The study in Russian historiography of the problem of Russian-Mongolian relations of the XIII-XV centuries. repeatedly became the subject of consideration by many scientists, mainly of the Soviet period, when a sufficient number of opinions and points of view accumulated both on individual periods and problems, and on the generalizing conclusions of the conceptual plan. Historiographic reviews of different goals and objectives are contained in the works of B.D. Grekov and A.Yu. Yakubovsky, A.N. Nasonova, M.G. Safargalieva, L.V. Cherepnina, V.V. Kargalova, N.S. Borisova, G.A. Fedorova-Davydova, I.B. Grekova, D.Yu. Arapova, A.A. Arslanova, P.P. Tolochko, A.A. Gorsky, V.A. Chukaeva. A distinctive feature of these historiographic excursions is that they are mostly devoted to the historiography of the 19th - early 20th centuries, and speak very sparingly of later works. In addition, in this historiographic series there are no works of recent times. Thus, the author sees one of his tasks in supplementing the historiography of the "Mongolian question" with an analysis of the latest literature.
At the same time, we do not aim to list all the works of the past and present years, in which certain conflicts of Russian-Mongolian relations are mentioned and / or an assessment is given to them. Historiographic discrepancies on certain specific issues will, of necessity, be set forth in the relevant chapters. We consider the following as our main task: to trace the most important directions of Russian historical thought on this one of the most significant and defining problems of Russian history, which, in turn, allows (together with source observations and analysis) to develop the basis for the author's study of the topic "Russia and the Mongols ".
1
There are a number of rather highly politicized subjects in Russian historiography. So, in the field of early Russian history, this is the “Norman problem”. This also includes the question of the Mongol-Tatar invasion and yoke. The vast majority of Russian historians have considered and are considering them mainly from the point of view of political content, for example, the subordination of the institute of princely power to the Mongols, as well as the “fall” for the same reason of other ancient Russian power structures. Such a one-sided approach entails a certain modernization of the relationship between the ethno-state structures of the Middle Ages, the interpolation of interstate relations of the new and modern times on them, and ultimately, as we see it, a certain discrepancy in understanding the situation as a whole.
The origins of this kind of perception can already be seen in the reports of the chroniclers, who also added a strong emotional coloring. The latter, of course, is understandable, because the original records were made either by eyewitnesses who survived the tragedy of the invasion, or from their words.
In fact, in Russian historiography, the isolation of the problem of "Tatars and Rus" dates back to the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th century. Its understanding and interpretation must be associated with "the process of self-affirmation of the Russian mentality", "an expression of the intensive growth of national self-consciousness" and "an unprecedentedly high patriotic upsurge." These socio-psychological foundations for the formation of the Russian national culture of modern times directly influenced the formation of Russian national historiography, its initial "romantic" period. Hence the highly emotional and dramatic, even tragic perception of the events of ancient Russian history, especially such as the Mongol-Tatar invasion and the yoke.
N.M. succumbed to the charm of Russian chronicles, tragically vividly depicting the Batu invasion and its consequences. Karamzin. His perception of the events of distant times is no less emotional than contemporaries or eyewitnesses of the events themselves. Russia is "a vast corpse after Batyev's invasion" - this is how he defines the immediate results of the Mongol campaigns. But the state of the country and the people under the yoke: it, “having exhausted the State, having swallowed up its civil well-being, humiliated humanity itself in our ancestors, and left deep, indelible marks for several hundred centuries, irrigated with the blood and tears of many generations.” The stamp of sentimentality is present even when N.M. Karamzin turns to sociological generalizations and conclusions. “The shadow of barbarism,” he writes, “clouding the horizon of Russia, hid Europe from us...”, “Russia, tormented by the Moghuls, strained its forces solely in order not to disappear: we had no time for enlightenment!” The Horde yoke as the reason for Russia's lagging behind the "European states" - this is the first main conclusion of N.M. Karamzin. The second conclusion of the historiographer relates to the internal development of Russia in the "Mongolian centuries". It does not correspond to what was said before, does not follow from it and, moreover, contradicts it, for, it turns out, the Mongols brought to Russia not only “blood and tears”, but also good: thanks to them, internecine strife was eliminated and “autocracy restored”, Moscow itself was "owed its greatness to the khans." "Karamzin was the first historian to single out the influence of the Mongol invasion on the development of Russia as a large independent problem of domestic science."
The views of N.M. Karamzin were widely used among contemporaries, which will be discussed below. For now, we are interested in their ideological origins. We have already pointed out one: it is the elevated socio-psychological and ideological atmosphere in Russia at the beginning of the 19th century. But there was another.
When analyzing the literature used by N.M. Karamzin in the III and IV volumes of the "History of the Russian State", a fairly frequent mention of the work of the French Orientalist historian of the 18th century is striking. J. De Guignes "General history of the Huns, Turks, Mongols and other Western Tatars in antiquity and from Jesus Christ to the present", published in 4 volumes in 1756-1758. (volume 5 appeared in 1824). J. De Guignes defines the Mongols and their place in world history as follows: “The people who caused a great upheaval and who then formed an empire, the most extensive of all that we know, were not at all a civilized people, nor did they seek to spread the wisdom of their laws . This was a barbarian people who went to the most distant countries only to seize all the riches, enslave peoples, return them to a barbaric state and make their name awesome.
The work of J. De Guignes was the most significant and popular study of Mongolian history in Europe in the 18th century. As you can see, N.M. Karamzin, not alien to European enlightenment, fully accepted the latest Western European scientific developments in the ancient history of the East.
But Europe influenced the study of Russian history not only from the outside, but also from the inside. We have in mind the activity in the first decades of the 19th century. Russian Academy of Sciences. Historical science in the first quarter of the 19th century. was in the Academy in obvious decline. Scholars of German origin, who were part of the department of history, were mainly engaged in auxiliary historical disciplines (numismatics, genealogy, chronology), and their works on Russian history were published in German. Elected in 1817 by Academician Kh.D. Fren was also a numismatist, a specialist in Oriental (Juchid) coins. But he caught, so to speak, the spirit of the times. The fact is that “it was precisely in the first decades of the 19th century. in France, England, Germany, the first oriental scientific societies arise, special oriental journals begin to be published, etc.” H.D. Fren was able to look more broadly than his predecessors at the problems facing Russian historical science. He became the founder of the Russian school of Oriental studies, and his previous studies of Mongolian problems determined the top priorities of Russian Oriental studies. X. Fren was aware of all the oriental literature of his time and, as the largest historian of the Golden Horde, had firm views on the role of the Mongol conquest in the history of Russia,” noted A.Yu. Yakubovsky. In 1826, the Academy of Sciences announced a competition on the topic “What were the consequences of the domination of the Mongols in Russia and exactly what effect did it have on the political relations of the state, on the form of government and on its internal administration, as well as on the enlightenment and education of the people?” The task was followed by recommendations. “For a proper answer to this question, it is required that it be preceded by a complete description of the external relations and internal situation of Russia before the first invasion of it by the Mongols, and that it should subsequently be shown exactly what changes were made by the rule of the Mongols in the state of the people, and it would be desirable that, in addition to scattered testimonies contained in the Russian chronicles, a comparison of everything that can be gleaned from eastern and western sources regarding the then state of the Mongols and their treatment of the conquered peoples was placed.
Undoubtedly, a grandiose prospect opened up before the researchers. Actually, the very formulation of the problem and explanations to it remain relevant to this day almost without changes. Their scientific literacy is undeniable. But already in this initial task there was a certain predestination: the installation on the "domination" of the Mongols in Russia is determined in advance, although it was precisely the proof or refutation of this that should have become the main task of stimulated research.
This trend became more pronounced later on. The competition of 1826, as is known, did not lead to the desired result and was resumed at the suggestion of H.D. Frena in 1832. The Academy of Sciences again presented the work written by H.D. Fren "Program of the task", more extensive than in the first case. The introduction was also longer. “The dominion of the Mongol dynasty, known to us under the name of the Golden Horde, among the Mohammedans under the name of the Ulus of Jochi, or the Genghis Khanate of Deshtkipchak, and among the Mongols themselves under the name of Togmak, which was once for almost two and a half centuries the horror and scourge of Russia, which held it in bonds of unconditional enslavement and having waywardly disposed of the crown and life of its Princes, this dominion should have more or less influence on the fate, structure, decrees, education, customs and language of our fatherland. The history of this dynasty forms a necessary link in Russian history, and it goes without saying that the closest knowledge of the first not only serves to the most accurate understanding of the latter, in this memorable and ill-fated period, but also contributes a lot to clarifying our concepts of the influence that Mongol rule had on resolutions and folk life in Russia.
Comparing the "tasks" of 1826 and 1832, one can note a certain shift in emphasis. Firstly, much more space is now given to the need to study the actual history of the Golden Horde; secondly, only the previously outlined focus on the “dominion” of the Mongols in Russia is now developing into a whole concept. It is said (in the spirit of the “Norman problem”) about the “Mongolian dynasty”, which forms “an essential link in Russian history”. The "horror and scourge" of Russia - the Mongol khans - kept it "in the bonds of unconditional enslavement", and "wilfulness" disposed of the "crown and life" of the princes. In addition, attention is also drawn to the transition, so to speak, to the Karamzin style of presentation (which is worth the same "horror and scourge", etc.).
Thus, the foundation was laid for the future - not only in the 19th, but also in the 20th century. - research on the Russian-Horde problems. The views of N.M. Karamzin, set forth by him in the IV and V volumes of the "History of the Russian State", and the academic competitions of 1826 and 1832 gave a strong impetus to the study of the topic "Russia and the Mongols". Already in the 1920s and 1940s, many works appeared that directly or indirectly developed certain judgments of scientific authorities. In 1822, the first book on this topic was published. Bringing to the point of absurdity the thought of N.M. Karamzin about slowing down historical development Russia as a result of the Mongol yoke, the author writes that the influence of the Mongols affected all levels of public life and contributed to the transformation of Russians into "Asiatic people". The same topic becomes relevant on the pages of the periodical press (moreover, the most popular magazines), asserting itself, therefore, as a socially significant one.
However, in a number of works of the same time, a different direction is seen than that of N.M. Karamzin and Kh.D. Fren. Thus, denying any benefit from the “Tatar domination”, M. Gastev further writes: “The autocracy itself, recognized by many as the fruit of their dominion, is not the fruit of their dominion, if even in the 15th century the princes divided their possessions. Rather, it can be called the fruit of the specific system, and most likely the fruit of the duration of civil life. Thus, M. Gastev was one of the first to question Karamzin's "concept of slowing down" the natural course of the social development of Russia, due to the intervention of the Mongols. Objections and one's own vision of the Mongol period in Russia can also be seen in the works of N.A. Polevoy and N.G. Ustryalova.
Considerations of a similar nature were put forward by S.M. Solovyov as the basis of his understanding of the time of the Russian Middle Ages. It is difficult to say how much the historiographical situation influenced him. Obviously, he proceeded primarily from his own concept of the historical development of Russia. “Since for us the subject of first importance was the change of the old order of things with a new one, the transition of tribal princely relations into state relations, on which the unity, power of Russia and the change in the internal order depended, and since we notice the beginning of a new order of things in the north before the Tatars, then Mongolian relations should be important to us insofar as they helped or hindered the establishment of this new order of things. We notice, - he continued, - that the influence of the Tatars was not the main and decisive one here. The Tatars remained to live far away, cared only about the collection of tribute, not interfering in any way with internal relations, leaving everything as it was, therefore, leaving those new relations that began in the north before them in complete freedom to operate. Even more clearly, his position as a scientist on the “Mongolian question” was formulated in the following words: “... a historian has no right to interrupt the natural thread of events from the second half of the 13th century - namely, the gradual transition of tribal princely relations into state ones - and insert the Tatar period, to bring to the fore the Tatars, Tatar relations, as a result of which the main phenomena, the main causes of these phenomena, must be closed. In his "History of Russia from Ancient Times" the great historian concretizes and details these general provisions.
With regard to S.M. Solovyov is attracted to the Russian-Mongolian theme by the balanced and conceptual approach. This was expressed accordingly in the absence of emotional assessments, which, as we have seen, the previous historiography was filled with, and in an attentive attitude to the development of precisely internal “original” (as his Slavophil contemporaries would say) processes. A look at the historical development of Mongolian Rus S.M. Solovyov, thus, was a new scientific concept of this period and became an alternative to the previously prevailing point of view of Karamzin-Fren. However, this line did not die either. This is due to the extremely successful development of Russian oriental studies. Moreover, Russia is becoming the only country where Mongolian studies are taking shape as an independent scientific discipline. In the middle - second half of the XIX century. it was represented by such names as N.Ya. Bichurin, V.V. Grigoriev, V.P. Vasiliev, I.N. Berezin, P.I. Kafarov, V.G. Tizenhausen.
V.G. Tizenhausen in 1884 noted that “the study of the Mongol-Tatar period since then (since academic competitions. - Yu.K.) has managed to move forward in many ways ... ". But at the same time, “the absence of a solid, possibly complete and critically processed history of the Golden Horde, or the Jochid ulus ... constitutes one of the most important and sensitive gaps in our everyday life, depriving us of the opportunity not only to get acquainted with the course of affairs and the entire structure of this vast and a kind of semi-steppe power that controlled the fate of Russia for more than 2 centuries, but also to correctly assess the degree of its influence on Russia, determining with certainty what exactly this Mongol-Tatar rule reflected in us and how much it actually slowed down the natural development of Russian people."
How to comment on the presented by V.G. Tizenhausen the historiographical situation? Of course, firstly, despite the “advancement” of the problem, the awareness of the unsatisfactory scientific level of previous studies (primarily due to the unusedness of the entire known fund of sources), and, secondly, the author clearly has “old prejudices”, because “the ideological platform ” remains basically the same - at the level of Karamzin and Fren.
Actually, the Karamzinskaya line found the most prominent representative in the person of N.I. Kostomarov. Exploring the "Mongolian problem", he approaches it, as it was inherent in him, on a large scale - against the backdrop of the history of all Slavs. “Wherever the Slavs were left to their own devices, there they remained with their primitive qualities and did not develop any stable social system suitable for internal order and external protection. Only a strong conquest or the influence of foreign elements could lead them to this,” he wrote in one of his seminal works. These provisions even A.N. Nasonov called "fantastic theory". But, based on them, N.I. Kostomarov, inheriting N.M. Karamzin, explained the origin of autocratic power in Russia by the Tatar conquest. The legacy of N.M. Karamzin is felt in another passage: under the Mongols, “the sense of freedom, honor, consciousness of personal dignity disappeared; servility to the higher, despotism over the lower became the qualities of the Russian soul”, there was a “fall of the free spirit and the stupefaction of the people”. In general, for N.I. Kostomarov, with the conquest of the Mongols, "the great upheaval of Russian history began."
So, from the middle of the XIX century. The "Mongolian question" becomes one of the most important topics in Oriental and Russian medieval studies. In the second half of the century, two main ways of its study were formed. The first, going back to the traditions laid down by N.M. Karamzin and Kh.D. Fren, and presented by a number of prominent Mongol scholars of that time, proceeds from the significant, and at times decisive and all-encompassing role of the Mongols in medieval Russian history. The second is associated with the name, first of all, S.M. Solovyov, as well as his successors, among whom the names of V.O. Klyuchevsky, S.F. Platonov, and in the first third of the XX century. M.N. Pokrovsky and A.E. Presnyakov. For these scientists, the main thing remains the natural course of the inner life of medieval Russia, which was not subject, at least in a cardinal way, to changes. So S.F. Platonov considered the Mongol yoke only "an accident in our history"; therefore, he wrote, “we can consider the inner life of Russian society in the thirteenth century. not paying attention to the fact of the Tatar yoke.
In a word, there was no unambiguity in the Mongolian question either in general or in specific subjects. This gave rise to one of the Orientalists of the early 20th century. to sum it up like this: "It is hardly possible to point to any other issue in Russian history that has been so little developed as the question of the Tatars."
2
Soviet historiography, thus, found the "Mongolian question" unresolved unambiguously, moreover, solved in a diametrically opposite way. For some time, the Mongolian period did not attract much attention of Soviet historians, and the works published in the late 1920s and early 1930s were mainly based on the widespread (and not yet debunked) theory of M.N. Pokrovsky. The situation began to change by the end of the 1930s, after the most important discussions on a number of problems in the history of Russia had passed, the class-harmful bourgeois concepts of Russian history were thrown off the “steamer of modernity”, and the Marxist doctrine was strengthened. After the approval of the concept of B.D. Grekov about the class feudal nature of ancient Russian society, the turn has come for the next - medieval - period in the history of Russia. It was then that the first Marxist works appeared, devoted to the period of the thirteenth and subsequent centuries. In 1937, a thematically special, but popular science work by B.D. Grekov and A.Yu. Yakubovsky "Golden Horde", consisting of two parts: "Golden Horde" and "Golden Horde and Russia".
The book was destined to give an answer to the question - how should one understand, study and present the problem of "Russia and the Mongols" in Soviet historical science. In this regard, the authors followed the path that has already become traditional for Marxist historiography. They turned to the classics of Marxist thought, specifically to the statements of K. Marx, as well as I.V. Stalin. “We have the opportunity to make sure more than once,” writes B.D. Grekov, - how Marx regarded the influence of the Golden Horde authorities on the history of the Russian people. In his remarks, we do not see even a hint of the progressive nature of this phenomenon. On the contrary, Marx sharply emphasizes the deeply negative influence of the Golden Horde power on the history of Russia. Marx also quotes that the yoke “lasted from 1257 to 1462, i.e., more than 2 centuries; this yoke not only crushed, it insulted and withered the very soul of the people who became its victim. I.V. spoke even more clearly and definitely. Stalin (this was done in connection with the Austro-German invasion of Ukraine in 1918): "The imperialists of Austria and Germany ... carry on their bayonets a new, shameful yoke, which is no better than the old, Tatar one ...".
This approach and the assessment by the classics of Marxism-Leninism of medieval Russian-Mongolian relations had a direct impact on all subsequent Soviet historiography. But was there anything fundamentally new in the judgments of the ideologists and politicians of the 19th and 20th centuries? on the problem we are considering? Apparently not. Indeed, with the exception of the "Karamzin" thesis about some positive features of the development of Russian statehood, in general, in the perception of the "Mongolian question" by the classics, the provisions of Karamzin - Kostomarov are repeated. It also speaks of the negative impact of the yoke on the social and spiritual life of medieval Russia, and rather emotionally.
So, the already tested path was "offered" to Soviet historical science. However, unlike the previous historiographical period, there was no alternative to this path. The rigid framework of possible interpretations of Russian-Horde relations should not have allowed any radically different understanding of them.
However, returning to the work of B.D. Grekov and A.Yu. Yakubovsky, it should be said that they themselves are not inclined to exaggerate the influence of the Mongols on either the economic, political or cultural development of Russia. So, A.Yu. Yakubovsky, criticizing H.D. Fren for his interpretation of the impact of the Golden Horde period on the course of Russian history, writes the following: “For all the merits that Fren has to science, it cannot be overlooked that for his historical consciousness the question was not posed differently ... For Fren, the Golden Horde remains only "ill-fated period", and only from this side is of scientific interest. “No matter how heavy the power of the Golden Horde Mongol khans in feudal Russia,” the scientist continues, “now it is impossible to study the history of the Golden Horde only from the point of view of the extent to which it was a “horror and scourge” for the history of Russia.” However, B.D. Grekov writes: “In the process of the hard struggle of the Russian people against the oppression of the Golden Horde, the Muscovite state was created. It was not the Golden Horde that created it, but it was born against the will of the Tatar Khan, against the interests of his power.” These two theses about the struggle of the Russian people and about the creation of a unified Russian state against the will of the Mongols, in fact, contained a specific program for the upcoming scientific research.
Portion of criticism of "Mongolian views" M.N. Pokrovsky was also in the article by A.N. Nasonov “The Tatar yoke in the coverage of M.N. Pokrovsky” in the well-known collection “Against the anti-Marxist concept of M.N. Pokrovsky. True, the author used this "tribune" to a greater extent to present his own concept of Russian-Horde relations. This was also emphasized by A.N. Nasonov. “Turning to the criticism of the views of M.N. Pokrovsky,” he wrote, “let us note that our task will be not so much to evaluate the works of Pokrovsky in order to determine the place he occupies in our historiography, but to test his views on concrete historical material.”
A little later, the concept of A.N. Nasonov will be issued already in the form of the book "Mongols and Russia". The work of A.N. Nasonov will become a milestone for the Soviet historiography of the "Mongolian question".
Anticipating his own formulation of the question, he not only criticizes, but, based on the socio-political conditions of his time, explains the reasons for the "general assessment of the significance of the Tatar yoke in Russia" of his predecessors. “Apparently,” he believes, “in the pre-revolutionary situation, the idea of the active policy of the Russian princes in the Horde was more easily perceived than the idea of the active policy of the Tatars in Russia, even by those historians who attached great importance to the Tatar yoke. Modern historians XIX - early XX century. Russia was a state with the class of the Great Russian center dominating over other peoples of the East European Plain. To a certain extent, they unwittingly transferred the idea of contemporary Russia to the old days. They willingly discussed the results of the policy of the Russian princes in the Horde, but the question of the Tatars in Russia was not studied or touched upon in passing. In most cases, they were of the opinion that the passive behavior of the Mongols contributed to the process of the state unification of Russia.
His reasoning about the influence of social conditions on the formation of "pre-revolutionary" concepts of Russian-Horde relations can be fully applied to the ideological origin of his own concept. Firstly, despite the fact that “the problem of studying the history of the Tatar policy in Russia is posed” by him “for the first time”, “the formulation of such a problem follows from the indications of the “traditional policy of the Tatars”” given by K. Marx in the book “The Secret History of Diplomacy XVIII century." This is the first impetus for subsequent constructions. Secondly, the ideological essence of A.N. Nasonov is explained by the social conditions of the time, of which he was a contemporary. “We prove,” he says, “that the Mongols pursued an active policy and the main line of this policy was expressed not in the desire to create a single state from a politically fragmented society, but in the desire to prevent consolidation in every possible way, to support the mutual strife of individual political groups and principalities. Such a conclusion suggests that a single "Great Russian" state, as we see it in the 17th century, was formed in the process of fighting the Tatars, that is, in the 15th-16th centuries, partly in the second half of the 16th century, when the struggle was possible according to the state of the Golden Horde itself. Consequently, “the formation of a centralized state was, therefore, by no means as a result of the peaceful activities of the Mongols-conquerors, but as a result of the struggle against the Mongols, when the struggle became possible, when the Golden Horde began to weaken and decay, and a popular movement arose in the Russian Northeast for the unification of Russia and for the overthrow of the Tatar domination.
Having analyzed a large number of Russian (mainly annals) and eastern (in translation) sources, A.N. Nasonov came to the following specific conclusions: 1) the internal political life of Russia in the second half of the 13th - early 15th centuries. decisively depended on the state of affairs in the Horde; the changes that took place in the Horde certainly entailed a new situation in Russia; 2) the Mongol khans constantly manipulated the Russian princes; 3) popular uprisings took place against the Mongols, but they were suppressed.
Book by A.N. Nasonova became the first monograph in Russian historiography entirely devoted to the topic "Russia and the Mongols", and most of her conclusions became the basis for the subsequent development of the problem. Moreover, it can be said that it still remains in this “role”: many (if not most) of its provisions are accepted as axioms in modern historiography. Therefore, thanks to the work of B.D. Grekov and A.Yu. Yakubovsky and the monograph by A.N. Nasonov, first of all, "Soviet historiography of the 30s - early 40s developed ... a unified scientifically based view of the consequences of the Mongol-Tatar invasion as a terrible disaster for the Russian people, which for a long time delayed the economic, political and cultural development of Russia" ; this was also due to the fact that for many decades a regime of “systematic terror” was established in Russia, wrote A.A. Zimin, fully accepting the scheme of A.N. Nasonov. Thus, as A.A. Zimin, "the study of the struggle of the Russian people against the Tatar-Mongolian enslavers is one of the important tasks of Soviet historical science."
An example of solving this problem is the fundamental work of L.V. Tcherepnin, Formation of the Russian Centralized State. In the chapters on the socio-political history of medieval Russia, its history is closely intertwined with the Horde theme. Peru L.V. Cherepnin also wrote an article about the initial period (XIII century) of Mongol dependence in Russia.
“Having suppressed the courageous and stubborn resistance of the peoples, the Mongol-Tatar invaders established their dominance over the Russian land, which had a detrimental effect on its future destinies.” In general, the researcher formulates the question of this “perniciousness” as follows: “the Mongol invasion of Russia is not a single fact, but a continuous long process that led the country to exhaustion, causing it to lag behind a number of other European countries that developed in more favorable conditions.” Already in the XIII century. the "Russian" policy of the Mongol khans is revealed, "aimed at inciting inter-princely strife, strife, internal wars." Although the Horde did not break (“could not break”) the “political order” that existed in Russia, it sought to put them “at its service, using in its own interests the Russian princes, who seemed to them reliable, exterminating the unreliable and all the time pushing the princes against each other to prevent anyone from gaining strength and to keep everyone in fear.
However, “the Horde khans acted not only in intimidation. They tried to rely on certain social forces; gifts, benefits, privileges to attract a part of the princes, boyars, clergy. This, according to L.V. Cherepnin, played a certain role: “some representatives of the ruling class went over to the service of the conquerors, helping to strengthen their dominion. But not everyone did so. And among the feudal elite - princes, boyars, clerics - there were enough people who resisted the foreign yoke. But they did not determine the "mode" of the fight against the enemy. “The active force in the fight against the Mongol-Tatar oppression was the masses. Throughout the thirteenth century there was a people's liberation movement, anti-Tatar uprisings broke out, ”representing, however, not“ organized armed resistance ”(which will happen only by the end of the 14th century), but“ separate spontaneous disparate performances ”.
This is how an authoritative researcher of the 13th century sees it. How much has changed in the XIV century.? The events of the century in relation to Russian-Mongolian relations are presented (and rightly so!) by L.V. Cherepnin is ambiguous. Before us is a detailed picture of that complex and dramatic era.
However, the first decades of the XIV century. not much different from the last 13th century. The scientist writes: “In the first quarter of the XIV century. the Tatar-Mongolian yoke weighed heavily on Russia. Fighting for political primacy in Russia, individual Russian princes did not oppose the Golden Horde, but acted as executors of the Khan's will. As soon as they stopped doing this, the Horde dealt with them. The struggle against the Horde was waged by the people themselves in the form of spontaneous uprisings, which arose mainly in the cities. The princes had not yet tried to lead the liberation movement of the townspeople. For this, they did not yet have the proper material prerequisites and forces. But the support of the cities to a large extent determined the success of certain princes in the political struggle with each other.
The same processes remained dominant during the time of Ivan Kalita. So, the uprising in Tver in 1327 was raised "by the people themselves, contrary to the instructions of the prince of Tver ...". In general, “under Kalita, the Russian feudal lords not only made no attempt to overthrow the Tatar-Mongol yoke (the time had not yet come for this), but this prince brutally suppressed those spontaneous popular movements that undermined the foundations of the Horde’s rule over Russia.”
Some changes are observed in the following decades. In the 1940s and 1950s, while still recognizing the supreme power and regularly paying the “exit”, the princes achieved “non-interference of the Horde Khan in the internal affairs of their possessions”. Thanks to this, these years become a time of "a certain strengthening of the independence of a number of Russian lands." This, as well as the internal struggle in the Golden Horde itself, lead to the fact that in the 60-70s of the XIV century. there is a "gradual weakening of the power of the Golden Horde over Russia." However, since the turn of the 60-70s of the XIV century. in connection with the intensified Tatar raids, “the resistance of the Russian people to the Horde invaders also intensified”, and the “Nizhny Novgorod Principality” becomes the “center of the national liberation struggle”. Ultimately, this "rise" led to "a decisive battle" on the Kulikovo field. Assessing the reign of Dmitry Donskoy L.V. Cherepnin writes about "a significant intensification of the foreign policy of Russia": if earlier the Russian princes ensured the security of their possessions by paying tribute to the khans, then "now they are already organizing a military rebuff to the Horde force." Dmitry Donskoy "tried to achieve" silence "for Russia, not only with the people's ruble, but also with the sword." Having “elevated” this prince in this way, L.V. Cherepnin hurries to make a reservation right there: “However, before Dm. Donskoy raised this sword, the Russian people have already risen to fight the Tatar yoke. And yet, "Prince Dmitry more consistently than his predecessors supported an alliance with the townspeople", which was due to the growth of their importance, primarily in socio-economic development. Dmitry Donskoy "objectively", thus, contributed to the rise of the people's liberation movement.
In the studies of L.V. Cherepnin devoted to the period of Horde dependence, a number of thoughts are clearly visible that develop the views of his predecessors. The first is princely-khan relations, mainly dependent on the khan's will and, in general, on the events taking place in the Horde. The second is an emphasis in relation to the Mongols of a deep class abyss between the princes (and other feudal lords) and the people. At the same time, certain successes in the inter-princely struggle depended on the latter, mainly on the townspeople. Of course, specific situations in one way or another changed the alignment of the noted parties, but always, according to L.V. Cherepnin, their original opposition was preserved: the prince - the khans, the feudal lords - the people (townspeople) and, of course, Russia - the Horde. At the same time, it is necessary to note a certain research flexibility, which allows the scientist in his conceptual scheme of events to take into account data that, at first glance, contradict the main trend of research (which, however, remains unchanged).
This distinguishes the works of L.V. Cherepnin from the somewhat straightforward conclusions of other Russian historians, whose works were contemporary with them or were published in subsequent years. So, I.U. Budovnits wrote the following very emotionally: “... In the most terrible decades of the Tatar yoke, which came after the bloody pogrom of Batu, the preaching of servitude, servility and groveling before the carriers of foreign oppression emanating from the clergy and the ruling feudal class, the people managed to oppose their fighting ideology based on intransigence towards the invaders, on contempt for death, on the readiness to sacrifice one's life in order to free the country from the foreign yoke.
Having considered the historiographical situation in the “Mongolian question” that had developed by the mid-1960s, V.V. Kargalov came to the conclusion that it was necessary to create a "special study" specifically about the period of the Mongol-Tatar invasion of Russia. These were the chapters of thematically and chronologically more general of his work.
The main goal of V.V. Kargalov is to maximize the "field" of the problem within the 13th century: chronologically, territorially, and finally, socially. As for the first task, “the consequences of the Mongol-Tatar invasion of Russia are considered not as the result of only Batu’s campaign, but as a consequence of a whole series of Tatar invasions that lasted several decades (starting with the Batu pogrom).” On the whole, I think that it is true and justified: the Mongol detachments still repeatedly appear in Russia. But V.V. Kargalov is a priori interested in only one aspect: "This formulation of the question makes it possible to more fully imagine the devastating consequences of the Mongol-Tatar conquest."
Expanding the "territorial field", V.V. Kargalov also contributes. If “the question of the consequences of the invasion for the Russian city,” he believes, “is well developed by Soviet historians,” then “the situation is somewhat worse with the study of the consequences of the invasion for the rural areas of feudal Russia. Having studied the written and archaeological data, V.V. Kargalov came to the conclusion that both the cities and the "productive forces of the Russian feudal village" were "dealt a terrible blow" by the Mongol invasion.
How did the population of the Russian lands react to these disasters: the nobility and the people? V.V. Kargalov continues the practice of their "bifurcation", outlined in previous works. The “policy of agreement” of the Tatars with the “local feudal lords”, “cooperation of the Tatar feudal lords”, their “alliance” among themselves, at best, “a certain compromise” - such is the picture of Russian-Mongolian relations in the second half of the 13th century. at the level of "feudalism" of two ethnic groups.
But unlike his predecessors, V.V. Kargalov proposes to consider this “compromising policy” of the Russian princes not locally (both in relation to individual princes and other “feudal lords” of certain Russian lands), but extends such conclusions to “Russian spiritual and secular feudal lords” as a whole. “The Russian feudal lords,” he concludes, “quickly came to an agreement with the Horde khans and, recognizing the supreme power of the khan, retained their “tables” and power over the oppressed classes.”
The attitude towards the Horde people was different. “The policy of cooperation with the Mongol-Tatar conquerors, which was pursued by a significant part of the Russian feudal lords, was opposed by the masses with an irreconcilable attitude towards the rapists. Despite the terrible consequences of the "Batu pogrom" and the policy of their own feudal lords, who conspired with the Horde khans, the Russian people continued to fight against the foreign yoke.
This alignment of social forces has led to at least two consequences. The first was that "anti-Tatar and anti-feudal motives were closely intertwined in the speeches of the lower classes." The second is that it is precisely “the struggle of the Russian people against the foreign yoke ... North-Eastern Russia owes its special position in relation to the Horde Khan. Not the "wise policy" of the Russian princes, but the struggle of the masses against the Mongol conquerors led to the elimination of "bessermenstvo" and "Basqueism", to the expulsion of numerous "tsarist ambassadors" from Russian cities, to the fact that Russia did not turn into a simple "ulus" of Golden Hordes. Under the oppressive foreign yoke, the Russian people managed to preserve the conditions for their independent national development. This is one main conclusion of the work of V.V. Kargalov. Another sums up the invasion. “The study of the history of Russia after the Mongol-Tatar invasion inevitably leads to the conclusion about the negative, deeply regressive influence of foreign conquest on the economic, political and cultural development of the country. The consequences of the Mongol-Tatar yoke were felt for several centuries. It was this that was the main reason for Russia's lagging behind the developed European countries, the elimination of which required the titanic efforts of the industrious and talented Russian people.
The work of V.V. Kargalov is a new milestone in the development of the national historiography of the "Mongolian question". She very clearly pointed out the main plots of Russian-Horde relations in the 13th century. and their perspective. Between Russia and the Horde there was an armed tough confrontation, between the princes (and other "feudal lords") and the people - irreconcilable class contradictions. At the same time, another aspect of the problem is the preservation of a certain (within the framework of feudal development) political independence of the Russian lands.
We see the development of this kind of research trends in the monograph by V.L. Egorova. Its main task is to study the historical geography of the Golden Horde in the XIII-XIV centuries. - is closely linked, in particular, with the military-political relations of Russia and the Horde. Along with the confirmation of a number of provisions already established in Russian historiography, for example, about “the undivided power of the Mongols and the absence of active resistance from the Russian princes” in the period before 1312 or that the period of 1359-1380. "characterized by a steady increase in the military and economic power of the Russian lands", the author puts some questions in a new way or emphasizes well-known ones more.
First, we see a clear division of "the main stages of the Mongolian policy in Russia." Secondly, it seems important to us the assertion that this policy "was not connected with the seizure and exclusion of new land territories." The Russian lands, therefore, according to the reasonable opinion of the researcher, were not included in the actual territory of the Golden Horde. And in the same connection is the concept of "buffer zones" introduced by him into scientific circulation, "limiting the Russian borders from the south." Finally, thirdly, emphasizing that the main goal of the Horde's policy "was to obtain the greatest possible tribute", and the Russian lands were "in the position of semi-dependent territories subject to tribute." At the same time, this status not only did not interfere, but, on the contrary, stimulated the military dictate of the Mongol khans over Russia. Therefore, "throughout the entire existence of the Golden Horde, the Russian principalities were forcibly drawn into the orbit of the political and economic interests of the Mongols."
The results of the consideration in the latest domestic historiography of the "Mongolian question" were summed up in the article by A.L. Khoroshkevich and A.I. Pliguzov, anticipating the book of J. Fennel about Russia 1200-1304. “The question of the impact of the Mongol invasion on the development of Russian society is one of the most difficult in the history of Russia. The extreme lack of sources makes it difficult to answer it, so the appearance of such works becomes quite possible, in which any impact of the invasion on the development of Russia is denied. Most historians, however, are of the opinion that the foreign yoke delayed the economic, social and political development of Russia, the completion of the formation of feudalism, reviving the archaic forms of exploitation.
Along with this conclusion, which, however, does not contain any innovations, the authors propose the formulation of some relevant problems that they consider to be relevant. Without a doubt, they are such and are both for solving private and general issues of Russian-Horde relations. But at the same time, we note that the “Mongolian question” as a whole is far from being resolved in principle. By no means do not seem frivolous and unscientific concepts, which before, having criticized, it was possible, simply speaking, to brush aside, citing their scientific inconsistency. In our historiography in such an unenviable role for a long time was the concept of L.N. Gumilyov.
The relationship between Russia and the Mongols is considered by L.N. Gumilyov against a broad background of foreign policy, largely based on the ethnic and confessional relations of that time. The invasion of Batu's troops for the scientist is not some kind of turning point in the history of Russia. It was a "Mongol raid", or "a big raid, not a systematic conquest, for which the entire Mongol Empire would not have had enough people"; it "in terms of the scale of the destruction produced is comparable to the internecine war, common for that turbulent time." “The Grand Duchy of Vladimir, which let the Tatar army through its lands, retained its military potential,” and “the destruction caused by the war” is “exaggerated.”
Subsequently, "in Great Russia they agreed that the Russian land became the land of "Kanovi and Batyev", that is, they recognized the suzerainty of the Mongol Khan." This situation suited both the Mongols and the Russians, since "it was justified by the foreign political situation." What was "suzerainty" for Russia? “... The Mongols, neither in Russia, nor in Poland, nor in Hungary, did not leave garrisons, did not impose a constant tax on the population, did not conclude unequal treaties with the princes. Therefore, the expression "a conquered but not conquered country" is completely wrong. The conquest did not take place, because it was not planned”; "Russia was neither subjugated nor conquered by the Mongols", and "Russian land became part of the Dzhuchiev ulus, without losing autonomy ...". “This system of Russian-Tatar relations that existed before 1312 should be called a symbiosis. And then everything changed ... ". The changes occurred as a result of the adoption of Islam by the Golden Horde, which L.N. Gumilyov calls "the victory of the neighboring Muslim super-ethnos, which in 1312 took possession of the Volga and Black Sea regions." “Great Russia, in order not to perish, was forced to become a military camp, and the former symbiosis with the Tatars turned into a military alliance with the Horde, which lasted more than half a century - from Uzbek to Mamai.” Its political essence was that the Russian princes “demanded and received military assistance against the West (Lithuania and the Germans) for the tribute they paid. - Yu.K.) and had a strong barrier that protected them from impending strikes from the East.
The subsequent confluence of circumstances (internal and external) has already made it possible to lay the "foundation of the future greatness of Russia."
The concept of "Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe" L.N. Gumilyov in many ways goes back to the idea of "Eurasianism" and its specific historical development, primarily in the works of G.V. Vernadsky. (L.N. Gumilyov, as is well known, called himself “the last Eurasian”.) “Eurasianism” now, unlike in the past decades, is actively present in Russian social and scientific thought. He is "opposed" by the concept of Russian-Mongolian relations, formed by our historical science in the late 30s - 60s-70s. How significant are the differences between these concepts? If you pay attention to the details, then, of course, there will be a lot of inconsistencies and disagreements. And if you look more broadly and voluminously?
Both concepts recognize, to one degree or another, the dependence of Russia on the Mongols, which is obvious. But the "Eurasian" view presupposes the status of the Russian lands as a "Russian ulus", i.e. their entry into the main territory of the Golden Horde. However, no "stagnation" in the internal life of Russia came from this. Moreover, she was enriched by many acquisitions in various spheres of social, political, cultural and even ethnic life.
Most domestic historians believed and still believe that Russia, as a territory and society, did not become the territory of the "Juchi ulus". As noted by V.L. Egorov, between the "indigenous" lands of North-Eastern Russia and the Golden Horde, there were so-called "buffer zones", in fact delimiting the Russian and Mongolian areas. But at the same time, this did not alleviate the situation of Russia. Russia found itself under the heavy Horde "yoke", which lasted almost two and a half centuries. The "yoke" threw the country, which was in line with the all-European development, for several centuries, causing its backwardness and specificity in the future. These are the positions of the currently opposing historiographic parties in the "Mongolian question".
It seems to us that, despite the external antagonism, there are no insurmountable obstacles between them. But for this it is necessary to somewhat soften their provisions regarding the internal state and development of Russia "under the yoke". There is no doubt that assessments of relations as “friendly” or “benevolent” did not correspond to reality. There was a confrontation between two ethno-social systems (although, perhaps, they were close in their basis), and the confrontation was tough. On the other hand, we believe that the view of Russian-Horde relations as a "total" subordination of Russia to the Horde, expressed in the form of constant "terror" in relation to the population and the prince, is at least somewhat exaggerated.
This is not about defending the Mongol-Tatar policy in Russia, we are not striving for any kind of apologetics for the Mongol-Tatars. (It seems that the history of any ethnic group does not need protection and patronage, because in the history of all peoples there is positive and negative, "black" and "white", if the question can be put that way at all.) We are talking about creating the most complete picture of Russian - Horde relations, complete and balanced, without ideological and other distortions in one direction or another. We are also talking about an attempt to explain some (all, apparently, fail) elements of relations (their origins, causes), which do not always fit into the rationalistic schemes that are familiar to us. Religious ideas, norms of customary law, everyday life, rituals - all this (along with "classical" economic and political relations, of course) must be taken into account when studying Russian-Horde relations.
Not only economic, social and political systems came into contact, not only the nomadic and sedentary worlds, but also worldview systems: ideological and mental. Without taking into account the latter, our perception of the events and phenomena of that time becomes impoverished and becomes inadequate to medieval realities.
Raids, assaults, violence clearly simplify Russian-Horde relations, as they generally simplify the internal development of Russia itself, in many respects reducing it only to the imposed influence of the Mongol-Tatar orders.
The essays proposed below are intended to show the common and the different, what connected or separated the two large social systems of the Eurasian Middle Ages. Ultimately, an attempt to move from the interpretation of Russian-Horde relations as a continuous struggle to an interpretation that involves multilateral and multi-level interaction.
Notes
. Grekov B.D., Yakubovsky A.Yu. 1) The Golden Horde (Essay on the history of the Ulus Ju-chi during the period of formation and flourishing in the XIII-XIV centuries). L., 1937. S. 3-10, 193-202; 2) The Golden Horde and its fall. M.; L., 1950. S. 5-12; Nasonov A.N. The Tatar yoke in the coverage of M.N. Pokrovsky // Against the anti-Marxist concept of M.N. Pokrovsky. Part 2. M.; L., 1940; Yakubovsky A.Yu. From the history of the study of the Mongols in Russia // Essays on the history of Russian oriental studies. M., 1953. S. 31-95; Safargaliev M.G. The collapse of the Golden Horde. Saransk, 1960. S. 3-18; Cherepnin L.V. Formation of the Russian centralized state in the XIV-XV centuries. Essays on the socio-economic and political history of Russia. M., 1960 (Chapter 1. Historiography of the issue of the formation of the Russian centralized state); Kargalov V.V. Foreign policy factors in the development of feudal Russia: Feudal Russia and nomads. M., 1967. S. 218-255; Fedorov-Davydov G.A. Social structure of the Golden Horde. M., 1973. S. 18-25; Borisov N.S. Domestic historiography on the impact of the Tatar-Mongol invasion on Russian culture // Problems of the history of the USSR. Issue. V. M., 1976. S. 129-148; Grekov I.B. Place of the Battle of Kulikovo in the political life of Eastern Europe at the end of the 14th century. // Battle of Kulikovo. M., 1980. S. 113-118; Arapov D.Yu. Russian Oriental Studies and the Study of the History of the Golden Horde // Battle of Kulikovo in the history and culture of our Motherland. M., 1983. S. 70-77; Arslanova A.A. From the history of the study of the Golden Horde according to Persian sources of the 13th - first half of the 15th centuries. in Russian historiography // Problems of socio-economic development of the village of the Middle Volga region during the period of feudalism. Kazan, 1986, pp. 11-130; Tolochko P.P. Ancient Russia. Essays on socio-political history. Kyiv, 1987. S. 165-167; Gorsky A.A. Russian lands in the XIII-XV centuries. Ways of political development. M., 1996. S. 56-57, 107-108; Chukaeea V.A. Russian principalities and the Golden Horde. 1243-1350 Dnepropetrovsk, 1998. S. 4-19.
Cm.: Borisov N.S. Domestic historiography ... S. 140-143; Kargalov V.V. Foreign Policy Factors... S. 253-255.
Cm.: Rudakov V.N. Perception of the Mongol-Tatars in the annalistic stories about the invasion of Batu // Hermeneutics of Old Russian Literature. Sat. 10. M., 2000, etc. Of course, it is necessary to take into account the later editorial processing of the "scribes" ( Prokhorov G.M. 1) Codicological analysis of the Laurentian Chronicle // VID. L., 1972; 2) The story of the Batu invasion in the Laurentian Chronicle // TODRL. T. 28. 1974).
. Stennik Yu.V. On the Origins of Slavophilism in Russian Literature of the 18th Century // Slavophilism and Modernity. SPb., 1994. S. 17, 19, 20; Poznansky V.V. Essay on the formation of Russian national culture: The first half of the 19th century. M., 1975. S. 8 and others.
. Karamzin N.M. History of the Russian State in 12 volumes. T. V. M., 1992. S. 205.
There. T. II-III. M., 1991. S. 462.
There. T. V. C. 201, 202, 208. See also: Borisov N.S. Domestic historiography ... S. 130-132.
There. S. 132.
. Karamzin N.M. History of the Russian State in 12 volumes. T. II-III. S. 751; T. IV. M., 1992. S. 423.
Cit. on: Golman M.I. Study of the history of Mongolia in the West (XIII - mid-XX centuries). M., 1988. S. 40.
There. - Another prominent French Orientalist of the early 19th century became his successor. D "Osson, who published in 1824 in 4 volumes "The History of the Mongols from Genghis Khan to Timur Bek." M.I. Golman believes that he "managed to recreate a broad picture of the Mongol conquests and, most importantly, correctly assess them devastating consequences for the peoples of Asia and Eastern Europe "; as de Guigne's work for the 18th century, the work of D" Osson was "the most significant in Western European historiography on the history of Mongolia in the 19th century. and did not lose scientific value and in the 20th century." (Ibid., pp. 42-43). A look at the Mongols of the 13th century. as conquerors who caused enormous destruction in the countries they conquered, was accepted by bourgeois science when this science was on the rise" ( Yakubovsky A.Yu. From the history of the study of the Mongols ... S. 33). Compare: "After D" Osson, historians, so to speak, vulgarized a negative attitude towards the Mongols and Genghisides "( Kozmin N.N. Preface // D "Osson K. History of the Mongols. T. 1. Genghis Khan. Irkutsk, 1937. C.XXVII-XXVIII).
History of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. T. 2. 1803-1917. M.; L., 1964. S. 189.
About H.D. Frenet see: Saveliev P. On the life and scientific works of Fren. SPb., 1855.
. Golman M.I. Studying the history of Mongolia ... S. 143, approx. 57. - D.Yu. Arapov ( Arapov D.Yu. Russian oriental studies and the study of the history of the Golden Horde. S. 70). See also: Gumilyov L.N. Ancient Russia and the Great Steppe. M., 1989. S. 602-604; Kozhinov V.V. Mysterious pages of the history of the XX century. M., 1995. S. 229, 231-232.
. Yakubovsky A.Yu. From the history of the study of the Mongols ... S. 39.
Collection of acts of the solemn meeting of the Academy of Sciences, which was on the occasion of its 100th anniversary of its existence on December 29, 1826. St. Petersburg, 1827. S. 52-53. - About the prehistory of setting the task and the results of the competition, see: Tizengauzen V.G. Collection of materials relating to the history of the Golden Horde. SPb., 1884. T. 1. S. V-VI; Safargaliev M.G. The collapse of the Golden Horde. pp. 3-6.
. Tizengauzen V.G. Collection of materials relating to the history of the Golden Horde. T. 1. S. 555-563.
There. S. 555.
There. pp. 556-557.
. "The views of H. Fren were then dominant in historical science" ( Yakubovsky A.Yu. From the history of the study of the Mongols ... S. 39). - It is hardly appropriate to say that in the "Program" compiled by H.D. Fren, "the problem of classes and the class struggle was not taken into account, no priority was given to the study of the socio-economic foundations of the Golden Horde state" ( Arapov D.Yu. Russian Oriental Studies ... S. 72).
. Richter A. Something about the influence of the Mongols and Tatars on Russia. SPb., 1822. See also: Naumov P. On the relationship of Russian princes to the Mongol and Tatar khans from 1224 to 1480. St. Petersburg, 1823; Bernhof A. Russia under the yoke of the Tatars. Riga, 1830; Kartamyshev A. On the significance of the Mongolian period in Russian history. Odessa, 1847.
. A.R. Research on the influence of the Mongol-Tatars on Russia // Otechestvennye zapiski. 1825, June; Prandunas G. The reasons for the fall of Russia under the yoke of the Tatars and the gradual restoration of autocracy in it // Bulletin of Europe. 1827. Ch. 155. No. 14; [N. W.] On the state of Russia before the invasion of the Mongols (excerpt) // Son of the Fatherland. 1831. V. 22. No. 33-34; [M.P.] Reasoning about the reasons that slowed down civil education in the Russian state to Peter the Great, essay by M. Gastev. M., 1832 // Telescope. 1832. No. 12; Fisher A. Speech delivered at the solemn meeting of St. Petersburg University by Ordinary Professor of Philosophy A. Fisher, September 20, 1834 // ZhMNP. 1835.4.5. No. 1.
. Gastev M. Reasoning about the reasons that slowed down civil education in the Russian state. M., 1832. S. 131.
. Polevoy N.A. History of the Russian people. SPb., 1833. T. 4. S. 9; T. 5. S. 22-23 and others; Ustryalov N.G. Russian history. Part 1. St. Petersburg, 1855. S. 185, 187-193.
Although it is possible to assume that his view was “a reaction to the exaggeration of the role of the Tatar yoke in Russian history” (Russian history in essays and articles / Edited by M.V. Dovnar-Zapolsky. T. I. B. m., 6. g. S. 589).
. Soloviev S.M. Op. in 18 books. Book. I. History of Russia since ancient times. T. 1-2.M., 1988. S. 53.
There. S. 54.
The concept of the "Mongolian question" S.M. Solovyov was not accepted by Soviet historical science and was sharply criticized. So, N.S. Borisov wrote that in his works “the significance of the Tatar invasion is extremely underestimated, even the very term “Mongolian period” is discarded. In his multi-volume "History of Russia" Batu's invasion occupies only four pages, and about the same - a description of the customs of the Tatars "( Borisov N.S. Domestic historiography ... S. 135).
. Kononov A.N. Some questions of studying the history of domestic oriental studies. M., 1960. S. 3; Golman M.I. The study of the history of Mongolia ... S. 54. - On the subsequent development of Mongolian studies in Russia, see p. 108-118.
. Tizengauzen V.G. Collection of materials relating to the history of the Golden Horde. T. 1. S. IX.
There. S. V. Compare: “The merits of that generation of Orientalists to which Berezin belongs are determined not so much by the fulfillment as by the setting of scientific tasks, and in this regard, a scientist who understood that “Russian Orientalists have the duty of explaining” the Mongolian period of Russian history, and not only in word, but also in deed, he who has proved the consciousness of this duty ... has the full right to the gratitude of posterity ”( Bartold V.V. Op. T. IX. M., 1977. S. 756).
. Kostomarov N.I. The beginning of autocracy in ancient Russia // Kostomarov N.I. Sobr. op. Historical monographs and researches. Book. 5. T. XII-XIV. SPb., 1905. S. 5.
. Nasonov A.N. The Tatar yoke in the coverage of M.N. Pokrovsky. S. 61.
. Kostomarov N.I. The beginning of autocracy in ancient Russia. S. 47.
There. S. 43.
. Platonov S.F. Op. in 2 vols. T. 1. St. Petersburg, 1993. S. 135-139. - Brief description other points of view of Russian historiography of the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. see: Russian history in essays and articles. pp. 589-590. - Reassessment of the "Mongolian heritage" at the end of the 19th century. took place in Western historiography. “In bourgeois historical science, at that time, a revision of views on the past began, including the question of the role of the Mongol conquest. More and more voices began to be heard that previous historians had incorrectly assessed the role of the Mongols and the Mongol conquest in the history of mankind, that it was high time to reassess the previous views in this area, that the Mongols were not at all such destroyers as they thought before, and that, on the contrary, , they brought a lot of positive things into the life of the conquered peoples and countries. This change of progressive views in the field of evaluating the Mongol conquests with reactionary ones captured even the most serious representatives of bourgeois historiography of the late 19th and 20th centuries, ”described from the standpoint of the early 50s of the 20th century. a revolution in the views on the "Mongolian problem" A.Yu. Yakubovsky ( Yakubovsky A.Yu. From the history of the study of the Mongols ... S. 64. See also: Golman M.I. The study of the history of Mongolia ... S. 44, 52).
Unlike the countries of Central Asia, the Caspian Sea and the Northern Black Sea region conquered by the Mongols, which had favorable natural conditions for extensive nomadic cattle breeding, which became the territory of the Mongolian states, Russia retained its statehood. The dependence of Russia on the khans of the Golden Irda was expressed primarily in the heavy tribute that the Russian people were forced to pay to the conquerors.
Having received an idea of the military capabilities of Russia and the readiness of the Russian people to defend their national statehood, the Mongol-Tatars refused to directly include Russia in the Golden Horde and create their own administration in the Russian lands.
In 1243, the brother of the Grand Duke of Vladimir, Yuri Vsevolodich, Yaroslav, who was killed in the City, was summoned to Batu’s headquarters, to whom, after officially recognizing his vassal dependence on the Horde, the Khan handed a label (deed) to the great reign of Vladimir with recognition as the “oldest” prince of North-Eastern Russia . Other princes also received labels for their reigns, who arrived after Yaroslav in the Horde and agreed to perform a series of humiliating procedures emphasizing their vassal "submission to the Khan".
Having retained power in the hands of the princes in their principalities, the khans limited themselves to controlling their vassal loyalty and activities by sending their special representatives, the Baskaks. The latest research does not confirm the previously accepted view of the Basques as a military-administrative form of organizing the rule of the Mongols in Russia. The functions of the Basques were to actively control the actions of the princes. According to the denunciations of the Baskaks, the princes who were “guilty” of anything before the khan were summoned to the Horde or sent to the Russian lands a punitive army.
The Batyev pogrom did not break the will of the Russian people to resist the invaders. It took the khans of the Golden Horde more than ten years to consolidate their dominance over Russia. The western and northwestern Russian lands, which were almost unaffected by the invasion, refused to recognize dependence on the Horde. Southwestern Russia quickly recovered from the pogrom. Daniil Galitsky defiantly refused to appear in the Horde for a label and prepared to continue the fight against it. In the early 50s, Vladimir Grand Duke Andrei Yaroslavich (1249 - 1252) tried to unite all forces hostile to the Horde by concluding an anti-Horde alliance with Daniil-Galitsky and the Tver prince. In the proud words put into his mouth by the chronicler: “It is better for me to flee to a foreign land, than to be friends and serve as Tatars,” reflected the intransigence of the people towards the conquerors. Batu warned the upcoming joint action of the princes by sending punitive troops against them. Near Pereyaslavl, the Horde army of the “Prince” Nevryuy defeated the hastily assembled regiments of Andrei Yaroslavich and the Prince of Tver. Daniil of Galicia managed to repel the punitive army of the “prince” Kuremsa, but in 1259 Southwestern Russia was subjected to a new invasion of the Horde hordes and Daniil Romanovich was forced to admit his dependence on the khan. Ruined and fragmented Russia did not yet have sufficient strength to resist the Horde. The economic and political conditions necessary for the success of the liberation struggle have not yet taken shape.
After the flight of Prince Andrei Yaroslavich abroad, Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky (1252-1263) became the Grand Duke of Vladimir, who, in relations with the khans, strove to proceed from the real balance of forces of Russia and the Horde at that time. Alexander Nevsky considered the main task of Russia to be the fight against the aggression of the crusaders from the west, actively supported by the Roman curia. Despite the severity of the Horde yoke, Russia retained its statehood, the Russian people were not threatened by assimilation by the conquerors. Those who stood at a lower level general development the Mongols could not impose their language and culture on the Russian people. The aggression of the crusaders threatened not only the state, but also the national existence and cultural development of the Russian people.
Concentrating the forces of Russia to repel aggression from the west, Alexander sought to maintain peaceful relations with the khans, not to give rise to new invasions and raids, and, restoring the undermined productive forces and economy of the country, gradually accumulate strength for the future liberation struggle. This course of Nevsky in relations with the Horde for a long time became decisive for the Vladimir, and then Moscow princes. It also met the interests of the bulk of the Russian feudal lords, who preferred to enter into an agreement with the conquerors, to give up part of their income in their favor, but to retain their reigns and estates, power over the people. The church also called for an agreement with the Horde, which received from the khans letters of protection for church property and exemption from tribute.
The liberation struggle against the invaders was hampered by the strengthening of feudal decentralization and the weakening of the grand ducal power. The temporary strengthening of the grand duke's power under Alexander Nevsky, who extended his power to many cities of the Smolensk, Chernigov and Novgorod-Pskov lands, was supported by the khans, who at first needed its strength and authority to assert the Horde's dominance in the lands that were not affected by the invasion, and for assistance in conducting a census and taxing the people with tribute.
After the death of Alexander Nevsky, the title of Grand Duke of Vladimir became an object of struggle between the specific princes, for whom the possession of it was associated primarily with receiving income from the administration of the territory that constituted the "Vladimir inheritance", and suzerainty over the richest cities of North-Western Russia - Novgorod and Pskov.
The weakening of the grand ducal power also occurred in the Galicia-Volyn land, which was divided after the death of Daniel Romanovich of Galicia (1264) into a number of specific principalities. His son Lev Danilovich managed to temporarily unite Southwestern Russia, but cut off from other Russian lands, weakened by internal strife and frequent invasions of the Horde, it became in the XIV century. object of aggression from the Polish, Lithuanian and Hungarian feudal lords.
The khans of the Golden Horde, who sought to prevent the strengthening of individual princes, contributed in every possible way to the feudal fragmentation of Russian lands and the incitement of strife between the princes. The khans confronted princes obedient to them with dangerous and objectionable princes to the Horde, eliminated the latter by murder at the khan's headquarters or by sending punitive armies against them. Having turned the issuance of labels into an object of rivalry and bargaining between the princes, into an instrument of political pressure on them, the khans deliberately violated the order of inheritance of “tables” that had developed in Russia and intervened in princely strife, using them as pretexts for predatory invasions of Russia. Often, the Tatar rati "led" to Russia in the fight against their rivals and the princes themselves, as they had previously "led" the Polovtsians.
In 1257, the Mongolian scribes (“numerals”), relying on the help of the grand ducal administration and the assistance of secular and spiritual feudal lords, carried out a census (recording in the “number”) of the population of Russian lands for the imposition of tribute and duties. By assisting the Horde "numerals" in conducting the census, the Russian feudal lords sought to shift the entire burden of the "imminent tribute" onto the shoulders of the working masses. The tribute sent annually to the Horde (“exit”, “tithe”) was the greatest burden of the Horde yoke. At first, it was collected in kind, but then it was transferred to money (“silver”). The unit of taxation was each urban and agricultural sector. The severity of the constant tribute was exacerbated by the frequent demands of the khans to send them additional large sums (the so-called “requests”. Deductions from trade duties were also in favor of the khan. Yamskaya and underwater duties fell heavily on the peasants, the duty to give “feed” to the passing Horde ranks and their retinue The collection of tribute was given by the khans at the mercy of Muslim merchants (“besermens”), who imposed additional arbitrary taxes on the population, enslaved peasants and townspeople with usurious fetters, and sold insolvent debtors into slavery in the eastern slave markets.
The struggle of the Russian people against the Golden Horde yoke in the second half of the XIII century.
In the forced recognition by the Mongols of the special position of Russia in relation to the Golden Horde, in the refusal of the conquerors to create their own administration in the Russian lands, a huge role was played not only by the heroic resistance of the Russian people during the years of the Batu invasion, but also by its unceasing struggle against the Horde scribes, tribute collectors, arbitrariness and the atrocities of the Baskaks, Khan's ambassadors, who came from the Horde. The liberation struggle of the working people was closely intertwined with the struggle against the Russian feudal lords, who entered into an agreement with the Horde. This was most clearly manifested during the census in 1257, which caused a series of anti-Tatar unrest, during which the townspeople and peasants also cracked down on the feudal lords who assisted the “numerous”. The "numerals" who arrived in Novgorod were forced to seek protection from the Grand Duke from the rebellious urban poor. During these unrest, the posadnik Mikhalka was killed, who, together with the boyars, sought to shift the entire burden of tribute to the "lesser people" ("It is easy for the boyars to create for themselves, but evil for the lesser"). Alexander Nevsky, with the help of other princes, brutally suppressed the uprising. When in 1259 the “numerals” again arrived in the city for the census, the prince again had to take them under his protection and force the Novgorodians to “appear according to the number”. In 1262, the inhabitants of Vladimir, Suzdal, Rostov, Yaroslavl, Pereyaslavl-Zalessky, Ustyug and other cities of North-Eastern Russia revolted. The rebels dealt with the hated "besermen" and local feudal lords who collaborated with the Tatars. Unrest against the Basques and tribute collectors continued in the 70s - 90s of the XIII century. In the course of urban uprisings, veche meetings were revived, which in the hands of the urban people became an instrument of national liberation and anti-feudal struggle.
The khans failed to suppress the liberation struggle of the Russian people with some frightening punitive armies, and they had to make separate concessions. At the end of the XIII century. the collection of tribute was transferred to the Russian princes, and then the Baskaks were also recalled from the Russian cities, which deprived the Horde of the opportunity to directly interfere in the internal political life of the Russian lands. These concessions, wrested in the hard struggle of the people, were of great importance in creating more favorable conditions for eliminating the grave consequences of the Tatar invasions in the country's economy, for starting the struggle for the state-political unity of Russia.
The consequences of the invasion and the establishment of the Horde yoke
The Batu pogrom and the foreign yoke that was then established for two centuries led to a long decline in the economic, political and cultural development of the Russian lands, marked the beginning of their development lagging behind the advanced Western European countries.
Huge damage was done to the basis of the country's economy - agriculture. The old landowning centers of Russia (Kyiv land, the central regions of North-Eastern Russia) were deserted and fell into decay, the inhabitants of which survived death and captivity, left cultivated places and fled to the remote forest thickets of the Upper Volga region, inaccessible to the Tatars, and further north - to the Trans-Volga region . The Mongol-Tatars pushed the borders of Russia to the north and west, including in the huge "Wild Field" stretching from the Northern Black Sea region to the Oka and Ugra, the steppe and forest-steppe lands mastered by the Russian people since ancient times (the Principality of Pereyaslavl in the south, the eastern regions of the Chernigov-Seversk land and the southern regions of North-Eastern Russia).
A severe consequence of the Mongol-Tatar conquest was the division of Russia into its separate parts, which led to a sharp weakening of the active economic and political ties between the northeastern and northwestern Russian lands with the population of the western and southwestern Russian lands, subsequently captured by Polish and Lithuanian feudal lords.
The massive ruin and destruction of Russian cities, the death and captivity of skilled craftsmen led to a decline in the role of cities in the political and economic life of the country, to the loss of many craft skills and technological methods, to the coarsening and simplification of crafts and handicrafts. Disappeared forever or revived only after 150 - 200 years complex types of crafts (filigree, niello, cloisonne enamel, polychrome glazed ceramics, stone carving, etc.). Stone construction in cities stopped, fine and applied arts fell into decay. The connection between urban handicraft and the market weakened, the development of commodity production slowed down, and the emerging trend towards the transformation of handicraft into small-scale production was interrupted. The tribute to "silver" led to its leakage to the Horde and the almost complete cessation of monetary circulation within the Russian lands, which led to the cessation of the development of commodity-money relations that had begun before the Batyev invasion.
A heavy blow was dealt to political and commercial relations with foreign countries. Only the cities of Western and Northwestern Russia (Novgorod, Pskov, Polotsk, Vitebsk, Smolensk) preserved trade relations with the West. North-Eastern Russia retained trade with the East along the Volga route, but it was hampered by the predatory raids of the Horde on Russian trade caravans.
The difficulties of restoring the national economy undermined by the invasion, restoring destroyed cities and villages were aggravated by the departure of a significant part of the national income to the Horde in the form of "tribute", "requests", "commemoration" (gifts) to the khans and the Horde nobility, as well as the incessant raids of the Mongol-Tatars on the Russians. lands that repeated on different scales the disasters of the Batu invasion. Only in the last quarter of the thirteenth century 14 major invasions of Russian lands were made, not counting the many smaller raids undertaken for the personal enrichment of the Horde nobility - “princes”, “temniki”, “ulans”, etc. The most devastating invasion, which Russian chroniclers compared with Batyev, was “ Dudenev's army" to North-Eastern Russia in 1293, when the Mongol-Tatars again "created the whole earth empty."
It took almost a century of hard work and heroic struggle of the people to restore the pre-Mongolian level of the national economy under these difficult conditions and ensure its further rise and development as a necessary basis for the elimination of feudal fragmentation and the creation of a Russian centralized state.
9. Discussions about the Mongol-Tatar yoke in Russia and its consequences
Main dates and events: 1237-1240 p. - Batu campaigns on
Russia; 1380 - Battle of Kulikovo; 1480 - standing on the Ugra River, the liquidation of the Horde domination in Russia.
Basic terms and concepts: yoke; label; baskak.
Historical figures: Batu; Ivan Kalita; Dmitry Donskoy; Mamai; Tokhtamysh; Ivan IP.
Working with the map: show the territories of Russian lands that were part of the Golden Horde or paid tribute to it.
Answer plan: one). main points of view on the nature of the relationship between Russia and the Horde in the XIlI-XV centuries; 2) features of the economic development of Russian lands under the rule of the Mongol-Tatars; 3) changes in the organization of power in Russia; 4) Russian Orthodox church under the conditions of the Horde dominion; 5) the consequences of the domination of the Golden Horde in the Russian lands.
Reply material: The problems of the Horde dominion caused and continue to cause different assessments and points of view in the national historical literature.
Even N. M. Karamzin noted that the Mongol-Tatar domination in Russia had one important positive effect.
vie - it accelerated the unification of the Russian principalities and the revival of the unified Russian state. This gave grounds to some later historians to speak of the positive influence of the Mongols.
Another point of view is that the Mongol-Tatar domination had extremely difficult consequences for Russia, as it threw back its development 250 years ago. This approach allows us to explain all subsequent problems in the history of Russia precisely by the long dominance of the Horde.
The third point of view is presented in the works of some modern historians, who believe that there was no Mongol-Tatar yoke at all. The interaction of the Russian principalities with the Golden Horde was more like an allied relationship: Russia paid tribute (and its size was not so great), and the Horde in return ensured the security of the borders of the weakened and scattered Russian principalities.
It seems that each of these points of view covers only part of the problem. It is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of "invasion" and "yoke":
In the first case, we are talking about the Batu invasion, which ruined Russia, and about the measures that the Mongol khans took from time to time against the recalcitrant princes; in the second - about the very system of relations between the Russian and Horde authorities and territories.
The Russian lands were considered in the Horde as a part of its own territory that had a certain degree of independence. The principalities were obliged to pay a rather significant tribute to the Horde (even those lands that were not captured by the Horde paid it); in preparation for new campaigns, the khans demanded from the Russian princes not only money, but also soldiers; finally, "F!FOY goods" from the Russian lands were highly valued in the slave markets of the Horde.
Russia was deprived of its former independence. The princes of MOI "do not rule, only having received a label for reigning. The Mongol khans encouraged numerous conflicts and strife between the princes. Therefore, in an effort to obtain labels, the princes were ready to take any steps, which gradually changed the very nature of princely power in the Russian lands.
At the same time, the khans did not encroach on the positions of the Russian Orthodox Church - they, unlike the German knights in the Baltic states, did not prevent the population subject to them from believing in their own God. This, despite the most difficult conditions of foreign domination, made it possible to preserve national customs, traditions, and mentality.
The economy of the Russian principalities after a period of complete ruin was restored quite quickly, and from the beginning of the XIV century. began to develop rapidly. Since that time, stone construction has been revived in the cities, and the restoration of temples and fortresses destroyed during the invasion began. An established and fixed tribute was soon no longer considered a heavy burden. And since the time of Ivan Kali-you, a significant part of the funds raised has been directed to the internal needs of the Russian lands themselves.
10. Moscow - the center of the unification of Russian lands
Main dates and events: 1276 - formation of the Moscow principality; 1325-1340 - reign of Ivan Kalita; 1359-1389 P. - reign of Dmitry Donskoy; September 8, 1380 - Battle of Kulikovo.
Historical figures: Daniel Alexandrovich; Ivan Kalita; Dmitry Donskoy; Ivan IP; Vasily IP.
Basic terms and concepts: political center; label to reign; liberty.
Working with the map: show the boundaries of the Moscow principality at the time of its creation and the territory of the expansion of the principality in the XIV-XV centuries.
Answer plan: 1) political and socio-economic prerequisites for the rise of Moscow; 2) the main stages of development of the Moscow principality; 3) the significance of the rise of Moscow and the unification of BOKpyr over Russian lands.
Reply material: The Moscow principality became independent under the son of Alexander Nevsky Daniel in 1276. At that time, no one could imagine that it was Moscow that would become the center of the collection of Russian lands. More real candidates for this role were Tver, Ryazan, Novgorod. However, already during the reign of Ivan Kalita, the importance of the young Moscow principality increased immeasurably.
The main reasons for the rise of Moscow were: its relative remoteness from the Horde; the skillful policy of the Moscow princes; transfer to Moscow of the right to collect tribute; patronage of the Horde khans; the intersection of trade routes in CebePO-Eastern Russia, etc. However, there were two main prerequisites: the transformation of Moscow into the center of the struggle for liberation from the Horde domination and the transfer to Moscow under Ivan Kalita of the center of the Russian Orthodox Church.
There are several main stages in the collection of Russian lands by Moscow. On the first (from the formation of the Moscow principality to the beginning of the reign Ivana Kalyu]>l and his new sons Semyon Proud and Ivan the Red) were pledged ene05-new economical and political power of the principality. on the SECOND (the reign of Dmitry Donskoy and his son Vasily 1) a fairly successful military P. Qot willows confrontation between Russia and the Horde. The largest battles of this period were the battles on the Vozha River (1378) and on the Kulikovo Field (1380). At the same time, the territory of the Moscow state is expanding significantly. The international authority of the Moscow princes is growing (for example, Vasily 1 was married to the daughter of the Grand Duke of Lithuania Vitovt). The third stage (1425-1462) is characterized by a long feudal war between Grand Duke Vasily 11 and his relatives. The main goal of this struggle was no longer to defend the leading position of Moscow, but to seize power in the Muscovite state, which was gaining strength and weight. Of great importance was the transformation of the Russian Orthodox Church into the world center of pra-
Orthodoxy after the fall of Byzantium (1453). The final one.
pom was the reign of Ivan III (1462-1505) and Vasily and I(1505-1533), when the main Russian principalities united under the rule of Moscow. A unified code of laws was adopted, state administration bodies were created, economic orders were established, etc.
The formation of a unified Russian state was of great historical significance. It contributed to the liberation of Russia from the Horde dominion. The formation of the political center strengthened the position of the state in the international arena. On the Russian lands, the formation of a single economic space began. The awareness of the Russian people as a single whole now formed the basis of the spiritual life of the inhabitants of various regions of the state.
11. Golden Horde in XIII-XV centuries
Main dates and events: the beginning of the 1240s - the formation of the Golden Horde; first half of the 14th century - the heyday of the Golden Horde under the khans Uzbek and Dzhanibek, the adoption of Islam; 15th century - disintegration of the Golden Horde.
Historical figures: Batu; Menry- Timur; Nogai; Uzbek; Janibek; Mamai; Tokhtamysh; EdigeY.
Basic terms and concepts: khan; kurultai; baskak; sofa; Murza.
Working with the map: show the territory of the Golden Horde, its capital, the territories of the khanates formed on its lands.
Answer plan: 1) the reasons for the formation of the Golden Horde; 2) social and economic system; 3) political system; 4) the rise of the Golden Horde; 5) causes and consequences of the disintegration of the Golden Horde.
Reply material: As a result of the Mongol invasion, one of the largest states of that time, the Golden Horde, was formed in the conquered territories. It stretched from the Balkans in the west to central Siberia in the east; from Russian lands in the north to Transcaucasia and Turkestan in the south. The hundred-lyceum of the Horde was the city of Sarai-Batu, founded in the lower reaches of the Volga. At the beginning of the XIV century. The capital was the city of Novy Saray, which arose to the north of the former, on the banks of the Akhtuba River.
The basis of the economy of the Horde was nomadic cattle breeding (mainly horses, sheep, and camels were bred). Crafts were highly developed in the cities, focused mainly on the production of horse harness, weapons, and jewelry. The population of the Volga region, which became part of the state, was engaged in agriculture, fishing, the Siberian peoples - in their traditional hunting, the inhabitants of Central Asia wove carpets. The major cities of the country were Bakhchisaray, Azba (Azov), Khadzhitarkhan (Astrakhan), Kazan, Isker (Siberia), Turkestan, Urgench, Khiva.
The head of state was a khan from the Genghis clan. The supreme council under him (kurultai) included the closest relatives of the khan, governors of subject lands, and military leaders (temniks). The central institutions of the Horde were sofas, which were led by secretaries. The collection of tribute from subordinate territories was carried out by the Baskaks. The basis of the ruling class was the beks, who owned pastures and herds.
The Golden Horde was a multinational state in which the Mongols constituted the minority of the population. Under Khan Uzbek, Islam became the state religion.
The Golden Horde had lively trade relations not only with Asian states, but. also with Europe. After the adoption of Islam, ties with the countries of the Middle East became closer.
The Russian lands were not included in the Horde, but were considered semi-independent "Russian ulus". Russian princes had to receive a label to reign from the khan, pay an annual tribute, provide soldiers for the khan's army, and participate in their military campaigns.
The Horde reached its heyday under the khans Uzbek and Dzhani-bek in the first half of the 14th century, when its influence and international prestige, economic power and strength of the khan's power reached its apogee. However, later the Golden Horde entered a period of feudal fragmentation, the main reasons for which were the increased level of economic development of the subject territories and the intensified struggle for power. The beginning of the collapse of a great power fell on the 15th century. The Crimean Khan Devlet-Girey was the first to receive independence from the Horde Khan. He created the Crimean Khanate, which included the territories of the Crimea and the steppe regions of the Northern Black Sea region. In 1438, the most economically and militarily developed Kazan Khanate was formed in the middle reaches of the Volga. On the Lower Volga, the Bollyaya Horde Khanate arose, and in the interfluve of the Tobol and Ob rivers, the Siberian Khanate. The steppe regions of the northern Caspian (up to the Irtysh) became part of the Nogai Horde. There were numerous contradictions between the former parts of the Golden Horde, which resulted in military clashes.
The collapse of the Golden Horde accelerated the liberation of the Russian lands from the Mongol "adychism" and their unification within the framework of a single state.
12. Russia and Lithuania
Main dates and events: 1385 - Union of Kreva; 1410 - Battle of Grunwald.
Historical figures: Mindovg; Gediminas; Olgerd; Jagiello; Vitovt.
Basic terms and concepts: union; dialect.
Working with the map: show the boundaries of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and their expansion in the XHI-XV centuries.
Answer plan: 1) prerequisites for the formation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania; 2) Lithuania as one of the centers of the unification of Russian
Sky lands; 3) the economic and social structure of the Lithuanian state; 4) political system; 5) Kreva union; 6) Battle of Grunwald.
Reply material: The collapse of tribal communities and the expansion of economic ties between various Lithuanian tribes created the prerequisites for the formation in the XHI century. Lithuanian state. The first prince was Mindovg, who managed in a short time to include lands in the young principality.
Whether Lithuanians, Zhmud, Yotvingians, as well as part of the Polotsk, Vitebsk, Smolensk lands. When creating the State of Lithuania, the state traditions of the Russian principalities were used. Representatives of the Russian nobility had strong positions in Lithuania. Their greatest influence on princely power was achieved under Prince Gediminas (1316-1341), who was married to a Russian princess. At this time, the Russian nobility formed the basis of the army, led the embassies, ruled the Lithuanian cities. It is not surprising that many Russian principalities presented Lithuania as a force capable of reviving Russian statehood. The annexation of Russian territories to Lithuania began, the official name of which was the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia. The gathering of the western and southern Russian territories continued under the sons of Gediminas - Olgerd and Keistut. In addition, they managed to stop the advance of the Germans into the Lithuanian lands. Lithuania has become a strong center for the unification of Russian lands, which did not cause protest among the Russian population, perceiving-. which this process is like the revival of the Old Russian state. Unsuccessful were only schshytki to annex Novgorod and Pskov to Lithuania.
After the death of Olgerd, his son Jagiello married the Polish queen Jadwiga and in 1385 concluded a state-religious union with Poland - the Union of Krevo. According to the treaty, Jagiello became both the Polish king (under the name of Vladislav) and the Grand Duke of Lithuania. He converted to Catholicism and began to convert the entire Lithuanian nobility to the Catholic faith, and then the population of his country. Lithuanian lands were transferred to Poland "for all eternity". Vitovt, the son of Keistut, who was killed on the orders of Yagailo, began to fight against the subjugation of Poland. He sought to break the Kreva Union
And declare himself the Lithuanian king.
Prior to the conclusion of the Union of Kreva, the state system of Lithuania was similar to the ancient Russian one: the local princes, who had their own squads, were subordinate to the Grand Duke. In the cities, there was a veche administration, which extended to the rural territories subordinate to the cities (populated by free farmers - smerds). The Lithuanian prince exercised control, OPIJ), relying on the support of the clan nobility, united in the Rada. However, after the Union of Kreva, only Catholics could be members of the Rada, it received the right to make any decisions in the absence of the prince. Thus, the power of the prince became less and less significant (following the example of the Polish kings, who depended on the opinion of the pans). After the conclusion of the union, the cities were deprived of veche management, in the countryside the dependence of smerds on the owners of the land was introduced. A new estate was formed that served the prince for land grants - the gentry (nobility). They had the right to convene gentry diets locally, which resolved issues of local importance. The upper class in the state were pans (princes), who had huge territorial divisions and elected kings.
The joint struggle of Russians, Lithuanians and Poles against the strengthening of German influence led to the defeat of the Germans during the Battle of Grunwald (1410), which marked the beginning of the decline of the Teutonic Order and its dominance in the Baltic states.
The heyday of the Lithuanian state was associated with the powerful influence of Russian state and cultural traditions. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia became the real center of the unification of Russian lands. However, its merger with Poland and the beginning of catholization did not allow the Lithuanian princes to win in the struggle for the creation of a unified Russian state. The process of dividing the ancient Russian people into Belarusians, Ukrainians and Russians began.
14. Features of the cultural development of Russian lands in the XIII-XVcenturies
Main dates and events: 1479 - completion of the construction of the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin.
Historical figures: Aristotle Fioravanti; Theophanes the Greek; Andrey Rublev; Daniel Black; Dionysius; Prokhor from Gorodets.
Basic terms and concepts: Novgorod style in architecture; epic; historical song.
Answer plan: 1) historical conditions for the development of culture rus- ski lands in the XIII-XV centuries; 2) the main achievements of the kulylu-
Ry: folklore, literature, architecture, painting; 3) the significance of Russian culture of this period.
Reply material: The main events that determined the development of the culture of the Russian lands in the Xllf-XV centuries were the Batu invasion and the establishment of Mongol-Tatar rule. The largest monuments of Kulylur were destroyed or lost - cathedrals and monasteries, frescoes and mosaics, handicrafts. The artisans and craftsmen themselves were killed or driven into Horde slavery. The stone building has stopped.
The formation of the Russian people and a single state, the struggle for liberation from the Mongols, the creation of a single language became important factors in the development of the culture of the Russian lands in the 13th-15th centuries.
The main theme of oral folk art was the struggle against Horde domination. Legends about the battle on Kal-ka, about the devastation of Ryazan by Batu, about Yevpatiy Kolovrat, the exploits of Alexander Nevsky, the Battle of Kulikovo have survived or in a revised form have survived to this day. All of them make up the heroic epic epic. In the XIV century. were created about Vasily Buslaev, Sadko, reflecting the freedom-loving character of the Novgorodians, the wealth and strength of their land. A new type of oral folk art appeared - a historical song that described in detail the events of which the author was a contemporary.
In works of literature, the theme of the fight against invaders was also central. At the end of the XIV century. the general Russian chronicle is resumed.
From the end of the XIII century. the revival of stone construction began. It developed more actively in the lands that suffered the least from the invasion. Novgorod became one of the centers of culture in these years, the architects of which built the Church of St. Nicholas on Lipna and the Church of Fyodor Stratilat. These temples marked the emergence of a special architectural style, characterized by a combination of simplicity and majesty, relatively small size of structures, more modest wall decoration, and the use of limestone slabs and boulders along with brick. In Moscow, stone construction began in the time of Ivan Kalita, when the Assumption Cathedral was laid in the Kremlin, which became the cathedral (main) temple of Russia. At the same time, the Annunciation Cathedral (which became the palace church of the Grand Dukes) and the Archangel Cathedral (the tomb of Moscow rulers) were created. The Faceted Chamber of the Novgorod Kremlin was built. The stone Kremlin, built in 1367, testified to the growth of the political power of Moscow.
Political motives were also present in church painting - icon painting. A vivid example of this was the icon "King of Kings", on which Jesus Christ was depicted with a crown on his head. This expressed the non-recognition of the power of the Horde khans (who called themselves "kings of kings") and showed the priority of the Christian faith and the power of Orthodox rulers. It is no coincidence that this icon was installed in the Assumption Cathedral after the Battle of Kulikovo.
Along with local masters, foreign painters, mainly from Byzantium, also worked in Russia at that time. Among them was Theophanes the Greek, who managed to connect the classical Byzantine style of icon painting with the traditions of Russian masters. Feofan, who worked in Novgorod and Moscow at the end of the 14th century, painted the icons of Our Lady of the Don, Saints Peter and Paul, and the Assumption of Our Lady. Some of his works were decorated with the Annunciation Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. Theophan's disciple and follower was the Russian artist Andrei Rublev (1360-1430) - a monk of the Trinity-Sergius, and then the Spaso-Andronikov Monastery. Together with Daniil Cherny, he painted frescoes on the walls of the Assumption Cathedral in Vladimir, and then the Trinity Cathedral in the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. The most famous of his works was the "Trinity", written for the iconostasis of the Trinity Cathedral.
Having suffered during the period of the Mongol invasion, Russian culture began its revival already at the end of XIII century. Literature, architecture, fine arts of that time were permeated with the desire of the authors for high spiritual ideals, the idea of the struggle to overthrow the Horde domination, and the formation of the foundations of the all-Russian culture.
15. Termination of Russia's dependence on the Horde. IvanIII
Main dates and events: 1462-1505 P. - reign of Ivan III; 1478 - annexation of Novgorod the Great to Moscow; 1480 - the liquidation of the Horde dominion.
historical figures; Ivan III; Akhmat.
Basic terms and concepts:“standing on the Ugra,>; centralized state.
Working with the map: show the expansion of the boundaries of the Moscow state, the place of "standing on the Ugra,>.
Answer plan: 1) the prerequisites for the overthrow of the Horde domination; 2) Ivan IJI; 3) standing on the river Ugra; 4) the significance of the liquidation of the Horde dominion.
Reply material: The main prerequisite for the overthrow of the Horde domination was the desire of the Russian people for independence, which was expressed in the policy of the Moscow princes, who united the Russian lands under their rule.
No less important were the formed economic conditions: the transition to a two- and three-field crop rotation system, the use of a plow with an iron plowshare, natural
rhenium - all this led to a significant economic upsurge and the formation of the material base for liberation from foreign domination. The growth of cities, the development of handicraft production in them contributed to the strengthening of the power of the Russian lands, made the fight against the invaders more effective. (Since 1382, Russia had its own artillery.) Russian cities, unlike the cities of Western Europe, were not economic centers for the unification of lands - this was hindered by the weak development of commodity-money relations. However, the cities "were important strategic centers in which forces were concentrated to fight the Horde.
An important factor for the overthrow of the Horde domination was the support from the Russian Orthodox Church.
Not the last role "was also played by the fact that the Golden Horde itself entered a period of political fragmentation and disintegrated into a number of khanates.
In the process of overthrowing the Horde domination, several milestone events in Russian history can be distinguished. In 1327, the Moscow prince Ivan Kalita received the right to independently collect tribute to the D1IYA Horde. In 1380, with the support of the boyars and Metropolitan Alexei, Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich for the first time gathered an army from all Russian lands to fight Mamai and on September 8, using the tactics of an ambush regiment, utterly defeated the Horde. This victory did not lead to deliverance from Mongol rule, but it showed that the united army of all Russian principalities could defeat the enemy.
It is important to note that the struggle against the Mongols and the formation of a unified Russian state were closely interconnected. these processes reached a result under the Grand Duke Ivan 111, who managed to turn the Moscow principality into the largest European state. Since 1476, he stopped paying tribute to the Horde. Khan Akhmat, who marched against Moscow in the autumn of 1480, met the army of Ivan 111 on the banks of the Ugra River, but did not dare to openly clash and, after a week of standing, turned back. Horde domination was over.
The overthrow of the yoke was of great importance for the D1IYA of Russia. It led to the completion of the formation of a unified Russian state. In 1485, Ivan 111 declared himself "sovereign of all Russia." Income from economic activity was now fully directed to the development of a single state. Urban growth accelerated. A new stage was marked in the development of the national artistic culture. It was the beginning of the formation of a multinational Russian
centralized state, which already then included representatives of a number of peoples of the Volga region,
By the right of the conqueror, the great Khan of the Golden Horde, Batu, achieved recognition of his supreme power (suzerainty) from the princes of the Russian lands. The Russian lands were not directly included in the territory of the Golden Horde: their dependence was expressed in the payment of tribute - the Horde "exit" - and in the issuance of "labels" by the khan of the Golden Horde - letters to reign to Russian rulers. In terms of the scale of destruction, the Mongol conquest differed from countless internecine wars, primarily in that they were carried out simultaneously in all lands.
A heavy result of the Mongol conquest for Russia was the payment of tribute to the Horde. Tribute (“yield”) began to be levied as early as the 40s of the 13th century, and in 1257, on the orders of Khan Berke, the Mongols conducted a population census (“number”) in North-Eastern Russia, setting fixed amounts of collection. Only the clergy were exempted from paying the yield (before the adoption of Islam in the Horde at the beginning of the 14th century, the Mongols were distinguished by religious tolerance). Representatives of the khan, the Baskaks, were sent to Russia to control the collection of tribute. By the end of the XIII - the beginning of the XIV century. the institute of Basque culture was canceled in connection with the active opposition of the Russian population to it. Since that time, the princes of the Russian lands themselves were engaged in collecting the Horde "exit", whom the khan kept in obedience with the help of the system of issuing labels for reigning.
The question of the influence of the Mongol-Tatar invasion and the establishment of the Horde dominion on the history of Russia has long been one of the debatable ones. There are three main points of view on this problem in Russian historiography. Firstly, it is the recognition of the very significant and predominantly positive impact of the conquerors on the development of Russia, which prompted the process of creating a unified Muscovite state.
The founder of this point of view was N.M. Karamzin, and in the 20s of our century it was developed by the so-called Eurasians. At the same time, unlike L.N. Gumilyov, who in his studies painted a picture of good-neighborly and allied relations between Russia and the Horde, did not deny such obvious facts as the devastating campaigns of the Mongol-Tatars on Russian lands, the collection of heavy tribute, etc.
Other historians (among them S.M. Solovyov, V.O. Klyuchevsky, S.F. Platonov) assessed the influence of the conquerors on the inner life of ancient Russian society as extremely insignificant. They believed that the processes that took place in the second half of the 13th - 15th centuries either organically followed from the trend of the previous period, or arose independently of the Horde.
Finally, many historians are characterized by a kind of intermediate position. The influence of the conquerors is regarded as noticeable, but not determining the development of Russia (and unambiguously negative). The creation of a single state, according to B.D. Grekov, A.N. Nasonov, V.A. Kuchkin and others happened not thanks to, but in spite of the Horde.
Based on the current level of knowledge about the economic, social, political, cultural development of the Russian lands of the 13th - 15th centuries, as well as the nature of Russian-Horde relations, we can talk about the consequences of a foreign invasion. The impact on the economy was expressed, firstly, in the direct destruction of territories during the Horde campaigns and raids, which were especially frequent in the second half of the 13th century. The heaviest blow was inflicted on the cities. Secondly, the conquest led to the systematic siphoning off of significant material resources in the form of the Horde "exit" and other extortions, which bled the country bled.
The Horde sought to actively influence the political life of Russia. The efforts of the conquerors were aimed at preventing the consolidation of Russian lands by opposing some principalities to others and weakening them mutually. Sometimes the khans went for these purposes to change the territorial and political structure of Russia: at the initiative of the Horde, new principalities were formed (Nizhny Novgorod) or the territories of the old ones were divided (Vladimir).
The consequence of the invasion of the XIII century. was the strengthening of the isolation of the Russian lands, the weakening of the southern and western principalities. As a result, they were included in the structure that arose in the 13th century. early feudal state - the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: Polotsk and Turov-Pinsk principalities - by the beginning of the XIV century, Volyn - in the middle of the XIV century, Kiev and Chernigov - in the 60s of the XIV century, Smolensk - at the beginning of the XV century.
As a result, Russian statehood (under the suzerainty of the Horde) was preserved only in North-Eastern Russia (Vladimir-Suzdal land), in Novgorod, Murom and Ryazan lands. It was North-Eastern Russia from about the second half of the 14th century. became the core of the formation of the Russian state. At the same time, the fate of the western and southern lands was finally determined.
Thus, in the XIV century. the old political structure ceased to exist, which was characterized by independent principalities-lands, ruled by different branches of the princely family of Rurik, within which there were smaller vassal principalities. The disappearance of this political structure also marked the subsequent disintegration of the established in the 9th - 10th centuries. ancient Russian nationality - the ancestor of the three currently existing East Slavic peoples. On the territories of North-Eastern and North-Western Russia, the Russian (Great Russian) nationality begins to gradually take shape, on the lands that became part of Lithuania and Poland, the Ukrainian and Belarusian nationalities.
In addition to these "visible" consequences of the conquest in the socio-economic and political spheres of ancient Russian society, significant structural changes can also be traced.
In the pre-Mongolian period, feudal relations in Russia developed in general according to a pattern characteristic of all European countries: from the predominance of state forms of feudalism at an early stage to the gradual strengthening of patrimonial forms, although more slowly than in Western Europe. After the invasion, this process slows down, and state forms of exploitation are conserved. This was largely due to the need to find funds to pay for the "exit".
in Russia in the 14th century. state-feudal forms prevailed, the relations of personal dependence of the peasants on the feudal lords were at the stage of formation, the cities remained in a subordinate position in relation to the princes and boyars. Thus, there were no sufficient socio-economic prerequisites for the formation of a single state in Russia. Therefore, the leading role in the formation of the Russian state was played by a political ("external") factor - the need to confront the Horde and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Because of this need, broad sections of the population - and the ruling class, and the townspeople, and the peasantry - were interested in centralization.
Such a “outstripping” nature of the unification process in relation to socio-economic development determined the features of the unification process that had formed by the end of the 15th - 16th centuries. states: strong monarchical power, rigid dependence of the ruling class on it, a high degree of exploitation of direct producers. The latter circumstance was one of the reasons for the folding of the system of serfdom.
Thus, the Mongol-Tatar conquest generally had a significant impact on ancient Russian civilization.
In addition to the direct consequences of the Horde's policy, structural deformations are observed here, which ultimately led to a change in the type of feudal development of the country. The Moscow monarchy was not directly created by the Mongol-Tatars, rather the opposite: it took shape in spite of the Horde and in the struggle against it. However, indirectly, it was precisely the consequences of the influence of the conquerors that determined many of the essential features of this state and its social system.
North-Eastern Russia after the Mongol invasion
The relatively more favorable development of North-Eastern Russia (Vladimir-Suzdal land), which became the core of the new unified Russian state (Russia), in the second half of the 13th-14th centuries. was connected with the factors operating on the eve of the invasion and after it.
The princes of the Vladimir-Suzdal land almost did not participate in the internecine struggle of the 30s of the XIII century, which significantly weakened the Chernigov and Smolensk princes. The Grand Dukes of Vladimir succeeded in extending their suzerainty to Novgorod, which turned out to be a more profitable "all-Russian" table than Kyiv, which had lost its significance, and Galich, bordering on the steppe.
Unlike Smolensk, Volyn and Chernihiv, North-Eastern Russia until the second half of the XIV century. practically did not experience pressure from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The impact of the Horde factor was also ambiguous. Although North-Eastern Russia underwent in the XIII century. very significant ruin, it was her princes who were recognized in the Horde as the "oldest" in Russia. This contributed to the transition of the status of the "all-Russian" capital from Kyiv to Vladimir.
During the period of the Mongol invasion, Northern Russia simultaneously faced expansion coming from the Baltic. By the XII century. the population of the Baltic lands entered the phase of statehood formation. At the same time, the territories inhabited by the Baltic tribes turned out to be the object of the invasion of the German knights, who, with the blessing of the Pope, organized a crusade against the Livs.
In 1201, the crusaders, led by the monk Albert, founded the fortress of Riga, and the following year, the "Order of the Sword" was formed on the conquered lands. In 1212 The crusaders subjugated all of Livonia and set about conquering the lands of the Estonians, coming close to Novgorod's borders.
The expansion of the crusaders was accompanied by the distribution of land to the German feudal lords and the forced conversion of the local pagan population to Catholicism. This was the difference between the policy of the Order and the actions of the Russian princes in the Eastern Baltic: the latter did not claim to directly seize land (satisfied with tribute) and did not carry out forced Christianization. In 1234, Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodich of Novgorod, son of Vsevolod the Big Nest, managed to defeat the German knights near Yuryev (Derpt). And two years later, the swordsmen were defeated by the militia of Lithuanians and Semigallians.
The defeats suffered forced the remnants of the Order of the Sword in 1237 to unite with the larger Teutonic Order, which by this time, as a result of active "missionary" activity, had occupied the lands of the Prussians.
The unification of the forces of the spiritual and chivalrous Orders and the formation of the Livonian Order significantly increased the danger that threatened Veliky Novgorod and its "suburb" Pskov. At the same time, the danger from the Swedish and Danish knights increased.
Bibliography
For the preparation of this work, materials from the site http://russia.rin.ru/
Other materials
- Mongol conquest of Russia: consequences and role in national history
- Domestic historiography of the Mongol conquest of Russia
- Traditional and new assessments of the Tatar-Mongol yoke in Russia
- Tatar-Mongol invasion and its consequences for the Russian lands
- The nature of the socio-economic development of Russia during the Mongol-Tatar invasion
- Mongolian states on the territory of Russia in the 12th-16th centuries (Report)
It could not have had larger consequences, first of all, as has just been said, an increase in their role in the economy, but not only. The political significance of large grand ducal possessions could also increase. In our opinion, if at least at the first stage after the conquest of Russia by the Mongols, one can say ...
Europe to the Middle East can hardly be compared with these events. But there is still no comprehensive generalizing work on the domestic historiography of the Mongol conquest of Russia. At the same time, the successive development of historical knowledge objectively leads to a rethinking and re-examination of certain ones over time ...
This circumstance played a fatal role not only in the fate of the conquered peoples of Asia and Europe, but also in the fate of the Mongolian people themselves. 1.2. Genghis Khan and his army. While the Tatars were breaking up into small hordes, they could disturb their neighbors only with such raids as raids ...
In 1783, this was the last fragment of the Golden Horde, which came from the Middle Ages to the New Age. So, what are the consequences of the Tatar-Mongol yoke for Russia. This issue is also controversial among historians. Most sources, based on facts, speak of the negative consequences of the Tatar-...
Soon he was killed by his rivals. Thus, the unification of Russian lands into a single centralized state led to the liberation of Russia from the Tatar-Mongol yoke. The Russian state became independent. His international contacts have expanded significantly. Ambassadors came to Moscow from many...
The state structure, the main stages of its political history and conquests. These points are important for a correct understanding of the nature of the Tatar-Mongol invasion of Russia and its consequences. The Golden Horde was one of the ancient states of the Middle Ages, whose extensive possessions...
At the same time strengthening the princely civil strife. Thus, the Mongol-Tatar invasion cannot be called a progressive phenomenon in the history of our country. Chapter III. Discussions about the nature of the socio-economic development of Russia during the Mongol-Tatar yoke §1. The position of L.N. Gumilyov ...
2. The period of Mongol rule 2.1 The system of taxes The nomads could only subjugate the Russian lands, and not include them in their empire. In the lands they conquered, the Mongols hurried to determine the solvency of the population by conducting a census. The first census in Western Russia...
To change the territorial and political structure of Russia: at the initiative of the Horde, new principalities were formed (Nizhny Novgorod) or the territories of the old ones were divided (Vladimir). The struggle of Russia against the Mongol yoke, its results and consequences The struggle against the Horde yoke began from the moment it was established. She is...
He managed to curb Genghis Khan, but also the wealth of Russia. A fragmented, fragmented country seems to be an even more tasty morsel. The Mongol invasion as a stage in national history § 1. The invasion of the Tatar-Mongols in Russia “... I have no doubt that someone will survive after us, after this era, and see ...
Eastern Russia. Many cities were ravaged five or more times. These campaigns also caused great damage to Ancient Russia. 3. The defeat of the Mongol - Tatar yoke. In North-Eastern Russia, the Horde rati began to appear one after another: 1273 - the ruin of the cities of North-Eastern Russia "royal ...
Topic: "Horde dominion"
The purpose of the lesson: determine the attitude of students to the problem under study.
Tasks:
- to establish whether the enslavement of Russia by the Mongol-Tatars was (having considered different versions proposed by Russian scientists of the 19th-20th centuries);
Determine the forms of Mongol-Tatar rule over Russian lands;
Determine the consequences of the Mongol-Tatar yoke;
To consolidate the skills of independent work with historical documents and popular science literature;
Improve communication skills through the organization of work on an individual educational route.
To promote the formation of students' critical, logical thinking, the ability to work with a historical map, a historical source, work in groups, perform a problem task
- to educate students in love for the Motherland, a sense of civic duty, cognitive interest in the subject.
Equipment: multimedia presentation, historical sources.
During the classes
Introduction
Organizing time.
2. Work motivation
In the last lesson, we considered the issue of the attack of the Mongol-Tatars on Russian soil.
"Oh, bright and beautifully decorated, the Russian land! You are glorified with many beauties: clean fields, countless great cities, glorious villages, monastery gardens, God's temples and formidable princes. You are full of everything, the Russian land
" A huge number of people died, many were taken captive, mighty cities disappeared from the face of the earth forever, precious manuscripts, magnificent frescoes were destroyed, the secrets of many crafts were lost ... " (Teacher reads both statements)
Teacher: These two statements characterize Russia in the thirteenth century. Why did this metamorphosis take place, what happened in Russia? This will be discussed in the lesson, the topic of which is “Mongol-Tatar invasion of Russia. Establishment of the Horde yoke”.
Questions for students.
- What questions do you think should be considered when studying this topic? Suggested answers. (What is a yoke? What was it?
What are the consequences of the yoke for Russia?)
II. Main part. Learning new material. Presentation of the topic and objectives of the lesson.
1. To acquaint with different points of view on the essence and role of the yoke in the development of Russia and summarize them.
There are many turning points in Russian history. But the main frontier is the Mongol-Tatar invasion. It divided Russia into pre-Mongolian and post-Mongolian. The Mongol-Tatar invasion and the Horde yoke forced our ancestors to experience such terrible stress that I think it still sits in our genetic memory. And although Russia took revenge on the Horde on the Kulikovo field, and then completely threw off the yoke, but nothing passes without a trace. Mongol-Tatar slavery made the Russian man different. The Russian man did not become better or worse, he became different.
In historical science, there are different points of view on the role of the yoke in Russian history. We have brought to your attention some excerpts from the assessment of the role of the yoke, Read and make a conclusion about the points of view on this issue:
1. V.P.Darkevich: "... the role of the Mongol invasion in the history of the Russian people is completely negative."
2. V.V. Trepavlov: "... the conquest had an equally negative and positive impact on the history of Russia."
3. A.A. Gorsky: “The history of the Golden Horde is part of the history of Russia. It is unscientific to raise the question of the influence of the Mongol invasion on the centuries-old development of Russian statehood on a scale positively or negatively.
4. A.S. Pushkin: “Russia’s destiny was determined: its boundless plains absorbed the power of the Mongols and stopped their invasion at the very edge of Europe: the barbarians did not dare to leave enslaved Russia in their rear and returned to the steppes of their East. The emerging Enlightenment was saved by a torn and dying Russia.
5. P.N.Savitsky: “Without the “Tatars” there would be no Russia. Great happiness that she went to the Tatars. The Tatars did not change the spiritual being of Russia. But in the quality of the creators of states, a military-organizing force, which was distinctive for them in this era, they undoubtedly influenced Russia.
6. N.M. Karamzin: “Moscow owes its greatness to the Khan”
7. S.M. Solovyov: “We notice that the influence of the Mongols here was not the main and decisive one. The Mongols remained to live in the distance ... not at all interfering in internal relations, leaving in complete freedom to operate those new relations that began in the north of Russia before them.
8. V.V. Kargalov: “It was the invasion that caused the temporary backwardness of our country from the most developed states.”
9. VL Yanin: “There is no epoch in the history of medieval Russia more terrible than the tragic beginning of the 13th century, Our past was cut in two by a crooked Tatar saber.”
10. M. Geller: "In the public mind, the time of the Mongol yoke left a clear, unambiguous memory: foreign power, slavery, violence, self-will."
11. V. Klyuchevsky: "The power of the Horde Khan gave at least the specter of unity to the smaller and mutually alienated patrimonial corners of the Russian princes."
12. L.N. Gumilyov: “The stories about the complete destruction of Russia ... suffer from exaggeration ... Batu wanted to establish true friendship with the Russian princes ... An alliance with the Orthodox Mongols was needed like air.”
Thus, we can conclude that there are the following points of view on the role of the Mongol yoke in the development of Russia:
1. The Mongol-Tatars had a mostly positive impact on the development of Russia, tk. they pushed for the creation of a unified Muscovite state.
2. The Mongol-Tatars had little impact on the life of ancient Russian society.
3. The Mongol-Tatars had a negative impact, slowed down the development of Russia and its unification.
The impact of the Mongol-Tatars on Russia
Today in the lesson I invite you to think about which point of view you agree with and why.
2. Consider the features of the development of Russia during the period of Mongol dependence.
I offer you the role of historians who should consider the features of the development of Russia during the period of Mongol dependence and draw a conclusion about the influence and consequences of the yoke.
In 1243, the Golden Horde was founded, after the return of Batu from a campaign in Western Europe. The Mongol-Tatars reached the bottom of the Volga and founded the capital of the Horde - the city of Sarai. The first Khan of the Golden Horde - Batu. The Golden Horde included: Crimea, the Black Sea region, the North Caucasus, the Volga region, Kazakhstan, the south of Western Siberia and Central Asia. The Russian principalities were not part of the Golden Horde, but were dependent on it - under the yoke. The yoke was established in 1240.
First, let's find out what a yoke is? Yoke is
And now let's see how relations between Russia and the Golden Horde developed and developed in the region:
political development;
economic life;
spiritual life
2.1. Find out the changes in political life.
BUT) Karamzin noted that the Tatar-Mongol yoke played an important role in the evolution of Russian statehood. In addition, he also pointed to the Horde as the obvious reason for the rise of the Moscow principality. Follow him Klyuchevsky also believed that the Horde prevented exhausting internecine wars in Russia. According to L.N. Gumilyov, the interaction of the Horde and Russia was a profitable political union, first of all, for Russia. He believed that the relationship between Russia and the Horde should be called "symbiosis". Analyze the content of the following source: “The Tatars did not change the system of power in Russia, they retained the existing political system, taking the right to appoint a prince. Each Russian prince - the khans never went beyond the Rurik dynasty - had to appear in Saray and receive a label for reigning. The Mongolian system opened up the widest possibilities for indirect control of the country: all princes received a “label” and thus had access to the khan. (Geller m. History of the Russian Empire) "
What changes have taken place in the organization of power?
The conquerors did not occupy the territory of Russia, they did not keep their troops here, the governors of the khan did not sit in the cities. Russian princes were still at the head of the Russian principalities, princely dynasties were preserved, but the power of the princes was limited. Although the ancient Russian norms of inheritance continued to operate, the Horde authorities put them under their control. Only with the permission of the Khan of the Golden Horde did they have the right to occupy the throne, receiving special permission for this - a khan's letter - a label. To obtain a label, one had to go to Sarai and go through a humiliating procedure there - to go through the supposedly cleansing fire that burned in front of the khan's tent and kiss his shoe. Those who refused to do so were killed. And among the Russian princes there were such. Khan thus became the source of princely power.
The first to go to the Horde in 1243 was his brother Yaroslav, who remained the main prince of Vladimir-Suzdal after the death of Yuri. According to the chronicle, Batu "honored him with great honor and his men" and appointed him the eldest of the princes: "May you be older than all the princes in the Russian language." Following the Prince of Vladimir, the others followed.
- AT what was the significance of the ability of the khans to distribute labels?
For the Horde rulers, the distribution of labels for reigning became a means of political pressure on the Russian princes. With their help, the khans redrawn the political map of North-Eastern Russia, kindled rivalry and sought to weaken the most dangerous princes. A trip to the Horde for a label did not always end happily for the Russian princes. So, Prince Mikhail Vsevolodovich Chernigovsky, who reigned in Kyiv during the time of the Batu invasion, was executed in the Horde, as his life tells, because of his refusal to perform the pagan rite of purification: to pass between two fires. Galician Prince Daniil Romanovich also went to the Horde for a label. Yaroslav Vsevolodovich's trip to distant Karakorum turned out to be unsuccessful - he was poisoned there (1246).
The Mongols introduced into the minds of their tributaries - the Russians - the idea of the rights of their leader (khan) as the supreme owner (patrimony) of all the land they occupied. Then, after the overthrow of the yoke, the princes could transfer the supreme power of the khan to themselves. Only in the Mongol period does the concept of a prince appear not only as a sovereign, but also as the owner of all the land. The Grand Dukes gradually became to their subjects in such an attitude in which the Mongol khans stood in relation to themselves. “According to the principles of Mongolian state law,” says Nevolin, “all the land in general, which was within the dominion of the khan, was his property; the subjects of the khan could only be simple landowners.” In all regions of Russia, except for Novgorod and Western Russia, these principles were to be reflected in the principles of Russian law. The princes, as rulers of their regions, as representatives of the khan, naturally enjoyed the same rights in their destinies as he did in his entire state. With the fall of the Mongol rule, the princes became the heirs of the khan's power, and, consequently, of those rights that were connected with it”
In political terms, according to Karamzin, the Mongol yoke led to the complete disappearance of free-thinking: "Princes, humbly groveling in the Horde, returned from there as formidable rulers." The boyar aristocracy lost power and influence. "In a word, autocracy was born." All these changes were a heavy burden on the population, but in the long run their effect was positive. They brought an end to the civil strife that destroyed the Kievan state and helped Russia get back on its feet when the Mongol empire fell.
The political of this time was characterized by a fierce struggle for a great reign between the most powerful princes: Tver, Rostov and Moscow.
B) a special place among the princes is occupied by A. Nevsky, whose activities had an ambiguous assessment: some called him a traitor, others justified his actions by objective necessity.
1. “Among the exploits of Alexander Nevsky is the answer to the ambassadors who came to him from the Pope “from the great Rome”: “... we will not accept teachings from you” (Geller M. History of the Russian Empire).
Domestic historians gave the following assessment of the activities of Nevsky.
2. N.S. Borisov “His name has become a symbol of military prowess. He was not sinless, but a worthy son of his troubled age.”
3. A.Ya. Degtyarev "He is the ancestor of the revival of Russia."
4. A.N. Kirpichnikov "Rus was lucky with such a ruler, when the very survival of the people was called into question"
- Why does Nevsky's activity cause controversy? (Message by Dobrynin)
AT) In pre-Mongolian Russia, a big role played veche. Does his position change? (Kalinin)
D) in Russia during the period under study there was an institution of Basques. Read textbook p. 133 top paragraph.and determine its value.
Baskak- a representative of the Horde Khan in Russia, who controlled the actions of the princes, was in charge of collecting tribute, the "great Baskak" had a residence in Vladimir, where the political center of the country actually moved from Kyiv.
E) The foreign policy of the princes (speech by a student )
Exercise. Consider S. Ivanov "Baskaki" - what did the Baskaks collect from the Russian population?
2.2. Historian Katsva L.A. so characterizes economic situation: “According to archaeologists, out of 74 cities that existed in Russia in the XII-XIII centuries, 49 were destroyed by Batu, and 14 were depopulated forever. Many of the survivors, especially artisans, were driven into slavery. Entire professions have disappeared. The heaviest damage was inflicted on the feudal lords. Out of 12 Ryazan princes, 9 died, out of 3 Rostov princes -2, out of 9 Suzdal princes -5. The composition of the squads has changed almost completely.
What conclusion can be drawn from this document?
Vl. Rodionov will tell about the geopolitical situation.
The Russian state was thrown back. Russia turned into a strongly economically and culturally lagging state. Moreover, many elements of the Asian mode of production were "woven" into its economy, which affected the path of the country's historical development. After the Mongols occupied the southern and southeastern steppes, the Western Russian principalities went to Lithuania. As a result, Russia seemed to be cordoned off from all sides. She was cut off from the outside world. The foreign economic and political relations of Russia with the more enlightened Western countries and Greece were disrupted, cultural ties were interrupted. Russia, surrounded by uneducated invaders, gradually grew wild. Therefore, there was such a backwardness from other states and the coarsening of the people, and the country itself stalled in its development. However, this did not affect some northern lands, such as Novgorod, which continued trade and economic relations with the West. Surrounded by dense forests and swamps, Novgorod, Pskov received natural protection from the invasion of the Mongols, whose cavalry was not adapted to wage war in such conditions. In these city-republics, for a long time, according to the old established custom, the power belonged to the veche, and the prince was invited to reign, who was elected by the whole society. If the prince's rule was not liked, then he could also be expelled from the city with the help of the veche. Thus, the influence of the yoke had a huge negative impact on Kievan Rus, which not only became impoverished, but also, as a result of the increased fragmentation of the principalities between the heirs, gradually moved its center from Kyiv to Moscow, which was getting richer and gaining power (thanks to its active rulers)
- What changes have taken place in this area?
- How did business develop? Listen to Anvarova V. and draw a conclusion about the consequences of the Mongol invasion in the field of economy.
Researchers note in Russia during the yoke the decline of stone construction and the disappearance of complex crafts, such as the production of glass jewelry, cloisonne enamel, niello, granulation, and polychrome glazed ceramics. "Rus was thrown back several centuries, and in those centuries when the guild industry of the West was passing to the era of primitive accumulation, the Russian handicraft industry had to pass part of the historical path that had been done before Batu for the second time."
2.3. Tributary relationship. How do you understand the essence of the following historical source: “The population of Russian lands was taxed from their homes. Preparation for the introduction of the tax system in Russia was the census. In addition to the monetary tax, the yamskaya duty was added: providing carts and horses for the yamskaya service - mail. (Geller m. History of the Russian Empire).
As you remember, already near Ryazan, the Mongols demanded payment of tribute, and not having received it, they continued their campaign against other Russian cities and villages, burning and devastating on their way.
How were tributary relations established and developed? Listen to Druzhinina I.
For almost 20 years, there was no clear procedure for paying tribute. In 1257, clerks were sent to North-Eastern Russia to conduct a census in order to determine the internal resources of the population for use in military campaigns and organize an orderly collection of tribute. Since that time, annual tribute payments, called output, have been established. The population was taxed in accordance with their property status. The Italian monk Plano Carpini wrote that "... anyone who does not give this should be taken to the Tatars and turned into their slave." Initially, tenants, centurions, thousanders and temniks were appointed from local residents, who were supposed to monitor the flow of tribute from the courtyards assigned to them. The direct collection of tribute was carried out by Muslim merchants - tax-farmers, who had long traded with the Mongols. In Russia they were called infidels. They paid the khans at once the entire amount from this or that region, and themselves, having settled in one of the cities, collected it from the population, of course, in a larger amount. Since popular uprisings began against the Basurmans and the constant presence of Mongol troops was required to maintain the existing system, the khan eventually transferred the collection of the Horde tribute to the Russian princes, which led to new problems. The expenses associated with frequent trips to the Horde ruined the petty princes. Not receiving payment of debts, the Tatars completely ruined entire cities and volosts. In addition, strife arises, as princes often use trips to the Horde to weave intrigues against each other. The next step in the development of the Horde tribute collection system was the recognition by the khan of the exclusive right of the Grand Duke of Vladimir to receive and deliver output from all Russian lands to the Horde.
- What do you think are the consequences of this tribute payment procedure? (raising the status of the Grand Duke, centralizing the collection of tribute)
2.3. Find out the attitude of the people to their position
- How did the Russian people treat the oppressors?
The masses resisted the Horde oppression. Strong unrest occurred in Novgorod land. In 1257, when they began to collect tribute there, the Novgorodians refused to pay it. However, Alexander Nevsky, who considered it impossible to openly clash with the Horde, brutally cracked down on the rebels. However, the Novgorodians continued to resist. They refused to be "given in number", to be recorded during the census. Their indignation was also caused by the fact that the boyars "do it easy for themselves, but evil for the lesser." It was possible to put smaller people in the number only in 1259. But in 1262, in many cities of the Russian land, in particular in Rostov, Suzdal, Yaroslavl, Ustyug the Great, Vladimir, there were popular uprisings, many tribute collectors were Baskaks and Muslim merchants, to whom the Baskaks handed over the collection of tribute at the mercy, were killed. Frightened by the popular movement, the Horde decided to transfer a significant tribute to the specific Russian princes with tea.
Thus, the popular movement forced the Horde to go, if not to the complete abolition of Basqueism, then at least to limit it, and the obligation to collect tribute passed to the Russian princes.
2.5. Consider the development of culture.
BUT) The role of the church : “The privileged position of the church was ensured by the fact that the metropolitan, as princes, had direct access to the khan. This gave him the opportunity to influence politics. In Russian churches they prayed for the "free tsar", as the khan was called. Having received a label from the khan, the metropolitan was independent of the prince. (Geller m. History of the Russian Empire).
The establishment of the political domination of the conquerors over Russia somewhat changed the position of the church. She, like the princes, became a vassal of the khans. But at the same time, the Russian hierarchs got the opportunity to defend their interests in the Horde, regardless of the princely power, which made them active participants in the political struggle in Russia. This was facilitated by the loyal attitude of the Mongols towards all religious cults and their servants, and the release of the latter from paying tribute to the Horde, whichall other subjects of the Mongol Empire. This circumstance put the Russian Church in a privileged position, but for this she had to recognize the power of the Khan as given by God and call for obedience to her. The thirteenth century was a time of decisive penetration of Christianity into the masses of the population (the people sought protection and patronage from God), and the terrible decades of foreign conquest and yoke probably contributed to this process.
Thus, the influence of the yoke had a huge negative impact on Kievan Rus, which not only became impoverished, but also, as a result of the increased fragmentation of the principalities between the heirs, gradually moved its center from Kyiv to Moscow, which was getting richer and gaining power (thanks to its active rulers)
B) Development of culture Listen to Tolstoy
The influence of the Mongol conquest on cultural development is traditionally defined in historical writings as negative. According to many historians, cultural stagnation set in in Russia, expressed in the cessation of chronicle writing, stone construction, etc. Karamzin wrote: “At the same time, Russia, tormented by the Mughals, strained its forces solely in order not to disappear: we had no time for enlightenment!”. Under the rule of the Mongols, the Russians lost their civic virtues; in order to survive, they did not shy away from deception, love of money, cruelty: “Perhaps the very present character of the Russians still shows the stains placed on it by the barbarity of the Mughals,” wrote Karamzin. If any moral values were preserved in them at that time, then this happened solely thanks to Orthodoxy.
While recognizing the existence of these and other negative consequences, it should be noted that there are other consequences that cannot always be assessed from a negative point of view. The Tatar-Mongols tried not to openly encroach on the spiritual way of life of the Russian people, and above all on the Orthodox faith, although they destroyed churches. To some extent, they were tolerant of any religion, outwardly and in their own Golden Horde did not interfere with the performance of any religious rites. The Russian clergy, not without reason, were often considered by the Horde as their allies. Firstly, the Russian Church fought against the influence of Catholicism, and the Pope was an enemy of the Golden Horde. Secondly, the church in Russia in the initial period of the yoke supported the princes who advocated coexistence with the Horde. In turn, the Horde freed the Russian clergy from tribute and supplied the ministers of the church with letters of protection for church property. Later, the church played a significant role in rallying the entire Russian people to fight for independence.
The Russian scholar Alexander Richter draws attention to the Russian adoption of Mongolian diplomatic etiquette, as well as evidence of influence such as the isolation of women and them, the spread of inns and taverns, food preferences (tea and bread), methods of warfare, the practice of punishment (beating with a whip) , the use of extrajudicial decisions, the introduction of money and a system of measures, ways of processing silver and steel, numerous language innovations.
Eastern customs spread uncontrollably in Russia during the time of the Mongols, bringing with them a new culture. It changed in a general way: from white long Slavic shirts, long trousers, they switched to golden caftans, to colored trousers, to morocco boots. A great change in life made that time in the position of women: the domestic life of a Russian woman came from the East. In addition to these major features of everyday Russian life of that time, abacus, felt boots, coffee, dumplings, the uniformity of Russian and Asian carpentry and joinery tools, the similarity of the walls of the Kremlin of Beijing and Moscow, all this is the influence of the East. Church bells, this is a specific Russian feature, came from Asia, from there and pit bells. Before the Mongols, churches and monasteries did not use bells, but beat and riveted. The foundry art was then developed in China, and bells could come from there.
III. Consolidation.
1. So, we examined the features of the development of Russia in the period of the 13th - 14th centuries. Which point of view, in your opinion, most accurately reflects the changes that have taken place? Why
2. What do you think, what are the consequences of the Mongol-Tatar yoke? (Students answer, then write in notebooks):
Many Russian people were killed.
Many villages and towns were devastated.
The craft has fallen into disrepair. Many crafts are forgotten.
Funds were systematically extorted from the country in the form of an “exit”.
The disunity of the Russian lands increased, because. the Mongol-Tatars pitted the princes against each other.
Many cultural values \u200b\u200bare lost, there was a decline in stone construction.
A consequence hidden from contemporaries: if in pre-Mongol Russia feudal relations developed according to the general European scheme, i.e. from the predominance of state forms to the strengthening of patrimonial ones, then in post-Mongolian Russia, the pressure of the state on the individual increases, and state forms are conserved. This is due to the need to find funds to pay tribute.
The position of the Vladimir prince is strengthening.
IV. Summing up the lesson. Consequences of the Mongol conquest:
a) Economic: The agricultural centers ("wild field") were deserted. After the invasion, many production skills are lost.
6) Social: The country's population has drastically declined. Many people were killed, no less were taken into slavery. Many cities have been destroyed.
Different categories of the population suffered losses to varying degrees. Apparently, the peasant population suffered less: the enemy could not even get into some villages and villages located in dense forests. The townspeople died more often: the invaders burned the cities, killed many residents, took them into slavery. Many princes and combatants - professional warriors - died. in)Cultural : The Mongol-Tatars took away many artisans and architects into captivity, there was a constant outflow of significant material resources to the Horde, and the decline of cities.
d) Loss of communication with other countries : The invasion and the yoke threw the Russian lands back in their development.
Evaluation of student activities
V. Homework. P. 15-16, p.130-135
Do you agree that: “The Mongol-Tatars swept over Russia like a cloud of locusts, like a hurricane crushing everything that was in its path. They ravaged cities, burned villages, plundered. It was during this unfortunate time, which lasted about two centuries, that Russia allowed Europe to overtake itself.
Golden Horde yoke(1243-1480) - the system of exploitation of Russian lands by the Mongol-Tatar conquerors.
“Horde Exit”
taxable population census
Basques
label
military service
tribute, which the Russian principalities Golden Horde.
Accounting for the taxable population in Russia. (no tribute was taken from the clergy)
military protection of the tribute collectors.
a charter to reign, issued to a Russian prince by the Mongol Khan.
the male population should participate in the conquests of the Mongols.
The Mongol-Tatar yoke delayed the development of Russia, but did not stop it at all? Why do you think?
Mongol-Tatars did not settle on Russian lands (forests and forest-steppe are not their landscape, it is alien to them).
Tolerance of pagan Tatars: Russia retained its religious independence. The only requirement for the ROC is prayers for the health of the great khan.
Russian princes did not lose power over the population of their lands. They became vassals of the Khan of the Golden Horde, recognizing his supreme power (the autonomy of Russia).
Slide 24. Slide 25. Khan's governors were sent to Russia, who
Materials "The establishment of the Mongol - Tatar yoke."
“The Horde maintained power over Russia with the help of constant terror. In the Russian principalities, cities, the Horde punitive detachments, led by the Baskaks, settled down; their task is to maintain order, the obedience of the princes and their subjects, the main thing is to monitor the proper collection and flow of tribute from Russia to the Horde - the "Horde exit". (Sakharov A.N. Buganov V.I. History of Russia)”.
Discussions about the Horde yoke in Russian historiography concern the negative and positive aspects of the impact of the yoke, the degree of inhibition of the objective processes of the country's historical development. Of course, Russia was plundered and for several centuries was forced to tribute, but, on the other hand, it is noted in the literature that the preservation of the church, church institutions and property contributed not only to the preservation of faith, literacy, church culture, but also to the growth of the economic and moral authority of the church. Comparing the conditions of the Tatar-Mongolian administration of Russia, in particular, with the Turkish (Muslim) conquests, the authors note that the latter, of course, caused much more damage to the conquered peoples. A number of historians note and emphasize the importance of the Tatar-Mongol yoke for the formation of ideas of centralization and for the rise of Moscow. Supporters of the idea that the Tatar-Mongol conquest sharply slowed down the unifying tendencies in the Russian lands are opposed by those who point out that strife and separation of the principalities existed even before the invasion. They also argue about the degree of "moral decline" and the national spirit. We are talking about the extent to which the manners and customs of the Tatar-Mongol were adopted by the local subjugated population, to what extent it "coarse morals". Almost no dispute, however, the idea that it was the Mongol-Tatar conquest of Russia that became the factor that determined the difference in the development of Russia from Western Europe, created a specific “despotic”, autocratic rule in the Muscovite state subsequently.
The Mongol-Tatar yoke left an indelible mark on the history of Russia, dividing it into two eras - before the "Batu invasion" and after it, pre-Mongolian Russia and Russia after the invasion of the Mongols.
P. 3. Question to the students.
Students complete the task assigned to them at the beginning of the lesson: in Russian historiography there are three points of view on the role of the yoke in Russian history; write,