Historians consider the date of the beginning of the collapse of the Old Russian state to be the year of the death of Grand Duke Yaroslav the Wise, who owned the throne of Kyiv from 1016 to 1054.
Of course, centrifugal forces in the Russian state began to act even under Vladimir the Baptist: Yaroslav the Wise himself opposed his father, refusing to pay tribute to Kyiv in 2,000 hryvnias.
strife
Discord between the sons of Vladimir arose immediately after his death. At first, it almost resulted in the capture of Kyiv by the Pechenegs, who were called by the son of Vladimir Yaropolk, and then the Polish king Boleslav the Brave almost ascended the throne of Kyiv. And only the indignant population of Kyiv managed to save the situation: the people of Kiev began to cut the Poles, and the king with the army was forced to leave the city.
The strife between the 12 sons of Vladimir led to the fact that everyone died, except for Yaroslav and Mstislav. And after the death of the Grand Duke Yaroslav the Wise, who did a lot to strengthen the Old Russian state, Russia, according to the historian Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin, "buried its power and prosperity."
Two forces
The Soviet historian Boris Dmitrievich Grekov noted in his writings that the Old Russian state collapsed under the influence of two forces: the strength of the Grand Duke of Kyiv, seeking to assert his dominance in the lands of Russia, and the forces of specific princes, each of which denied the right of Kyiv to dispose of all the land and sought to assert its sovereignty .
Many conflicts arose because of the order of applicants for princely tables. Power was transferred by seniority - from a smaller table to a larger one, which caused controversy.
New principle of succession
After the death of Yaroslav, the struggle for Kyiv and its sovereignty was continued by his sons, and then by his grandchildren. Although one of them - Vladimir Monomakh - in 1097 tried to stop the strife by gathering all the princes in the city of Lyubech, where a new principle of succession of princely power was proclaimed. From now on, each prince with his offspring kept his fiefdom, not claiming other people's cities. And although civil strife subsided, in fact, this only increased the disunity of the lands.
At the princely council, Kyiv remained the patrimony of the grandson of Yaroslav the Wise, Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, after whom Vladimir Monomakh himself ascended the throne. The time of his reign and the reign of his son, Mstislav, became a period of relative stability in Russia. But later, Mstislav handed over the reign to his brother Yaropolk, who decided to fulfill the will of his father - Vladmir Monomakh - and plant the eldest son of his brother Mstislav, his nephew Vsevolod-Gabriel, Prince of Novgorod, to reign in Kyiv. This angered the other sons of Monomakh, among whom was Yuri Dolgoruky, who owned Rostov, and led to a general war, about which the Novgorod chronicle says the following: "... And the whole Russian land was torn to pieces ..."
13 lands
Closer to the middle of the 12th century, Ancient Russia actually broke up into 13 lands that were heterogeneous in area and composition of the population.
Nine princely "fatherlands" remained the backbone of the state.
The Principality of Gorodno (the city of Gorodno), which later broke up into volosts and came under the rule of Lithuania.
The Turov-Pinsk principality, located in Polesie and in the region of the lower reaches of the Pripyat River, with the cities of Turov and Pinsk. Two centuries later, it fell under the rule of the Lithuanian princes.
Volyn-Vladimir principality, headed by the city of Vladimir, which included the smaller cities of Lutsk, Izyaslavl, Dorogobuzh, Shumsk and others.
Smolensk Principality with its center in Smolensk, which was located in the upper reaches of the Volga and Northern Dvina rivers and included at least 18 cities and settlements, including Mozhaisk, Orsha, Rzhev, Toropets and Rostislavl.
The Principality of Suzdal (Rostov-Suzdal, and in the XII century - Vladimir-Suzdal), which was located in the north-east of Russia and extended far to the north.
The Principality of Murom, headed by the city of Murom, was part of the Kyiv estate for a long time, but separated at the beginning of the 13th century and existed until the invasion of the Horde.
Around 1160, the Ryazan principality separated from the Principality of Murom, with its center in Ryazan. True, historians often consider these lands as one whole.
In the south of Russia, the Principality of Chernigov and the Principality of Galicia continued to exist.
The Kiev principality was still considered the center of the Old Russian land, although the power of Kyiv was nominal and rested on the authority of ancestors and tradition.
Four more "lands" did not have princely power over themselves. This was Novgorod with the surrounding territories, in which a strong local elite was formed and power belonged to the veche. Later, Pskov broke away from the Novgorod lands, which was also controlled by the people's assembly. The Pereyaslav lands did not have their own princes, but invited outside rulers to reign. For a long time, the city of Galich remained a draw (later it entered the Galicia-Volyn principality).
The domestic and foreign policy of the state was ahead of the four most powerful principalities - Suzdal, Volyn, Smolensk and Chernigov.
Known until the XII century, the principality of Tmutarkan and the city of Belaya Vezha at the very beginning of the century fell under the onslaught of the Kipchaks (Polovtsy) and ceased to exist.
Russia is united
However, the idea of the unity of the Russian land did not disappear, as before, Kyiv remained a “capital city”, and the Kyiv prince was called the “prince of all Russia”, although the Vladimir princes already had the right to bear the title “Grand Duke”.
Before the conquest of the southern territories by Lithuania, all Russian lands were, in fact, in the possession of one princely family - the Rurik family, which united at the moment of the highest danger to the homeland. So, for example, almost all the princes took part in the campaign against the Mongol army in 1233.
The Orthodox faith played a huge role in the unification of the lands. The Church was alone and was first headed by the Metropolitan of Kyiv. At the end of the 13th century, the residence of the metropolitan was transferred to Vladimir, and then to Moscow.
In addition to these factors, there was a historically established cultural and linguistic community, which did not allow the Old Russian state to completely disintegrate and sink into oblivion.
History as a science, subject, goals and principles of its study.
In human life, which relate to the life of peoples and states, the activities of individuals, international relations.
The subject of the national history course is the Russian historical process from antiquity to the present.
In the revival of the Fatherland, along with economic factors, the intellectual potential of society plays an important role, and this, to some extent, depends on higher education, on the place and importance of the humanities in it. In the process of studying history, a person develops a historical consciousness, the content of which includes a number of elements:
1. Knowledge of the facts of history;
2. The ability to consider reality in all three time dimensions: in the past, present, future;
3. Generalized historical experience and the lessons of history arising from it;
4. Social forecasting based on the study of social processes.
History features. History is traditionally the basis of humanitarian education and the most important factor in the formation of people's self-awareness. It performs a number of functions, often beyond the world of science. These include:
– descriptive (narrative) function
, which boils down to fixing what is happening and the primary systematization of information;
– cognitive (cognitive, explanatory) function
, the essence of which is the understanding and explanation of historical processes and phenomena;
– prognostic function (foreseeing the future)
and practical-recommendatory (practical-political) function
. Both involve using the lessons of the past to improve the lives of human communities in the near and distant future;
– educational (cultural and ideological) function, function of social memory
.
2. Natural-climatic, geopolitical and other factors of Russia's development and their influence on Russian history.
In physical and geographical terms, our Fatherland is a complex complex. The country occupies the territory of two parts of the world - the eastern part of Europe and the north of Asia. A feature of the relief is the predominance of plains in the west and northwest, and mountains in the south and east.
An important geographical factor that determines the characteristics of the country's territory are the seas, lakes, and other bodies of water. Water systems may have contributed or counteracted economic development lands, economic and political ties, in some cases played an important role in the historical fate of individual territories. Russia is a vast, sparsely populated territory, the Russian border is protected by natural barriers. It is also characterized by isolation from the seas, a dense river network, an intermediate position between Europe and Asia. A huge variety of soils has influenced and still affects human economic activity. Its characteristic properties are monotonous surfaces, comparatively short coastline and the absence of internal natural boundaries in the form of mountains and mountain ranges. Russia has always been characterized by long winters and short summers, as a result of which the volume of the total surplus product was low. And this led to the emergence of serfdom, despotic power. The fundamental features of the peasant economy, ultimately, left an indelible imprint on the Russian national character, at first glance contradictory: the ability to exert oneself to the extreme - the absence of a pronounced habit of thoroughness, accuracy in work, eternal craving for the “podraisky land”, an extraordinary feeling of kindness, collectivism, readiness to provide assistance, up to self-sacrifice, etc.
3.Settlement of the Slavs in Europe. Eastern Slavs in antiquity.
The ancestors of the Slavs - the Proto-Slavs - belonged to the Indo-European family of peoples who inhabited the vast territories of the European continent, stretching from Europe to India, in the 4th-3rd millennia BC.
In the second half of the 1st millennium BC, the ancient Slavs settled the lands from the Elbe and Oder in the West to the Upper Dnieper and Middle Dnieper in the East. During the period of cohabitation, the Slavic tribes spoke the same Proto-Slavic language. However, as they settled, they began to move further and further away from each other, which was especially evident in language and culture.
Somewhat later, the Slavic family was divided into three branches, which served as the basis for three modern nations - Western Slavs (Poles, Czechs, Slovaks), Southern Slavs (Bulgarians, Croats, Serbs, Slovenes, Macedonians, Bosnians, Montenegrins), Eastern Slavs (Russians, Belarusians , Ukrainians).
The resettlement of the Eastern Slavs in antiquity
In the 6th-9th centuries, the Eastern Slavs settled in the territory stretching from east to west from the upper reaches of the Don and the Middle Oka to the Carpathians and from the south to the north from the Middle Dnieper to the Neva and Lake Ladoga. The main occupation of the East Slavic tribes was agriculture.
In the process of the settlement of the Slavic tribes along the East European Plain, they undergo a gradual decomposition of the primitive communal system. As the Tale of Bygone Years says, individual tribes united around one of the most powerful tribes in tribal unions or reigns. The annals mention more than a dozen such associations and places of their settlement. Eastern tribal unions were headed by princes from the tribal nobility. Particularly important decisions for the tribe were made at general meetings - veche gatherings.
The most influential, according to historians, was the union of the meadows that inhabited the territory of the middle reaches of the Dnieper. The land of glades, according to ancient chronicles, was called "Rus". It is considered to be the core of the ancient Russian state.
The process of gathering the Slavic lands into a single whole took place from north to south around two centers: in the northwest - Novgorod, in the south - Kyiv. As a result, Novgorod-Kievan Rus was formed. Conventionally, the date of this unification is considered to be the reign of Oleg - 882. The two-centric structure was actually preserved in the future, despite the fact that Kiev was named the capital. They are considered the ancestors of modern Chuvash, partly Tatars, Mari, Udmurts.
4. Formation of the Old Russian state and its history There are three main versions of the origin of the Old Russian state:
1. Norman theory
2. Anti-Normanism (Slavic theory)
3. Neo-Norman theory
According to the chroniclers of the beginning of the 12th century, in 862 Prince Rurik and his two brothers were called to Russia by Novgorodians, marking the beginning of a princely dynasty. The legend about the calling of the Varangian princes served as the basis for the creation of the Norman theory.
M.V. Lomonosov denied the Varangian origin of the word "Rus", associating this word with the river Ros in the south of the Slavic territory. The "southern" hypothesis of the origin of the name "Rus", the thesis about the internal development of the ancient Russian state contributed to the formation of the anti-Norman theory. There are also several more assumptions for the name "Rus": from the word "blond" - fair-haired, from the word "Russo" - red.
During the first half of the 20th century, a neo-Norman theory was formed, the essence of which is that the state cannot be imposed from the outside, it is a purely internal process of any society. The Slavs were at that stage of development when they should have had a state, but if the chronicle tells about the Varangians, then, apparently, they were and contributed to the acceleration of the emergence of the state among the Eastern Slavs.
Reasons for the formation of the Old Russian state:
1. The collapse of the tribal community, its property stratification, the emergence of a neighboring community;
2. The influx of population into the lands of North-Eastern Russia;
3. Formation of tribal unions.
Stages of formation of statehood.
First there are tribal unions. Russian chronicles name two - northern and southern: Southern - with a center in Kyiv, Northern - with a center in Novgorod.
In 882, Prince Oleg made a campaign against Kyiv, killed the Kievan princes Askold and Dir, and proclaimed Kyiv the mother of Russian cities. Thus, the process of formation of a single Old Russian state is completed. The Kyiv princes sought to seize the surrounding Slavic and non-Slavic lands. The expansion of the state was facilitated by the wars against the Khazars, Volga and Danube Bulgaria. Raised the authority of the Old Russian state and campaigns against Byzantium. The ancient Russian state was early feudal, state property dominated in it, and the property of the feudal lords was only being formed. Therefore, the exploitation of the population was carried out by the state mainly in the form of tribute (polyudya). The trend towards strengthening the state was observed until the middle of the 11th century, but already under Yaroslav the Wise by the beginning of the 12th century. the process of feudal fragmentation was growing, through which all states passed.
5.The adoption of Christianity in Russia: causes and significance.
In the 9th century, Christianity spread throughout almost all of Europe. In Russia, paganism remained the state religion, but from the middle of the 10th century, the first Christians appeared. In 946 (or 954), Princess Olga converted to Christianity, but her son Svyatoslav remained a pagan. In 988, the baptism of Russia takes place. Using the connections of Russia with Byzantium, the Kyiv prince Vladimir baptized the people of Kiev in the Dnieper, and then Christianity was introduced in other cities.
Causes:
1. Strengthening the role of the state and its rise above the people.
2. The desire to unite the country with religion.
3. To join unions, raise international prestige.
Baptism took place voluntarily, but there were cases of violence.
At that moment, it was with the Christian powers that Russia maintained relations, so the choice of the prince is not surprising. The fact that Orthodoxy was chosen was a factor in the closest rapprochement between Russia and Byzantium, these countries had not only political and economic ties, they were culturally close. Also in favor of Orthodoxy was the fact that such a religion depended on the ruler and was subordinate to him. Naturally, the Byzantine patriarch became the main church in Russia, but Russia still remained independent both politically and religiously. The next defining moment was that Orthodoxy allows rituals to be performed in the national language of any people, while Catholicism requires rituals to be performed in Latin. It was important for Kyiv that it was the Slavic language that was exalted.
It should be noted that the adoption of Orthodoxy in Russia was not easy, it underwent a process of Russification. The originality of the Slavs could not be put anywhere, and the new faith was still weak, unlike the old rites, so it is not surprising that the assimilation of Orthodoxy took place in a peculiar way.
Meanwhile, in contrast to Kyiv, where the new religion took root relatively easily thanks to the authority of the prince, some regions actively resisted the reforms. For example, the inhabitants of Novgorod resisted for a very long time, and they had to be forcibly converted to Christianity. Therefore, analyzing the stages of the adoption of Christianity in Russia, it must be said that not everything is so simple. In the minds of the people of that time, paganism existed for a long time. The Orthodox Church had to adapt and sometimes combine pagan holidays and its cults. And now we have such pagan holidays as Maslenitsa and some others that have merged with Orthodox ones. This process cannot be called dual faith, it is rather a synthesis of paganism and Christianity, which resulted in Russian Orthodoxy. Over time, the pagan elements were removed and gradually only some of the most persistent remained.
Effects:
1. The morals of the Russian people softened.
2. Increase of moral and spiritual values, development of culture.
3. Strengthening princely power.
4. Strengthening the international authority of Russia.
5. The unification of the Russian people, the birth of national identity (the formation of one nation).
6. The construction of temples, the emergence of cities and new crafts.
7. The adoption of the alphabet (Cyril and Methodius, IX century), the spread of literacy, education.
By the turn of the 10th - 11th centuries, the state of Rus had become one of the largest and most powerful in Europe.
Russia in the XI-XIII centuries. The collapse of the ancient Russian state.
In 1097, princes from different lands of Kievan Rus gathered in the city of Lyubech and proclaimed a new principle of relations among themselves: "Let everyone keep his fatherland." Its adoption meant that the princes abandoned the ladder system of succession to princely thrones (it went to the eldest in the entire grand ducal family) and switched to inheriting the throne from father to eldest son within individual lands. By the middle of the XII century. the political fragmentation of the Old Russian state with its center in Kyiv was already a fait accompli. It is believed that the introduction of the principle adopted in Lyubech was a factor in the collapse of Kievan Rus. However, not the only and not the most important.
During the 11th century Russian lands developed in an ascending line: the population grew, the economy grew stronger, large princely and boyar land ownership increased, cities grew rich. They were less and less dependent on Kyiv and were burdened by his guardianship. To maintain order within his "fatherland", the prince had enough strength and power. Local boyars and cities supported their princes in their quest for independence: they were closer, more closely connected with them, better able to protect their interests. External reasons were added to the internal ones. The Polovtsy raids weakened the southern Russian lands, the population left the restless lands for the northeastern (Vladimir, Suzdal) and southwestern (Galic, Volyn) outskirts. The princes of Kyiv were weakening in the military and economic sense, their authority and influence in solving all-Russian affairs were falling.
In the 30-40s. 12th century princes cease to recognize the power of the Kievan prince. Russia breaks up into separate principalities (“lands”). For Kyiv began the struggle of different princely branches. The strongest lands were Chernigov, Vladimir-ro-Suzdal, Galicia-Volyn. Their princes were subject to princes whose possessions (destinies) were part of large lands. The prerequisites for fragmentation are the growth of local centers, already burdened by the guardianship of Kyiv, the development of princely and boyar land ownership.
The principality of Vladimir rose under Yuri Dolgoruky and his sons Andrei Bogolyubsky (d. 1174) and Vsevolod the Big Nest (d. 1212). Yuri and Andrei captured Kyiv more than once, but Andrei, unlike his father, planted his brother there, and did not reign himself. Andrew tried to rule by despotic methods and was killed by conspirators. the Polovtsian danger intensifies. The southern princes, led by Svyatoslav of Kyiv, inflicted several defeats on them, but in 1185 Igor Novgorod-Seversky was defeated and captured by the Polovtsy, the nomads ravaged part of southern Russia. But by the end of the century, the Polovtsy, having broken up into many separate hordes, stopped the raids. The consequences of political fragmentation.
1. In the conditions of the formation of new economic regions and the formation of new political formations, the steady development of the peasant economy took place, new arable lands were developed, there was an expansion and quantitative multiplication of estates, which for their time became the most progressive form of farming.
2. Within the framework of the principalities-states, the Russian church was gaining strength, which had a strong influence on culture.
3. A counterbalance to the final disintegration of Russia was the constantly existing external danger to the Russian lands from the side of the Polovtsians, respectively, the Kyiv prince acted as the defender of Russia.
Political fragmentation
From the 2nd third of the 12th century to the end of the 15th century, a period of feudal fragmentation lasted in Russia. The main prerequisites:
weakening of the central power of the Kyiv prince,
strengthening the power of the feudal lords in the field. (uprising in Kyiv-1113.
the disaster of the people due to the strife of the princes) Large-scale feudal landownership grew.
Large feudal lords have their own squads, control apparatus: an increase in desire to separate from Kiev. Special reliance on service nobles, who made up the squad. and the dependence of smerds. At the end of the 12th-beginning of the 13th century. three centers developed in Russia: the Galicia-Volyn principality had territories from the Prussians and Lithuanians to the Danube (Galic, Cherven, Lvov, Przemysl, Vladimir) 1199-1205 princes. Roman Mstislavovich. A special flourishing under Daniil Romanovich (1238-1264) The boyars wanted to get out of the princely power, conspiring with the Vladimir-Suzdal region from Nizhny Novg to Tver. -1157)
He expanded by subjugating: Murom, Ryazan, Mordovians, Mari. RostetMoscowAndrei Bogolyubsky (1157-1174) -captured Kyiv and proclaimed himself the Grand Duke. .
Novgorod. freed from Kyiv in 1136. Power belonged to the rich. Boyars. The prince was invited with a retinue. The prince did not have the right to manage and own in the republic. In 1348, Pskov separated. Polit. crushed. did not result in a cult. disunity. The general religious conscience. And the unity of the church slowed the processes apart. I created the predp.
For the future reunification of Russian lands.
A positive moment of fragmentation was the development of the country's regions.
Negative: 1. Civil strife 2. The struggle for the territory of the principality 3. Russia was secured on the eve of the next invasion of nomads.
In 1097, princes from different lands of Kievan Rus came to the city of Lyubech and proclaimed a new principle of relations among themselves: "Let everyone keep his fatherland." Its adoption meant that the princes abandoned the ladder system of succession to princely thrones (it went to the eldest in the entire grand ducal family) and switched to inheriting the throne from father to eldest son within individual lands. By the middle of the XII century. the political fragmentation of the Old Russian state with its center in Kyiv was already a fait accompli. It is believed that the introduction of the principle adopted in Lyubech was a factor in the collapse of Kievan Rus. However, not the only and not the most important.
Political fragmentation was inevitable. During the 11th century Russian lands developed in an ascending line: the population grew, the economy grew stronger, large princely and boyar land ownership increased, cities grew rich. They were less and less dependent on Kyiv and were burdened by his guardianship. To maintain order within his "fatherland", the prince had enough strength and power. Local boyars and cities supported their princes in their quest for independence: they were closer, more closely connected with them, better able to protect their interests. External reasons were added to the internal ones. The Polovtsy raids weakened the southern Russian lands, the population left the restless lands for the northeastern (Vladimir, Suzdal) and southwestern (Galic, Volyn) outskirts. The princes of Kyiv were weakening in the military and economic sense, their authority and influence in solving all-Russian affairs were falling.
The negative consequences of the political fragmentation of Russia are concentrated in the military-strategic area: the defense capability has weakened in the face of external threats, inter-princely feuds have intensified. But fragmentation also had positive aspects. The isolation of the lands contributed to their economic and cultural development. The collapse of a single state did not mean a complete loss of principles that united the Russian lands. The seniority of the Grand Prince of Kyiv was formally recognized; ecclesiastical and linguistic unity was preserved; the basis of the legislation of the destinies was the norms of Russian Truth. In the popular mind up to the XIII-XIV centuries. lived ideas about the unity of the lands that were part of Kievan Rus.
At the end of the XII century. There were 15 independent lands, essentially independent states. The largest were: in the south-west - the Galicia-Volyn principality; in the northeast - the Vladimir-Suzdal principality; in the northwest - the Novgorod Republic.
Reasons for fragmentation:
External: no external threat
Economical:
The dominance of subsistence farming
Shift in trade routes
· The economy of individual lands is developing, the principalities are turning into a strong state. Education
Socio-political:
· Multinational composition
Kyiv is losing its historical role
The strife of the princes does not stop
The boyars begin to fight the princes
The mechanism of inheritance of supreme power
The consequences of the collapse of Russia:
Development of the economy of each principality
Easier to govern the principality
Development of cities, crafts, trade
+ Emergence of new centers of chronicle writing
Cultural development
Development of a peasant economy, development of new arable lands;
The weakening of the country's defense
Increased risk of external intrusion
Principalities are crushed
strife
The collapse of Russia was not complete:
The influence of Kyiv is preserved
・United Church
The main political centers of Russia in the period of fragmentation: common and differences.
During the period of fragmentation on the territory of Russia, 12 states-principalities were formed: Rostov-Suzdal, Murmansk, Ryazan, Smolensk, Kiev, Pereyaslav, Galicia-Volinsky, Chernigov, Polotsk-Minsk, Turov-Pinsk, Tmutarakan, Novgorod land. Inside some of them, the process of division into smaller principalities-possessions continued.
In the Old Russian lands, there are 3 ways of forming feudal property: the land of the prince and his relatives; the lands of "put in place" warriors (feudal nobility); the lands of the "best people" of the community (tribal nobility). Due to the underdevelopment of socio-economic relations and the primacy of external causes in the formation of the Old Russian state, the third method was preferable. In Soviet historiography, the economic option for the development of feudal relations in the Old Russian lands was considered a priority, i.e. feudal fragmentation is a natural stage in the development of society. The development of a subsistence economy ultimately leads to the fact that individual subjects of ownership are able to maintain their own apparatus of ownership.
In the XI century. there was a disintegration of the unified Old Russian state into 13-15 principalities. The most prominent in their development were: Vladimir-Suzdal, Galicia-Volyn and Novgorod principalities. Kiev also lost its authority. For the princes, the occupation of the Kyiv throne became a purely symbolic event, however, this fact itself gave rise to strife and civil strife.
Novgorod Principality.
The geopolitical position of the Novgorod land was determined by the conditions of its socio-economic and political development. There are no enemies. Trade with Europe and Scandinavian countries.
vast territory; the climate and soils are unsuitable for agriculture; remoteness from the steppe; proximity to the Baltic Sea and many lakes.
Compared to other Slavic lands, the conditions for agriculture were unfavorable here. But a lot of furs and salt. Novgorod imported fabrics, metal products, raw materials for handicraft production, exported furs and craftsmen's products. Novgorod land was on the way "from the Varangians to the Greeks." And it was trade that determined the social differentiation of the population. There is an opinion of historians that Novgorod and Staraya Ladoga arose as Varangian tax collection centers, where Slovenes, Krivichi and representatives of the Finno-Ugric peoples (Merya) then began to settle. Novgorod played a significant role in political history Ancient Russia. Oleg, Vladimir, Yaroslav began their ascent to the throne of Kyiv from Novgorod, recruiting the Varangians into their squad. These facts indicate that even during the period of statehood, Novgorod was not a mono-ethnic center of the Slavic lands, it was a kind of link between Russia and Europe.
Traders and artisans dominated. But still, the social elite of the Novgorod society was made up, first of all, by the boyars-landowners. The class of boyars was formed here differently than in other regions: they were not the prince's combatants, but the local tribal nobility, therefore, independent of the prince (they owed him nothing). Intermediaries between the Novgorod boyars and the outside world were merchants (guests) who traded on their behalf. Since the raw materials belonged to the boyars, they owned the majority of the profits from trade. The main partners of the Novgorodians were the German city of Lübeck (Gondzee Union between independent cities of Germany) and Swedish merchants from the island of Gotland. Novgorodians themselves made only a few trips to Europe, because. courts in the X-XIII centuries. could not make long voyages.
Craftsmen in Novgorod were largely dependent on the nobility. Very often, the workshops of artisans themselves were located on the territory of boyar estates. Despite the craft and trade nature of the bulk of the population of Novgorod, the real power in the city belonged to the landowning boyars, whose estates were both within the Novgorod "hundreds" and in distant colonies. Due to the peculiarities of the Novgorod land, the boyars were firmly connected with the foreign fur trade, and this gave them great economic strength and corporate cohesion.
The history of the Novgorod Republic begins with 1136 when the grandson of Vladimir Monomakh Vsevolod Mstislavich was expelled from Novgorod. From this period, a peculiar political system was established in Novgorod, called the Novgorod feudal or aristocratic republic (slide 8). In reality, political power was concentrated in the hands of 300-400 families (as a rule, boyar families), which were the subjects of political law, i.e. members of local governments - Veche. Rich merchants could also take part in its work. Veche elected the head of local self-government - posadnik and thousandth. In modern historical literature, opinions about the functions of the thousandth differ. Classic: thousand led the people's militia. However, now they believe that if this was his function, then it was secondary. First of all, the tysyatsky was responsible for collecting taxes, because. By profession, Novgorod artisans and merchants were divided into hundreds, which united into thousands. Veche also chose Novgorod archbishop. This was a unique phenomenon, because in all other lands, the bishop was appointed by the Kyiv Metropolitan, and then approved by the Kyiv Metropolis. The archbishop was responsible for foreign policy, sealed all the international treaties of the Novgorodians, was in charge of the Novgorod treasury
: limited monarchy
In the XII century, Kievan Rus broke up into independent principalities. The era of the XII-XVI centuries is usually called the specific period or feudal fragmentation. 1132, the year of the death of the last powerful prince of Kyiv, Mstislav the Great, is considered to be the turn of the collapse. The result of the collapse was the emergence of new political formations in place of the Old Russian state, a distant consequence - the formation of modern peoples: Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians.
Reasons for the collapse
Kievan Rus was not a centralized state. Like most early medieval powers, its collapse was natural. The period of disintegration is usually interpreted not simply as strife of the overgrown offspring of Rurik, but as an objective and even progressive process associated with an increase in boyar land ownership. In the principalities, their own nobility arose, which was more profitable to have its own prince protecting its rights than to support the Grand Duke of Kyiv.
Crisis brewing
The first threat to the integrity of the country arose immediately after the death of Vladimir I Svyatoslavich. Vladimir ruled the country, seating his 12 sons in the main cities. The eldest son Yaroslav, planted in Novgorod, already during the life of his father refused to send tribute to Kyiv. When Vladimir died (1015), a fratricidal massacre began, ending in the death of all children except Yaroslav and Mstislav of Tmutarakan. The two brothers divided the "Russian Land", which was the core of the Rurikovich's possessions, along the Dnieper. Only in 1036, after the death of Mstislav, Yaroslav began to rule single-handedly over the entire territory of Russia, except for the isolated principality of Polotsk, where, from the end of the 10th century, the descendants of another son of Vladimir, Izyaslav, established themselves.
After the death of Yaroslav in 1054, Russia was divided in accordance with his will among five sons. The elder Izyaslav was given Kyiv and Novgorod, Svyatoslav - Chernigov, Ryazan, Murom and Tmutarakan, Vsevolod - Pereyaslavl and Rostov, the younger, Vyacheslav and Igor - Smolensk and Volyn. The established procedure for replacing princely tables has received the name "ladder" in modern historiography. The princes moved in turn from table to table in accordance with their seniority. With the death of one of the princes, the lower ones moved up a step. But, if one of the sons died before his parent and did not have time to visit his table, then his descendants were deprived of the rights to this table and became “outcasts”. On the one hand, this order prevented the isolation of the lands, since the princes constantly moved from one table to another, but on the other hand, it gave rise to constant conflicts between uncles and nephews. In 1097, at the initiative of Vladimir Vsevolodovich Monomakh, the next generation of princes gathered for a congress in Lyubech, where a decision was made to end the strife and a new principle was proclaimed: “everyone keeps his fatherland.” Thus, the process of creating regional dynasties was opened.
Kyiv, by decision of the Lyubech Congress, was recognized as the fatherland of Svyatopolk Izyaslavich (1093-1113), which meant the preservation of the tradition of inheriting the capital by the genealogical senior prince. The reign of Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125) and his son Mstislav (1125-1132) became a period of political stabilization, and almost all parts of Russia, including the Principality of Polotsk, again found themselves in the orbit of Kyiv.
Mstislav transferred the reign of Kiev to his brother Yaropolk. The intention of the latter to fulfill the plan of Vladimir Monomakh and make his son Mstislav, Vsevolod, his successor, bypassing the younger Monomashichs - the Rostov prince Yuri Dolgoruky and the Volyn prince Andrei, led to a general internecine war, characterizing which the Novgorod chronicler wrote in 1134: "And the whole Russian land was torn apart."
Rise of sovereign principalities
By the middle of the XII century, Kievan Rus was actually divided into 13 principalities (according to chronicle terminology "lands"), each of which pursued an independent policy. The principalities differed both in terms of the size of the territory and the degree of consolidation, and in the balance of power between the prince, the boyars, the emerging service nobility and the ordinary population.
The nine principalities were ruled by their own dynasties. Their structure reproduced in miniature the system that previously existed on the scale of the whole of Russia: local tables were distributed among the members of the dynasty according to the ladder principle, the main table went to the eldest in the family. The princes did not seek to occupy tables in foreign lands, and the external borders of this group of principalities were distinguished by stability.
At the end of the 11th century, the sons of the eldest grandson of Yaroslav the Wise, Rostislav Vladimirovich, were assigned to the Przemysl and Tereboval volosts, later united into the Galician principality (which flourished during the reign of Yaroslav Osmomysl). From 1127, the sons of Davyd and Oleg Svyatoslavich ruled in the Chernigov principality (later only the Olgovichi). In the Principality of Murom that separated from him, their uncle Yaroslav Svyatoslavich ruled. Later, the Principality of Ryazan separated from the Murom Principality. The descendants of the son of Vladimir Monomakh, Yuri Dolgoruky, settled in the Rostov-Suzdal land. Since the 1120s, the principality of Smolensk has been assigned to the line of the grandson of Vladimir Monomakh, Rostislav Mstislavich. In the Volyn principality, the descendants of another grandson of Monomakh, Izyaslav Mstislavich, began to rule. In the second half of the 12th century, the Turov-Pinsk principality was assigned to the descendants of Prince Svyatopolk Izyaslavich. From the 2nd third of the 12th century, the Gorodensky principality was assigned to the descendants of Vsevolodk (his patronymic is not given in the annals, presumably he was the grandson of Yaropolk Izyaslavich). The enclaved Principality of Tmutarakan and the city of Belaya Vezha ceased to exist at the beginning of the 12th century, having fallen under the blows of the Polovtsians.
The three principalities were not attached to any one dynasty. The Pereyaslav Principality did not become a fatherland, which during the XII century - XIII centuries was owned by the younger representatives of different branches of the Monomakhoviches, who came from other lands.
Kyiv remained a constant bone of contention. In the second half of the 12th century, the struggle for it was mainly between the Monomakhoviches and the Olgoviches. At the same time, the area around Kyiv - the so-called "Russian land" in the narrow sense of the word - continued to be considered as a common domain of the entire princely family, and representatives of several dynasties could occupy tables in it at once. For example, in 1181-1194 Kyiv was in the hands of Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich of Chernigov, and the rest of the principality was ruled by Rurik Rostislavich Smolensky.
Novgorod also remained the all-Russian table. An extremely strong boyar class developed here, which did not allow a single princely branch to gain a foothold in the city. In 1136, Monomakhovich Vsevolod Mstislavich was expelled, and power passed to the veche. Novgorod became an aristocratic republic. The boyars themselves invited the princes. Their role was limited to the performance of some executive functions, and the strengthening of the Novgorod militia by princely combatants. A similar order was established in Pskov, which by the middle of the 13th century had become autonomous from Novgorod.
After the suppression of the dynasty of the Galician Rostislavichs (1199), Galich temporarily turned out to be among the "no man's" tables. Roman Mstislavich of Volyn took possession of it, and as a result of the unification of two neighboring lands, the Galicia-Volyn principality arose. However, after the death of Roman (1205), the Galician boyars refused to recognize the power of his young children, and for the Galician land a struggle broke out between all the main princely branches, the winner of which was Roman's son Daniel.
Decline of Kyiv
For the Kyiv land, which turned from a metropolis into a "simple" principality, a steady decrease in its political role was characteristic. The territory of the land itself, which remained under the control of the Kyiv prince, was also constantly decreasing. One of the economic factors that undermined the power of the city was the change in international trade communications. "The path from the Varangians to the Greeks", which was the core of the Old Russian state, lost its relevance after the Crusades. Europe and the East were now connected bypassing Kyiv (through the Mediterranean Sea and through the Volga trade route).
In 1169, as a result of a campaign of a coalition of 10 princes, acting on the initiative of the Vladimir-Suzdal prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, Kyiv for the first time in the practice of princely strife was taken by storm and plundered, and for the first time the prince who took possession of the city did not remain to reign in it, putting his protege to reign . Andrei was recognized as the oldest and bore the title of Grand Duke, but did not attempt to sit down in Kyiv. Thus, the traditional connection between the reign of Kyiv and the recognition of seniority in the princely family became optional. In 1203, Kyiv was subjected to a second defeat, this time at the hands of the Smolensk Rurik Rostislavich, who had already reigned in the city three times before.
A terrible blow was dealt to Kyiv during the Mongol invasion in 1240. At that moment, the city was ruled only by the princely governor, since the beginning of the invasion, 5 princes have changed in it. According to Plano Carpini, who visited the city six years later, the capital of Russia turned into a town with no more than 200 houses. There is an opinion that a significant part of the population of the Kiev region went to the western and northern regions. In the 2nd floor. In the 13th century, Kyiv was ruled by the governors of Vladimir, and later by the Horde Baskaks and local provincial princes, the names of most of whom are unknown. In 1299 Kyiv lost its last attribute of the capital - the residence of the metropolitan. In 1321, in the battle on the Irpen River, the Kyiv prince Sudislav, a descendant of the Olgoviches, was defeated by the Lithuanians and recognized himself as a vassal of the Lithuanian prince Gediminas, while remaining dependent on the Horde. In 1362 the city was finally annexed to Lithuania.
Unity Factors
Despite the political disintegration, the idea of the unity of the Russian land was preserved. The most important unifying factors that testified to the commonality of Russian lands and at the same time distinguished Russia from other Orthodox countries were:
- Kyiv and the title of the Kyiv prince as the eldest. The city of Kyiv, even after 1169, formally remained the capital, that is, the oldest table of Russia. It was called the "aging city" and the "mother of cities". It was perceived as the sacred center of the Orthodox land. It is to the Kyiv rulers (regardless of their dynastic affiliation) that the title is used in the sources of the pre-Mongolian time "princes of all Russia". As for the title « Grand Duke» , then in the same period it was applied to both the Kievan and Vladimir princes. And with respect to the second more consistently. But in the South Russian annals, its use was necessarily accompanied by a restrictive clarification, the Grand Duke of Suzdal.
- princely family. Before the conquest of the South Russian lands by Lithuania, absolutely all local thrones were occupied only by the descendants of Rurik. Russia was in the collective possession of the clan. Active princes during their lives constantly moved from table to table. A visible echo of the tradition of common clan ownership was the conviction that the defense of the "Russian land" (in the narrow sense), that is, the principality of Kyiv, is a common Russian affair. The princes of almost all Russian lands took part in major campaigns against the Polovtsy in 1183 and the Mongols in 1223.
- Church. The entire Old Russian territory constituted a single metropolis, ruled by the Kyiv metropolitan. From the 1160s he began to bear the title of "All Russia". Cases of violation of church unity under the influence of political struggle periodically arose, but were of a short-term nature. Their services include the establishment of a titular metropolis in Chernigov and Pereyaslavl during the triumvirate of the Yaroslavichs of the 11th century, the project of Andrei Bogolyubsky to create a separate metropolis for the Vladimir-Suzdal land, the existence of the Galician metropolis (in 1303-1347, with interruptions, etc.). In 1299 the residence of the metropolitan was transferred from Kyiv to Vladimir, and from 1325 to Moscow. The final division of the metropolis into Moscow and Kyiv took place only in the 15th century.
- Unified historical memory. The countdown of history in all Russian chronicles always began with the Primary Chronicle of the Kyiv cycle and the activities of the first Kyiv princes.
- Awareness of ethnic community. The question of the existence of a single ancient Russian people in the era of the formation of Kievan Rus is debatable. However, the folding of such a period of fragmentation raises no serious doubts. Tribal identification among the Eastern Slavs gave way to territorial. The inhabitants of all the principalities called themselves Russians and their language Russian. A vivid embodiment of the idea of “great Russia” from the Arctic Ocean to the Carpathians is the “Word about the destruction of the Russian land”, written in the first years after the invasion, and the “List of Russian cities far and near” (end of the 14th century)
Consequences of the breakup
Being a natural phenomenon, fragmentation contributed to the dynamic economic development of Russian lands: the growth of cities, the flourishing of culture. On the other hand, fragmentation led to a decrease in the defense potential, which coincided in time with the unfavorable foreign policy situation. By the beginning of the 13th century, in addition to the Polovtsian danger (which was decreasing, since after 1185 the Polovtsians did not undertake invasions of Russia outside the framework of Russian civil strife), Russia was faced with aggression from two other directions. Enemies appeared in the northwest: Catholic German Orders and Lithuanian tribes, which entered the stage of decomposition of the tribal system, threatened Polotsk, Pskov, Novgorod and Smolensk. In 1237-1240 there was a Mongol-Tatar invasion from the southeast, after which the Russian lands fell under the rule of the Golden Horde.
Merging trends
At the beginning of the 13th century, the total number of principalities (including specific ones) reached 50. At the same time, several potential centers of unification were maturing. The most powerful Russian principalities in the northeast were Vladimir-Suzdal and Smolensk. To the beginning In the 13th century, the nominal supremacy of the Grand Duke of Vladimir Vsevolod Yuryevich the Big Nest was recognized by all Russian lands, except for Chernigov and Polotsk, and he acted as an arbiter in the dispute between the southern princes over Kyiv. In the 1st third of the 13th century, the leading position was occupied by the house of the Smolensk Rostislavichs, who, unlike other princes, did not split their principality into destinies, but sought to occupy tables outside it. With the arrival in Galich of the representative of the Monomakhoviches, Roman Mstislavich, Galicia-Volyn became the most powerful principality in the southwest. In the latter case, a multi-ethnic center was formed, open to contacts with Central Europe.
However, the natural course of centralization was crossed out by the Mongol invasion. Further gathering of Russian lands took place in difficult foreign policy conditions and was dictated primarily by political prerequisites. The principalities of northeastern Russia during the XIV-XV centuries consolidated around Moscow. The southern and western Russian lands became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.
The historical path from formation to the collapse of the Old Russian stateEastern Slavs have passed for three centuries. The unification of disparate Slavic tribes by Prince Rurik in 862 gave a powerful impetus to the development of the country, which reached its peak by the middle XI century. But already a hundred years later, instead of a powerful state, dozens of independent, medium-sized principalities were formed. Period XII - XVI centuries gave rise to the definition of "Specific Russia".
The beginning of the collapse of a single state
The heyday of the Russian state fell on the period of power of the Grand Duke Yaroslav the Wise. He, like his predecessors of the Rurik family, did a lot to strengthen external ties, increase borders and state power.
Kievan Rus was actively engaged in trade, developed handicraft and agricultural production. The historian N. M. Karamzin wrote: "Ancient Russia buried its power and prosperity with Yaroslav." Yaroslav the Wise died in 1054, this date is considered the beginningcollapse of the Old Russian state.
Lubech Congress of Princes. Trying to stop decay
From that moment, strife for power broke out between the heirs of the princely throne. Three of his sons entered into a dispute, but the younger Yaroslavichi, the grandsons of the prince, did not lag behind them. This happened at a time when the Polovtsy first raided Russia from the steppes. The princes, who were at war with each other, sought to achieve power and wealth at any cost. Some of them, hoping to get rich destinies, entered into an agreement with enemies and brought their hordes to Russia.
The disastrous strife for the country was seen by some princes, one of whom was the grandson of Yaroslav Vladimir Monomakh. In 1097, he convinced the princes-relatives to meet in the city of Lyubech, on the Dnieper, and agree on the rule of the country. They managed to divide the land among themselves. Kissing the cross in fidelity to the agreement, they decided: "Let the Russian land be a common fatherland, and whoever rises up against his brother, we will all rise up against him." But the agreement did not last long: one of the brothers blinded the other, and anger and distrust flared up in the family with renewed vigor. The congress of princes in Lyubech actually opened a wide road to the collapse of the Old Russian stategiving it the legal force of the agreement.
Further fragmentation of the state
Nothing else held back the decayOld Russian state, for centuriesreceding into an era of political disunity. Scientists call it the period of specific, or feudal, fragmentation.
Fragmentation, according to historians, was a natural stage in the development of the Russian state. In Europe, not a single country could avoid this during the period of early feudalism. The power of the prince at that time was weak, the functions of the state were insignificant, and the desire of the wealthy landowners to strengthen their specific power, to get out of obedience to centralized rule was understandable.
Events accompanying the collapse of the Old Russian state
Russian scattered lands, little connected with each other, led a subsistence economy, sufficient for their own consumption, but not capable of ensuring the unity of the state. The decline in the world influence of the Byzantine Empire coincided in time, which was weakening and soon ceased to be a major center. Thus, the trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks”, which allowed Kyiv to carry out international relations for many centuries, also lost its significance.
Kievan Rus united several dozen tribes with complex relationships within the clan. In addition, nomadic raids also made life difficult for them. Fleeing, people left their inhabited places for sparsely populated lands, arranged their dwelling there. This is how the far north-eastern part of Russia was settled, which led to an increase in the territory of the state and the loss of influence of the Kyiv prince on them.
The emergence of private feudal landownership also contributed to the generation of feudal fragmentation and the disintegration of the Old Russian state intoindependent lands. The warriors, who often received payment from the prince for their service in the form of land allotments or simply took them away from the weaker, began to settle down on the land. Large feudal estates appear - boyar villages, the power and influence of their owners are growing. The presence of a large number of such possessions becomes incompatible with the state, which has a large territory and a weak administrative apparatus.
The reasons for the collapse of the Old Russian state briefly
Historians call the fragmentation of Russia into small specific principalities a process that was natural in those conditions.
The presence of disunity between the Slavic tribes and the superiority of a subsistence economy sufficient for the community to live.
The emergence of new, rich and influential feudal lords, an increase in the princely-boyar land ownership, who did not want to share power and income with Kyiv.
The intensifying struggle between numerous heirs for power and land.
Migration of tribal communities to new distant lands due to the robberies of nomads, removal from Kyiv, loss of contact with it.
The loss of world domination by Byzantium, the decrease in trade turnover of the trade route to it, the weakening of Kyiv's international relations.
The emergence of new cities as centers of specific principalities, the growth of their importance against the background of the weakening of the power of Kyiv.
The consequences of the collapse of Russia
Consequences of the collapse of the Old Russian stateare both positive and negative. Positive consequences include:
the emergence and flourishing of cities in numerous principalities;
the search for trade routes to replace the Byzantine one, which has lost its former importance;
preservation of a single spirituality, religion, as well as cultural traditions by the Russian people.
The negative consequences of this event are:
incessant princely wars among themselves;
division of land into small plots in favor of all heirs;
reduced ability to defend, lack of unity in the country.
Significant negative consequences had a most serious impact on the life of the Old Russian state during the period of collapse
. But scientists do not consider it a retreat back in the development of Russia.Some specific centers
During this historical period, the power of Kyiv and its importance as the first city of the state, gradually decreasing, comes to naught. Now it is just one of the major Russian cities. At the same time, the importance of other lands and their centers is growing.
The Novgorod land was the first to come out from under the authority of the Grand Duke. The structure of management of the inheritance that has developed there is called by historians a feudal republic. The locals themselves called their state "Lord Veliky Novgorod". The supreme power here was represented by the people's assembly - the veche, which removed objectionable princes, inviting others to rule.
Mongol invasion
Nomadic Mongolian tribes united at the beginning of XIIcentury Genghis Khan, invaded the territory of Russia.The collapse of the Old Russian stateweakened him, making him a desirable prey for the invaders.
For many centuries, Mongol-Tatar dominion was established in Russia.