). However, in graphic design it is identical to the sign placed by L. Doncheva-Petkova on tables XXVII-XXVIII ("trident") (85) (Fig. 7).

Despite the commonality of worldview concepts characteristic of the pagan world, and the identity in connection with this pictorial symbolism (the image of the "world tree" in the vertical and horizontal planes - in the form of a stylized tree with a crown, trunk and roots, braids - four cardinal directions) in the pre-Christian , early Christian Danube Bulgaria and Khazaria, during the reconstruction of their religious and mythological systems, practically in the same chronological period, one can notice a certain difference in belief systems. This is reflected in the graphic symbolism. The study of amulets as the most striking exponents of religious preferences testifies that the signs "upsilon" with two vertical lines on the sides are absent in similar monuments of Khazaria. However, there are no clearly expressed images of shamanism and the design of the latter in the corresponding sign interpretation.

Referring the reader to the books of V.E. Flerova for acquaintance with the system of symbolic design of the beliefs of the population of the Khazar Kaganate to the books of V.E. Flerova, I will note only the most general provisions related to the semantics of bident and trident. The fine plastic art of Khazaria is characterized by bipolarity (reflection of archaic cosmogonic ideas about the movement of the sun - during the day from left to right, at night - from right to left), mirror doubling, which is embodied in the type of amulet with paired compositions (figures on both sides of the axis), and in graphics - with two-prongs and tridents.

In bipolarity, which Flerova singled out as an integral feature of the art of Khazaria, including graphics, the idea of ​​a confrontation between two mutually exclusive cosmic principles can be traced. The struggle of the gods of light and fire with darkness, ritual filth (the battle of gods and demons) was reflected not only in the cosmic law, dating back to Indo-European prototypes, but also in earthly oppositions: day - night, rain - drought, oasis - desert, etc. ... (86). Such an understanding of the universe was the basis of the beliefs of the Iranians, it was also reflected in the beliefs of the population of Khazaria, as can be concluded from the constructions of V.E. Flerova. She notes that in the First Bulgarian Kingdom, among the images inscribed on the fortress walls, on tiles, etc., there are anthropomorphic images in a realistic or schematic execution with characteristically raised arms. As shown above, they are associated with the Proto-Bulgarian shamanic cult. Emphasizing that the plot of the anthropomorphic deity "with the forthcoming ones" is archaic, Flerova, in relation to her research, reveals him as the image of the Great Goddess (with her accompanying "paired semicircles or braces"), which in a schematic interpretation is expressed by a two-pronged. The author also provides information that the emblem of the Great Goddess in the context of Indo-European traditions could also be the sign of the trident (87).

A complex of graphic images, coupled with archaeological material of a "definite purpose" - amulets - allowed B.E. Flerova to recreate a picture of the worldview of the multiethnic population of Khazaria. The pagan belief system highlighted by her is fundamental for the entire state. It does not include the impact of "world religions": Christianity, Judaism, existing, so to speak, "in purity."

This system has developed in the dual unity of the Turkic and Iranian, with the Iranian being the priority (88). Probably, the roots of this phenomenon lie in the deepest antiquity, going back to the era when the southern Russian steppes served as one of the areas inhabited by the carriers of Indo-European culture (89). Later, this fact created the priority of "Iranism" in the way of thinking of the Khazars. Although Flerova believes that it is impossible to distinguish in Khazaria a special sign similar to the "upsilon" with vertical lines on the sides, characteristic of the First Bulgarian Kingdom (see above), the original sacred semantics of bident and trident is emphasized by it. Since in the constructions of V.E. Flerova "the theme of Iranianism in the beliefs of the population of the Kaganate appears wider and more diverse than a simple continuation of the Alanian traditions in the early medieval culture" (90), it is not surprising that the author directly refers to the culture of Iran, trying to find analogies in it Khazar signs and symbols. Undoubtedly, her interest in the tamga-like signs of Iran, which are depicted on plaster, are found on carved stones, coins, ceramics, and toreutics, deserves special attention.

Domestic researchers of Sassanian art believe that "neither the semantic meaning of these signs, nor their prototypes have been finally clarified" (91). Most scholars do not consider them to be tamgas by origin, however, they distinguish three groups of signs, among which there may be generic tamgas, and signs corresponding to certain titles and ranks, and signs ("neshans") of temples (92). Temple signs include, in particular, the trefoil (trident). A similar trident can be seen on the seal of one of the magicians (93). (fig. 13)

Leaving aside the variety of bident and trident designs, the analysis of which was made in the book by V.E. Flerova, I will emphasize the importance of her conclusion about the genetic unity of these two Khazar signs. To a large extent, this conclusion was influenced by the "collection" of the Khumarin settlement in the Kuban (an outpost of the Khazar Kaganate), consisting almost entirely of two teeth and tridents, the semantic homogeneity of which, according to Flerova, is undeniable (94). In the bident, according to the author, the symbolism of the sacredness of the supreme power is concentrated, myths of archaic Indo-European beliefs are associated with it - myths about twins ("twin myths"), the image of the Great Goddess. (As noted above, in Khazaria, there is no sign directly associated with the personality of the ruler, with power, for example, with the kagan.)

The system of "binary oppositions", which was vividly embodied in amulets - materialized symbols of beliefs of the population of the Khazar Kaganate, was reflected in the organization of the power of this state - the duality of government exercised by the kagan and the bek (95). Moreover, the bek was inherently Practical activities(for example, the leadership of an army), the kagan embodied divine magical power, which was well known to all neighboring peoples who fought with Khazaria. At the sight of the kagan, who was specially taken out on this occasion, they fled (96).

At the beginning of the IX century. Khazar rulers and nobles converted to Judaism, Religion arose in Khazaria ruling house, which by no means meant a rejection of the previous beliefs of the entire population of the Khazar Kaganate: “the bulk of the people remained pagan. at the beginning of the second millennium, they adopted Christianity or Islam, as a full-fledged religion of the masses "(97). Archaeological excavations carried out in recent years on the territory of the former Khazar Kaganate bring more and more evidence of the preservation of pagan rituals and beliefs here and the absence of traces of the influence of Judaism on the monuments of the material culture of Khazaria. This testifies not only to religious tolerance, but also to the strength of the religious system of the Khazar Kaganate, which was a reflection of the high level of social development of the latter, as researchers believe (98).

MI Artamonov considered a large steppe state - the Khazar Kaganate "almost equal in strength and might of the Byzantine Empire and the Arab Caliphate." In any case, in the VIII-IX centuries. The Khazar Kaganate held a leading place in the history of the southern lands of Eastern Europe, and it was Khazaria that was the first state with which Russia came into contact during the formation of its statehood (99).

We are talking about the state formation of the Slavic tribes, carriers of the Volyntsev culture (and the Roman, Borshev and Oka that evolved on its basis) - the predecessor (one of the predecessors) of the Old Russian state. This political entity, located in the Dnieper-Don interfluve, known already in the first quarter of the 9th century, appears in the literature under the name of the Russian Kaganate (100).

Despite the fierce rejection of the concept of the Russian Kaganate, its post-Soviet critic cannot but admit the obvious interaction of the Volyntsev and Saltovo-Mayak supra-ethnic culture of Khazaria, citing archaeological research data: was under the direct influence of Saltovo-Mayatskaya archaeological culture Khazar Kaganate "(101). Indeed, in the archaeological works of recent decades, the fact of mixing of cultures that took part in the formation of the culture of early Kievan Rus is emphasized, it is emphasized that, for example, in the Middle Dnieper in the last quarter of the 1st millennium AD there were various according to the cultural affiliation of the group of monuments (102), the "close ties of the Slavic and Saltov cultures" (103) in the 8th century in the Middle Dnieper region, etc. are especially emphasized.

New data from archaeological excavations have also changed the very principle of approach to the problem of relations between Slavs and nomads: a purely negative assessment of them is gradually transforming, scientists increasingly insistently declare "the constructive beginning of Russian-nomadic contacts" (104).

In this context, the relationship of the Slavs is now also considered, primarily with the Proto-Bulgarians and Khazars of interest to us. Bulgarians before the resettlement of their significant part in the 7th century. on the Danube they lived in the Don region, the Azov region, in the North Caucasus, together with the Khazars and Alans, in the region of the Saltov culture. The latest research emphasizes that this region is characterized by "a mixture of ethnocultural traditions, including not only Alan and Bulgarian, but also Slavic components" (105). On the Danube, as is known, the Turkic-Bulgarians turned into Slavic-Bulgarians, in the 9th century. became Christians, but did not abandon the previous beliefs, which were embodied, as shown above, in graphic symbolism colored by "Iranism" and "Turkism" brought from Central Asia and the Don steppes. Echoes of this symbolism are the inscriptions on the walls of Veliky Preslav, Pliska, Madara, etc. White-stone fortresses made of similarly processed stone blocks with similar, but not always identical, drawings and signs applied to them are a characteristic feature of Khazaria in the 8th-9th centuries. (106). One of these fortresses on the Don was located only 25 km from the Slavic settlement of Titchikha. A whole system of fortresses in the 20-30s. IX century was built in the north-west of Khazaria, on the territory in contact with the area of ​​the Volyntsev culture (107). It is hard to imagine that such a territorial proximity would exclude mutual influences, including cultural, religious, etc., and the priority always remains with the stronger partner.

I will again refer to modern Ukrainian researchers who, while recognizing the above, emphasize that “the influence of Khazaria on the formation of economic and political structures Eastern Slavs... There is reason to assert that the early Russian system of the two-umvirate on the Kiev table (Askold and Dir, Oleg and Igor. - N.S.) was borrowed from the Khazars. This is evidenced, in particular, by the fact that the Kiev princes bore the title of Khakan or Khagan "(108).

Is it any wonder that in ancient Kiev, during excavations, they find numerous objects (ceramics, bricks, products of applied art), which depict two teeth and tridents? (Fig. 9) On the bricks of the oldest buildings in Kiev - the Church of the Tithes and the Palace of Vladimir near it - tridents were found (109) (as on similar buildings in Danube Bulgaria), on a metal bull attributed to Svyatoslav Igorevich, from Kiev (not preserved) and on a bone the Sarkel buckle shows identical two-prongs (110), etc. (Figure 8).

B.A. Rybakov also informs about signs (two-prongs and tridents) on the wall bricks of churches in other Russian cities of the XI-XII centuries, but we are primarily interested in Kiev, where the first Russian coins began to be minted, also bearing a similar sign.

Even N.M. Karamzin, one can read that "the inhabitants of Kiev used the name of the Kagan instead of the sovereign, so that they were subject to the Khazar Great Kagans for a long time" (111). Modern foreign and domestic historians put forward a hypothesis about the founding of Kiev by the Khazars, in any case, they give arguments in favor of the fact that "Kiev had, in addition to the Slavic, also a Khazar purpose" (112). The fact that the Khazars lived in Kiev is widely known. This is evidenced at least by the burial ground of the "Saltovsk tipp", discovered by M.K. Karger during excavations of ancient Kiev (113).

Recognizing, as noted above, the influence of the Khazars on the formation of "administrative" structures among the Eastern Slavs, noting the interaction of the Saltov-Mayatsk and Volyntsev cultures on the left bank of the Dnieper, most archaeologists exclude the "any significant" Khazar influence on the right bank of the Dnieper and Kiev in features (114). Meanwhile, V.V. Sedov noted that in the Kiev region, the Volyntsev culture is also moving to the right bank (115). Probably, also together with Saltovskaya, which can explain the presence here of subsequently blossoming with a magnificent color of two-toothed and three-toothed "signs of Rurikovich", still giving the impression of "self-born". Ethnocultural contacts between the Slavs of the Left Bank and the Right Bank of the Dnieper (Kiev) and the inhabitants of Khazaria may be the reason for some purely external, including graphic, borrowings, but the adoption of the title "kagan" by the Slavic rulers is hardly such. This title denoted the Russian ruler in Western European and Eastern sources of the 9th-10th centuries. (116). It is believed that the adoption of the title "kagan" took place in the 1920s and 1930s. IX century, "when the bearer of this title in Khazaria was not yet a symbolic head of state. Otherwise, it would not make sense for the Russian prince to be called a kagan." And further: "At this time the Khakan Khazar was a real ruler, who was considered the king (117).

It is rightly emphasized that a ruler with such a title was hardly just a tribal leader, but "stood at the head of the association, which can be regarded as the embryo of a large early feudal state" (118). V.V.Sedov wrote about such a political association on the territory of the Volyntsev culture, believing that there was no other powerful political formation of the Slavs in the lands of Eastern Europe, "and if" there was still an administrative center in the Rus kaganate, then it could to be only Kiev "(119) .

In all likelihood, the head of the Slavic state association, the kagan, was also in Kiev. This title was borne not only by the Khazar ruler, but also by the Avar. He was well known to Western Europe and Byzantium from the 6th century. in connection with the invasion of the Avars into Central Europe and their actions there, as a result of which the title "kagan" was recorded by Byzantine and Latin sources. At the same time, it is known that in the middle of the IX century. Russia was a significant force enjoying international recognition (120), and the adoption of the most famous title in the region by its ruler introduced the Kaganate of the Rus into the international political field.

Thus, in the adoption of this title one can see not so much the Khazar influence as a kind of self-identification, due primarily to foreign policy circumstances (121).

It is believed that the Russian Khaganate ceased to exist after the capture of Kiev by Oleg in 882, the unification of the Middle Dnieper and northern territories and the formation of a single Old Russian state (122). However, the title "kagan" was used by the Russian rulers after this event, even during the decline of Khazaria and after the baptism of Rus in the X-XI centuries. This is evidenced by the "internal sources" and above all the first, in fact, the original work in Russian "The Word of Law and Grace", created, as it is believed, between 1037 and 1050. then still a priest of the Berestovskaya church near Kiev, the future Metropolitan Hilarion. The "Word" contains "praise for the kaganou nashou wlodimerou. From him the baptism was byhom" (124). It is unlikely that the naming several times of Vladimir "our kagan" can only be described as a rhetorical device or a desire to "emphasize the exceptional position of the Russian prince in the world surrounding Byzantium" (125). Indeed, after the creation of the Lay in 1051, Yaroslav the Wise, having gathered bishops in Sophia of Kiev, elevated his confessor Hilarion to the metropolitan table, after which he made a special note - "Bysha si in the summer 6559 to the reigning bloody kagan Yaroslav sleep Vladimir" (126 ), where "Kagan Yaroslav" sounds like a statement. Hilarion, judging by the text of the Lay, quite naturally combines the Christian and pagan names of Vladimir (Vasily) and Yaroslav (George), nevertheless calling them kagans.

In a completely "prosaic" inscription on the wall of St. Sophia of Kiev "Save, Lord, our kagan", the son of Yaroslav Vladimirovich - Svyatopolk Yaroslavich, who ruled in Kiev in 1073 - 1076, is named in a similar way. On the wall of St. Sophia of Kiev there is also a drawing of a trident, by the way, most of all similar to the modern Ukrainian coat of arms (127). It seems that the inscription on the wall of the same temple "In (summer) 6562 February 20 the death of our king ...", which is associated with Yaroslav the Wise (128), also means the "kaganism" of the latter, for it is known that the ruler of the Khazars, who bore the title of "kagan", was also called the king (129). The Byzantines also called the Khazar Khagans and Russian rulers archons, but if they had other terms for the former, then for the latter the name "archon" remained for a long time.

A.P. Novoseltsev, recognizing that the Russian rulers were called kagans in the 9th-10th centuries, comes to the conclusion that in the second half of the 11th century. they lose this title and “at the beginning of the 12th century, the Russian chronicler does not call the Kiev prince a Khakan even in relation to the past.” (130) the Bulgarian language is rather late - at the end (middle?) of the XI - the beginning of the XII century. The researcher of the vocabulary of the "Tale of Bygone Years" A.S. Lvov, noting that the chronicler sometimes uses the word "prince" instead of the words "caesar" and "kagan", emphasizes that he deliberately excluded the word "kagan" not only in relation to the Russian ruler , but also in relation to the rulers of even the Turkic peoples (131). As a result, the researcher comes to the conclusion: "In the Tale of Bygone Years, the word prince was introduced during the revision and rewriting of this historical work almost earlier than the beginning of the 12th century. Until that time ... at least in Kiev, in the same meaning, apparently , the word kagan, a Türkic in origin, was used "(132). Only once in this monument is the title "kagan" mentioned in relation to the Khazar ruler defeated by Svyatoslav, but even then this title is equated to the title "prince" ("the Khazars with their prince their kagan"). As a memory of the bygone "kagan time" in the "Lay of Igor's Regiment" (80s of the XII century), the title of kagan is used in relation to Prince Oleg Svyatoslavich. It is no coincidence that the nickname "Gorislavich" is attributed to him as a reminder of the evil deeds that this prince committed, being the instigator of many internecine strife (133). A hint is also possible here on the fact that Oleg Svyatoslavich was not only a Chernigov prince, but also ruled the Tmutarakan principality on Taman, where the descendants of the Khazars lived. He was, as it were, likened to the Khazars, towards whom a clearly negative attitude can be traced in the written monuments of this time. In the end, the "civilized world" began to perceive the term "kagan" with disdain. There is a well-known saying preserved in the XIV century manuscript: "Animal-shaped Scythian kagan" (134).

Almost simultaneously with the title "kagan", the "signs of the Rurik people" also disappear: some believe that this happened in the middle of the 12th century. (135), others - at the beginning of the XIII century. (first half of the 13th century) (136).

Let's return to the interpretation of the sign of Russian coins. As it was shown in the semantics of signs in the form of a bident and a trident in the closest neighbors of the Eastern Slavs, in the state of the Khazar Kaganate there is an imprint of beliefs, which are based on Indo-European (Iranian) pagan cults, the exponents of which were primarily amulets. Old Russian metal amulets differ in typology and content from Saltov ones (137). Their images are associated with the specifics of Slavic beliefs. Slavic pagan deities are described in the "Tale of Bygone Years" under 980: "And the beginning of the princes Volodymer in Kiev is one, and put idols on a hill outside the courtyard of the Teremnago: Perun is drevyan, and his head is silver, and us gold, and Khrsa, Dazhbog, and Striboga and Simargla, and Mokosh. And im zhryakhu, I designate the gods ... "(138). Even earlier, in the treaties between Russia and the Greeks, the "cattle god" Belee (Volos) was mentioned (139). The treaties reconstructing the system of ancient Russian pagan oaths call Perun and Beles, the main gods of pagan Russia. They are considered gods of the "first rank", dating back to Indo-European theonymy (140). The clearly Slavic deities include Mokosh, a female deity associated with the cult of women in labor (141). Khora and Simargl are interpreted as Iranian deities (142). New data as a result of studying the vocabulary of The Lay of Igor's Campaign testify to the "semantic correlation" of the names of Dazhbog and Stribog (Dazhbog's grandchildren are princes who led Russia to death, Stribog's grandchildren are warriors guarding it), i.e. the first is mentioned in a negative sense, the second in a positive one (143).

The Iranian etymology of the name Stribog was proposed earlier; at present, a version of the name Dazhbog is accepted, also dating back to Iranian roots ("evil god") (144). If we take into account the modern interpretation of the six named gods, then the system of "binary oppositions" in the selection of deities can be traced quite clearly in the following pairs: extreme - Perun, the thunderer, associated with a military function, Mokosh (Makosh), a female image associated with birth, procreation ; the second pair - Hora, a solar deity (light, warmth) and Simargl, associated with the mythical Senmurv and with the ominous bird Div, "hostile to the Russian land"; finally, Dazhbog and Stribog, as noted above, can be perceived as opposite in meaning ("evil" and "good").

Thus, there is an Iranian principle of views, expressed through a certain system of selection (oppositions) of deities (maybe that is why Veles did not find a place here). In this system, both "primordial" Slavic deities participate, and those perceived, as it seems, through contacts with the Khazars.

Very soon (in 988) Vladimir was baptized; it is known that the images of the gods (primarily Perun) were destroyed, but it was not so easy to force them out of consciousness ordinary people and Vladimir himself, former beliefs.

Modern linguists studying the problems of the Proto-Slavic languages ​​emphasize that “by the time writing emerged, the Slavs had managed to change their sacred ideas twice. At first, ancient paganism was strongly influenced by the Iranian-type dualism, then the latter, having not won a complete victory, was ousted by Christianity. The dual system of sacred representations left deep traces in the Proto-Slavic language ... "(145). You can observe these traces in ancient Russian art (146), which reflects the existence in the past of a certain religious, mythological and cultural community between Iranians and Slavs ... "(147).

The adoption of a monotheistic religion by Ancient Russia in the late 980s. Byzantine sources do not pay as much attention as it would seem they should have. In the "Tale of Bygone Years" over the years, the strengthening of Russia is clearly visible, with which the Byzantines coped with difficulty. (This is evidenced at least by the words of the emperors, persuading their sister Anna to marry a Russian ruler: "And restoring her brother:" What food can you turn the Rus land into repentance? And now, if you don’t go, you have to do the same. ”) (148) This strengthening allowed the Russian prince to choose a religion of a certain kind, and this choice, as in the case with the title of kagan, was based on political reasons.

A.P. Novoseltsev (149) examined in detail the issues of the adoption of Christianity by Russia (149), who, complaining about the scarcity and contradictory nature of the sources illuminating the fact of the Christianization of Russia, dwells on the difficulties associated with this process: obviously, part of the upper classes "(150). Seeing in Vladimir not a “hasty reformer,” but a “cautious politician,” the author believes that “Vladimir, having become a Christian, retained many of the habits and traits of a prince of the pagan times. , in more private matters remained faithful to the old days ... "(151). As an example, Novoseltsev cites a chronicler's message about how people cried when the deposed Perun was beaten "with sticks, and said:" Yesterday we honor from a man, but today we will mock him. "

Probably, in this context, one should also consider the return, when minting the first coins, from the image of Jesus Christ to the trident. The sacredness of this sign was mentioned above (in semantics, it is adequate to a bident - a symbolic exponent of Khazar (Iranian) beliefs). The sacredness of the trident corresponded to the sacredness of the ruler of Russia, which correlates with the functions of the rulers in the early stages of the development of statehood. One of the researchers of the princely ideology of the X-XII centuries. noted: "The perception of princes as spiritual rulers is very precisely emphasized by the Khazar title" kagan "applied to the supreme sacred king. This title was used by Hilarion in" The Word of Law and Grace "in relation to Vladimir, Yaroslav ..." (152). Obviously, the author has no doubts about the "kagan" sacredness of the latter. Although it is hardly worthwhile to directly link the functions attributed to the Khazar Kagan with the "realities of life" of the rulers of the Rus who took this title (153), however, the magical function performed by the Russian ruler cannot be ruled out. Researchers write about Oleg, who acts as a "prince-priest who combined sacred and political functions" (154), about the priestly functions of Vladimir Svyatoslavich (155). Among the Proto-Bulgarians, as evidenced by early Bulgarian sources, the khan (khan syubigi) was the supreme ruler of the state, the supreme military leader, the supreme legislator and judge, and also the chief priest (156).

The sign "upsilon" had a magical meaning among the Proto-Bulgarians on the Danube, as mentioned above. It can be assumed that for the Russian rulers this was a bident - a trident. VE Flerova gives an interesting detail, recorded in Danube Bulgaria - the combination of a trident (similar to the image on the coin of the Bulgarian Tsar Mikhail Shishman) and a griffin.

Griffins (eagle-griffins) are characteristic of ancient Russian art, where their images are associated with the princely environment. They are also found in Khazaria (157).

It seems that the extensive material used in this article in order to search for analogies and explanations of the "mysterious sign" of the first Russian coins allows us to characterize it as a sacred, magical symbol (158), a relic of previous beliefs (a similar symbol that differs from the property sign, generic sign , meant N.P. Likhachev).

This sign ("the Iranian contribution to the ancient Russian spiritual culture") corresponded to the ideas of the Russian ruler about his functions, as a result of which a combination of the sign with such an imperious attribute as a coin is observed.

Subsequently, its transformation took place - a sign of princely property, "the sign of the Rurikovich", as it is qualified in historiography.

Notes:

1. Sotnikova M.P., Spassky I.G. Millennium of the oldest coins of Russia.Consolidated catalog of Russian coinsX- XIcenturies, L., 1983.

2. Karamzin IM. History of Russian Goverment. T. 2.M, 1988. Approx. 56.

3. You mean the sign "Trident"izvhdki lice to be like. (Listz Berlin)// Trident. Tizhnevik.Paris, 1928. No. 6. S. 15-16.

4. Shapovalov G.I. The sign of the Rurikovich is not a Trident, but a yaklar-cross // MemoUkraineither. Keyiin, 1990. T. 1; He's the same. On the anchor-cross symbol and the meaning of the Ryu signrikovich // Byzantine time-book. 1997. T. 57. S. 204-210.

5. See, for example, the definition of "heraldry" and "coat of arms" in the article largestfrom the French heraldry specialist Michel Pastouraud:Heraldique// DictionnaireduMoyenAges. Paris: PUP, 2002. P... 664-667: "Heraldry- helpa significant historical discipline dealing with the study of coats of arms. Coats of arms- it colored emblems belonging to an individual, dynasty or a groupwu and created according to certain rules, the rules of heraldry. It is these greatvila (however, not as numerous and not as complex as is usually believed, the basis of which is the correct use of color) distinguishes the Europeanheraldic system from all other emblematic systems, precedingcurrent and subsequent, military and civilian ".

6. Tolstoy I.I. The oldest Russian coins of the Grand Duchy of Kiev.SPb., 1882.

7. In the same place. S. 165-182.

8. In the same place. P. 182.

9. In the same place. P. 186.

10. Trutovsky V.K. Scientific works of A.V. Oreshnikov.M, 1915.S. 8-9.

11. Artsikhovsky A.V. In memory of A.L. Oreshnikov // Numismatic collection.M.,1955.4.1(B.25). C.7-1 Z

12. Oreshnikov AV. (A.O.) New materials on the question of mysterious figureson the oldest Russian coins // Archaeological news and notes. M, 1894. No. 10. S. 301-311.

13. Russian antiquities in the monuments of art, 1891. V.IV... P. 172.

14. A. V. Oreshnikov The oldest Russian coins // Russian coins before 1547. M., 1896 (Repr. M, 1996). S. 1-5; He's the same. Materials for Russian sphragistics// Proceedings of the Moscow Numismatic Society. M., 1903.T.III... B.1.C. 9-11;He's the same. The tasks of the Russian numismatics of the most ancient period. Simferopol, 1917;He's the same. Classification of the most ancient Russian coins by generic signs // Izvestiya AN SSSR. Department of Humanities. L., 1930.Viiseries.№ 2; He's the same. Degentle signs of pre-Mongol Russia. M., 1936.

15. Bauer N.P. Old Russian coinage of the endXand startedXIv. // Izvestia GAIMK A., 1927. T.V... S. 313-318.

16. Likhachev N.P. Materials for the history of the Russian and Byzantine sphragistki // Proceedings of the Museum of Paleography. Issue 2.A, 1930.II... P. 56.

17. Taube M.A. Mysterious patrimonial mark of the family of Vladimir Saint // Collection dedicated to prof. P.N. Milyukov. Prague, 1929.S. 117-132; He's the same. Ancestral sign of the family of St. Vladimir in its historical development and state significance for ancient Russia // Vladimir collection in memory of the 950th anniversary of the baptism of Rus. 988-1938.Belgrade, (1939). S. 89-112.

18. Taube M.A. Ancestral sign of the family of Vladimir St. ... p. 104.
19. Also, pp. 91-92.

20. In the same place. P. 106.

21. In the same place. S. 109-110.

22. In the same place. Pp. 111-112.

23. See, for example, his comments on the message of V.K. Trutovsky to Moskovarchaeological society " A New Look on the origin of the mysterioussign on the coins of St. Vladimir "// Antiquities, Proceedings of the Imperial Moscowsky archaeological society. M., 1900.T.Xvii... P. 121; A. V. Oreshnikov Degentle signs of pre-Mongol Russia. P. 49.

24. Rapov O.M. Signs of Rurik and falcon symbol // "Soviet archeology (SA). 1968. No. 3. P. 62-69.

25. Rybakov B.A. Property marks in the princely economy of Kievan RusX- XIIcenturies // Soviet archeology. 1940.VIS. 227-257.

26. Ibid, p. 233.

27. In the same place. S.233-234.

28. In the same place. P. 234.

29. Yanin V.L. The oldest Russian sealXv. // Insti Brief Messagesmulberry of the history of material culture (KSIIMK). 1955. Issue. 57. WITH. 39-46; Hethe same. Princely signs of Suzdal Rurikovich // KSIIMK 1956. Issue. 62.

S. 3-16. In this work, V.L. Yanin substantiates the thesis about personal characteristicstike of the princely tamga, which existed initially, only later acquired a generic or territorial character (Ryazan tamgaXIV- Xvcenturies); He's the same. TOthe question of the date of the Lopastitskogo cross // KSIIMK 1957. Vol. 68. S. 31-34; He's the same. Assembly seals of Ancient Rus.X- Xvcenturies M., 1970.Vol. 1.S. 36-41,132-146 and

AR

30. Ilyin A.A. Topography of the treasures of ancient Russian coinsX- XIv. and coinsspecific period. A., 1924.S. 6.

31. Likhachev N.P. Decree. op. P. 266.

32. In the same place. P. 108.

33. In the same place. From 57.

34. In the same place. From 266.

35. In the same place. S. 262-263.

36. In the same place. P. 264.

37. In the same place. P. 266.

38. Golb N., Pritsak O. Khazar-Jewish documentsXv. Sci. ed., after. and comments. V.Ya. Petrukhina M; Jerusalem, 1997; FlerovB. C... Colloquium "Hazary" and "Brief Jewish Encyclopedia of the Khazars" // Russian archeology (RA). 2000. No. 3; See review: P.P. Tolochko The myth of the Khazar-Jewish foundation of Kiev // RA. 2001. No. 2. S. 38-42.

39. About it.CMJV. V. Sedov Russian kaganateIXv. // National history.

1998. No. 4. S. 3-15; He's the same. At the origins of the East Slavic statehood. M,

1999. WITH. 54; Petrukhin V.Ya. "Russian Kaganate", Scandinavians and southern Russia: middle ageskovaya tradition and stereotypes of modern historiography // Ancient states of Eastern Europe. 1994. M, 1999. S. 127-142.

40. Sotnikova M.P., Spassky I.G. Decree. op. P. 7.

41. Darkevich V.P. Romanesque elements in ancient Russian art and their processing // Soviet archeology. 1968.№ 3, p. 71.

42. Sotnikova M.P. Spassky I.G. Op. Cit. S. 6. 60-61.

43. Butyrskiy M.N. Images of imperial power on Byzantine coins// Numismatic almanac. 2000. No. 1. P.20-21.

44. Sotnikova M.P., Spassky I.G. Decree. op. P. 6.

45. EngelA. eg Serrure R. Tralte de Numismatique du Moyen Age. Paris,1891. T.1. P. XL, 164.183.

46. Myths of the peoples of the world. M., 1988.T.2. P.241.

47. Stavisky V.I. At the origins of ancient Russian state symbols // Philosophical and sociological thought. 1991. No. 5.P. 99.

48. See about this: Yu.E. Berezkin. Two-headed jaguar and wands of chiefs // Westnickname of ancient history. 1983. No. 1. S. 163-164.

49. RintchenV... Les signes de prop "riete chez les Mongols // Arhiv orientalni Praha, 1954. T XXII.№ 2-3. P.467-473.

50. In the same place. P. 468.

51. Kyzlasov I.A. Runic scripts of the Eurasian steppes. M, 1994.S. 228-230.

52. In the same place. P. 231.

53. Kochkina AF. Signs and drawings on the ceramics of Bilyar // Early Bulgarians in Eastern Europe. Kazan, 1989.S. 97-107.

55. In the same place. WITH 101. Poluboyarinova M.D. Signs on the Golden Eagle ceramics // Medieval antiquities of the Eurasian steppes. M., 1980.S. 165-212.

56. In the same place. P. 205.

57. In the same place. P. 174.

58. Bidzhiev Kh.Kh.Khumarinskoe settlement. Cherkessk, 1983.

59. In the same place. P. 92.

60. Artamonov M.I. History of the Khazars. SPb., 2002.S. 308.

61. Shkorpil K.V. Signs on building material // Izvestia Russkoyu arthe Cheological Institute in Constantinople. T.H. Sofia, 1905.

62. A review of works devoted to the graphics of Khazarin was undertaken by V.E. Flerova(Graffiti Khazarin. M., 1997. S. 11-22). See also a historiographical sketch inbook: Doncheva-Petkova L. Znatsi varkhu archaeological monument from the middlekovna BulgariaVii- Xcentury. Sofia, 1980.S. 7-18.

63. Shcherbak: A.M. Signs on Sarkel's ceramics // Epigraphy of the East.XII... M; A,1958, pp. 52-58; Doncheva-Petkova A Decree. cit .; Yatsenko S. A. Signs-tamgas Iranian languageny peoples of antiquity and the early Middle Ages. M, 2001. WITH 107-117.

64. Aladzhov J. Teachings in v'rhu staroblgarskite znatsi (In türsen forconformity) // Digging and teaching. Sofia, 1991. P. As a result of researchthe complex of signs from the burial grounds of Proto-Bulgarand Slavs in the pagan and Christian periods in different regions of Bulgaria revealed their difference, mutual influence, genetic relationship - by periods, observed persistence in Christiansperiod of stable types of pagan signs, etc. As an example to follow, the author names the work of T.I. Makarova and SAPletnevoi "Typologyand the topography of the signs of the masters on the walls of the inner city of Pliska (In the book: In the pasmet on prof. St. Vaklinov. Sofia, 1984), in which the complex of signs associated with a specific, accurately dated monument is investigated in various aspects.

65. Flerova V.E. Graffiti Khazarin. M., 1997.

66. Flerova V.E. Imagesand plots of the mythology of Khazaria. Jerusalem; Moscow,2001.

67. Ibid, p. 43.
68. Ibid., P. 54.

69. Beshevlnev V. Parvobalgarite. Bit and culture. Sofia, 1981.S. 70-71. Even earlier, in special articles, V. Beshevliev gives a more detailed description ofthis sign, giving numerous examples of its use and describing the interpretation options (Beshevlnev V. Parvoblgarski amulet // News of the National Museum Varna. 1973. Book.IX (Xxiv). S. 55-63; He's the same. Value onprabulgar signiyi// News of the People's Museum Varna. 1979. No. 15. S. 17-24).

70. Petrova P. For the piercing and the meaning of the sign "upsilon" and the non-phonetic version // Staroblgaristika.XIV.(1990). 2.S. 39-50.

71. Ovcharov D. For prab'lgarskite amulets // Museums and monuments on culturethose. 1977. No. 1. S. 12; He Osche knows for staroblgarskite- tamga // OvcharovD. Prab'lgarskata religion. Arrival and supply. Sofia, 1997.S. 117 andAR

72. Beshevlnev V. Parvoblgarski amulet ... p. 62.

73. Petrova P. Decree. op. P. 42.

75. Ibid. P. 50.

76. About this: Flerova V.E. Images and plots. P. 62.

77. Ovcharov A. On the question of shamanism in medieval BulgariaVIII- Xvekov //BulgarianHistoricalReiiew. SoRa,1981.3, p. 73.

78. Ibid. P. 82; He's the same. For esicheskaya symbolism in prab'lglrite // Ovcharov DPrab'lgarskata religion. S. 278.281; He's the same. By question per Shumenskata plochka// Museums and memorials of the culture. 1978. # 2. P.22-25; Akheksiev Y. The image on the shaman varkhu of the Middle Ages off from Tsarevets vv Veliko Tarnovo // Problems onprab'lgarskata history and culture. Sofia, 1989.S. 440-447.

79. Ovcharov N. Did the goddess Umai exist in the pro-Bulgarian pantheon?// Problems on prab'lgarskata history and culture. S. 430-439.

80. In the same place. P. 433. See also: Ovcharov D Early Middle Ages graphiteDrawings from Bulgaria and a request for the technique of production // Pliska-Preslav, 2. Sofia, 1981. P. 98.

81. P. Petrova S. 49-50.

82. Ovcharov A Middle Ages graphite drawings from Bulgaria and tyakhnata vrzka from rock art to Central Asia and Siberia // Bulgaria in light fromantiquity is old today. Sofia, 1979.Vol. 1, pp. 244-245.

83. Doncheva-Petkova L. Decree. op. P. 27.

84. Mushmov N. Monetnte and bake in balgarskite for the tsar. Sofia, 1924.S. 97-98.

85. Doncheva-Petkova A Decree. op. S. 168,170.

86. Myths of the peoples of the world. Moscow, 1987. T. 1.S. 560-561.

87. Flerova V.E. Images and plots. P. 63.

88. In the same place. P. 10.

89. Myths of the peoples of the world. T. 1.P. 527.

90. Flerova V.E. Images and plots. S. 9-10.

91. Borisov A.Ya., Lukonin V.G. Sassanid gems L., 1963.S. 38.

92. In the same place. P. 45.

93. In the same place. S. 43-44.

94. Flerova V.E. Images and plots. P. 60.
95. Also, pp. 117-118.

96. Artamonov MM. Op. Cit. S. 410-412; Pletneva SA From nomads to YuroI will. M, 1967. S. 178; Flerova V.E. Images and plots. S. 117-118.

97. Pletneva S.A. From nomads to cities. WITH 171.

98. In the same place. P. 179.

99. Artamonov M.I. Decree op. P. 64; V. V. Sedov Russian kaganateIXv. P. 3.

100. The well-known archaeologist Academician V.V. Sedov presented in his works a well-known archaeologist, Academician V.V. Sedov: Sedov V.V. Russian kaganateIXv.; He's the same. At the origins of the East Slavicstatehood, etc.

101. Petrukhin VYa. "Russian Kaganate". P. 138.

102. Petrashenko V.A. Volyntsevskaya culture on the Right-bank Dniepervie // Problems of archeology of South Russia. Kiev, 1990.From 50.

103. Shcheglova O.A. Saltovskie things on the monuments of the Volyntsev type// Archaeological sites of the Early Iron Age of the Eastern European forest-steppe. Voronezh, 1987.S. 83.

104. Tolochko P.P. Nomadic peoples of the steppes and Kievaosh Rus. SPb., 2003.From 7.

105. Pletneva S. A. Essays on Khazar archeology. M .; Jerusalem, 2000. S. 223. On the contacts of the Slavs and the Bulgarians who are going to the heat, see: P.P. Tolochko. Decree. op.

S. 22-23.

106. Pletneva S.A. From nomads to cities, pp. 42-43.

107. V. V. Sedov Russian kaganateIXv. WITH. 5.

108. Tolochko P.P. Decree. op. P. 41; See about the "beneficial influence of the Khazars on the slVyanskiy ethnos ": Novoseliev A.P. Formation of the Old Russian state and its first ruler // Questions of history. 1991. No. 2-3. P. 5.

109. Rybakov B.A. Property signs. P. 247; Carter M.K Ancient Kiev. M .;L. 1958.T.I.Rice 123-124; T.P. P.379.

110. Artamonov M.I. Decree op. P. 431- both items are shown,

111. Karamzin N.M. History of the Russian state. Book. 1. T. 1. Notes. 284.

112. Tolochko P.P. The myth of the Khazar-Jewish founding of Kiev (considersN. Golba's theory and O. Pritsak); He is the nomadic peoples of the steppes Ikievskaya Rus.P.37- 40; SkrynnikovP. P... Ancient Russia. Chronicle myths and reality// Questions of history. 1997. No. 8. Coll.

113. Carter M.K. Decree. op.T. I. C.13 S-137; Pletneva S.A. Sketches of the khaz 114. Be-rezovetsDT. Slovenia and tribes of Salt1vsko1 culture // Archeology, 1965.T. XIXP.47-67; Bulkin V.A., Dubov I.V., Lebedev G.S. Archaeological sitesAncient RusIX- XIcenturies. L., 1978.S. 10-14; Tolochko P.P. Nomadic peoples stedrink and Kievan Rus. S. 40, etc.

115. V. V. Sedov Russian kaganateIXv. WITH. 6; See also: Petrashenko VL. Decree.op.

116. Novoseltsev A.P. On the question of one of the most ancient titles of the RussianPrince // History of the USSR, 1982. №4. S. 150-159; He's the same. The formation of the Old Russian state and its first ruler. S. 8-9 and others; Konovalova I.G. On possible sources of borrowing the title "kagan" in Ancient Rus // Slavs and their neighbors, M., 2001. Vol. 10.S. 108-135. The author cites all the existing literature about the title "kagan", its origin, gives different options his readings by different nations.

117. Novoseliev A.P. Khazar state and its role in the history of EasternEurope and the Caucasus.M, 1990.S. 138-139.

118. Florea V.N. The formation of self-awareness of the ancient Russian nationality (according to pamintniks of Old Russian writing of the X-XN centuries.) // Development of ethnic samosoknowledge Slavic peoples in the early Middle Ages M, 1982.S102.

119. V. V. Sedov Russian kaganateIXv. In more detail his views on the formation and existence of the Russian Kaganate, he outlined in the book: "At the origins of the East Slavic statehood", where he analyzed all existing versions about the location of the 1> Uskoy Kaganate, gave me arguments (written sourcesniks, zero-scale data) in favor of the dislocation of an earlyzation - the Kaganate of the Rus in the Dnieper - Don region In the same bookV.V. Sedov presents material about the state education that existed inthe same time in the north of the East European Plain,- Sueven Confederation,Krivichi and Mary, which was headed by Rurik, who is not called a kagan. Sonotice about MIArgamon- "The title of the head of Russia- kagan who is incrediblefor the Northern Slavs, but quite understandable for the Slavs of the Middle Dnieper .. "(Istoriya khazars. P. 369).

120. Artamonov M.I. Decree. op. P. 369; Novoseltsev A.P. Education Ancientthe Russian state. P. 10; V. V. Sedov Russian kaganateIXv. P. 9.

121. More about this: I.G. Konovalova. Decree. op.

122. Novoseltsev A.P. The adoption of Christianity by the Old Russian stateas a natural phenomenon of the era // History of the USSR. 1988. No. 4. S. 101-102; He's the same. Formation of the Old Russian state. S. 12-14; V. V. Sedov At the origins of the East Slavic statehood. S. 69 -70.

123. Novoseltsev A.P. On the question of one of the most ancient titles.P. 159; V. V. Sedov Russian kaganateIXv. P. 9.

124. MoldovanA. M... "Word of Law and Grace" by Hilarion. Kiev, 1984.S. 78.

125. Avenarius A. Metropolitan Hilarion and the beginning of the transformation of the Byzantinesinfluence in Russia // Early feudal Slavic states,and nationalities. Sofia, 1991.S. 117.

126. MoldovanAM... Op. Cit. Pp. 4, 7. Fig. 2. See also: Zhdanov I.N. Sochinniya. SPb., 1904.S. 23, 33.

127. Vysotsky SL. Old Russian inscriptions of St. Sophia of KievXI- XIVcenturies Kiev, 1966. Issue 1. C49. Tab.Xvii- Xviii... S. 110-111. Tab.LXIX.l; LXXJ.

128. In the same place. S. 39-40. Tab. 1X, 1; X, 2.

129. Novoseltsev A.P. On the question of one of the most ancient titles. P. 154; ToNovalova I.G. Op. Cit. P. 119. The author quotes the words of Ibn Rust: "There are Urusesking (malik), called khakan- rus ", p. 117.

130. Novoseltsev A / 7. On the question of one of the most ancient titles. P. 159.

131. A. S. Avvov Lexicon "Tale of Bygone Years". M, 1975.S. 200.

132. In the same place. P. 207. See also: V.V. Kolesov. The world of man in the word of Ancient Rusi. L., 1986.S. 269.

133. A word about Igor's regiment // Literary monuments of Ancient Russia.XIIcentury. M, 1980.S. 376.

134. Sreznevsky I.I. Materials for the Dictionary of the Old Russian language. SPb.,1893 (reprinted, M., 1958). T. 1C 1171.

135. Rybakov B A. Property signs. S. 233.257.

136. A. V. Oreshnikov Banknotes of pre-Mongol Rus. P.35.37; Yanin V.A.Princely signs of the Suzdal Rurikovichs. From 16.

137. Flerova V.E. Images and plots. WITH 91 (with reference to BA, Rybakov).

138. XI- StartXIIcentury. M., 1978. WITH 94.

In the same place. P. 86.

139. Martynov V.V. The sacred world "Words about Igor's regiment" // Slavic and Balkan folklore. M, 1989.S. 63.

140. Rybakov B.A. Paganism of the ancient Slavs. М, 1981. С.496-500; Toporov V.N. On the Iranian element in Russian spiritual culture // Slavic and Balkan folklore. P. 39.

141 Martynov V.V. Decree. op. S. 63-66; Toporov V.N. Decree. op. S. 26 and yes, \ her.

143. Martynov V.V. Decree. op. S. 71-72.

144. Ibid, pp. 69-71. See also V.N. Toporova: "The specifics of the two theophoric names Dazhbog considered hereand Stribogconsists in the fact that they, being completely Slavic in their composition, together withthemes can be understood as such tracing copies from Indo-Iranian, in which both members ineach of these two names turns out to be genetically identical, respectively.the leading Indo-Iranian elements "(op. cit. p. 42).

145. Martynov V.V. Decree. op. P. 61. Ref. and other authors.

146. Aelekov LA Iran and Eastern Europe in Sh-Khveki // Art and Archeology of Iran. 1976. No. 11. S. 135-141.

147. Toporov V.N. Decree. op. P. 23.

148. The Tale of Bygone Years // Literary Monuments of Ancient Rus.XI- StartXIIcentury. S. 124-126.

149. Novoseltsev A.P. The adoption of Christianity by the Old Russian state.P. 97.

150. In the same place. P. 116.

151. In the same place. P. 108.

152. Orlov R.S. Paganism in the princely ideology of Russia // Rituals and faiththe population of ancient Ukraine. Kiev, 1990.S. 108.

153. See about this: Petrukhin VYa. On the question of the sacred status of the Khazar kaghana: tradition and reality // Slavs and their neighbors. Issue 10.S. 73-78.

154. Orlov R.S. Decree op. P. 108.

155. Talkovskiy N.M. The struggle of Christianity with the remnants of paganism in the AncientRus.M, 2000 (Repr. Edition: Kharkov, 1916). T. 1.S. 6; Borovskiy Ya.E. Mythologicalcue world of the ancient people of Kiev. Kiev, 1982. WITH 34.

156. Aitavrin G.G. The Byzantine system of government and the Bulgarian stateness (Vii- XIcenturies) // Early feudal Slavic states and nationalities(problems of ideology and culture). Sofia, 1991.S. 23.

157. Flerova V.E. Images and plots. P. 82.

158. See note. 47.

The beginning of minting coins in Russia, in the modern sense of the word, dates back to the end of the 10th - the beginning of the 11th centuries. Silver and gold Russian coins appeared during the reign of Vladimir the Great. Before that, either dirhams brought by merchants from the East, or Byzantine coins were used for mutual settlements. Natural exchange could also take place. In addition, written sources mention several payment units, about most of which the researchers did not come to a consensus.

Payment units of pre-Vladimir Russia

The most famous means of payment for this period is the hryvnia. This name implied a massive silver jewelry worn around the neck. In payment terms, the hryvnia was equal to a 200 g silver bar and was exchanged for it.

Also in written sources such names as grivna kun, kun, nogata, cut, viveritsa (veksha) are mentioned. Researchers have not agreed on what these words mean. Kuna is sometimes identified with the Arab dirham, Western European denarius, or other silver coins. Sometimes it is associated with payments for goods with fur. Also correlated with the name of the taxes that existed in those days and were called "marten". But one way or another, the hryvnia kuna is the sum of 25 kunas.

Another unit of account was the nogat, which is correlated either with a separate group of Arab dirhams, or with the calculations of leather and furs. The hryvnia kun was split into 20 legs if necessary. The rezana was 1/2 kuna, and one of the possible physical expressions of this payment unit could well be the trimmings of Arab dirhams found in ancient Russian hoards.

The smallest denomination was called veksha or wyveritsa (squirrel) and was 1/6 kuna or, according to other sources, 1/100 hryvnia. It is quite possible that the ancient system of payments with fur simply left an imprint in the form of names on coins introduced into circulation by merchants.

The first Russian coins

The first coins, which began to be minted at the court of Vladimir the Great, were made of gold and silver and were called gold and silver coins, respectively. The obverse of the coin depicted the Grand Duke of Kiev, on the reverse - a trident, the prince's coat of arms. The same coins were minted by the son of Vladimir the Great, Yaroslav the Wise, and Yaroslav's cousin, Svyatoslav Turovsky. The obverse of the Yaroslavov coins depicted the patron saint of the prince - Yuri the Shining.

It is interesting to note that Russian coins with portraits of Kiev princes and a trident were at that time unique for Europe. Western European monetary units of that time were copies of Roman coins.

The coinless period and the emergence of the ruble

After the attack of the Mongol Tatars, a period of fragmentation began. Kiev fell, and the minting of common coins in Russia ceased. Bars of precious metals of various shapes gradually came into circulation. Among them, a single-type rectangular silver ingot with a seam-scar and "chopped off" ends began to stand out, which was named the ruble. One ruble was equal to ten hryvnia kunas. The ruble was divided into smaller payment units by cutting it into pieces, which only supported its name, firmly introducing the word into everyday life.

One tenth of it was called a dime. The ruble, divided in half, was called a half, and into four parts - a quarter. Also, small payment units were made from the ruble - money. Moreover, in Moscow they received 200 money from the ruble, and in Novogorod - 216.

Return of the minted coin

Russian coins began to be minted again in the second half of the 14th century. The “specific” period in Russian numismatics begins in the 1380s and is characterized by the appearance of coins minted in individual specific principalities. During this period, local monetary systems began to emerge, which subsequently formed a single one.

For the first time, personalized silver money was made in the Grand Duchy of Moscow during the reign of Prince Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoy. Ancient Russian coins of the Ryazan and Nizhny Novgorod principalities date back to almost the same time. At the very beginning of the 15th century. the principality of Tverskoe began to mint its coin, and within 20 years Pskov and Veliky Novgorod caught up with it. Until the end of the first half of the 15th century. up to 50 appanage rulers began to issue their own coins.

The set of coins was small: silver money and half money. Novgorod and Pskov minted money and a quarter of the money. V selected locations(for example, in the Moscow and Tver principalities) there was also a copper coin of the lowest denomination - a pool.

In Moscow, at the end of the 14th century, the counting system was as follows: the ruble (ingot) was divided into two half rubles, 10 hryvnias or 33 1/3 altyns. At the same time, poltina, dime and altyn did not have a monetary expression, they were units of account. But money and half-money were minted Russian coins, and their value, in comparison with bullion, was as follows: one ruble was equal to 200 minted money or 400 half-money. There is no data on the quantitative ratio of the copper pool to silver coins.

Royal period of numismatics

From 1533 to the end of the 17th century. specific monetary systems merged, forming one, single for the Russian state.

During the reign of the mother of Ivan the Terrible - Elena Glinskaya - strict rules for minting coins were established. Silver money was produced in small and large weights. Small coins carried the image of a horseman with a sword and were called sword coins. On large silver money, a horseman-spearman was depicted, they were called spear money. The modern penny originates from the latter. The smallest coin was called a half. It was equal to a quarter of a penny or half money.

Until the reign of Fyodor Ivanovich, Russian coins did not bear the designation of the year of issue. This king was the first to have a date stamped on a penny.

Old Russian coins in history and numismatics

Numismatics is an auxiliary historical discipline. Money is an important element of any society. They bear the imprint of his political, ideological structure, religious attitudes and the historical processes taking place in him. In addition, money reflects many aspects of social life that have dropped out of sight of other documentary evidence of the past.

Thus, for example, the transition to a standardized monetary system of the tsarist period from the variety of coins of the XIV-XVI centuries. reflects the completion of a long process of centralization of disparate principalities.

In addition to being important for historical science, numismatics is also one of the types of collecting. Peter I, together with his associate, Alexander Menshikov, is called the first coin collector in Russia.

Russian coins value

There are many catalogs listing the currently known Russian coins and their value. However, the price of a particular coin also depends on its safety and general condition.

For example, if the price of a silversmith of Prince Vladimir in good enough condition can be more than $ 250, then a badly damaged coin without a few fragments costs much less. That is why the question of how much Russian antiquity coins are worth is most reasonable to solve in each specific case by the method of appropriate examination, because we are talking about archaeological value.

It is generally accepted that the beginning of Russian statehood was 882 AD, when the Novgorod prince Oleg and his retinue took the city of Kiev. It is from this moment that the official history of our state begins. Like other countries, not only appeared in Russia from the very beginning government bodies but also money.

The oldest coins found in Russia are Byzantine silver and gold coins.

On the one hand, the coin depicted a portrait of the emperor, the other could be occupied by various images, inscriptions and the denomination of the coin. It was this type of coin that was taken as a model in Russia. It is thanks to the Byzantines that we have such modern look coins in real Russia.

Epochs and rulers, coats of arms and names changed, and Russia developed and prospered, and with it the coin evolved.

The beginning of minting coins directly in Russia leads us, grateful descendants, to Kievan Rus, where approximately at the end of the 10th century “Srebrenik” appears. The coin depicted Kiev prince, and next to it is the coat of arms of Rurikovich - a soaring falcon in the form of a trident.

However, a full-fledged workshop for the production of coins in Russia did not appear at that time. The main currency was a silver bar called the hryvnia.

In the thirteenth century, the technique of making money changes. Now coins began to be made from silver wire. Hence the name "Ruble", familiar to all of us, comes from the fact that the ingots were "chopped" from wire. The dimensions of the ingots varied in weight and shape. Moscow and Novgorod issued their own rubles. Coins were made from the ruble.

But it was all handicraft production. The first mass coins in Russia began to be made at the beginning of the fifteenth century in Moscow, then in the Suzdal principality, and then in Ryazan and Tver. The first Moscow coins depicted mainly Dmitry Donskoy, but coins depicting horsemen, warriors with weapons in their hands, animals, both existing and mythical, are often found. This was due to the fact that, as such, the mint did not exist, and the coins were produced by silversmiths, whom the prince personally allowed to mint coins to replenish the monetary fund. Even county princes and wealthy boyars minted coins in this way. On the other side of the Moscow coins, there was an inscription in the Tatar language. The fact is that already at that time Muscovy was actively conquering the markets of the Volga region, where the main language was Tatar, so the money was “multilingual”. This bore fruit, in the second half of the fifteenth century and before the inclusion of these lands in Russia, the Russian ancient coin called "dengoy" readily retained the leadership in the region and was an analogue of the dollar in the modern world.

With the centralization of the state and the creation of an internal market, money began to be minted only with Russian inscriptions, and the need to distribute money abroad has disappeared.

The next milestone in the history of copper money in Russia is considered to be 1534, the year when the monetary reform of Elena Glinskaya ends. Now in Russia they began to mint money of a single state standard. A horseman with a spear was depicted on the coin, hence the new name - "kopeck". The kopeck became for a long time the largest coin of the Moscow kingdom.

Silver became the only material for making money for a long time. Many tsars tried to carry out monetary reform, copper money was also introduced, and Vasily Shuisky even issued the first gold money, but all this was a drop in the ocean and often failed. Thus, the copper revolt even received a separate chapter in history and Moscow studies textbooks.

The next step in the development of Russian money was made by the reformer Tsar Peter Alekseevich Romanov, better known as Emperor Peter I. In 1704, Peter carried out a monetary reform. Silver ruble coins, fifty rubles, half rubles, a dime, a penny with the inscription "Ten money" and Altyn, equal to three kopecks, appear.

Now, on one side of the royal coin, a two-headed eagle was depicted - the coat of arms of the Russian Empire, as was customary in all European countries. Since 1730, the coat of arms of the Moscow kingdom - George the Victorious - appears on the body of the eagle.

In addition to silver, work was carried out on a copper coin. The fact is that throughout the reign of Peter I, searches were carried out for the denomination of a copper coin, therefore, copper coins of this period often changed in weight and shape.

The further development of the coin in Russia was increasing. The coins became larger in volume, more valuable in weight, the image of the emperors became more clear and skillful.

With the development of the state, paper money gradually began to appear, the first appeared in the Russian Empire even during the reign of Mother Empress Catherine II. The final point of coinage in the Russian Empire was 1917, the First World War, the revolution. The Russian economy of that period was characterized by the phrase of I.A. Vyshnegradskiy, Minister of Finance of Russia in 1887-1892, "We will not finish eating, but we will take them out."

In 1915, it got to the point that there were no shells and cartridges in the tsarist army, the soldiers of some units were given axes on long sticks to repel the attacks of the Germans and Austrians. In the country, the rich became more and more richer and the poor became more and more poorer. This state of affairs led to the revolution in February 1917, when the bourgeois circles took advantage of the situation, and to the Great October Socialist Revolution. The new government quickly realized the need for their own, new money. Coins of the Soviet era will be discussed in another article ...

Every state that arose on this planet in any of the historical periods eventually came to the conclusion that it needed something more than natural exchange. The increase in the growth of trade and the emergence of large cities forced rulers or communities to find a way to value a particular product. This is how commodity-money relations were formed.

Coins of Ancient Rus appeared in the Kiev principality at a time when the young state felt a vital need for this.

Money in Kievan Rus before its minting

Before the Slavic tribes united into a single great state - Kievan Rus, countries with a more ancient history had been minting money for many centuries and, thanks to them, had trade relations with each other.

The most of Rus, found on the territory of the Kiev principality, date back to the 1-3rd centuries A.D. e. and are Roman denarii. Such artifacts were found at the site of excavations of ancient settlements, but the Slavs used them for payment or for decoration, until it is reliably known. Since trade relations between tribes were more of an exchange nature, the real value of a denarius in this territory has not been studied.

So, the coin of Ancient Rus kun is a concept that is applicable according to the ancient Russian chronicles both to Roman, Byzantine and Arab money, and to the fur of martens, which were often used to pay for goods. Fur and leather have long been the object of commodity-money relations on the territory of many countries.

Own money in Kievan Rus began to be minted only from the end of the 10th century.

Coins of Kievan Rus

The earliest coins of Ancient Rus, found on the territory of the Kiev principality, had an image of a prince on one side and a trident or two-toothed coat of arms on the other. They were made of gold and silver, so in the 19th century, when studying ancient coins and describing them in chronicles, they were given the name "gold coins" and "silver coins".

The image of Prince Vladimir on coins from 980 to 1015 bore the inscription "Vladimir is on the table, and this is his silver." WITH back side the sign of the Rurikovich was depicted, which changed depending on who reigned.

The very first Ancient Rus and the name "grivna" applicable to them have their own etymology. Initially, this word meant equal to the cost of one horse (mane). In the annals of those years, the category "silver hryvnia" is mentioned. Later, when the outflow of coins from this metal began, it began to correspond to its quantity in the banknote.

Under Vladimir the Great, gold coins were minted, which weighed ~ 4.4 g, and silver coins, the weight of which varied from 1.7 to 4.68 grams. In addition to the fact that these banknotes were widespread and marketable within Kievan Rus, they were also accepted outside its borders in the settlements in trade. Rus was made only under Prince Vladimir, while his followers used exclusively silver for this.

The image on the obverse of the portrait of Prince Vladimir, and on the reverse - of the sign of belonging to the Rurik dynasty was of a political nature, since it showed the subjects of the newly united state its central authority.

Banknotes of Russia 11-13th centuries

After Vladimir's death, coins of Ancient Rus continued to be minted by his son Yaroslav (Prince of Novgorod), known in history as the Wise.

Since Orthodoxy spread throughout the entire territory of the Kiev principality, on the banknotes of Yaroslav there is an image not of a prince, but of St. George, whom the bishop considered his personal patron. The reverse of the coin still had a trident and an inscription that it was Yaroslav's silver. After he began to reign in Kiev, minting of coins stopped, and the hryvnia took the form of a silver rhombus.

The last coins of Ancient Rus (the photo below is the money of Oleg Svyatoslavich) are banknotes of 1083-1094, since the subsequent historical period of this state is called coinless. At this time, it was customary to calculate the silver hryvnia, which was actually an ingot.

There were several types of grivna, the main difference of which was in shape and weight. So, the Kiev hryvnia looked like a rhombus with cut ends, the weight of which was ~ 160 g. Chernihiv (regular-shaped rhombus weighing ~ 195 g), Volga region (flat ingot of 200 g), Lithuanian (bar with notches) and Novgorod (smooth bar weighing 200 g) hryvnia.

The smallest coin of Ancient Russia still remained of European origin, since no silver was spent on change. During the times of the Kiev principality, foreign money had its own name - kuna, nogat, veksha - and had its own denomination. So, in the 11-12th centuries, 1 hryvnia was equal to 20 kunas or 25 kunas, and from the end of the 12th century - 50 kunas or 100 vekshas. This is due to the rapid growth of both Kievan Rus itself and its trade relations with other countries.

There is an opinion of scientists that the skins of a marten - kuna, and squirrels - vekshi were considered the smallest coins. One skin was equal to the twenty-fifth or fiftieth part of the hryvnia, but from the 12th century, the payment for fur became obsolete, as the minting of metal kunas began.

The emergence of the ruble

Since the 12th century, “chopped” money, which was made from the hryvnia of silver, began to appear in the circulation of Kievan Rus. It was a silver rod, which included 4 "chopped" parts. Each such piece had notches indicating its weight and, accordingly, its value.

Each ruble could be divided into 2 halves, then they were called "half a tint". From the 13th century, all hryvnias gradually acquired the name "ruble", and from the 14th century they began to depict the brands of masters, the names of princes and various symbols.

The coins of Ancient Rus were used not only to pay for goods, but also to pay fines to the prince's treasury. So, for the murder of a free citizen, the punishment was the highest measure - "vira", which could cost from 5 hryvnia for a smerd and up to 80 hryvnia for a noble person. For the injury inflicted, the court imposed the punishment of a half-verse. "Poklepna" - a fine for libel - was equal to 12 hryvnia.

The payment of taxes to the princely treasury was called "bow", and the law itself, issued by Yaroslav the Wise, was called "bow to the faithful", indicating the amount of tribute collected from each community.

Coins of the Moscow principality

The "coinless" time in Kievan Rus ended by the middle of the 14th century, when the minting of coins, which received the name "money", began again. Often, instead of minting, they used silver coins of the Golden Horde, on which Russian symbols were embossed. The small coins produced were called "half money" and "quarters", and the copper ones were called pools.

At this time, banknotes did not yet have a generally recognized denomination, although the Novgorod money produced since 1420 was already close to this. They were minted for over 50 years unchanged - with the inscription “Veliky Novgorod”.

Since 1425, “Pskov money” appeared, but a single system of money was formed only by the end of the 15th century, when 2 types of coins were adopted - Moscow and Novgorod. The basis of the denomination was the ruble, the value of which was equal to 100 Novgorod and 200 Moscow money. The main monetary unit of weight was still considered the hryvnia of silver (204.7 g), from which coins for 2.6 rubles were cast.

Only in 1530 did 1 ruble receive its final nominal value, which is still used today. It is equal to 100 kopecks, half a dollar - 50, and the hryvnia - 10 kopecks. The smallest money - altyn - was equal to 3 kopecks, 1 kopeck had a face value of 4 polushki.

Rubles were minted in Moscow, and small money - in Novgorod and Pskov. During the reign of the last of the Rurikovich family, Fyodor Ivanovich, kopecks were also minted in Moscow. The coins acquired the same weight and image, which indicates the adoption of a unified monetary system.

During the Polish and Swedish occupation, money again lost its uniform appearance, but after the proclamation of a king from the Romanov family in 1613, the coins acquired the same appearance with his image. From the end of 1627 it became the only one in the country.

Coins of other principalities

At various times they minted their own money. The production of coins was most widespread after Dmitry Donskoy issued his first money, which depicted a warrior with a saber on horseback. They were made from a thin silver rod, which was previously flattened. Craftsmen used special tool with a prepared image - a coinage, from the impact of which on silver coins of the same size, weight and pattern were obtained.

Soon, the rider's saber was replaced by a spear, and the name of the coin, thanks to this, became a "penny".

Following Donskoy, many began to mint their own coins, depicting the ruling princes on them. Because of this, there was a discrepancy in the nominal value of money, which made it extremely difficult to conduct trade, therefore, except for Moscow, minting anywhere was prohibited, and a single monetary system appeared in the country.

Rezan

In addition to the whole, there was also a home-made coin in Ancient Russia, which was called "rezana". It was made by cutting the dirhem of the Abbasid Caliphate. The nominal value of "rezan" was equal to 1/20 of the hryvnia, and circulation continued until the 12th century. The disappearance of this coin from the territory of Kievan Rus is due to the fact that the caliphate stopped minting dirhams, and the “rezana” began to be replaced by the kuna.

Russian coins of the 17th century

Since 1654, the main money was the ruble, poltina, poltina and altyn. There was no need for smaller coins.

Rubles in those days were made of silver, and half-tines that were similar to them were minted from copper to distinguish them. The half-halfs were also silver, and the pennies were copper.

The tsar's decree ordering to equate copper change in value with silver led to real inflation, because of which the price of food increased and popular unrest began. The great uprising in 1662 in Moscow, called the "copper riot", led to the fact that the decree was canceled, and the minting of silver money was restored.

Reform of Peter 1

For the first time, a real monetary reform was carried out by Peter I in 1700. Thanks to her, the minting of silver rubles, halftins, halfpoltins, altyns, hryvnias and copper kopecks began at the mint. They made chervonets from gold. They made gold round blanks, on which inscriptions and images were applied by embossing.

There were simple (weight - 3.4 g) and double ducats (6.8 g with the image of Peter I on the obverse and a two-headed eagle on the reverse). Also in 1718, a coin with a face value - a two-ruble coin - appeared for the first time.

These denominations existed practically unchanged until the 20th century.

Coins of Kievan Rus today

Today there are:

• zlatnikov Vladimir - 11;

• silvermen of Vladimir - more than 250;
• silver coins of Svyatopolk - about 50;
• silvermen of Yaroslav the Wise - 7.

The most expensive coins of Ancient Rus are the gold coins of Vladimir (over $ 100,000) and the silver coins of Yaroslav the Wise ($ 60,000).

Numismatics

The science that studies coins is called numismatics. Thanks to it, collectors can correctly assess the historical and financial value of money. The rarest coins of Kievan Rus are in the expositions of historical museums, where visitors can get acquainted with the history of their minting and today's market value.