The study of Western European influence on the early Russian chronicle tradition was made by B., following A.A. Shakhmatov, including a new analysis of the ‘Korsun Legend’. The author examined a connection between the ‘Legend’ and the chronicle tradition, emphasizing the specific character of the first one, noting its hagiographic character. B. set a number of questions about the chronicle evidence of earlier embassies to Western Europe by Vladimir's predecessors, for example, Princess Olga. The author noted that, taking into account the repeated reports (for example, in the Hildesheim and Quedlinburg Annals) about the Reginon of Libutia, whom Emperor Otto sent to Russia, a number of evidence from the Primary Chronicle can be considered close to historical reality. Thus, the point of view about the complete legendary nature of the events was refuted. As confirmation of some information related to Vladimir, B. cited the Chronicles of Bruno of Querfurt and Titmar of Merseburg. He believed that the available evidence of Anna's influence on the baptism of Vladimir appears first in the Chronicle of Titmar of Merseburg. He also believed that the storyline about the baptism of Constantine, written by Amartol, was partially used. B. emphasized that the borrowing from Amartol most likely came to Russia indirectly, through Western Europe, since there are many differences. B. also points to the influence of the legend of the baptism of Clovis, which came down in the compilation of the eighth century, Liber Historiae Francorum.