If you ask yourself what the most ancient coins of Russia will be, then the answer may be very surprising. It turns out that the most ancient coins that archaeologists found where the lands of the Kiev principality stretched were Roman denarii, issued in the period from four hundred to one 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 had much great popularity as part of jewelry. This fact will not seem surprising to anyone who imagines the nature of commodity relations at that time. At a time when the ships and caravans of merchants followed busy trade routes, Russia was away from these routes. Natural exchange flourished on its lands. Only since the enlargement of settlements and the appearance of cities has there been a need to have some universal equivalent of the value of any commodity, facilitating most exchange transactions.

As a tree has its origin in the roots, so the genealogy of the coins of Ancient Russia can be stretched from the hryvnia. It is difficult to call the original hryvnia a coin familiar to us. In fairy tales of different peoples, we often stumble upon the fact that the wealth of a person was measured in the number of herds of his horses. It turns out that the herd acted as a wallet, and the horse from it - as a bargaining chip. The amount of silver sufficient to purchase a horse ("buying a mane") began to be 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 ornament, but turned into a certain measure of weight in the form of an ingot. Over time, they began to give it a characteristic shape, which the National Bank of Ukraine likes to depict on its collection sets. After the start of minting coins, the name "hryvnia" passed to them.

Gold coins 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 used precious metals - gold and silver. This determined their names "zlatniks" and "srebreniki", but this does not mean at all that they were called that way 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, on coins dating from the period from 980 to 1015, there is an inscription "Vladimir is on the table, and behold his silver." Of course, the Grand Duke does not dance on the table, but this word denotes a “throne” more appropriate to him. If on one side of the coin there was a princely portrait, then on the other side we can see the coat of arms of the principality, in the form of a trident or bident (late copies), or Jesus Christ (early copies). The Rurik family sign over the shoulder of the prince was not a constant, but carried changes associated with those who were currently on the throne. The weight of the gold coin was slightly lighter than four and a half grams. And the pieces of silver had a whole range of coins, where the mass changed from 1.7 to 4.68 grams. After the reign of Vladimir, gold was no longer used for issuing coins. Silver money was fixed in circulation, they were already accepted for payment outside Kievan Rus, which significantly facilitated the merchant's life.

The princely portrait disappears during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, 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 mounted on a horse and does not strike a snake. The inscription on the reverse, the center of which is occupied by the Rurik family sign, is also modified ("Yaroslavl silver" is in place, but "on the table" is missing, so 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 the Kiev churches. However, for some reason, the coins did not suit the Grand Duke, their release gradually ceased. The last surge is characterized by the banknotes of Oleg Svyatoslavovich of 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".

Hryvnias of Old Russian Principalities

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

Other running coins of Ancient Russia

This foreign trifle was sometimes called the words understandable to Russian ears "kuna", "veksha", "nogata" (or "nagata", if we consider the origin from the Arabic "nagd" - "selective coin" or "naqada" - "to select good coins") . Modern man it will not be difficult 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 the money. "veveritsy" and "vekshi" originating from local names squirrel skins (a silver veksha weighed a third of a gram). And "nogata" is a direct designation of a furry skin with legs. An interesting fact is the existence of leather money. Of course, they were not directly equated with gold or silver, but rather served as financial obligations. The meaning hidden in the title is "cut". This is the predecessor of the "kuna". Rezana was produced in a barbaric way for numismatists. They took the dirhems of the Abbasid Caliphate and cut them into pieces. But the caliphate stopped issuing dirhams, and therefore the rezans gradually left the circulation. The need for a bargaining chip was closed by the advent of the kuna.

The cut is symbolically combined with the ruble, which was "chopped" from a silver hryvnia. The ruble was a large monetary unit, so it had to be cut into halves, which received the name "half". The name "hryvnia" is gradually disappearing from the language, being replaced by the word "ruble". Of course, later the concept of "kryvnia" was destined to appear, but it will already be just an integral part of the ruble. But the pennies familiar to us appeared much later, already in the Middle Ages, so it is unreasonable to attribute them to the coins of Ancient Russia.

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

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

For two centuries, the oldest Russian coins are "in development" by scientists. A consolidated catalog of the first Russian coins has been created, a detailed classification of "zlatnikov" and "silver coins" has been made, and the chronological framework for their issue has been determined. Many questions concerning the first Russian coinage can be considered closed. In a generalizing work that appeared on the occasion of 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 were summed up. and their multidimensional significance in the history of national statehood is determined (1).

Nevertheless, white spots remain on the seemingly absolutely woven canvas of the history of the initial Russian coinage. Primarily we are talking about the "mysterious sign", placed first on the front side (according to I.G. Spassky and M.P. Sotnikova), and then occupied a firm place on the reverse side of ancient Russian silver coins (Fig. 1).


With a light hand N.M. Karamzin, who described the pieces of silver of Yaroslav Vladimirovich and noted on the reverse side "in the middle of the inscription a sign similar to 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 sound, because it is used as the coat of arms of a sovereign state - the Republic of Ukraine. Naturally, the new status of the trident also caused a new wave of 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 greatest Ukrainian historian M.S. Hrushevsky proposed to use the trident of Kievan Rus as the coat of arms of the Ukrainian People's Republic. This "coat of arms of Vladimir the Great" at the beginning of 1918 was approved by the Rada. And although a year later it was replaced by the coat of arms of 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 "Trident" was the name of the political magazine of the Ukrainian emigration, published in the 1920s. 20th 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 items 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, brings to life more and more original research constructions, in which, along with fantastic decodings of the trident - the "sign of the Ruriks" - its verbal change is also proposed: instead of " trident" - "anchor-cross" (4). Unfortunately, even in the latest works, this emblem is called the coat of arms "in the old fashioned way" and is interpreted in the context of the "heraldry of Kievan Rus of the X-XI centuries", which looks like an obvious archaic against the background of scientific achievements in the field of semiotics, heraldry, numerous works on the signs of domestic and foreign" (5).

Perhaps, none of the researchers of the first Russian coins, namely, they own the initial definitions and characteristics of the "mysterious sign", left the latter without attention. Moreover, the classification of coins, their dating has always been the most important for those who studied them, the question of deciphering the sign played, as it were, a secondary role. In separate works, from time to time, various opinions on the essence of an incomprehensible sign were generalized. One of the first to make such an attempt was the author of a major work on the most ancient Russian coins, I.I. Tolstoy, who devoted an entire chapter to "various explanations of the enigmatic figure on the coins of the Grand Dukes of Kiev" (6). He listed a dozen authors, detailing the arguments of each in relation to their proposed interpretation (trident, lamp, banner, church portal, anchor, raven, dove as the Holy Spirit, the upper part of the Byzantine scepter, a type of weapon) (7).

In the appendix to the chapter I.I. Tolstoy publishes the changed opinion of A.A. Kunik about the origin of the "mysterious figure", who noted: "I am now more inclined than in 1861 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 "family banner of Vladimir", which grew out of the sign of ownership.

Tolstoy also agreed with Kunik's last conclusion, adding that the original form of property 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 cutting of some part of the main figure, or in the addition of some decorations; the addition of crosses to any part of the figure is especially often noticed, and the crosses come in the most diverse forms. We notice the same phenomenon and in our enigmatic figure" (9).

Tolstoy's last position was picked up and interpreted by authors who wrote about the first Russian coins and "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 ancient, Russian numismatics, applied art, noted Oreshnikov’s special merits in the study of the “mysterious sign” of gold coins and silver coins , proving its use on coins as a generic princely sign, identical at that time to the property sign, but differing 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 centenary of A.V. Oreshnikov, the famous archaeologist A.V. Artsikhovsky also credited A.V. Oreshnikov - "the largest of the Russian numismatists" - with the importance of classifying the family princely signs, "binding" them to a specific prince, compiling a table of their options from St. Vladimir to Vsevolod III and involving archaeological evidence for their classification. material. The latter, as A.V. Artsikhovsky emphasized, brought Oreshnikov's works beyond the scope of numismatics: they became an indispensable tool for all domestic 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 activity. In 1894 (12) he summarized the opinions existing in the literature about the essence of the "mysterious sign", including in the literature review a little-known article by P.N. dressing. Oreshnikov also mentions the statement of D.Ya.

Oreshnikov’s apparent rejection, perhaps, is only caused by a new look at the trident of I.I. Tolstoy, who proposed looking for analogies in the East: “Most likely, the solution to the riddle will have to be sought in the field of oriental ornament, and some images of a flower found in floral decorations of oriental manuscripts, it may very well be that 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 him in approach. The latter transferred his observations on the signs of customary law among the Votyaks who preserved the ancestral life of the contemporary Votyaks, in which the sons turned the original paternal simple form of the ancestral sign-label into a more complex sign by adding an additional element, transferred it 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" scheme of the evolution of the "rurikovich family signs", which Oreshnikov mentions in all his subsequent works, was based on material objects equipped with similar figures from archaeological excavations, primarily rings, pendants, and bull seals (14). As a result, A.V. Oreshnikov, based on the scheme of evolution of signs of the first Russian coins developed by him, presented the chronology of their issue, different from that previously proposed by I.I. Tolstoy. She 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 hoard complexes, which included early Russian coins, analysis of re-coins and other (15).

The ambiguity of 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 edition, 1930) published, the author emphasized: “We see that the theory of the generic sign has become completely consolidated, only the interpretations of its origin are diverse (16).

Baron M.A. Taube agreed with a similar approach to the question of the "mysterious sign", who published in the late 1920s and 1930s. 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 cleared up, namely: its meaning (in genere) and its image (in specie).

With regard 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 was its meaning, i.e. to what category of signs it belongs, we can definitely say that it really represented a generic sign of the Varangian princely house settled in Russia, the family of the “old Igor" (18), which arose in the simplest form in pagan times".

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

We present them in abbreviated form: BUT. Sign as a symbol of state power (trident, top of the Byzantine scepter, Scythian scepter, crown). B. The sign as a church-Christian emblem (trikirium, labarum, gonfalon, dove of the Holy Spirit, akakiya). AT. Badge as a secular military emblem (anchor, "Francisca" tip, bow and arrow, Norman helmet, axe). G. Sign as a heraldic-numismatic image (Norman raven, Genoese-Lithuanian "portal"). E. The sign as a geometric ornament (of Byzantine origin, oriental type, Slavic, Varangian) (19). Taube himself believed that the sign "in specie" does not represent any object real world, 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, an ornament. “But,” Taube reasoned, “if the sign of Vladimirov’s house was nothing more than a well-known pattern, ornament, then it is quite clear that the question of its origin comes down to finding the artistic environment in which such an ornament was in use or could have arisen” (20). The author discovered the artistic environment in Scandinavia and did not doubt at all, having found analogies for the "sign of the Ruriks" on the "rune stones of medieval Sweden", in its Swedish origin. Exploring the pictorial form of the "mysterious sign", Taube discovered in it the presence of a lily "knot" that had magical meaning"conspiracy", charms of happiness and spells of evil. On the other hand, the author acknowledged that the "sign of Rurikovich" 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 ... famous in the vast region of activity of the ancient Scandinavian Vikings".

As a result, M.A. Taube proposed to interpret the "mysterious figure", widespread in ancient Russian life, as a stylized image of a sea trident - the oldest 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 characteristic of the mark has not remained unchanged. From a symbol of the 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 (it means that this sign goes beyond the borders of the Russian state) (22).

Taube "consolidated" the opinion that already existed in historiography about the Scandinavian roots of the "mysterious sign". Along with such an interpretation, the idea of ​​completely borrowing 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 in favor of its local, i.e. domestic origin (23). He was followed by some Soviet historians, for example, O.M. Rapov (24).

It seems that the works of A.V. Oreshnikov on the signs of the Ruriks were the impetus for studying them in a broader context. In any case, four years after the publication of Oreshnikov's book "Banknotes of pre-Mongolian Russia", a large article by the future academician B.A. appeared. Rybakov, dedicated to princely signs of property (25), which has become 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 signs of property of Russian princes, on the basis of which he proposed a new classification. He outlined the territorial and chronological framework for the existence of signs, analyzing the scope of their use.

B.A. Rybakov only in in general terms spoke on the topic of interest to us, noting that "the origin of the inscriptions 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." “The genetic connection, due to the absence of intermediate elements, cannot be noticed,” the scientist writes further, “but the semantic one is obvious. Both here and there these signs belong to the ruling family, dynasty, and here and there they are modified, preserving general scheme, and here and there they coexist with phonemic writing as a surviving relic of earlier forms of writing ... "(27).

Important for our further construction are two assumptions of B.A. Rybakov. The first concerns the discovery 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 the signs of the Slavic (Ant) leaders. However, he carefully noted that the derivation of the system of signs of the X-XII centuries. of these tamgas, although tempting, is "so far unfounded."

Rybakov's second remark refers to the Bosporan royal signs, also tamga-shaped. The upper parts of some of these signs are reminiscent of a man with his arms upraised, or the heads of horned animals. “Perhaps,” the scientist writes, “with the 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 famous “Daco-Sarmatian elements in Russian folk art (28) .

The study of the Rurik signs 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.) the initial classification of signs, tracing the change in their structure (the study of "marks"), or thoroughly analyzed the scope of their application in Ancient Russia, i.e. developed the direction proposed by BA Rybakov.

Without touching on the issues of classification of Rurikovich signs, their transformation, the degree of use, the boundaries of distribution and application (all these issues have been raised and to some extent 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 Varangians, in Russian history. However, there were those who discovered the original eastern influence on its formation. Among them, in particular, was N.P. Kondakov, who together with I.I. Tolstoy published "Russian antiquities in the monuments of art" (see above). The well-known numismatist A.A. Ilyin also suggested that the first Russian coins were minted "with the influence of the East". In his opinion, a person engaged in the manufacture of coins should have had Sasanian lunettes before their eyes, 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 Sasanian coins" (30).

An outstanding specialist in the field of auxiliary historical disciplines N.P. Likhachev, having encountered various versions of the "mysterious sign" on seals, seals and other similar material during many years of sphragistic research, could not pass by this "sphinx". N.P. Likhachev included his reflections on the signs of the Ruriks in the context great job"Seals with the image of a tamga or a generic sign", published in the 2nd edition of "Materials for the history of Russian and Byzantine sphragistics", which, unfortunately, is little used by researchers. After carefully analyzing attempts to interpret the sign by numismatists and not supporting 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 negative sense. This question does not occur whether the so-called "banner of Rurik" (and with it the same type of signs on seals) from the east; it is appropriate, because according to its outlines, the sign of Rurik is of the same type with some, for example, 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 huge amount seals, seals, coins, which depict signs that are identical in configuration to the signs of the Rurikovich. The mass of analogies in material diverse in time and territory made him not only conclude: “All this shows how signs of the same pattern can be formed at different times and in different places” (32), but also warn: “Review and study of signs of property and, so-called symbols, especially in this case, the tamgas of the Turkic tribes, is of great importance, but the very touch with the generic signs can lead to the Scythians and the Indo-Scythian kings and even further, and next to this in the question of origin, borrowings and influences extreme caution is necessary, otherwise, in the hallmarks of the Finnish village, which is modern to us, one 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 signs-tamgas that interested him, marking "ancestry, property, production", which were in use in Ancient Russia, falling on monuments of "public 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 in relation to the Russian tamga sign, he cautiously remarks: "The neighborhood of the "Ruses" with peoples of Turkic origin (above - Khazar, Avar. - N.S.), with nomads, among whom there were clan tamgas in such distribution, undoubtedly - and in addition to 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 collected numerous inscriptions of signs similar to the signs of the Rurikids, 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, let alone with the works of Bulgarian scientists of the last decades of the 20th century, where a search for analogies of the tamg signs of the Proto-Bulgarians is carried out, their decoding is proposed, etc. However, the intuition of the scientist led him to very important observations and conclusions, which can be guided even now when comprehending the signs of the Ruriks. So, Likhachev believed that "changes in signs cannot be explained by any one law, for example, gradual complication. In different places, under different, perhaps, circumstances, peculiar customs also 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 the origin, rules of inheritance and the image of the tamga as a sign of men's property, and the tamga used by women on pottery. While male tamgas pass through the male line from father to son, gradually changing along 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 tamga sign (a sign of property) and the totem, no matter how tamga-like in configuration it was. At the same time, he could not but note the fact that he encountered in the work devoted to the Buryat signs of property, the presence in the inscription of one of the types of tamga of local khans of traces of a sign "borrowed from the Lamai cult" (36). The remark of N.P. Likhachev that “generic signs, and especially property signs, are not at all like “symbols”, which, thanks to the sacred cult meaning attached to them for some reason, migrate, retaining their form” (37).

Exceptionally 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 comprehension is determined by new trends that characterize the development of domestic historical knowledge at the present stage. In relation to our plot, this is the transformation of the prevailing ideas about the emergence of the Old Russian state, the persistent search for autochthonous Russia, the concept of the Russian Kaganate that existed in the 9th century, which was actively asserting itself in historiography, the problem of Khazaria and its relationship with the Slavs, which is becoming more and more vividly colored, 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 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 an early state formation of the Rus - Russian Khaganate, its location. With varying degrees of argumentation, the territories of the location of the Russian Khaganate are substantiated - from the north-eastern part of Eastern Europe to the Dnieper-Don region (39). In the latter case, only Kyiv 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 ancient Russian statehood, including the "trident" and objects , "marked" by him, into 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 importance of coins as a monument to Russian statehood, modern researchers emphasize that not only is their issue itself 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). Having discarded the speculation about the "coat of arms of the state", which was supposedly embodied in this sign, we agree that this sign really expressed a certain idea (which did not prevent it from becoming a generic sign of the Ruriks with subsequent changes, "marks" and so on.).

Since the minting of coins 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 "armorial" 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 “until the 13th century was enriched with borrowings, combining elements of various origins” (41), we can speak about specific borrowing only in relation to the composition of gold coins and pieces of silver of the first type of Vladimir Svyatoslavich (42). In general, the borrowing is relative, because the figure of the front side has the features of a "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 portrait images on coins.

The correct, in our opinion, explanation of this phenomenon is contained in the article by M.N. At the same time, "the importance and almost sacredness (significance) of the royal image on the coins is beyond doubt." The main expression 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 image is nothing more than a claim to identity. However, the main difference between the Russian ruler wearing gold pieces and pieces of silver is in the individualization of the image, which is enhanced by the presence of the "mysterious sign". Without it, apparently, this image was not conceived, and it is unlikely that the carver's intention plays the main role here.

Modern researchers of the first Russian coins, assessing their relationship with one-time Byzantine coins, write: "The most common in Russian gold hoards of the late 10th and first half of the 11th centuries, the gold of Vasily II and Constantine VIII transferred the canonical image of the eldest of the gods of the new faith to the created type of coin to whose patronage the baptized prince entrusted himself" (44). However, almost immediately this image gave way to another image, equal in importance in the eyes of the "owner" of the coin - Vladimir Svyatoslavich (Fig. 2) (initially, the sign accompanied the figure in the crown on the front side 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 ideological choice, the association of this sign with other ideas deeply rooted in the mind about the universe and one's place in it, which differ from the little-known Christian ideas.

In itself, the fact of the use in coinage of signs associated with earlier beliefs or pictorial plots of the previous period is not something special. In the early coinage of the Germanic peoples (for example, among the Vandals), coin types, usually imitating Rome (the bust of the ruler in a wreath, Victoria holding a crown, etc.), on the reverse side may bear the image of a horse's head. On early Anglo-Saxon coins, a dragon or a snake is placed, 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 important role(46) (Fig. 4 "b").


The sign placed instead of Jesus Christ on the most important imperious attribute, as already noted in the literature, can hardly be linked exclusively with the princely economy (the sign of property). It is assumed that pagan and cult symbols, the magical nature of which is undoubted, were adopted as the sign of the Ruriks (47). Such conclusions are based on the results of studying the ideology of ancient societies, which made it possible to reconstruct the tripartite nature of social phenomena, perceived by people in the era of the formation 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 the sign, which is inextricably linked with such an imperious action as the issuance of a coin, will expand our understanding of the mentality of the ancient Russian society in the early stages of its existence.

Significant assistance in the interpretation of the coin "trident" could be provided by analogies - after all, signs identical in shape are common over a vast area. In some regions, original catalogs of various signs are compiled, including tamgas, the graphic interpretation of which is similar - in Mongolia, Southern Siberia, the Volga region, in the North Caucasus, in the Dnieper-Don region and in modern Bulgaria. However, surveying the territories with "similar" signs, you recognize the correctness of P.P. Likhachev, who emphasized that in different time and in different places signs of the same pattern may be formed. And yet, against the background of the similarity of styles, including bidents and tridents, scientists in different regions distinguish varieties of tamga, which have a certain symbolic meaning.

The study of Mongolian property signs allowed its author to single out two groups of such signs: "simple" signs-styles and tamgas, which have a magical meaning. The author highlights 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 the tamga with a similar name to the privileges of the ruling families (50). Graphically, the verbal expression, including the designation of this tamga, corresponds to a trident in various versions (see Nos. 94 - 97; Fig. 2).

Funeral Yenisei stelae (Tuva, VIII - early IX centuries), the text of which contains epitaphs, bear the image of "heraldic signs", as the author calls them (51). These are tamgas in the form of a trident (Fig. 3).


According to I.A. Kyzlasov, who studied the monuments, the construction of such stelae was determined by the belonging of a representative of one or another people (we are talking about the multi-ethnic Ancient Khakassian state) "to the aristocratic circle of power, his being in the public service of the appropriate level" (52).

Signs in the form of a bident and a trident were identified during the study of 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 she emphasizes their greater social conditioning in comparison, for example, with potter's marks. The author explains the presence of such signs on the vessels by the existence of a special "commercial language, possibly dating back to tamgas", widespread "in international trade and production circles within the Middle Ages, at least in the regions of the strongest interaction" (54).

A huge amount of work to identify tamga-like signs on the Golden Horde ceramics was undertaken by M.D. Poluboyarinova (55). Among them are two groups of signs of interest to us - bidents 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", i.e. 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 use of signs similar in form 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 family: "the belonging of the bident and trident to the ruling family is confirmed for the Golden Horde by ethnographic data on the Turkic peoples who were once part of this state" (57 ).

As an analogue (in significance) to the tridents of the Jochid coins belonging to the rulers of this clan, Poluboyarinova mentions the Nogai trident, which was called the "Khan's tamga", almost identical in design to the "Sultan's tamga" among the Kazakhs of the Lesser Zhuz and the Bashkirs. The Kirghiz of northwestern Mongolia called the trident "sultan" or "noble" tamga (Fig. 9.13)




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

The complex of tamga-shaped signs, among which groups of bidents and tridents stand out, 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, according to researchers, belong to the Bulgarian-Khazar period of the existence of the settlement - to the VIII-IX centuries. According to their outline, they are typical of the Turkic-speaking peoples who inhabited the lands of the North Caucasus and the steppes of Eastern Europe during this period. However, the closest analogies to bidents and tridents can be traced in Khazarin, Volga and Danube Bulgaria (Fig. 5).

Kh.Kh.Bidzhiev, the author of the work on the Khumarinsky settlement, after carefully analyzing the domestic literature devoted to 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 the material brought or made works, and the signs applied to various objects inside the settlement can be considered as generic or personal tamgas of the population of the medieval settlement, which is exceptionally variegated in linguistic and ethnic terms. After completion of construction, tamgas of the ruling clans could be applied to the wall of the Khumarinsky settlement. Finally, the author singles out the religious and magical function of the signs, which were performed by those of them that were found in burial grounds or burial chambers, on the stones of the sanctuary (59).

Extremely important for our problematics are the studies of tamga-like signs in the Khazar Khaganate, the closest neighbor of the Dnieper Slavs. 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 Sarkel 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 for a long time served as a material for comparison by researchers of the signs of the Khazar Khaganate (62).

The formal-typological study of signs, which was and is currently being carried out by most scientists, makes it possible to note, for all the apparent identity of their inscriptions, not only the heterogeneity of signs, but also to associate this heterogeneity with different ethnic groups, different territories, 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 being practiced (63). However, in last years searches are being made 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 the patterns of using one or another form of a group of signs or further one sign, allows to raise more specifically the question of the semantics of the latter (64).

Phenomenal work in this direction was carried out by V.E. Flerova. Initially undertaking a formal-typological study of the Khazar graffiti, among which the majority were tamga-like signs (65) (Fig. 6),


Later, she modified her research to a large extent, using systematized graffiti in the reconstruction. religious beliefs 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 transform the image into a sign, which is conventional in nature, but does not lose symbolic meaning from this.

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

Emphasizing that bidents and tridents are most widely used 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 tribal affiliation ... "(68). However, without leaving aside the semantic nature of these signs, she asks herself the question: is their popularity due to a semantic load, for example, do they personify the supreme deity with whom they could correlate?



In the fundamental work on the ancient Bulgarians by V. Beshevliev, the sign "upsilon" is included in the section of magical signs (in different versions it is shown in Fig. 10), which is common in various areas settlements of the Danube Bulgarians and found in almost all major 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 apotropaic, 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 me"); acted as an analogue of the cross, accompanying one of the ancient Bulgarian inscriptions (69). Concretizing his thought, Prof. Beshevliev emphasized that among the ancient Bulgarians the sign "iyi" corresponds to the concept of "heaven", 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, a divine meaning is embedded in the sign "upsilon" with accompanying lateral vertical lines or without them.

The article by P. Petrova (70) is of serious scientific importance, in which great attention is given to the disclosure of the semantics of the sign, the cases of its use in the attributes of the First Bulgarian Kingdom (681-1018), as well as the options for the mark of the mark, and the figurative basis of this mark is revealed. The author proceeds from the established fact that in proto-Indian writing the sign "upsilon" embodies the image of divine progenitor twins holding onto the trunk of the sacred world tree. Petrova emphasizes that the geographical proximity, cultural and economic ties, linguistic proximity of the Altaic and Proto-Indian groups influenced a number of visual phenomena, including the figurative expression of magical and religious concepts. Similar concepts-images have passed a long geographical and chronological path and were embodied among 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 a ritual associated with the cult of twins was recorded in Bulgaria.) The author notes that in the proto-Indian writing, the divine twins also conveyed the concept of "power" (analogue: in 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 locality, two medallions were found depicting an "upsilon" with lateral vertical lines and a patriarchal cross with ends in the form of an "upsilon" (Fig. 12).


The find testifies that "upsilon" was used not only during the pagan period of the existence 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, in which magical pre-Christian signs are combined with a Christian cross, reflect the complex and contradictory changes in the worldview of medieval Bulgaria at the border of two eras: the Christian religion entered slowly, for a long time, into the consciousness of the Bulgarian population, 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 Virgin Eleusa of the 14th century. (72) . A lot of crosses with ends in the form of trident signs similar to "upsilon" were carved in Christian times on stone walls, bricks, and tiles.

Comparing similar options, the author comes to the conclusion that "upsilon" with two vertical lines on the sides in the period of the First Bulgarian Kingdom can be interpreted: 1) as an ideogram of divine twins (ancestors); 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 in 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 family sign. In Veliky Preslav, a tin seal with rune signs of the "upsilon" type with vertical lines on the sides was discovered not so long ago, which the researchers attribute "to the representative of the highest authority in the state, i.e. the khan or, in his person, the high priest" (74). It was in Veliky Preslav that an "administrative building" or "state office" of the 10th-11th centuries was discovered, on the brick walls of which the sign "upsilon" with two vertical lines (a symbol of pagan religion) was carved. It is believed that here it is used as a royal sign (75). (Fig. 10).

Petrova proposed another version of the reconstruction of the Proto-Bulgarian signs: she compared the images of bidents and tridents with images of high priests or shamans, emphasizing that the various geometric and stylized forms of the "upsilon" embody the most important ritual gestures of shamans during their action (76). Shamanism, according to Bulgarian scholars, is "one of the very characteristic aspects of the structure of the pagan beliefs of the Proto-Bulgarians" (77). In Bulgaria, numerous depictions of human figures were found with objects characteristic of the shamanic cult - a tambourine, a beater, in three-horned headdresses (crowns), often in masks, dancing, with raised or outstretched arms. Both in figurative and symbolic incarnation, 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 early Turkic cults, but also by others, in particular Indo-European ones. The Iranian deities of the Danubian Bulgarians were embodied in signs, in specific female images (79), moreover, scientists emphasize that Iranian culture could be reflected in Proto-Bulgarian beliefs not only through proximity to the Iranian-cultural Alans in the Black Sea steppes, but also much earlier - even in Asia, where the Proto-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 existence of the state.

A detailed study of the sign "upsilon", popular among the Proto-Bulgarians, in its various versions led P. Petrova to the conclusion that it contains the idea of ​​divine power and its subjects: god, shaman, earthly ruler, and the 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 both by the seal and by the signs depicted on the bricks of the "state office" of the Veliky 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 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). The front side of them is occupied by figures of an equestrian or foot king in appropriate attire and the monogram "ЦР" (Byzantine influence is visible in the type); the reverse side is provided 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 the tables XXVII-XXVIII ("trident") (85) (Fig. 7).

Despite the commonality of worldview concepts characteristic of the pagan world, and the identity of the pictorial symbolism in this regard (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, wickerwork - the four cardinal points) in the pre-Christian , early Christian Danube Bulgaria and Khazaria, during the reconstruction of their religious and mythological systems in almost 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 vivid expressions of religious preferences shows that there are no signs of "upsilon" with two vertical lines on the sides in similar monuments of Khazaria. However, there are also no pronounced images of shamanism and the design of the latter in the corresponding symbolic interpretation.

Referring the reader to the books of V.E. Flerova to get acquainted with the system of sign formation of the beliefs of the population of the Khazar Khaganate, I will note only the most general provisions related to the semantics of bidents and tridents. The fine plastic art of Khazaria is characterized by bipolarity (a 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, embodied in the type of amulet with paired compositions (figures on both sides of the axis), and in graphics - with bidents and tridents.

In bipolarity, which Flerova singled out as an integral feature of the art of the Khazars, including graphics, the idea of ​​​​the 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 realistic or schematic anthropomorphic images with hands characteristically raised up. As shown above, they are associated with the Proto-Bulgarian shamanic cult. Emphasizing that the plot of the anthropomorphic deity "with the upcoming ones" is archaic, Flerova, in relation to her research, reveals it as the image of the Great Goddess (with "paired semicircles or brackets" accompanying her), which is expressed in a schematic interpretation by a bident. The author also cites 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 specific purpose" - amulets - allowed B.E. Flerova to recreate a picture of the worldview of the multi-ethnos population of Khazaria. The pagan belief system she singled out 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 Turkic and Iranian, with Iranian being a 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 habitats of the carriers of the Indo-European culture (89). Later, this fact created the priority of "Iranisms" in the ways of thinking of the Khazars. Although Flerova believes that it is impossible to distinguish in Khazaria a special sign similar to "upsilon" with vertical lines on the sides, characteristic of the First Bulgarian Kingdom (see above), she emphasizes the original sacred semantics of bidents and tridents. Since in the constructions of V.E. Flerova "the theme of Iranism 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-shaped signs of Iran, which are depicted on plaster, are found on carved stones, coins, ceramics, and toreutics, deserves special attention.

Domestic researchers of Sasanian art believe that "neither the semantic meaning of these signs, nor their prototypes have been fully elucidated" (91). Most scientists 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). The temple signs include, in particular, the shamrock (trident). A similar trident can be seen on the seal of one of the magicians (93). (Fig. 13)


Leaving aside the variety of inscriptions of bidents and tridents, the analysis of which is made in the book by V.E. Flerova, I will emphasize the significance 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 Khumarinsky settlement in the Kuban (an outpost of the Khazar Khaganate), consisting almost entirely of bidents and tridents, the semantic homogeneity of which, according to Flerova, is undeniable (94). The author believes that in the bident, the symbolism of the sacredness of the supreme power is concentrated, the myths of archaic Indo-European beliefs are associated with it - the 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 the beliefs of the population of the Khazar Khaganate, was also reflected in the organization of the power of this state - the duality of control, which was carried out by the kagan and the bek (95). Moreover, the bek was characterized by purely practical activities (for example, leadership of the army), while 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 for this occasion, they took to flight (96) .

At the beginning of the ninth century Khazar rulers and nobles converted to Judaism, In Khazaria, the religion of the ruling house arose, which by no means meant a rejection of the previous beliefs of the entire population of the Khazar Khaganate: "the bulk of the people remained pagan. Moreover, paganism was not a remnant phenomenon here, as in Danube Bulgaria, among Central Asian nomads , in Russia and in other countries, which at the end of the 1st - beginning of the 2nd millennium adopted Christianity or Islam, but as a full-fledged religion of the masses "(97). Archaeological excavations carried out in recent years on the territory of the former Khazar Khaganate bring more and more evidence of the preservation of pagan rites 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 Khaganate, which was a reflection of the high level of social development of the latter, as researchers believe (98).

M.I. Artamonov considered a large steppe state - the Khazar Khaganate "almost equal in strength and power to the Byzantine Empire and the Arab Caliphate." In any case, in the VIII-IX centuries. The Khazar Khaganate occupied a leading place in the history of the southern lands of Eastern Europe, and it was Khazaria that was the first state with which Rus came into contact when forming its statehood (99).

We are talking about the state formation of Slavic tribes, carriers of the Volyntsevo culture (and the Roman, Borshev and Oka cultures that evolved on its basis) - the predecessor (one of the predecessors) of the Old Russian state. This political formation, 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 Khaganate (100).

Despite the fierce rejection of the concept of the Russian Kaganate, its post-Soviet critic cannot but recognize the obvious interaction of the Volyntsevskaya and Saltov-Mayak supra-ethnic "state" culture of Khazaria, citing archaeological research data: "New studies of the Volyntsev monuments on the Left Bank of the Dnieper showed that this Slavic culture was under the direct influence of the Saltov-Mayak archaeological culture of the Khazar Khaganate" (101). Indeed, in the archaeological works of recent decades, the fact of mixing cultures that took part in the formation of the culture of early Kievan Rus is especially emphasized, it is emphasized that, for example, in the Middle Dnieper region in the last quarter of the 1st millennium AD. there were different cultural groups of monuments (102); "close ties between the Slavic and Saltov cultures" (103) in the 8th century are especially emphasized. in the Middle Dnieper, etc.

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

In this context, the relations of the Slavs are now considered, primarily with the Proto-Bulgarians and Khazars that interest us. Bulgarians before the resettlement of their significant part in the 7th century. on the Danube they lived in the Don region, the Sea of ​​\u200b\u200bAzov, in the North Caucasus, together with the Khazars and Alans, in the region of the Saltov culture. AT latest research it is emphasized that this region is characterized by "a mixture of ethno-cultural traditions, including not only Alanian and Bulgarian, but also Slavic components" (105). On the Danube, as is known, the Turko-Bulgarians turned into Slavic-Bulgarians, in the 9th century. became Christians, but did not abandon their former beliefs, which were embodied, as shown above, in graphic symbols, colored by "Iranisms" and "Turkisms" brought from Central Asia and the Don steppes. Echoes of this symbolism are 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 only 25 km from the Slavic settlement of Titchikha. A whole system of fortresses in the 20-30s. 9th century was built in the north-west of Khazaria, on the territory adjoining the area of ​​the Volintsevo culture (107). It is hard to imagine that such territorial proximity excludes mutual influences, including cultural, religious, etc., and priority always remains with a stronger partner.

I will refer again to modern Ukrainian researchers who, recognizing the above, emphasize that "the influence of Khazaria on the formation of the economic and political structures of the Eastern Slavs turned out to be tangible. 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 supported, in particular, by the fact that the Kiev princes bore the title of khakan or kagan" (108).

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


B.A. Rybakov also reports on the signs (two teeth and tridents) on the wall bricks of churches in other Russian cities of the 11th-12th centuries, but we are primarily interested in Kiev, where the first Russian coins began to be minted, also bearing a similar sign.

Also at N.M. Karamzin, one can read that "Kiev residents used the name of Kagan instead of the sovereign, because for a long time they were subject to the Khazar Great Kagans" (111). Modern foreign and domestic historians put forward a hypothesis about the founding of Kiev by the Khazars, in any case, they argue in favor of the fact that "Kiev had, in addition to the Slavic, also the Khazar purpose" (112). The fact that the Khazars lived in Kiev is widely known. This is evidenced by at least the burial ground of the "Saltovsky Tipp", discovered by M.K. Karger during the excavations of ancient Kyiv (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-Mayak and Volyntsev cultures on the left bank of the Dnieper, most archaeologists exclude "any significant" Khazar influence on the Right Bank of the Dnieper and Kiev in singularities (114). Meanwhile, V.V. Sedov noted that in the region of Kyiv, the Volintsevo culture also passes to the right bank (115). Probably also together with Saltovskaya, which can explain the presence here of the two-toothed and tridental "signs of the Ruriks" that later flourished in lush color, which still gives the impression of "self-born". Ethno-cultural 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 it is unlikely that these include the adoption of the title "Kagan" by the Slavic rulers. The Russian ruler was designated by this title in Western European and Eastern sources of the 9th-10th centuries. (116). It is believed that the adoption of the title "kagan" occurred in the 20-30s. 9th 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 that time, the Khazar khakan was the real ruler, who was considered the king (117).

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

In all likelihood, the head of the Slavic state association, the kagan, was also in Kyiv. This title was worn 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 in 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 Khaganate of the Rus into the international political field.

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

It is assumed 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 Russian rulers after this event, even during the decline of Khazaria and after the baptism of Russia in the 10th-11th centuries. This is already evidenced by "internal sources" and, above all, the first, in fact, original work in Russian, "The Word of Law and Grace", created, as is believed, between 1037 and 1050. then still a priest of the Berestovskaya church near Kiev, the future Metropolitan Hilarion. The "Word" contains "praise to our Kaganov Vlodimerou. Baptism was from him" (124). It is unlikely that several times Vladimir was called "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 around Byzantium" (125). After all, after the creation of the "Lay" in 1051, Yaroslav the Wise, having gathered bishops in St. Sophia of Kiev, elevated his confessor Hilarion to the metropolitan table, after which he made a special note: ), 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), calling them all the same 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 similar to the modern Ukrainian coat of arms (127). It seems that the inscription on the wall of the same temple "In (summer) 6562 months of February on the 20th the death of our tsar ...", which is associated with Yaroslav the Wise (128), also means the "kaganship" 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 called both the Khazar kagans and the Russian rulers archons, but if they had other terms for the former, the name "archon" remained for the latter for a long time.

A.P. Novoseltsev, recognizing that 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 Khakan even in relation to the past" (130). This fact correlates with the observations of philologists over the term "prince", which came to the Eastern Slavs (orally) from Bulgarian language quite late - at the end (mid?) XI - beginning of the XII century. The researcher of the Tale of Bygone Years vocabulary 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 re-editing 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, which is of Turkic 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 with the title "prince" ("Khazars with their prince kagan"). As a recollection of the past "kagan time" in the "Tale of Igor's Campaign" (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). It is possible here to hint at the fact that Oleg Svyatoslavich was not only a prince of Chernigov, but also ruled the Tmutarakan principality on Taman, where the descendants of the Khazars lived. He seemed to be likened to the Khazars, to whom a clearly negative attitude can be traced in the written monuments of that time. In the end, the "civilized world" began to perceive the term "kagan" completely disdainfully. There is a well-known saying preserved in a manuscript of the 14th century: "Kagan is a bestial Scythian" (134) .

Almost simultaneously with the title "kagan" the "signs of the Ruriks" 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 us return to the interpretation of the sign of Russian coins. As was shown in the semantics of the signs in the form of a bident and a trident among the closest neighbors of the Eastern Slavs, in the state of the Khazar Khaganate one can see the imprint of beliefs based on Indo-European (Iranian) pagan cults, the spokesmen of which were primarily amulets. Old Russian metal amulets both in typology and in content differ from those of Saltov (137). Their images are associated with the specifics of Slavic beliefs. The Slavic pagan deities are described in the Tale of Bygone Years under 980: “And the beginning of the prince Volodimer in Kiev is one, and put idols on a hill outside the courtyard of the tower: Perun is wooden, and his head is silver, and his head is gold, and Kharsa, Dazhbog, and Stribog and Simargl, and Mokosh. And I eat them, calling me gods ... "(138). Even earlier, in the treaties between Russia and the Greeks, the "cattle god" Beley (Volos) was mentioned (139). The treaties reconstructing the system of ancient Russian pagan oaths name Perun and Beles, the main gods of pagan Russia. They are considered gods of the "first rank", going back to the Indo-European theonymia (140). Among the clearly Slavic deities is Mokosh, a female deity associated with the cult of women in childbirth (141). Hore and Simargl are interpreted as Iranian deities (142). New data as a result of studying the vocabulary of "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" testifies to the "semantic correlation" of the names of Dazhbog and Stribog (Dazhbog's grandchildren are the 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, currently the version of the name Dazhbog is accepted, which also goes 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, according to the following pairs: extreme - Perun, a thunderer, associated with a military function, Mokosh (Makosh), a female image associated with birth, procreation ; the second pair is Hora, a solar deity (light, heat) and Simargl, associated with the mythical Senmurv and with the sinister 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, the Iranian principle of views is evident, expressed through a certain system of selection (oppositions) of deities (perhaps that is why Veles did not find a place here). This system involves both "primordial" Slavic deities 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 oust the former beliefs from the minds of ordinary people and Vladimir himself.

Modern linguists studying the problems of the Proto-Slavic languages ​​emphasize that "by the time of the emergence of writing, the Slavs managed to change their sacred ideas twice. First, ancient paganism was strongly influenced by the dualism of the Iranian type, then the latter, not having won a complete victory, was replaced by Christianity. The double system of sacred ideas left deep traces in the Proto-Slavic language ... "(145). One 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 by Ancient Russia of a monotheistic religion in the late 980s. Byzantine sources do not pay as much attention as it would seem they should. 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 by at least the words of the emperors persuading sister Anna to marry the Russian ruler: “And rest her brother:“ How can God turn the Russian land to repentance, and you will save the Greek land from the fierce rati. You see how much evil Russia has done Greek? And now, if you don’t go, do the same for us "(148). This strengthening allowed the Russian prince to choose a religion of a certain kind, and this choice, as in the case of the title of kagan, was based on political reasons.

The issues of the adoption of Christianity by Russia were considered in detail by A.P. Novoseltsev (149), who, complaining about the paucity and inconsistency of sources covering the fact of the Christianization of Russia, dwells on the difficulties associated with this process: obviously, parts of the upper classes" (150). Seeing in Vladimir not a "precocious reformer", but a "cautious politician", the author believes that "Vladimir, having become a Christian, retained many of the habits and traits of a pagan prince. , in more particular matters remained true to antiquity ... "(151). As an example, Novoseltsev cites the chronicler's report about how people cried when the overthrown Perun was beaten "with sticks, and they said:" Yesterday we honor from people, and today we will scold.

It is probably in this context that the return of the first coins from the image of Jesus Christ to the trident should be considered. The sacredness of this sign was discussed above (in semantics, it is adequate to the bident - a symbolic exponent of the Khazar (Iranian) beliefs). The sacredness of the trident also corresponded to the sacredness of the ruler of Russia, which correlates with the functions of 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 accurately emphasized by the Khazar title" kagan "applied to the supreme sacral king. This title was used by Hilarion in the "Word of Law and Grace" in relation to Vladimir, Yaroslav ..." (152). Obviously, the author does not doubt the "kagan" sacredness of the latter. Although it is hardly worth directly linking the functions attributed to the Khazar kagan with the "realities of being" of the Rus rulers who assumed this title (153), however, the magical function performed by the Russian ruler cannot be ruled out. Researchers write about Oleg, acting 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 subigi) was the supreme ruler of the state, the highest military leader, the supreme legislator and judge, and also the chief priest (156).

The Proto-Bulgarians on the Danube had the magical meaning of the sign "upsilon", as mentioned above. It can be assumed that for the Russian rulers this was a bident - a trident. V.E. Flerova cites 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 find analogies and explanations for the "mysterious sign" of the first Russian coins allows us to characterize it as a sacred, magical symbol (158), a relic of former beliefs (a similar symbol that differs from the sign of property, a generic sign , meant N.P. Likhachev).

This sign ("Iranian contribution to the ancient Russian spiritual culture") corresponded to the ideas of the Russian ruler about his functions, as a result of which the 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 Ruriks", as it is qualified in historiography.



Notes:


1. Sotnikova M.P., Spassky I.G. Millennium of the most ancient 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. What does the sign "Trident" mean?izvhdki vsh look like. (Listz Berlin)//Trident. Tizhnevik.Paris, 1928. No. 6. S. 15-16.

4. Shapovalov G.I. The sign of the Ruriks is not the Trident, but the yaklr-cross // MemoriesUkraineineither. Keyiin, 1990. Vol. 1; He is. About the symbol "anchor-cross" and the meaning of the Ryu signrikovich //Byzantine time. 1997. V. 57. S. 204-210.

5. See, for example, the definition of the concepts "heraldry" and "coat of arms" in the larger articleour French specialist in heraldry Michel Pastouro:heraldique// DictionnaireduMoyenAges. Paris: PUP, 2002. P. 664-667: "Heraldry- auxiliarytelny historical discipline dealing with the study of coats of arms. Coats of arms- This colored emblems belonging to an individual, a dynasty, or a collectivitywu and created according to certain rules, the rules of heraldry. It is these rightvillas (though not as numerous and not as complex as is commonly believed, the basis of which is the correct use of color) distinguish Europeanheraldic system from all other emblematic systems, previousexisting and subsequent, military and civilian".

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

7. There. pp. 165-182.

8. There. S. 182.

9. There. S. 186.

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

11. Artsikhovsky A.V. In memory of A. 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. pp. 301-311.

13. Russian Antiquities in Art Monuments, 1891. V.IV. S. 172.

14. Oreshnikov A.V. The oldest Russian coins // Russian coins until 1547. M., 1896 (Repr.. M, 1996). S. 1-5; He is. Materials for Russian sphragistics// Proceedings of the Moscow Numismatic Society. M., 1903. T.III. B.1.C. 9-11;He is. Tasks of Russian numismatics of the most ancient period. Simferopol, 1917;He is. Classification of the oldest Russian coins according to generic signs // Izvestia of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Branch humanities. L., 1930.VIIseries.№ 2; He is. Detender signs of pre-Mongol Rus. M., 1936.

15. Bauer N.P. Old Russian coinage of the endXand startXIin. // Izvestiya GAIMK A., 1927. T.V. pp. 313-318.

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

17. Taube M.A. The mysterious family sign of the family of St. Vladimir // Collection dedicated to prof. P. NMilyukov. Prague, 1929, pp. 117-132; He is. The family sign of St. Vladimir's family in his historical development and state importance for ancient Russia // Vladimir collection in memory of the 950th anniversary of the baptism of Russia. 988-1938.Belgrade, (1939). pp. 89-112.

18. Taube M.A. The family sign of Vladimir's family is St... S. 104.
19. There. P. 91-92.

20. There. S. 106.

21. There. pp. 109-110.

22. There. pp.111-112.

23. See, for example, his remarks on V.K. Trutovsky's message to MoscowArchaeological Society "A new look at the origin of the mysterioussign on the coins of St. Vladimir "// Antiquities, Proceedings of the Imperial MoscowArchaeological Society. M., 1900. T.XVII. S. 121; Oreshnikov A.V. Detender signs of pre-Mongol Rus. S. 49.

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

25. Rybakov B.A. Signs of property in the princely economy of Kievan RusX- XIIcenturies //Soviet archeology. 1940.VIpp. 227-257.

26. Ibid S. 233.

27. There. pp.233-234.

28. There. S. 234.

29. Yanin V.L. Ancient Russian sealXin. // Brief messages instymulberry history of material culture (KSIIMK). 1955. Issue. 57. WITH. 39-46; Hesame. Princely signs of the Suzdal Rurikovich // KSIIMK 1956. Issue. 62.

pp. 3-16. In this work, V.L. Yanin substantiates the thesis about the personalitytikki princely tamga, which existed initially, only later acquired a tribal or territorial character (Ryazan tamgaXIV- XVcenturies); He is. Tothe question of the date of the Lopastice Cross // KSIIMK 1957. Issue. 68. S. 31-34; He is. Assembly seals of Ancient Russia.X- XVcenturies M., 1970. T. 1. S. 36-41,132-146 and

AR

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

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

32. There. S. 108.

33. There. From 57.

34. There. From 266.

35. There. pp. 262-263.

36. There. S. 264.

37. There. S. 266.

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

39. About it.CMJSedov V.V. Russian KhaganateIXin. // National history.

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

1999. WITH. 54; Petrukhin V.Ya. "Russian Khaganate", 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. S. 7.

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

42. Sotnikova M.P. Spassky I.G. Decree op. S. 6. 60-61.

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

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

45. EngelBUT. 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. V.2. P.241.

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

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

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

50. There. S. 468.

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

52. There. S. 231.

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

55. There. With 101. Poluboyarinova M.D. Signs on the Golden Orlyn ceramics // Medieval antiquities of the Eurasian steppes. M., 1980. S. 165-212.

56. There. S. 205.

57. There. S. 174.

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

59. There. S. 92.

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

61. Shkorpil K.V. Signs on building material // Izvestiya Russkoyu arInstitute of Geology in Constantinople. T.H.Sofia, 1905.

62. A review of the works devoted to the Khazarin graphics was undertaken by V.E. Flerova(Graffiti Khazarin. M., 1997. S. 11-22). See also the historiographical essay inbook: Doncheva-Petkova L. Significant archeological monuments from the middleKovna BulgariaVII- Xcentury. Sofia, 1980. S. 7-18.

63. Shcherbak: A.M. Signs on ceramics of Sarkel // Epigraphics of the East.XII. M; BUT,1958. S. 52-58; Doncheva-Petkova BUT Decree. op.; Yatsenko S A. Signs-tamgas in Iranian languageny peoples of antiquity and the early Middle Ages. M, 2001. With 107-117.

64. Aladzhov Zh.regularity) // Excavation and study. Sofia, 1991. P. As a result of researchof the complex of signs from the burial grounds of the Proto-Bulgariansand Slavs in the pagan and Christian periods in different regions of Bulgaria revealed their difference, mutual influence, genetic relationship - by periods, the persistence in Christians is seenperiod of stable types of pagan signs, etc. As an example to follow, the author names the work of T.I. Makarova and SAPletneva "Typologyand topography of signs of masters on the walls of the inner city of Pliska (In the book: In pamet on prof. St. Vaklinov. Sofia, 1984), which examines in various aspects a complex of signs associated with a certain, precisely dated monument.

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

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

67. Ibid S. 43.
68. There. P. 54.

69. Beshevlnev V. Parvoblgarite. Beat and culture. Sofia, 1981. S. 70-71. Even earlier, in special articles, V. Beshevliev gives a more detailed descriptionthis sign, giving numerous examples of its use and describing the interpretation options (Beshevlnev V. Parvob'lgarski amulet // Izvestia on the National Museum of Varna. 1973. Book.IX (XXIV). pp. 55-63; He is. Valueto onprabulgarian signiyi// Izvestia at Narodnia Museum Varna. 1979. No. 15. S. 17-24).

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

71. Ovcharov D. For Prabhgarskite amulets // Museums and monuments on culture-those. 1977. No. 1. S. 12; He is Oshche Vednzh for the Old Bulgarian Signs- tamgi // OvtcharovD. Prabhgarskata religion. Production and contingency. Sofia, 1997. S. 117 andAR

72. Beshevlnev V. Parvob'lgarsky amulet... P. 62.

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

75. Ibid. S. 50.

76. About this: Flerova V.E. Images and stories. S. 62.

77. Ovtcharov A. To the question of shamanism in medieval BulgariaVIII- Xvecov //BulgarianHistoricalReieew. sora,1981. 3. S. 73.

78. Ibid S. 82; He is. For the ezical symbolism of prabalgrite / / Ovcharov DPrablgarskata religion. pp. 278,281; He is. On request behind Shumenskata plate//Museums and monuments of the nakulturat. 1978.№2. S.22-25; Akheksiev Y. The image on the shaman varhu of the medieval sad from Tsarevets in Veliko Tarnovo // ProblemsPrabulgarskata history and culture. Sofia, 1989. S. 440-447.

79. Ovcharov N. Did the goddess Umai exist in the Proto-Bulgarian pantheon?//Problems on prabalgarskata history and culture. pp. 430-439.

80. There. P. 433. See also: Ovtcharov D Early medieval graphitedrawings from Bulgaria and a question for the technique of production // Pliska-Preslav, 2. Sofia, 1981. P. 98.

81. Petrova P. Decree. pp. 49-50.

82. Ovcharov A Medieval graphite drawings from Bulgaria and tyakhnata vrazka from rock art in Central Asia and Siberia // Bulgaria in the light ofantiquity to our days. Sofia, 1979. Vol. 1, pp. 244-245.

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

84. Mushmov N. Monetnte and bake on the Bulgarian king. Sofia, 1924.pp. 97-98.

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

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

87. Flerova V.E. images and stories. S. 63.

88. There. P. 10.

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

90. Flerova V.E. Images and stories. pp. 9-10.

91. Borisov A.Ya., Lukonin V.G. Sassanian gems, L., 1963, p. 38.

92. There. S. 45.

93. There. pp. 43-44.

94. Flerova V.E. Images and stories. S. 60.
95. There, pp. 117-118.

96. Artamonov MM. Decree op. pp. 410-412; Pletneva S A From nomads to Yuroladies. M, 1967. S. 178; Flerova V.E. Images and stories. pp. 117-118.

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

98. There. S. 179.

99. Artamonov M.I. Decree op. S. 64; Sedov V.V. Russian KhaganateIXin. C. 3.

100. A harmonious concept of existence in this region at the indicated time, the well-known archaeologist Academician V.V. Sedov presented the Russian Khaganate in his works: Sedov V.V. Russian KhaganateIXin.; He is. At the origins of the East Slavicstatehood, etc.

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

102. Petrashenko V A. Volintsevskaya culture on the Right Bank of the DnieperVie // Problems of Archeology of Southern Russia. Kyiv, 1990.From 50.

103. Shcheglova O.A. Saltov things on monuments of the Volyntsev type//Archaeological monuments of the Early Iron Age of the East European forest-steppe. Voronezh, 1987, p. 83.

104. Tolochko P.P. Nomadic peoples of the steppes and Kievan 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 going to the fuse, see: Tolochko P.P. Decree. op.

pp. 22-23.

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

107. Sedov V.V. Russian KhaganateIXin. WITH. 5.

108. Tolochko P.P. Decree. op. S. 41; See about the "beneficial influence of the Khazars on the slaVyansky 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. S. 247; Carter M.K Ancient Kyiv. M.;L..1958.T.I.Fig 123-124; T.P. P.379.

110. Artamonov M.I. Decree op. S. 431- Both items are shown

111. Karamzin N.M. History of the Russian State. Book. 1. T. 1. Note. 284.

112. Tolochko P.P. The myth of the Khazar-Jewish foundation of Kyiv (considerstheory of N. Golba and O. Pritsak); He is the nomadic peoples of the steppes of Kievan Rus.p.37- 40; SkrynnikovP. P. Ancient Russia. Chroniclemyths and reality// Questions of history. 1997. No. 8. Sat.

113. Carter M.K. Decree. op.T. I. C.13 S-137; Pletneva S.A. Chaz essays114. Be-RezovetsDT. Slavs and tribes of Salt1vsko1 culture // Archeology, 1965.T. XIXpp.47-67; Bulkin V.A., Dubov I.V., Lebedev G.S. archaeological sitesAncient RussiaIX- XIcenturies. L., 1978. S. 10-14; Tolochko P.P. nomadic peoplesdrink and Kievan Rus. S. 40 and others.

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

116. Novoseltsev A.P. To the question of one of the most ancient titles of the RussianPrince // History of the USSR, 1982. No. 4. pp.150-159; He is. The formation of the Old Russian state and its first ruler. pp. 8-9 and others; Konovalova I.G. On possible sources of borrowing the title "kagan" in ancient Russia // Slavs and their neighbors, M., 2001. Issue. 10. S. 108-135. The author cites all the existing literature about the title "kagan", its origin, gives various versions of its reading among different peoples.

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

118. Florya V.N. The formation of the self-consciousness of the ancient Russian people (according tominers Old Russian writing X-XN centuries) // Development of ethnic samosoknowledge of the Slavic peoples in the era of the early Middle Ages M, 1982.C102.

119. Sedov V.V. Russian KhaganateIXin. He outlined his views on the formation and existence of the Russian Kaganate in more detail in the book: "At the origins of East Slavic statehood", where he analyzed all existing versions about the location of the 1> Russian Kaganate, gave me arguments (written sourcesnicknames, null data) in favor of the dislocation of the early statetitles - Khaganate of the Rus in the Dnieper - Don region In the same bookV.V. Sedov also presents material on the state education that existed inthe same time in the north of the East European Plain,- Suven Confederation,Krivichi and Meri, which was headed by Rurik, who was not called a kagan. Soabout MIArgamonov to notice - "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 Khazar. S. 369).

120. Artamonov M.I. Decree. op. S. 369; Novoseltsev A.P. Education AncientRussian state. S. 10; Sedov V.V. Russian KhaganateIXin. S. 9.

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

122. Novoseltsev A.P. Adoption of Christianity by the Old Russian Stateas a natural phenomenon of the era // History of the USSR. 1988. N° 4. S. 101-102; He is. Formation of the Old Russian state. pp. 12-14; Sedov V.V. At the origins of East Slavic statehood. pp. 69-70.

123. Novoseltsev A.P. To the question of one of the oldest titles.S. 159; Sedov V.V. Russian KhaganateIXin. S. 9.

124. MoldovanA. M. "Sermon about Law and Grace" by Hilarion. Kyiv, 1984. S. 78.

125. Avenarius A. Metropolitan Hilarion and the Beginning of the Transformation of the Byzantinesinfluence on Russia // Early feudal Slavic states,and nationalities. Sofia, 1991. P.117.

126. MoldovanAM. Decree op. P. 4, 7. Fig. 2. See also: Zhdanov I.N. Sochiniya. 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. pp. 110-111. Tab.LXIX.l; LXXJ.

128. There. pp. 39-40. Tab. 1X,1; X,2.

129. Novoseltsev A.P. To the question of one of the oldest titles. S. 154; Co.Novalova I.G. Decree op. P. 119. The author cites the words of Ibn Ruste: "There are Urusesking (malik), called khakan- rus", p. 117.

130. Novoseltsev A/7. To the question of one of the oldest titles. S. 159.

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

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

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

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

135. Rybakov B A. Signs of ownership. pp. 233,257.

136. Oreshnikov A.V. Banknotes of pre-Mongol Rus. S.35,37; Yanin V.A.Princely signs of the Suzdal Rurikovich. From 16.

137. Flerova V.E. images and stories. With 91 (with reference to BA, Rybakov).

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

There. S. 86.

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

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

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

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

144. Ibid., pp. 69-71. See also V.N. Toporova: "The specifics of the two theophoric names Dazhbog considered hereand Striboglies in the fact that they, being completely Slavic in composition, together withtopics can be understood as such calques from Indo-Iranian, in which both terms ineach of these two names turn out to be genetically identical to the correspondingexisting 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-Khvek / / Art and archeology of Iran. 1976. No. 11. S. 135-141.

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

148. The Tale of Bygone Years // Monuments of Literature of Ancient Russia.XI- StartXIIcentury. pp. 124-126.

149. Novoseltsev A.P. Adoption of Christianity by the Old Russian state.S. 97.

150. There. S. 116.

151. There. S. 108.

152. Orlov R.S. Paganism in the princely ideology of Russia //Rites and faithof the population of ancient Ukraine. Kyiv, 1990. S. 108.

153. See about this: Petrukhin VYa. To 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. S. 108.

155. Talkovsky N.M. The struggle of Christianity with the remnants of paganism in the AncientRussia.M, 2000 (Repr.ed.: Kharkov, 1916). T. 1. S. 6; Borovsky Ya.E. Mythologicalcue world of ancient Kievans. Kyiv, 1982. With 34.

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

157. Flerova V.E. Images and stories. S. 82.

158. See note. 47.


Ancient Russia largely copied the achievements of the Byzantine Empire, and money was no exception.
At the end of the 10th century, under Vladimir Svyatoslavich, they began to mint the first coins in Russia - pieces of silver. They corresponded to the Byzantine ones in size and weight, the same production technologies were used, but the inscriptions were Russian, and a princely sign was also added. Currently, only about 400 such coins are known, they are considered rarities and almost all of them are kept in museums.

Around the same time, goldsmiths appeared, copying Byzantine gold solids. The images on pieces of silver and gold pieces are very similar. Under the following rulers, only pieces of silver were minted, the latter date back to the time of Yaroslav the Wise. In the future, for unknown reasons, the minting of their own coins stops for three centuries.

Russia did not always have its own coins, and this is well known. Payments were made for both services and goods. Long time furs served as an equivalent. In the course there was an imperial denarius (Rome), and an eastern dirham, and even a Byzantine solidus. But the era of own money has steadily come. So....

Silversmiths



The first of the coins minted in Russia was called a silversmith. She appeared in the time of the book. Vladimir, before Baptism. The lack of small change began to be felt especially acutely, there were not enough dirhams. The material was silver from the remelting of the latter.

Silver pieces were minted in two types of designs. At first it was a copy of the idea of ​​​​the Byzantine solids: on the one hand - the throne book. Vladimir, on the reverse - Jesus. Later the design changed. The face of the Messiah has disappeared. His place was taken by a trident, Rurik's family coat of arms. The portrait of the prince was surrounded by the inscription: "Prince Volodymyr is on the throne, and this is his money."

Zolotniki (Zlatniki)



Zlatnik (980-1015)

Goldsmiths were present in the course, as were silversmiths. Their coinage was also unfolded by Prince. Vladimir. Only poured coins, as the name implies, in gold. The Byzantine solidus served as the prototype for the goldsmith. The weight was quite impressive - 4 g.

It was a rather rare and expensive coin of a very limited edition. However, popular rumor to this day keeps its name in folklore. Modern numismatists can show the public no more than a dozen gold coins. That is why their price is very high, both on the official and on the black market.

Hryvnia

It was the hryvnia that became a truly independent official monetary unit of Russia. It originated in the 9th-10th century. It was a heavy gold or silver ingot. But it was, rather, a standard of mass than a monetary unit. With the help of the hryvnia, the weights of precious metals were measured.

Hryvnias of Kyiv had 160 g of mass and a 6-coal shape of a honeycomb. The money of Novgorod was a long bar weighing 200 g. However, the name did not change due to the difference in appearance. The Tatars also used the hryvnia, which circulated in the Volga region. It was called that, "Tatar", had the shape of a boat.

The name of the money comes from a completely unrelated item - a women's neck circlet, made by jewelers in gold. The decoration was worn on the "mane". Hence - "hryvnia".

Vekshi

A perfect analogue of the current penny, old Russian veksha! Its other names are squirrel, string. There is an interesting explanation for the first version. It says that during the circulation of a small silver coin, its “natural” counterpart was a dressed squirrel skin.

Chronicles mention that the ancient tribute from some tribes was "one squirrel or coin from a single house." By the way, one hryvnia was equivalent to 150 vekshas.

Kuna

The conversion of the Eastern dichrem is a historical fact. No less popular was the denarius. The Russians called them both “kuns”. Why?

There are two explanations. First, dressed and stamped marten skins served as the equivalent of both coins. By the way, very valuable, even in those days. Second: the English word "coin" (sounds: "coin"), in translation - "coin".

Rezans

Rezans were called "monetary units", designed to calculate as accurately as possible. For example, marten skins were divided into patches in order to fit them to a certain price of the goods. It was these flaps that were called "cuts" (emphasis on the second "a").
And since the fur skin and the Arab dirham were equivalent, the coin was also divided into parts. To this day, halves and even quarters of dirhams are found in ancient Russian treasures, because the Arab coin was too large for small trade transactions.

Today, archaeologists often find halves and quarters of these coins in ancient treasures. Arab money had a rather large denomination in order to operate with them as a whole in small transactions.

Nogaty

Nogata, a small change coin, 1/20 hryvnia. Its name, as philologists and historians suggest, came from the Estonian "nahat" ("fur"). It is possible that the legs were originally "tied" to furs.

With all the variety of coins in Russia, the fact that any trade thing was “tied” to its own money is quite remarkable. Evidence of this is in its text "The Tale of Igor's Campaign". It says that if Vsevolod were on the throne, a slave would be valued at a foot, and a slave would be sold at a cut.

In the days of Ancient Russia, silver was imported from other countries; Russia did not have its own silver. In this regard, coin circles were not made of silver, but simply cut into pieces of wire, flattened with a hammer, and an image was applied with a strike of a coinage. Coins made in this way were not quite even, often completely shapeless, and the image on them was not always clear. The main advantage of this method of coin production is that it is waste-free. After all, then they tried to use every grain of valuable material. The value of silver against gold was 10:1, while now it is 60:1. Silver in those days was very expensive. Therefore, even with the smallest silver money they gave change: the coin itself was cut into two, sometimes even into three parts. Later, in order to solve the problem with change, copper chasing began to be used, and the production technology was the same as silver chasing.

Any city, even the most seedy one, minted its own coins. The weight, as well as their sample, directly depended on the well-being of the city itself. If there was little metal, then the length of the wire decreased, the coins became thinner and became like fish scales. Most of the products were no more than 10 millimeters. Only a few letters were stamped on them, a fragment of the image. It was impossible to read and make out what was what. Yes, and it was inconvenient to hold such coins in your hands, counting them was even more difficult: they constantly stuck to your hands, slipped out, fell, and it was very difficult to find them on the ground. Even today with a metal detector, finding such coins is a difficult task.

Coins of the Ryazan Principality

Names of ancient Russian coins
All the names of the coins of the times of Ancient Russia, such as denga, pulo, have Turkic roots. The counting measure "altyn", the "usual" container for treasure chests are also Turkic words. Despite the fact that some scholars claim that “pulo” comes from the Latin word “follis” (they used to measure money in bags), in fact it is of Turkic origin and is translated as “fish scale”. And today in Turkic this word has two meanings: both “scales” and “money”. Peter I called these small coins "old lice". To get rid of them, he carried out a monetary reform, after which the coins became much larger and it is much easier to detect them with a metal detector today.

Old Russian coins as an indicator economic situation in the country
Images, inscriptions on coins, their weight and composition were a direct reflection of the economic and political situation in the country, an indicator of the state of monetary circulation. The redistribution of power between the princes, the death of many of them in the XIV-XV centuries. was so fast that the princes did not have time to mint coins with their own image. Yes, and the chroniclers did not have time to write everything down and pass it on to their descendants. For example, historians can only judge the principality of Gorodensky with its capital Gorodeno by the inscriptions on the coins, and the location of the principality - by the place where they were found. Gorodensky princes were called "great". It seems that archaeologists have yet to discover the grand-ducal city, which was “lost” somewhere in the Tver forests.


Zlatnik of Kiev Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich (Hermitage)

History in ancient coins
Coins of the 15th century very different from those minted in later years. At that time, dual faith dominated (paganism had not yet completely retreated under the onslaught of Christianity). Pagan beliefs have also found their way into money. The coins depicted State symbols ancient Russian principalities. Such, for example, as the firebird, the sacred drake, werewolves (wolflacks), double-headed eagles were depicted on coins even before the approval of this symbol by Ivan III, heads of tours, dragons, "red sun" (krin), griffins, horned devils, snakes, etc. So it turns out that the declared victory in the X century. Christianity is highly questionable. Although the ancient churches of the two faiths have long been destroyed, the annals have been rewritten, but coins with pagan symbols cannot be changed. True, with the capture of Tver, the Muscovites made an attempt to remake the ancient coins and close the pagan firebird with the letter “D” (maybe the very first name “money”?). Therefore, do not be surprised if on the coins of the XV century. under the letter "D" here and there a beak or a bird's tail peeps out. Not found on 15th century coins. archangels, saints, crucifixes and other Christian symbols. The rider on a horse with a spear, whom many take for "George the Victorious", did not immediately begin to be depicted with a defeated snake. So it turns out that there is no pagan symbolism, and Christian symbolism still needs to be “seen”, “thought out”.

Hasty conclusions were also often drawn about the events of past centuries. Often, the coin legend was interpreted incorrectly, and only with the discovery of a second identical coin with another surviving fragment, the search engines managed to draw up a whole truthful picture. True, with each new discovery, there are no fewer questions. For example, it is still unclear why the Tale of Igor's Campaign mentions some coins "nogata", "kuna", "cut". Also, on the discovered coins of the Gorodensky Principality, the inscriptions are encrypted, on the early coins of the Moscow Principality they wrote both in Russian and in Arabic. While in Tver the inscriptions were minted only in Russian. At the same time, it is impossible to write off all the questions on the mistakes of engravers. Many ancient Russian coins discovered by searchers contain images of animals taken from Varangian and Scandinavian myths. Russian coins of the XI-XIII centuries. none were found. European shillings and pence were in use at that time. It remains a mystery why. While scientists put forward only assumptions. The secret can only be revealed with the help of new finds. Will the general public learn the truth about the history of the Slavic, Finno-Ugric tribes? A very big question.

Therefore, all ancient coins found are so valued by historians. You will not find two identical copies of those times. The inscriptions on some ancient coins still confuse researchers.

The most amazing thing is that these priceless exhibits for historians have been right under our feet for seven hundred years already. Some coins under the cultural layer without access to oxygen, at the bottom of rivers, etc., can be stored for centuries.

Unfortunately, there are many such coins that lie in the upper layer of soil in fields and gardens. There, unique, they are crushed by tractors, destroyed during digging with shovels, fertilizing the earth with nitrogen-containing compounds, poisons, and when digging up the earth, moisture gets on them, and access to air is opened. Sometimes old coins lie right on the surface, constantly oxidizing and completely breaking down over the years. It often happens that there are many coins in the sand raised from the bottom of the river, but all of them, together with the sand, go to an asphalt or concrete plant. Rare coins are walled up in the walls of skyscrapers, in the asphalt of roads. So, the only found Uglich pool was discovered by a worker in a pile of sand, which was lifted from the bottom of the Moskva River. If this worker had not shown vigilance, and the world would not have known that their own money was minted in Uglich. To save ancient coins from disappearance and complete destruction is not even a goal, but the duty of every searcher with a metal detector.

You can find Old Russian coins in almost the entire Central Russian territory of Russia. The topography of the finds suggests that the new-fangled theories are wrong. Because they claim that before the Russians owned all the lands from the Pacific to the Atlantic oceans, including part of Africa, all of India, China (“Empire”, M. 1998). There are no finds on these lands and that's it. And nothing can be done about it. The theory of the "Cossack-Tatar Horde" is also highly questionable. In Mongolia, Central Asia, not a single scale was found. Therefore, we, Russian search engines, will have to collect these small scales.

Coins in Ancient Russia are known from the 1st century. n. e., these were different coins, both of their own minting and those brought from abroad. Since ancient times, the Slavs traded with many foreigners, and therefore in Russia one could meet both Russian rubles and hryvnias, as well as German thalers and Arab dirhams. Modern historians say that money appeared in Russia in the XIV century, but at the same time, they refute themselves when they say that the Slavs traded with foreigners even before the beginning of new era.

The first mentions of primordially Russian Slavic coins are found in the annals of Novgorod and Kyiv, where the names kuna, nogaty, rezany and hryvnia are found. Presumably 1 hryvnia kuna = 20 nogat = 25 kunam = 50 rezan = 150 veverits. Veksha (squirrel, veveritsa) - the smallest monetary unit of Ancient Russia, 1/3 gram of silver. In Russia, the so-called. Kuna system of measures, weights and money. Kuna - a silver coin (2 g of silver), the name of which comes from the skin of a marten, a popular exchange commodity. Over time, the kuna halved and amounted to 1/50 hryvnia-kuna until the beginning of the 15th century.

Trade between Russia and Rome began at the beginning of the first millennium of the new era. Treasures of silver coins with images of Roman emperors and with Latin inscriptions are often found on the territory of Ukraine and Belarus. These are Roman denarii of the 1st-3rd centuries. n. e. Since trade among the Slavs at that time was very developed, Roman denarii were used everywhere. Roman denarii is the name of the Roman silver coins of the times of the Republic and the first two centuries of the Empire, one of the most common coins in the territories under the rule or influence of Rome. The Roman denarius corresponded to the Greek drachma, therefore, Greek authors usually replace the denarius with the word drachma in stories about Roman history. The word drachma itself comes from the Assyrian (Russian) "darag-mana", i.e. dear exchange, denoting 10 grams of silver. Most likely, the Roman denarius also came from this word, because it, like the drachma, denoted a silver coin and is consonant in pronunciation. Therefore, to say that the names of Roman denarii and Greek drachmas were foreign coins for the Slavs is at least stupid. Even oriental dirhams in the VIII-IX centuries. in Russia - large silver coins with Arabic inscriptions, the name of which is also a distorted word drachma. Dirhams were minted in the Arab Caliphate, and from there Arab merchants brought them to the territory of Kievan Rus. Here the dirham received a Russian name: it was called a kuna or nogata, half a kuna - cut. 25 kunas were hryvnia kunas. At the end of the X century. in the Arab Caliphate, the minting of silver dirhams and their influx into Kievan Rus weakens, and in the XI century. stops completely.

Subsequently, Western European coins began to be imported to Russia, which were called the same as they were once Roman - dinars. On these thin silver coins with primitive images of rulers, the Russian names of the coins were transferred - kuns or cuts.

Russian coins were widespread - golden coins and silver coins, which were first minted in Kyiv. Archaeologists find pieces of silver I-VI centuries. The coins depicted the Grand Duke of Kyiv and a kind of state emblem in the form of a trident - the so-called sign of the Rurikids.
The inscription on the coins of Prince Vladimir (980-1015) read: “Vladimir is on the table, and this is his silver,” which means: “Vladimir is on the throne, and this is his money” (Fig. 2). For a long time in Russia the word "silver" - "silver" was equivalent to the concept of money.

In the XIII century. Muscovy was attacked by Cossacks from the Golden Order, Siberian Russia, or the so-called. Great Tartaria. The reason for their campaign was the decomposition of the elite of the Moscow and western Russian principalities, their dependence on their western neighbors, Poland and Lithuania, the forced Christianization of the Rule of the glorifying Slavs who lived in Muscovy. Many capital cities of the western principalities were destroyed, trade died out. In these difficult years in Muscovy, all the coins were brought from Siberia. True, there were Kiev hryvnias, hexagonal ingots weighing about 160 g, and Novgorod ones, in the form of a long bar weighing about 200 g. In the XIV century. on the western outskirts of the Russian lands, “Prague pennies” minted in the Czech Republic circulated, and on the eastern outskirts, in the current Ryazan, Gorky, Vladimir regions, there were eastern dirhams - small silver coins without images, with Arabic inscriptions.

Since the 12th century, the main Russian monetary unit has appeared - the ruble, the name of which is still alive. Rubles were parts of the hryvnia or pieces of silver with notches indicating their weight. Each hryvnia was divided into four parts; the name ruble comes from the word “cut”, because a silver rod worth a hryvnia was cut into four parts, which were called rubles. Ruble began to be called the Novgorod silver ingot, and half of the silver ingot - half. In the XIV century. one of the first to start minting was the Moscow principality under the famous Prince Dmitry Donskoy (1359-1389). On the coins of this prince, we see the image of a warrior with a battle ax in his hands, next to it is the name of the prince - Dmitry. The inscription is made in Russian letters. But the other side of the coin imitates the Siberian money that was in circulation in Siberia, Great Tartary. Until now, in Central Asia, there are heirs of Russian Siberian coins - tenge in Kazakhstan and tegreg in Mongolia.

The coins of various principalities differed from each other in both weight and appearance.
On the Novgorod coins, the laconic inscription read: “Great Novgorod”. On the coins of Pskov was placed the inscription: "Money Pskov". On the coins of Novgorod and Pskov, we do not see princely names, since the supreme power in these cities belonged to the vech. On the coins of the Ryazan principality, a peculiar coat of arms of the principality was depicted, the meaning of which has not yet been unraveled, and the name of the ruling prince. On Tver coins there are scenes of hunting.
The main Russian silver coin of the XIV-XV centuries. became money; this word, somewhat modified (money), has received a broader meaning in Russian.

In addition to silver coins, in some large cities coins were minted from copper - pools. There is a copper coin with the image of a bird and the inscription: "Moscow Poolo". Silver and copper coins were minted from wire, which was cut into pieces of a certain weight (less than 1 g).
These pieces of wire, previously flattened, were minted with chasings, on which images and inscriptions were carved.

As the Russian principalities united into a single state, the diversity in weight and appearance of Russian coins began to impede trade. In 1534, a monetary reform was carried out in the Russian centralized state. Three money yards were left: Moscow, Pskov, Novgorod, where only one type of national coin was minted.

These were kopecks, money (1/2 kopeck) and polushkas (1/4 kopeck). The kopecks depicted a rider with a spear (hence the name “penny”) and the inscription: “The Tsar and the Great Prince Ivan of All Russia”, on the money - a horseman with a saber and the inscription: “The Tsar and the Great Prince Ivan”, on the half - a bird and the word "sovereign". 100 kopecks were a ruble, 50 - half a penny, 10 - a hryvnia, 3 - altyn, however, all monetary units, except for a penny, money and polushka, were only counting concepts.

From 1534, Russian coins remained unchanged until the end of the 17th century. Only the names of the kings in the inscriptions changed.
From that time to the present day, the counting system has been preserved (100 kopecks make up the ruble) and the names of the main monetary units (our ruble, fifty kopecks - 50 kopecks, five-kopeck pieces - 15 kopecks, dime - 10 kopecks, kopeck).

During the years of the Polish-Swedish intervention at the beginning of the 17th century. Russian monetary system experienced a severe shock. The invaders proclaimed the Polish prince Vladislav the Russian tsar and began to mint coins of very low weight with his name in Moscow.
In Yaroslavl, the government of the Home Guard under the leadership of Minin and Pozharsky, in opposition to the coins of the interventionists, minted coins with the name of Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich, who died back in 1598, the last legitimate tsar of the Rurik dynasty.

In 1613, after the election of Mikhail Romanov to the throne, the former monetary system was restored.

In 1654, the minting of large denominations began - rubles, half a half, half a half, altyns, since small coins were inconvenient for large trade settlements. In Russia, the penny was first minted in 1654, under Alexei Mikhailovich, and was equal to 2 kopecks. Rubles were minted from silver, similar to them - from copper, half-and-a-half - from silver; then the so-called efimki with a sign appeared - Western European thalers with an overmarked stamp and date -1655. Efimok is the Russian name for the Western European silver thaler. The name "efimok" comes from the name of the first thalers minted in the city of Joachimsthal in Bohemia (now Jachymov in the Czech Republic) - Joachimsthaler. These coins are in large numbers began to be imported into Russia starting from the 16th century and were used as raw materials for minting their own silver coins. The population was reluctant to use this unusual money, it was difficult to mint them.

Soon they began to mint copper kopecks, which in appearance did not differ from silver ones. Copper kopecks were equated with silver by order of the government. This was very beneficial for the treasury and disadvantageous for the people. At that time there was a war with Poland, the people suffered from general economic ruin. Money depreciated, food became very expensive, famine began in the country.
In 1662, a popular uprising broke out in Moscow, which went down in history under the name "copper riot".

The frightened government in 1663 abolished the new money. The minting of silver kopecks, money and half coins was resumed.
Only at the beginning of the 18th century, under Peter I, were Russian coins finally changed. From 1700-1704 they began to mint silver rubles, half a half (560 kopecks), half a half (25 kopecks), hryvnias (hryvnias, 10 kopecks), altyns (3 kopecks), copper kopecks, polushki and semipolushki. Chervonets, 10 rubles, were minted from gold. They were minted not from wire, as in the XIV-XVII centuries, but on special coin blanks - mugs. In this form, the Russian monetary system existed without any significant changes until the 20th century.