Ukrainian Archaeology, 201666

Ancient Rus and Mediaeval Archaeology

viacheslav d. Sarychev *

kRARIIA cRoSSInG on tRAde Route fRoM vARAnGIAnS to GReekS

© V.D. SARYCHEV, 2017

* Sarychev Viacheslav Dmytrovych, first deputy director of the Zaporizhzhia branch of the National Television Company of Ukraine

A link between the information in archaeological and written sources on circumstances of Prince Sviatoslav’s death in the Dnipro rapids area within the context of situation in Kyiv Rus in 971–972.

K e y w o r d s: rapids part, Khortytsia, Krariia crossing, Kichkas settlement, Dniprobud swords, Voznesenka treasure, Protovcha ford, route from the Varangians to the Greeks.

At least since the Early Iron Age, the Dnipro has been a cultural and economic corridor between Northern Europe and the Black Sea region in the forming of European civilization. In the 9th and 10th centuries AD it became a part of the international trade route from the Varangians to the Greeks. The trade with Byzantium became an important eco-nomic factor in the formation of the Old Rus state and pushed the Kyiv princes to establish control over the land along this route. The local settlements and cities which arose earlier owing to successful trade, gradually formed a new trading infrastruc-ture. The archaeological research of these sites can shed light on the processes of ethnogenesis of the Slavs in the Dnipro River region and the develop-ment of the Dnipro lower region in Old Rus times. However, the state of archaeological sources re-mains unsatisfactory. As a rule, the monuments of this period are the materials from the archaeologi-cal prospecting, badly damaged and almost unex-plored systematically (Телєгін, Бодянський 1990; Козловський 1992). Objectively, this is a conse-quence of the peculiarities of Slavic community life in a nomadic environment. The settlements and fu-neral monuments of the period from the 9th to the 13th centuries are recorded in places not suitable for the nomadic economy: on coastal terraces, numer-ous islands (Сміленко 1975), or in the rapid part of the Dnipro (Телєгін, Бодянський 1990). Ex-actly these territories have undergone considerable

destruction because of economic activity in the 20th century.

Despite this fact, there are many finds which can expand the idea of a settlement near the Kich-kas (Krariia) crossing, a place around the dam of the Dnipro Hydroelectric Power Station (HES) in Za-porizhzhia.

A. Dobrovolskyi eloquently summed up the de-scription of this landscape: «All these rocky cliffs formed a natural bridge that was thrown over from one coast to another» (translation by the author). In his opinion, there were enough primitive instruments to carry out communications between the banks, moving from rock to rock (Добровольський 1929, с. 63–64, 103–105).

The depths around the shelves did not exceed an arshin (Павлович 1862, с. 32). The archaeologi-cal data confirm the presence of an ancient cross-ing of the Scythian time (Павлович 2001). It is not surprising that along with the crossing in 1928, a Slavic settlement, which had been localized on the right bank, in the district of Kichkas village and above the Sahaidachnyi tract on the left bank, was discovered and partially explored. The area on the right bank is localized between the rocks Bohatyr (opposite the Three Stacks) and Velyka (somewhat higher than the modern engine room of the HES) (Добровольський 1929, с. 144). The places of 59 dugouts, some of which had «street» planning, were specified. The structures were mainly square-shaped at the bottom and had columnar construc-tions in the corners and stone stoves. The loca-tion of settlements on different banks of the cross-ing indicates that the main task of the inhabitants was to maintain the crossing. The Chersonites were actively using the crossing, as evidenced by Con-stantine Porphyrogenitus: «This they pass at the so­called ford of Vrar, where Chersonites cross over from Russia and the Pechenegs to Cherson; which ford is as wide as the Hippodrome, and, measured upstream from the bottom as far as the rocks break surface, a bow­shot in length. It is at this point, therefore, that the Pechenegs come down and attack the Russians»

Ukrainian Archaeology, 2016 67

(Constantine Porphyrogenitus 1985, p. 61). Ac-cording to Mykhailo Miller, a participant of the Dniprelstan Expedition, during the cleaning of the riverbed section «many different things were found at the place of the ferry, including bronze, silver and gold coins: Pontic, Olbian, Bosporan, Greek, Ro­man, Arabic, Kyivan, Tatar and Western­European» (Міллер 1951, с. 7) (translation by the author).

However, the limited scope of the research did not give more data, as during the excavations, the Dnipro HES builders destroyed the settlement. This complicates the chronological definition of the object. For instance, A.O. Kozlovskyi estab-lished its date within a wide period: from the 10th to the 14th centuries.

In 1930, on the Dnipro left bank, during earth-works at the highest point over the Krariia cross-ing, the remains of a small earthen fortification, 82 × 51 m in size, were found. Their height did not exceed 0.8 m. In the inner part, the remains of a cremation with bones, stones, and arrowheads were found, as well as a cylindrical pit with a depth down to 0.9 m and a diameter up to 0.7 m. It was filled with many metal objects, topped with three sabres. 50 iron strings, 20 iron bridle bits, buckles,

rings and other parts of horse harness, ornament-ed with silver and gold incisions were also discov-ered. This find is known in the literature as «Kich-kas (Voznesenka) treasure». It counted up to 1500 golden items: mainly decorative plaques and lumps of molten metal with a total weight over 1200 kg. Plaques were decorated with sophisticated jewel-lery technique: grain and filigree, and some were created with stamp. They were intended mostly to decorate the military shoulder belt and horse-drawn harness. Among the finds were the golden rings, cuffs, and other parts from the sheaths for sabres, quivers, bows, saddles, and other military equipment. Most of the items had traces of stay-ing in the fire, and many of them were completely destroyed by fire and survived in the form of gold and silver shapeless metal pieces. Among the silver items, an eagle’s figure with a snake in its paws has preserved the best. There is a carved monogram in the form of a cross on the chest of an eagle, with the letters on its edges being components of the name «Petros». Judging from the location, this advanced stronghold, which had stone structures on the earth rampart, related to the settlement, since it gave an opportunity to observe the territory at a distance of

Fig. 1. Archaeological findings of the Kyiv Rus period in the southern part of the Dnipro rapids

Fig. 2. A sward of 2011: before the restoration (a); af-ter the restoration (b)

а б

Ukrainian Archaeology, 201668

tens of kilometres around and to clearly control the Krariia crossing from the east coast.

Among the variety of versions, there is an opin-ion that the figures of an eagle and a lion with Byz-antine stamps and inscriptions from the «Kichkas treasure» are the flags’ standards’ tops. H.I. Shapo-valov calls these unique items a military trophy of Prince Sviatoslav (Шаповалов 2002). Despite the controversy in the chronology and attributions of the assemblage, the recent research by A.V. Bilet-skyi likely relate it to the 10th century (Білецький 2012).

Another fortified settlement was found on the island of Khortytsia. According to Constan tine Porphyrogenitus, Rus people stopped there (Баг-ря но родный 1989, с. 49). Among the Khortyt-sia antiquities of the Khazars and Kyiv Rus time, Protolche settlement of the 10th–14th centuries is the most explored and related to another section of the crossing which is in the southern part of the island (Лаврентьевская летопись 1926–1928, стлб. 277–278; Ипатьевская летопись 1908, стлб. 253, 742).

Consequently, the archaeological data and writ-ten sources indicate that there was a conglomera-tion of settlements with commercial, economic, religious, and military infrastructure around the Krariia crossing during the Old Rus period. There was a transport hub: a crossroads of river and land

trade routes. Together with another group of arte-facts, it broadens the understanding of the causes of constant Pechenegs’ attacks and the importance of controlling the crossing area at any cost.

In 1928, the five 10th century swords were found in the construction pit for the dam of the Dnipro HES at the left bank in a layer of silt and sand at a depth of about 5.0 m. (Грінченко 1928, с. 22). One sword (No. 5) has no handle and a broken blade. The swords № 1 and № 2 are of type «S», and № 3 and № 4 are of type «T». All swords had a brand: three with a brand in the form of the in-scription «+ ULFBERH + T», two with a brand in the form of crosses. The iron crosses and pom-mel had rich ornamentation in the form of a cov-ering with non-ferrous metals. In another place at the Dniprobud, a mailed armour was found: a shirt and pants (Чернышев 1963, с. 211). The sixth sword was raised from the river bottom near the northern part of Khortytsia by Zaporizhzhian fish-erman S.B. Piankov in 2011 (fig. 4–6), at the dis-tance about 2.0 km from the place where the five Dniprobud swords had been found. It is very likely that it was moved along with a mass of sand dur-ing the Dnipro HES construction, and then dur-ing its demolitions in 1941 and 1943. The mas-sive discharge of water from the dam caused a su-pernaturally powerful flow that set off the bottom sediments and destroyed archaeological sites that

Fig. 3. Hilt of a sward 2011 (before the restoration) Fig. 4. Cross-guard during the restoration

Ukrainian Archaeology, 2016 69

were undiscovered. The sword could have been dis-placed by hundreds of meters. The likelihood of this is confirmed by the long-standing practice of hydro-archaeological research in the Khortytsia region. Thus, there is certainly the unprecedented concentration of swords of the same type and peri-od on a relatively small area.

The sword raised in 2011 is also branded «+ ULFBERH + T». According to the main charac-teristics (size, the form of a blade, pommel, cross-ing) and different classifications, it refers to:

– subtype V, according to J. Peterson;– subtype VII (the guard is different), accord-

ing to R. Veller;– subtype 11 (by the pommel), according to

A. Heybig (Петерсен 2005; Андрощук 2013).The technique of jewellery decoration of met-

al parts of the hilt fully corresponds to the exam-ples of the most complicated decoration of the 10th century swords known in Europe. The decora-tion of the sword of 2011 in the form of a geomet-ric ornament from thin strips of various metals that evoke the effect of «flickering» on the pommel and crossing, has similar analogies on the swords from Kashyn and Vakhrushev. In general, about three dozen samples with a similar decoration technique are known in Europe (Кирпичников 1966, с. 31; Петерсен 2005, табл. III). Such «parts» of weap-ons were made by the craftsmen of higher qualifi-cation, but even they could hardly create two per-fectly identical works.

The scientists, metallurgists, and connoisseurs of weapons from several countries carried out a study of the phenomenon of ULFBERHT swords. The most detailed conclusions belong to Alan Wil-liams, who carried out a thorough typological and technological analysis of 44 available samples with a mentioned brand (Viking Sword, 2012). It turned out that the arrangement of letters and signs was of fundamental importance. Blades with the brand + ULFBERH + T were made of a unique cruci-ble steel, which had no analogues in Europe. It was of better quality compared to steel from which the other swords of the period from the 8th to the 11th centuries were produced. The blades with the stamps «ULFBERHT», but with a different ar-rangement of letters and crosses, were made of less qualitative iron by the bloomery process and by the method of cementation or damasking. Only 11 swords of 44 studied samples were made of crucible steel. It was proved by the experiment that it was smelted at a temperature of about 3000 °С (Wil-liams 2009). It is believed that this technology was mastered by the metallurgists of Central Asia who supplied metal to Europe in the 8th–11th centuries.

The most likely centre for manufacturing this type of swords was the Rhine middle region. Appraising the quality of steel and decoration, Williams calls this type of swords the «Rolls-Royce» of the Mid-dle Ages. Only upper-class people could possess such a sword, as each sword was worth a fortune.

Such concentration of the 10th century elite swords is a direct evidence for non-trivial events, among which is the death of Sviatoslav in March 972. The cuts on the blades and a sword with a bro-ken blade and lost handle argue for the version of the military clash. The sword of 2011, found slight-ly to the south and closer to the west coast, marks the possible places of collisions. There is another circumstance which points at the possible «fight-ing losses» of swords: none of them has remains of sheathes, which would probably be preserved in fresh water. It looks like they got into the water in the «combat appearance», i.e. without the covers. Everything almost entirely corresponds to the con-tent of a miniature in the Radziwill Chronicle de-picting Sviatoslav and his warriors with bare swords on a boat, on the fast-moving Dnipro (Саричев 2012). It was the key value of the area of the Krari-ia crossing and the desire to control the main trade routes being the most likely reasons for the Prince Sviatoslav’s campaign to this region in 971–972.

Thus, all the known archaeological finds allow considering this area as the most important in com-

Fig. 5. Hilt of a sward 2011 (after the restora-tion)

Ukrainian Archaeology, 201670

parison with other places of crossings. In the 10th century, a whole group of settlements, that were associated with the work of crossings, and proba-bly of local markets, had appeared. Khortytsia was also an important religious centre, and those who stopped on the island needed repair and security in-frastructure. At the same time, a process of Chris-tianization of this topos began, which is reflected in the Greek name of the island named in honour of the Christian Saint Gregory (in other lists of Saint George). In general, the settlements around the Krariia crossing should be considered in the con-text of the settlements at the Lower Dnipro, the Black Sea north, and the Azov regions function-ing on the trade routes of the 9th and 10th centu-ries. Those settlements had the economic and po-litical relations with the central authorities forming in Kyiv and were the hallmarks of active develop-ment of the Ukrainian south-eastern region in the Middle Ages.

Андрощук Ф. Мечи викингов. К., 2013.Багрянородный К. Об управлении империей. – М. : Нау-

ка, 1989.Білецький А.В. Вознесенське поховання: проблема інтер-

претації. Проблеми археології Подніпров’я. Дніпропе-тровськ, 2012.

Грінченко В. Дослідження на дільниці Дніпра від Кічка-су до Вільного порогу на Запоріжжі. 1928 рік. Нау­ковий архів Інституту археології НАН України, ф. 18, № 30.

Добровольський А. Звіт за археологічні досліди на терито-рії Дніпрельстану р. 1927. (Околиці с. Кічкасу Запо-різької округи). Збірник Дніпропетровського краєвого історично­археологічного музею. Дн-ське, 1929, т. 1, с. 61–162.

Ипатьевская лѣтопись. Полное собраніе русскихъ лѣтописей. Изданіе второе. СПб, 1908, т. 2.

Кирпичников А.Н. Древнерусское оружие. Выпуск первый. Мечи и сабли IX–XIII вв. М.; Л., 1966.

Козловський А.О. Історико-культурний розвиток Південно-го Подніпров’я в IX–XIV ст. К.: Наукова думка, 1992.

Лаврентьевская летопись. Полное собрание русских ле-тописей. Издание второе. Л.: Из-во Академии Наук СССР, 1926–1928, т. 1.

Міллер М. Могила князя Святослава. Winnipeg: Культура і освіта, 1951.

Остапенко М.А. Пам’ятки осілості скіфського часу на ост-рові Хортиця. Археологія. 2001, № 1, с. 139–145.

Павлович В. Материалы для географіи и статистики Рос-сии, собранные офицерами генерального штаба. Ека теринославская губернія. СПб, 1862.

Петерсен Я. Норвежские мечи эпохи викингов. Типох-ронологическое изучение оружия эпохи викингов. СПб: Альфарет, 2005.

Саричев В.Д. Мініатюра Радзивилівського літопису в сис-темі джерел про останній бій князя Святослава. Му­зейний вісник. Запоріжжя, 2012, № 12.

Сміленко А.Т. Слов’яни та їх сусіди у степовому По-дніпров’ї: 2–13 ст. К., 1975.

Телєгін Д.Я., Бодянський О.В. Список археологічних па-м’я ток дніпровського Надпоріжжя (Дніпропетров-ська й Запорізька області). К., 1990.

Чернышев Н.А. О технике и происхождении «франкских» мечей, найденных на Днепрострое в 1928 году. Скан­динавский сборник. Таллин, 1963, VI.

Шаповалов Г.І. Останній бій князя Святослава. Урядовий кур’єр. 2002, 7 вересня, № 164.

Alan Williams. A Metallurgical Study of Some Viking Swords. Gladius XXIX (2009), p. 121–184.

Constantine Porphyrogenitus. De administrando imperio. Greek text edited by Gy. Moravcsik. English translation by R.J.H. Jenkins. Washington, 1985. Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies Trustees for Harvard Uni-versity.

Viking Sword (Ulfberht), фільм National Geographic 2012: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AciPmtBew8