Constantine Porphyrogenitus' account, it is further argued, explains also the foreign policy of the Rus which followed logically from their economic interests. The rulers in Kiev strove to gain foreign markets and to protect the lifelines of trade leading to those markets. The Kievan state depended above all on the great north-south commercial route "from the Varangians to the Greeks" which formed its main economic and political
axis, and it perished with the blocking of this route. The famous Russian campaigns against Constantinople, in 860, under Oleg in 907, under Igor in 941 and 944, under Sviatoslav in 970, and in the reign of Iaroslav the Wise in 1043, demonstrate in an especially striking manner this synthesis between trade and foreign policy. Typically, wars began over such incidents as attacks on Russian merchants in Constantinople and ended with trade pacts. All the Russo-Byzantine treaties which have come down to us exhibit a commercial character. Furthermore, their provisions dealing with trade are both extremely detailed and juridically highly developed, constituting in fact an engaging chapter in the history of international relations and international law. Russian commercial interests, it may well be noted, obtained various advantages from these agreements; and they were considered in Constantinople not as private enterprise but as trade missions of the allied Kievan court.
Full evidence for a history of Kievan commerce goes, of course, far beyond Constantine Porphyrogenitus' narration and even beyond the significant story of Russo-Byzantine relations. Its main points include trade routes and activities in southern Russia prior to the formation of the Kievan state, a subject expertly treated by Rostovtzeff and some other specialists. Attention must also be drawn to the widespread commercial enterprises of the East Slavs themselves long before the time of Oleg, as well as to the fact that at the dawn of Kievan history they already possessed many towns. Saveliev, for instance, estimates that the trade of the East Slavs with Oriental countries, which extended to the borders of China, dates at least from the seventh century a.D. Some Russian weights and measures were borrowed from the east, notably from Mesopotamia, while others came originally from Rome. Similarly, to the west at an early date the East Slavs established trade relations with their closer neighbors and also with some more remote European countries, like Scandinavia. With the flowering of the Kievan state, Russian trade continued to grow, and on an impressive scale. Its complexity and high degree of development find strong reflection, for example, in the eleventh-century legal code, The Russian Justice.
Whereas the traditional estimate of Kievan economy stresses commerce, a different interpretation emphasizing agriculture has more recently risen into prominence. Grekov was the ablest exponent of this view, and his work was continued by other Soviet historians. These scholars carefully delineated the early origin of agriculture in Russia and its great complexity and extent prior to as well as after the establishment of the Kievan state. In point of time, as mentioned earlier, agriculture in southern Russia goes back to the Scythian ploughmen and even to a neolithic civilization of the fourth millennium before Christ. The past of the East Slavs also testifies to their ancient and fundamental link with agriculture. For example,
linguistic data indicate that from deep antiquity they were acquainted with various kinds of grains, vegetables, and agricultural tools and implements. Their pagan religion contained the cults of mother earth and the sun, and their different beliefs and rites connected with the agricultural cycle survived in certain aspects of the worship of the Virgin and of Saints Elijah, George, and Nicholas, among others. The East Slavic calendar had its months named after the tasks which an agricultural society liying in a forest found it necessary to perform: the month when trees are cut down, the month when they dry, the month when burned trees turn to ashes, and so on. Archaeological finds similarly demonstrate the great antiquity and pervasiveness of agriculture among the East Slavs; in particular they include metallic agricultural implements and an enormous amount of various grains, often preserved in separate buildings.
Written sources offer further support of the case. "Products of the earth" were mentioned as early as the sixth century in a reference to the Antes. Slavic flax was reported on Central Asiatic markets in the ninth century, where it came to be known as "Russian silk." Kievan writings illustrate the central position of agriculture in Kievan life. Bread emerges as the principal food of people, oats of horses. Bread and water represent the basic ration, much bread is associated with abundance, while a drought means a calamity. It should be noted that the Kievan Russians knew the difference between winter grain and spring grain. The Russian Justice, for all its concern with trade, also laid extremely heavy penalties for moving field boundaries. Tribute and taxes too, while sometimes paid in furs, were more generally connected to the "plough" as the basic unit, which probably referred to a certain amount of cultivated land.
Grekov and other Soviet historians argued further that this fundamental role of agriculture in Kievan economy determined the social character of the prince and his druzhina and indeed the class structure of Kievan society. They emphasized the connections of the prince and his retainers with the land, as shown in references to elaborate princely households, the spread of princely and druzhina estates throughout Kievan territory, and nicknames associated with the land. They considered that Kievan Russia was developing into a fully feudal society, in the definition of which they stressed the prevalence of manorial economy.
It can readily be seen that the evidence supporting the significance of trade in Kievan Russia and the evidence urging the importance of agriculture supplement, rather than cancel, each other. Both occupations, then, must be recognized as highly characteristic of the country. But the interrelationship of the two does present certain difficulties. One view holds that the bulk of population supported itself by agriculture, whereas the prince and the upper class were mainly interested in trade. Other specialists stress
the evolution in time, suggesting that, while Constantine Porphyrogenitus' account may be a valid guide for the middle of the tenth century, subsequent Kievan development tipped the scales increasingly in favor of agriculture. Furthermore, there is no consensus on the social structure of Kievan Russia which is intimately related to this complicated economic picture.
Kievan exports, as has already been mentioned in the case of Byzantium, consisted primarily of raw materials, in particular furs, wax, and honey, and also, during the earlier part of Kievan history, of slaves. Other items for sale included flax, hemp, tow, burlap, hops, sheepskin, and hides. In return the Kievan Russians purchased such luxury goods as wines, silk fabrics, and objects of art from Byzantium, and spices, precious stones, and various fine fabrics from the Orient. Byzantium also supplied naval stores, while Damask blades and superior horses came from the east. From the west the Kievan Russians imported certain manufactured goods, for instance textiles and glassware, as well as some metals and other items, such as Hungarian horses. Russian merchants went abroad in many directions and foreign traders came in large numbers to Russia, where they established themselves, sometimes as separate communities, in Kiev, Novgorod, Smolensk, Suzdal, and other centers. The newcomers included Germans, Greeks, Armenians, Jews, Volga Bulgars, merchants from the Caucasus, and representatives of still other nationalities. Russian traders themselves were often organized in associations similar to Western guilds, not to mention less formal groupings. Financial transactions and commercial activity in general enjoyed a high development. It should be added that, in addition to exchange for direct consumption, the Kievan Russians engaged in transit trade on a large scale.