Analysis of surviving sources In
History of Ukraine-Rusʹ Volume 2 (1899), Ukrainian historian
Mykhailo Hrushevsky tentatively reconstructed the events of the Kiev campaign of 1173 in the
Kievan Chronicle, remarking that it had 'an epic tone and a pompous, rhetorical style.' Polish historian Jaroslaw Pelenski analysed in 1988 that the 1171–1173 Kievan succession crisis and Kiev campaign of 1173 were 'described in three interrelated narrations incorporated in the
Kievan Chronicle: • The Beginning of the Princely Reign of Volodimer in Kiev (columns 566–68); • The Beginning of the Princely Reign of Roman Rostislavič in Kiev (columns 568–72); • The untitled
skazanie about the Kiev campaign of 1173, the most extensive of the three (columns 572–78).' Pelenski noted that the Kievan
skazanie is highly partisan, heavily criticising Andrey Bogolyubsky in religious-ideological terms, including Biblical quotations, for being under the influence of the
devil, committing the
cardinal sin of pride, arrogance, haughtiness, and boasting, for which God supposedly punished him with a humiliating defeat. By comparison, the
Suzdalian Chronicle has very little to say, limiting itself to a few sentences in half a column. On the one hand, the editor(s) of the
Kievan Chronicle apparently had no issues with including ideologically contradictory narratives in its compilation – blaming the 1169 Sack of Kiev ordered by Andrey on the city's inhabitants' own "sins", and glorifying Andrey's piety after his assassination in 1174, but virulently rebuking him for his 1173 Kiev campaign and siege of Vyshgorod – as long as it gave an inclusive history of all of Kievan Rus'. On the other hand, Pelenski argued that the compilers of the
Suzdalian Chronicle were much more selective, usually limiting themselves to events concerning Vladimir-Suzdal, and giving them their own political and ideological twists as needed. The
Novgorod First Chronicle (NPL) has an even shorter account than the
Suzdalian. The only significant differences include that, according to the NPL, the coalition forces – consisting of only Novgorodians and Rostovians, and mentioning only
Andrey's son Yury, then
prince of Novgorod – are said to have besieged Vyshgorod for 7 weeks rather than 9, and that the Novgorodian troops 'came back all well to
Novgorod', apparently not having suffered heavy casualties, and not saying anything about having been defeated.
Order of battle The
Kievan and
Suzdalian chronicles agree that the coalition army of Andrey included at least twenty princes, led by his son
Yury Bogolyubsky and voivode Boris Zhidislavich. The
Suzdalian account specifically mentions the participation of Novgorodians, Rostovians, and Suzdalians; the
Novgorod First only Novgorodians and Rostovians. The much more detailed account in the
Kievan Chronicle lists 'troops from Rostov, Suzdal', Vladimir, Perejaslavl', Beloozero (Belozersk), Murom, Novgorod, and Rjazan'. And counting them, [Andrey] found there were fifty thousand of them', a number Pelenksi found 'apparently inflated', and Raffensperger &
Ostrowski (2023) called 'clearly a typical exaggeration'. The
Kievan Chronicle goes on to narrate that the coalition army marched from Suzdalia, passing by Smolensk; there, its prince
Roman Rostislavich 'was forced to send his son with warriors of Smolensk against their brothers, because he did not want to reveal his plans [to Andrej], since he was then under Andrej's power.' Roman thus had plans to turn on Andrey, but had to play along for now. Thereafter, Andrey is said to have ordered the Polotsk princes (or
Polovtsi) and the princes of Turov, Pinsk and Goroden (or Gorodets) to go along as well, and then passing by the
Olgovichi (probably at
Chernigov), they joined forces and all went to Kiev, crossing the
Dnieper. The situation for Kiev was critical. Both
Kievan and
Suzdalian chronicles state that, when it became known that the enemy army was approaching Kiev, Mstislav decided not to defend the capital, but instead the princely troops locked themselves in neighbouring towns and cities. Rurik sat down in Belgorod (modern
Bilhorod Kyivskyi),
Mstislav Rostislavich in Vyshgorod, and David went to
Galich (modern
Halych) to ask for help from 'Yaroslav', although which Yaroslav is unclear, nor whether his appeal was successful or not. The
Novgorod First Chronicle briefly confirms that the Novgorod–Rostov forces drove the Rostislavichi away from Kiev, and that a siege of Vyshgorod happened thereafter.
Battle and siege of Vyshgorod The
Kievan Chronicle goes into some length regarding the combat operations, specifying that once the coalition forces arrived at Vyshgorod, there was pitched battle with the Rostislavichi and Kievans on 8 September. Thereafter, the defenders retreated into Vyshgorod, and Andrey Bogolyubsky's troops laid siege to the hill fortress. The description of the actual siege is very brief: 'And they attacked every day and [the others] attacked [them] from the city. They were fighting heavily and many good men of Mstislav's retinue were wounded and killed.' After 9 weeks, they learned that prince
Yaroslav Iziaslavich of
Lutsk was coming to the city with allied Galician-Volynian forces. After negotiations, his right to Kiev was recognised by the Rostislavichi. Yaroslav also negotiated and reached an agreement with Sviatoslav Vsevolodich, causing the Olgovichi of Chernigov to defect from the coalition to the Kievan side. On the night of 18 to 19 December, near Vyshgorod, Bogolyubsky's coalition army was completely defeated by Kievans, Volhynians and perhaps Galicians under the command of Mstislav Rostislavich and Yaroslav Iziaslavich. Bogolyubsky's coalition army fled and fragmented, with all groups of soldiers going to their own homes. Andrey's grandiose campaign ended in failure, which meant that he lost power and influence in Kievan Rus'. The Rostislavichi gave the throne of Kiev to the eldest prince of Lutsk, Yaroslav Iziaslavich. == Aftermath ==