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 a fixed amount 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 an intermediate position, as it were. The influence of the conquerors is regarded as noticeable, but not determining the development of Russia (and unambiguously negative). Creation united 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 Russian lands of the XIII - XV 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 political life 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 common to all European countries: from the predominance of state forms of feudalism at an early stage to the gradual strengthening of patrimonial forms, however, 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 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 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 negative consequences 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 character Tatar-Mongol invasion to Russia and its consequences. 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. Period Mongol rule 2.1 Tax system 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. Mongol invasion as a stage national history§ 1. The invasion of the Tatar-Mongols in Russia “... I have no doubt that whoever will survive after us, after this era, will 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 ...
Federal Agency for Education of the Russian Federation
State municipal institution professional higher education
Vladimirsky State University
Department of History and Museology
Fulfilled
Student gr. ISG-106
Surnichenko K.A.
checked
Assoc. Pogorelaya S.V.
The Mongol-Tatra invasion, the essence of the Horde yoke and its influence on the fate of Russia
Vladimir 2006
Plan.
1. Formation of the Mongol Empire. Etymology of the concept of "Tatars" ... .1
2. Battle on the Kalka. Russia after the Battle of the Kalka…………………………3
3. The invasion of Batu in Russia. Reasons for the success of the Mongols. Consequences of Batu’s invasion…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
4. Establishment of the Horde yoke, its consequences and influence on the fate of Russia………………………………………………………………………......12
5. Discussion about the degree of influence of the Mongol (Horde) yoke on the development, the fate of Russia. ……………………………………………. …….fifteen
6. List of used literature……………………………………….21
7. List of used literature (footnotes)…….…………………...32
I.Formation of the Mongol Empire. Etymology of the concept "Tatars".
Mongolian tribes have long roamed the expanses of Central Asia. In the steppe regions, they were engaged in cattle breeding, and in the north, in the taiga regions, they also hunted. In the 12th century, the territory occupied by them stretched from Baikal, the upper reaches of the Yenisei and the Irtysh in the north to the Gobi Desert in the south. From the end of the 12th century, the Mongol tribes roaming here were undergoing a process of disintegration of tribal relations and the beginning of feudalization. From the environment of ordinary community members-cattle breeders, tribal nobility-noyons (princes), who owned large pastures and herds, began to stand out. To capture them from the communities of pastoralists, the noyons started their squads of nukers (warriors) led by bagaturs (heroes). From the very beginning, the state of the Mongols turned out to be militarized. Nomadic pastoralism led to the depletion of pastures, the depletion of pastures led to a struggle for new pastures. Hence, the seizure of the lands of neighboring tribes, rapid movement over vast distances.
In the second half of the 12th century, a struggle for leadership began between the Mongol tribes. During the bloody civil strife at the end of the 12th century, or rather in 1190, the khan of a tribe that roamed in the basin of the Onon and Korulen rivers (the mountainous outskirts of the Gobi steppe) won. At birth in 1154, he was named Temujin (according to other sources, Temujin). He had to endure many vicissitudes of fate and difficult trials. Temuchin was 13 years old when his father Esukai-bagatur died. The tributaries of the father, and it was 30-40 thousand families, refused to pay tribute to the minor heir, and began to attack his nomad camps. Temujin suffered setbacks in wars, treason, resentment, more than once fell into the hands of enemies. He is a boy for three years
spent in slavery and with a wooden block around his neck, doing the hardest work in the forge of a hostile tribe. He managed to kill the watchman with his own chain and escape from captivity 1 .
Before becoming a great khan, Temuchin had to wage a fierce struggle against his opponents for over 20 years, and neither his native people nor his neighbors knew mercy from him. Temuchin was already over 50 when he emerged victorious from a deadly fight for sole power. In 1206, at the khural-congress of all the Mongol princes, on the banks of the Onon, he proclaimed himself their supreme ruler, Genghis Khan (great khan, "sent from heaven").
Genghis Khan created a first-class army for his time. His entire army was divided into tens, hundreds and thousands. Ten thousand warriors made up a tumen (in Russian sources "darkness") - a kind of independent army. The high combat effectiveness of the Mongolian army was recognized by such a military authority as Napoleon. In particular, he noted: “... it is vain to think that the Mongol invasion was a senseless invasion of the Asian horde. It was a deeply thought-out offensive by an army in which the military organization was much higher than in the troops of its opponent.
The Mongols fought on undersized, with a shaggy mane, fast and very hardy horses. Before entering the main mass into a foreign land, they sent forward detachments with the aim of destroying as many people as possible and, having sowed panic, put them to flight. Then the main army followed, destroying everything in its path. Detachments of warriors of the conquered peoples marched in the center, and the Mongols suddenly and swiftly attacked from the flanks.
But the main distinguishing feature of the army of Genghis Khan, which significantly increased its combat effectiveness, was, along with a clear organization, iron military discipline. Circular, collective responsibility for
cowardice, failure to comply with an order, even for inexperience or for some other reason did not help a neighbor - death.
Genghis Khan put forward brave, determined and capable people in his army, regardless of their tribal and social origin, such as Subedei-Bagatur, Jebe-Noyon, Tohuchar-Noyon and others.
A well-established intelligence service also continuously worked for the Mongols' army. On the eve of the invasion of foreign lands, the military leaders had information about the military-political and economic potential the enemy - they were delivered by merchants, ambassadors and numerous prisoners.
In other words, the army of Genghis Khan in all respects surpassed its contemporary armies and in vain N.M. Karamzin writes: “... the ancient Russians, for many centuries, fighting either with foreigners or with foreigners, were not inferior both in courage and in the art people to any of the then European peoples” 3 . They did not yield to the European peoples, but they could not resist the Asian onslaught, and there were absolutely no chances. In 1211-1212. collapsed under the onslaught of the hordes of the Mongols
China is a single powerful state, so it is hardly worth referring to the feudal fragmentation of Russia.
In the summer of 1219, Genghis Khan began the conquest of Central Asia. In two years, an advanced civilization was turned into pastures. After that, Genghis Khan withdrew the main forces to Mongolia, and two tumens Jebe-noyon and Subedei-bagatura devastated Iran and Transcaucasia, and in the spring of 1223 struck at the Crimea, plundering Sudak.
Very confused in Russian history is the question of who nevertheless attacked Russia: the Mongols, Tatars or Mongol-Tatars? And what does modern Tatars (Kazan Tatars) have to do with those Central Asian Tatars. And where did this concept come from?
VO Klyuchevsky in his course of Russian history used mainly the concept of "Tatars" 4 . A. Nechvolodov equally uses the concepts of "Mongols" and "Tatars" 5 . To one degree or another, pages and lines are devoted to this problem in almost all serious publications that examine the history of the Mongol Empire, Genghis Khan and their relationship with Russia in the 13th-15th centuries. S.F. wrote about this. Platonov in "The Complete Course of Lectures on Russian History", "Kristall", St. Petersburg, 1997, using the concept of "Tatars", etc. In modern historiography, an important role is played by the double magazine "Motherland" (No. 3-4 for 1997), dedicated to both the Mongol invasion and the problem of the relationship between the Forest and the Steppe in the 9th-16th centuries. Modern answers to the above questions are approximately as follows.
All Mongols neighboring peoples, including Russian, were also called Tatars. The concept of "Tatars" is ambiguous in terms of semantic expression. The ethnonym "ta-ta" or "ta-tan" dates back to the 5th century and means the name of the largest Mongolian tribe that lived in the northeastern part of Mongolia, as well as in Manchuria. In the 12th century, under the name "dada" a tribal association was known in the steppes of Eastern and North-Eastern Mongolia and Transbaikalia. Then the name "Tatars", as well as the name "Mongols" spread to the multilingual Mongolian, Turkic, Manchu peoples of the Mongol Empire of the 13th-15th centuries, although the Tatars themselves almost completely exterminated Genghis Khan during the struggle for power 6 . “Tatars” entered the Russian language from the Chinese language, for which all Mongolian tribes were “Tatars”, i.e. "barbarians". Actually, they called the Tatars "white Tatars", while the Mongolian tribes to the north of them were "black Tatars", which was pejorative, emphasizing their savagery. The Chinese referred to Genghis Khan as a "black Tatar".
At the beginning of the 13th century, in retaliation for the poisoning of his father, Genghis Khan ordered the destruction of the Tatars. Tatars as a military and political force ceased to exist. However, the Chinese continued to call the Mongol tribes Tatars, although the Mongols did not call themselves Tatars. Thus, the army of Batu Khan consisted of Mongol warriors 7 and modern Tatars have nothing to do with the Central Asian Tatars 8 .
The term “Mongol-Tatars”, common in historical literature, is a combination of the self-name of the people with the term that this people was designated by neighbors 9 .
II. Battle on Kalka. Russia after the Battle of the Kalka.
In the spring of 1223, a 30,000-strong detachment of the Mongols, led by Jebe and Subedei, marched along the southern coast of the Caspian Sea and invaded Transcaucasia. Having defeated the Armenian-Georgian army and devastated Georgia and Azerbaijan, the invaders broke through the Derbent passage to the North Caucasus and clashed with the Alans (ancestors of the Ossetians) and the Polovtsians. Acting by cunning, they first defeated the Alans, and then began to push the Polovtsy.
The latter, led by Khan Kotyan, asked for help from the Russian princes with whom they were related (the Galician prince Mstislav Udaloy was married to the daughter of Khan Kotyan). On the initiative of Mstislav Mstislavovich Udaly, at the congress of South Russian princes in Kyiv, it was decided to come to the aid of the Polovtsy 10 .
A large Russian army led by the three strongest princes of southern Russia: Mstislav Romanovich of Kyiv, Mstislav Svyatoslavovich of Chernigov and Mstislav Mstislavovich of Galicia marched into the steppe. In the lower reaches of the Dnieper, it joined the Polovtsian army. This was the last joint major military action on the eve of Batu's invasion.
The Kyiv prince Mstislav Romanovich, having fortified himself with his army on a hill, did not take part in the battle. Regiments of Russian soldiers and Polovtsians, having crossed the Kalka, struck at the advanced Mongol detachments, which retreated. The Russian and Polovtsian regiments were carried away by the persecution. The main forces of the Mongols, who approached, took the pursuing Russian and Polovtsian warriors in pincers and destroyed them.
Then the Mongols laid siege to the hill, where the prince of Kyiv fortified. On the third day of the siege, Mstislav Romanovich believed the promise of the enemy to honorably release the Russians in the event of voluntary surrender and laid down his arms. The Russian princes and warriors did not know that the murder of ambassadors among the Mongols was the greatest crime, and no oaths counted against this evil! And the Russians killed the Mongol ambassadors on the eve of the battle on Kalka and the Mongol revenge was terrible. And Prince Mstislav Romanovich and all his soldiers were brutally killed. A tenth of the troops returned to Russia from the Azov steppes. In honor of their victory, the Mongols held a "feast on the bones." The captured princes were crushed with boards on which the victors sat and feasted. A Russian chronicler wrote after the Battle of the Kalka:
“It is for our sins that God has invested
bewilderment in us, and perished without number
many people. And there was a cry and a sigh,
and in all cities and volosts.
we don’t know about these evil Tatars,
where did they come from
and where have gone again God knows…” 11
Russian lands after the defeat at the Kalka were still embraced by inter-princely strife. Relative calm was preserved only on Vladimir land, where Grand Duke Yuri Vsevolodovich managed to maintain peaceful relations with the southern Russian princes.
However, Novgorod remained a bone of contention, from where Yuri's brother Yaroslav was expelled in the same sad 1223. Then in 1224, Yuri Vladimirsky appeared at the head of a large army and forced the Novgorodians to accept their brother-in-law, Mikhail Vsevolodovich Chernigov, for the reign. Soon a stubborn struggle for the reign of Novgorod began between Yaroslav and Mikhail of Chernigov, which culminated in the victory of Yaroslav in 1229. Then Daniil Galitsky joined this struggle, who was eager not to capture Novgorod, but to unite under his command all of Southern and South-Western Russia. The Russian princes and people fought furiously among themselves, forgetting or not attaching importance to the wise words of the chronicler. “... We don’t know about these evil Tatars where they came from and where God knows again.” Well, the Russians didn’t have intelligence at that time, and even Kalka didn’t teach us anything!
Meanwhile, Mongolian history was developing not in our favor!
Returning to their steppes, the Mongols made an unsuccessful attempt to capture Volga Bulgaria. Reconnaissance in force showed that aggressive campaigns against Russia and its neighbors can only be carried out by organizing a general Mongolian campaign and not just anywhere, but against the countries of Europe. In addition, Genghis Khan died in 1227, and the Mongol Empire was divided into regions (uluses), ruled by his sons and grandsons. The grandson of Genghis Khan Baty (1227-1255), who inherited from his grandfather all the lands in the "West", "where the foot of the Mongol horse sets foot." Subedey, who knew the theater of future military operations well, became his chief military adviser.
In 1235, at the kurultai - the congress of the Mongol princes in the capital of Mongolia, Karakorum, a decision was made on a general Mongol campaign to the West. In 1236 they captured the Volga Bulgaria, and in 1237 they subjugated the nomadic peoples of the steppe. In the autumn of 1237, the main Mongol forces, having crossed the Volga, concentrated on the Voronezh River, aiming at the Russian lands. Starting a difficult story about the terrible Russian defeats with the highest spirit of the Russian people, their courage, stamina and heroism, the question is natural: “What are the reasons for the success of the Mongols?”. We will try to answer it in more detail, but for now, the mournful pages of Russian history ...
III. The invasion of Batu in Russia. The reasons for the success of the Mongols. Consequences of Batu's invasion.
The first principality to undergo ruthless ruin was the Ryazan land. In the winter of 1237, the hordes of Batu invaded its borders, ruining and destroying everything in their path. The Princes of Vladimir and Chernigov refused to help Ryazan. The Mongols laid siege to Ryazan and sent envoys who demanded obedience and one-tenth "of everything." Karamzin also points out other details: “Yuri Ryazansky, left by the Grand Duke, sent his son Theodore with gifts to Batu, who, having learned about the beauty of Feodorova’s wife Evpraksia, wanted to see her, but this young prince answered him that Christians do not show their wives wicked pagans. Batu ordered to kill him; and the unfortunate Eupraxia, having learned about the death of her beloved husband, together with her baby, John, threw herself from the high tower to the ground and lost her life. The bottom line is that Batu began to demand from the Ryazan princes and nobles "daughters and sisters to his bed" 13.
Everything was followed by the courageous answer of the Ryazantsev: "If all of us are not there, then everything will be yours." On the sixth day of the siege, December 21, 1237, the city was taken, the princely family and the surviving inhabitants were killed. In the old place, Ryazan was no longer revived (modern Ryazan is a new city located 60 km from the old Ryazan, it used to be called Pereyaslavl Ryazansky).
In the grateful people's memory, the story of the heroic deed of the Ryazan hero Yevpaty Kolovrat, who entered into an unequal battle with the invaders and earned the respect of Batu himself for his valor and courage, has been preserved 14 .
Having devastated the Ryazan land in January 1238, the Mongol invaders defeated the Grand Duke's guard regiment of the Vladimir-Suzdal land near Kolomna, led by the son of the Grand Duke Vsevolod Yuryevich. Actually it was all the Vladimir army. This defeat predetermined the fate of North-Eastern Russia. During the battle for Kolomna, the last son of Genghis Khan Kulkan was killed. Genghisides, as usual, did not take direct part in the battle. Therefore, the death of Kulkan near Kolomna suggests that the Russians; probably managed to inflict in some place swipe along the Mongolian rear.
Then moving along the frozen rivers (Oka and others), the Mongols captured Moscow, where for 5 days all its population put up strong resistance under the leadership of the governor Philip Nyanka. Moscow was completely burned, and all its inhabitants were killed.
On February 4, 1238, Batu laid siege to Vladimir. Grand Duke Yuri Vsevolodovich left Vladimir in advance to organize a rebuff to uninvited guests in the northern forests on the Sit River. He took with him two nephews, and left the Grand Duchess and two sons in the city.
The Mongols prepared for the assault on Vladimir according to all the rules of military science, which they had learned back in China. At the walls of the city, they built siege towers in order to be on the same level with the besieged and at the right time to throw “strings” over the walls, they installed “vices” - wall-beating and throwing machines. At night, a "tyn" was erected around the city - an external fortification to protect against attacks by the besieged and in order to cut off all their escape routes.
Before the assault on the city at the Golden Gate, in front of the besieged Vladimirites, the Mongols killed the younger prince Vladimir Yuryevich, who had recently defended Moscow. Mstislav Yurievich soon died on the defensive line. Last son Grand Duke, Vsevolod, who fought with the horde in Kolomna, during the assault on Vladimir, decided to enter into negotiations with Batu. With a small retinue and large gifts, he left the besieged city, but the khan did not want to talk with the prince and "like a ferocious beast, do not spare his youth, he ordered to be slaughtered in front of him" 15.
After that, the horde rushed to the last assault. The Grand Duchess, Bishop Mitrofan, other princely wives, boyars and some of the common people, the last defenders of Vladimir, took refuge in the Assumption Cathedral. On February 7, 1238, the invaders broke into the city through gaps in the fortress wall and set it on fire. Many people died from fire and suffocation, not excluding those who took refuge in the cathedral. The most valuable monuments of literature, art and architecture perished in the fire and ruins.
After the capture and devastation of Vladimir, the horde spread throughout the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, ruining and burning cities, villages and villages. During February, 14 cities were plundered in the interfluve of the Klyazma and the Volga: Rostov, Suzdal, Yaroslavl, Kostroma, Galich, Dmitrov, Tver, Pereyaslavl-Zalessky, Yuryev and others.
On March 4, 1238, beyond the Volga on the City River, a battle took place between the main forces of North-Eastern Russia, led by the Grand Duke of Vladimir Yuri Vsevolodovich, and the Mongol invaders. 49-year-old Yuri Vsevolodovich was a brave fighter and a fairly experienced military leader. Behind him were victories over the Germans, Lithuanians, Mordovians, Kama Bulgarians and those Russian princes who claimed his grand princely throne. However, in the organization and preparation of Russian troops for the battle on the City River, he made a number of serious miscalculations: he showed carelessness in the defense of his military camp, did not pay due attention to intelligence, allowed his governors to disperse the army over several villages and did not establish reliable communication between scattered detachments. And when a large Mongol formation under the command of Barendey quite unexpectedly appeared in the Russian camp, the result of the battle was obvious. The chronicles and excavations of archaeologists in the City testify that the Russians were defeated in parts, fled, and the horde whipped people like grass. Yuri Vsevolodovich himself also died in this unequal battle. The circumstances of his death remain unknown. Only the following testimony about the Prince of Novgorod, a contemporary of that sad event, has come down to us: “God knows how he died, others say a lot about him” 16.
Since that time, the Mongol yoke began in Russia: Russia became obliged to pay tribute to the Mongols, and the princes were to receive the title of Grand Duke from the hands of the Khan 17 . The very term "yoke" in the sense of oppression was first used in 1275 by Metropolitan Cyril 18.
The Mongol hordes moved to the north-west of Russia. Everywhere they met stubborn resistance from the Russians. For two weeks, for example, the suburb of Novgorod, Torzhok, was defended. However, the approach of the spring thaw and significant human losses forced the Mongols, not reaching Veliky Novgorod about 100 miles, from the stone Ignach Cross to turn south, into the Polovtsian steppes. The retreat was in the nature of a "raid". Divided into separate detachments, the invaders "combed" the Russian cities from north to south. Smolensk managed to fight back. Kursk was destroyed, like other centers. The small city of Kozelsk, which held out for seven (!) weeks, put up the greatest resistance to the Mongols. The town stood on a steep, washed by two rivers - Zhizdra and Druchusnaya. In addition to these natural barriers, it was reliably covered by wooden fortress walls with towers and a moat about 25 meters deep. Before the arrival of the horde, the Kozeltsy managed to freeze a layer of ice on the floor wall and the entrance gate, which greatly complicated the assault on the city for the enemy. The inhabitants of the town wrote a heroic page in Russian history with their blood. Yes, it is not for nothing that the Mongols called it the "evil city". The Mongols stormed Ryazan for six days, Moscow for five days, Vladimir a little longer, Torzhok for fourteen days, and little Kozelsk fell on the 50th day, probably only because the Mongols - for the umpteenth time! - used their favorite trick - after another unsuccessful assault, they simulated a stampede. The besieged Kozeltsy, in order to complete their victory, made a general sortie, but were surrounded by superior enemy forces and all were killed. The Horde, finally, broke into the city and drowned in the blood of the inhabitants who remained there, including the 4-year-old prince Kozelsk 19 .
Having devastated North-Eastern Russia, Batu Khan and Subedei-Bagatur took their troops to the Don steppes for rest. Here the horde spent the entire summer of 1238. In the fall, Batu's detachments repeated raids on Ryazan and other Russian cities and towns that had so far survived from devastation. Murom, Gorokhovets, Yaropolch (modern Vyazniki), Nizhny Novgorod were defeated.
And in 1239, the hordes of Batu invaded the borders of Southern Russia. They took and burned Pereyaslavl, Chernigov and other settlements.
On September 5, 1240, the troops of Batu, Subedei and Barendei crossed the Dnieper and surrounded Kyiv from all sides. At that time, Kyiv was compared with Tsargrad (Constantinople) in terms of wealth and population. The population of the city was approaching 50 thousand people. Shortly before the arrival of the horde, the Galician prince Daniil Romanovich took possession of the throne of Kyiv. When she appeared, he went west to protect his ancestral possessions, and entrusted the defense of Kyiv to the thousand Dmitry.
The city was defended by artisans, suburban peasants, merchants. There were few professional soldiers. Therefore, the defense of Kyiv, as well as Kozelsk, can rightly be considered popular.
Kyiv was well fortified. The thickness of its earthen ramparts reached 20 meters at the base. The walls were oak, with earth filling. Stone defensive towers with gate openings stood in the walls. Along the ramparts stretched a moat filled with water 18 meters wide.
Subedei, of course, was well aware of the difficulties of the impending assault. Therefore, he first sent his ambassadors to Kyiv demanding his immediate and complete surrender. But the people of Kiev did not negotiate and killed the ambassadors, and we know what this meant for the Mongols. Then the systematic siege of the most ancient city in Russia began.
The Russian medieval chronicler described it as follows: “... Tsar Batu came to the city of Kyiv with many soldiers and surrounded the city ... and it was impossible for anyone to leave the city or enter the city. And it was impossible to hear each other in the city from the creak of carts, the roar of camels, from the sounds of trumpets ... from the neighing of horse herds and from the screams and screams of countless people ... they fought, and there were many dead ... the Tatars broke through the city walls and entered the city, and the townspeople rushed to meet them. And one could see and hear the terrible crack of spears and the sound of shields; the arrows darkened the light, so that the sky behind the arrows was not visible, but there was darkness from the many arrows of the Tatars, and the dead lay everywhere, and everywhere blood flowed like water ... and the townspeople were defeated, and the Tatars climbed the walls, but from great fatigue sat down on city walls. And the night came. The townspeople that night created another city, near the Church of the Holy Mother of God. The next morning, the Tatars came to them, and there was an evil slaughter. And people began to faint, and ran with their belongings into the church vaults, and the church walls fell down from the weight, and the Tatars took the city of Kyiv in the month of December on the 6th day ... "20
In the works of the pre-revolutionary years, such a fact is cited 21 that the Mongols seized the courageous organizer of the defense of Kyiv, Dimitra, and brought him to Batu.
“This formidable conqueror, having no idea about the virtues of philanthropy, knew how to appreciate extraordinary courage and with an air of proud pleasure said to the Russian governor: “I give you life!” Demetrius accepted the gift, because he could still be useful for the fatherland and was left under Batu.
Thus ended the heroic defense of Kyiv, which lasted 93 days. The invaders looted the church of St. Sophia, all other monasteries, and the surviving Kyivans killed everyone to the last, regardless of age.
In the next 1241, the Galicia-Volyn principality was defeated. On the territory of Russia, the Mongol yoke was established, which existed for 240 years (1240-1480) 22 . This is the point of view of historians of the Faculty of History of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov.
In the spring of 1241, the horde rushed to the West to conquer all the "evening countries" and extend its power to the whole of Europe, right down to the last sea, as Genghis Khan bequeathed.
Western Europe, like Russia, was going through a period of feudal fragmentation at that time. Torn apart by internal strife and rivalry between small and large rulers, she could not unite in order to stop the invasion of the steppes with common efforts. Alone at that time, not a single European state was able to withstand the military onslaught of the horde, especially its fast and hardy cavalry, which played a decisive role in hostilities. Therefore, despite the courageous resistance of the European peoples, in 1241 the hordes of Batu and Subedei invaded Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Moldavia, and in 1242 they reached Croatia and Dalmatia-Balkan countries. This is a critical moment for Western Europe. However, at the end of 1242, Batu turned his troops to the east. What's the matter? The Mongols had to reckon with incessant resistance in the rear of their troops. At the same time, they suffered a number of, albeit small, but failures in the Czech Republic and Hungary. But most importantly, their army was exhausted by battles with the Russians. And from the distant Karakorum, the capital of Mongolia, came the news of the death of the great khan. On the subsequent division of the empire, Batu must be himself. It was a very convenient excuse to stop the difficult campaign.
About the world-historical significance of the struggle of Russia with the Horde conquerors, A.S. Pushkin wrote:
“Russia was assigned a high destiny ... its boundless plains absorbed the power of the Mongols and stopped their invasion on 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…” 23 .
Reasons for the success of the Mongols.
The question of why the nomads, who were significantly inferior to the conquered peoples of Asia and Europe in economic and cultural terms, subjugated them to their power for almost three centuries, has always been in the center of attention, both of domestic and foreign historians. No textbook, study guide; historical monograph, to some extent considering the problems of the formation of the Mongol empire and its conquests, which would not reflect this problem. Presenting it in such a way that if Russia were united, it would show the Mongols is not a historically justified idea, although it is clear that the level of resistance would be an order of magnitude higher. But the example of a united China, as mentioned earlier, destroys this scheme, although it is present in the historical literature. More reasonable can be considered the quantity and quality of military force on each side and other military factors. In other words, the Mongols outnumbered their opponents in military power. As already noted, the Steppe militarily was always superior to the Forest in ancient times. After this short introduction to the "problem", let's list the factors of the victory of the steppes, cited in the historical literature.
The feudal fragmentation of Russia, Europe and the weak interstate relations of the countries of Asia and Europe, which did not allow, by combining their forces, to repulse the conquerors.
Numerical superiority of the conquerors. There were many disputes among historians about how much Batu brought to Russia. N.M. Karamzin indicated the number of 300 thousand soldiers 24 . However, a serious analysis does not allow even close approach to this figure. Each Mongol horseman (and they were all horsemen) had at least 2, and most likely 3 horses. Where in the forest of Russia to feed 1 million horses in winter? Not a single chronicle even raises this topic. Therefore, modern historians call the figure a maximum of 150 thousand Moghuls who came to Russia, more cautious ones stop at the figure of 120-130 thousand. And the whole of Russia, even if united, could put up 50 thousand, although there are figures up to 100 thousand 25 . So in reality, the Russians could put up 10-15 thousand soldiers for battle. Here the following circumstance should be taken into account. The strike force of the Russian squads, the princely ratis, were in no way inferior to the Mughals, but the bulk of the Russian squads were militia warriors, not professional warriors, but ordinary people who took up arms, not like professional Mongols. The tactics of the warring parties also differed. The Russians were forced to stick to defensive tactics designed to exhaust the enemy. Why? The fact is that in a direct military clash in the field, the Mongolian cavalry had clear advantages. Therefore, the Russians tried to sit out behind the fortress walls of their cities. However, wooden fortresses could not withstand the onslaught of the Mongol troops. In addition, the conquerors used the tactics of continuous assault, successfully used siege weapons and equipment perfect for their time, borrowed from the peoples of China, Central Asia and the Caucasus they conquered.
The Mongols conducted good reconnaissance before the start of hostilities. They had informants even among the Russians. In addition, the Mongol commanders did not personally participate in the battles, but led the battle from their headquarters, which, as a rule, was in a high place. The Russian princes, up to Vasily II the Dark (1425-1462), themselves directly participated in the battles. Therefore, very often, in the event of even the heroic death of a prince, his soldiers, deprived of professional leadership, found themselves in a very difficult situation.
It is important to note that Batu's attack on Russia in 1237 came as a complete surprise to the Russians. The Mongol hordes undertook it in the winter, attacking the Ryazan principality. The Ryazans, on the other hand, are accustomed only to the summer and autumn raids of enemies, mainly Polovtsy. Therefore, no one expected a winter strike. What did the steppe dwellers pursue with their winter attack? The fact is that the rivers, which were a natural barrier for enemy cavalry in the summer, were covered with ice in winter and lost their protective functions.
In addition, in Russia, stocks of food and fodder for livestock were prepared for the winter. Thus, the conquerors were already provided with fodder for their cavalry before the attack.
These, according to most historians, were the main and tactical reasons for the Mongol victories.
Consequences of Batu's invasion.
The results of the Mongol conquest for the Russian lands were extremely difficult. In terms of the scale of destruction and the victims suffered as a result of the invasion, they could not be compared with the damage caused by the raids of nomads and princely civil strife. First of all, the invasion caused huge damage to all the lands at the same time. According to archaeologists, out of 74 cities that existed in Russia in the pre-Mongolian period, 49 were completely destroyed by the hordes of Batu. At the same time, a third of them were depopulated forever and were no longer restored, and 15 former cities became villages. Only Veliky Novgorod, Pskov, Smolensk, Polotsk and the Turov-Pinsk principality did not suffer, primarily due to the fact that the Mongol hordes bypassed them. The population of Russian lands also sharply decreased. Most of the townspeople either died in battles, or were taken away by the conquerors to "full" (slavery). Handicraft production was particularly affected. After the invasion in Russia, some handicraft industries and specialties disappeared, stone construction stopped, the secrets of making glassware, cloisonne enamel, multi-colored ceramics, etc. were lost. .. Only after half a century in Russia, the service class begins to be restored, and, accordingly, the structure of the patrimonial and only nascent landlord economy is re-created.
However, the main consequence of the Mongol invasion of Russia and the establishment of Horde dominion from the middle of the 13th century was a sharp increase in the isolation of Russian lands, the disappearance of the old political and legal system and the organization of the power structure that was once characteristic of the Old Russian state. For Russia of the 9th-13th centuries, located between Europe and Asia, it was extremely important in which direction it would turn - to the East or to the West. Kievan Rus managed to maintain a neutral position between them, it was open to both the West and the East.
But the new political situation of the 13th century, the invasion of the Mongols and the crusade of the European Catholic knights, which called into question the continued existence of Russia, its Orthodox culture, forced the political elite of Russia to make a definite choice. The fate of the country for many centuries, including modern times, depended on this choice.
The collapse of the political unity of Ancient Russia also marked the beginning of the disappearance of the ancient Russian people, which became the progenitor of the three existing East Slavic peoples. Since the 14th century, the Russian (Great Russian) nationality has been formed in the northeast and northwest of Russia; on the lands that became part of Lithuania and Poland - Ukrainian and Belarusian nationalities 27.
IV. The establishment of the Horde yoke, its consequences and influence on the fate of Russia.
After the Batu invasion over Russia, the so-called Mongol-Tatar yoke was established - a complex of economic and political methods that ensured the dominance of the Golden Horde 28 over that part of the territory of Russia that was under its control. A new term "Golden Horde" also appears, which refers to the state formed in 1242-1243. Mongols who returned from western campaigns to the Lower Volga region, with the capital Saray (Saray-berke), the first khan of which was the same Batu 29 .
The main among these methods were the levying of various tributes and duties - "plough", the trade duty "tamga", food for the Mongol ambassadors - "honor", etc. The most difficult of them was the Horde "exit" - a tribute in silver, which began to be collected back in 40s XIII century, and from 1257 on the orders of Khan Berke, the Mongols carried out a census (the first census in the history of the country) of the population of North-Eastern Russia (“recording in a number”), setting fixed fees. Only the clergy were exempted from paying the “exit” (before the adoption of Islam by the Horde at the beginning of the 14th century, pagan Mongols, like all pagans, were religiously tolerant).
Representatives of the Khan-Baskaki were sent to Russia to control the collection of tribute. Tribute was collected by tax-farmers - "besermens" (Central Asian merchants). By the end of the 13th-beginning of the 14th century, the Basque institution was abolished due to the active opposition of the population. Since that time, the Russian princes themselves began to collect the Horde tribute. In case of disobedience, punitive campaigns followed. As the domination of the Golden Horde strengthened, punitive expeditions were replaced by repressions against individual princes.
The Russian principalities that became dependent on the Horde lost their sovereignty. Their receipt of the princely table depended on the will of the khan, who gave them labels (letters for reigning). The measure that consolidated the dominance of the Golden Horde over Russia was the issuance of labels for the great reign of Vladimir.
The one who received such a label added the Vladimir principality to his possessions and became the most powerful among the Russian princes in order to maintain order, stop strife and ensure an uninterrupted flow of tribute. The Horde khans did not allow any significant strengthening of any of the princes and a long stay on the grand prince's throne. In addition, having taken away the label from the next Grand Duke, they gave it to the rival prince, which caused princely strife and a struggle for obtaining the Vladimir reign at the Khan's court.
A well-thought-out system of measures provided the Golden Horde with firm control over the Russian lands.
Political and cultural consequences of the Mongol yoke.
The consequences of the Mongol yoke for Russian culture and history were very difficult. The Mongols inflicted particular damage on the cities, which at that time in Europe grew rich and were freed from the power of the feudal lords.
In Russian cities, as noted earlier, stone construction ceased for a century, the size of the urban population, and especially the number of skilled artisans, decreased. A number of craft specialties disappeared, especially in jewelry: the production of cloisonne enamel, glass beads, granulation, niello, and filigree. The stronghold of urban democracy, the vecha, was destroyed, trade relations with Western Europe were disrupted, Russian trade turned its face to the east.
The development of agriculture slowed down. Uncertainty in tomorrow and the increased demand for furs contributed to the increasing role of hunting to the detriment of agriculture. Serfdom, which was disappearing in Europe, was conserved. Slaves-serfs remained the main force in the households of princes and boyars until the beginning of the 16th century. The state of agriculture and forms of ownership was stagnant. In Western Europe, private property is playing an increasingly important role. It is protected by legislation and guaranteed by power. In Russia, state power-property is preserved and becomes traditional, limiting the sphere of development of private property. The term "state power-property" means that land is not, as a rule, an object of free sale and purchase, is not in someone's complete private ownership, land ownership is inextricably linked with the implementation of state functions (military, administrative, legislative, judicial) , and state power cannot be someone's private affair 30 .
The intermediate position of Ancient Russia between the West and the East is gradually being replaced by an orientation towards the East. Through the Mongols, Russians assimilate the values of the political culture of China and the Arab world. If the ruling elite of the West in the X-XIII centuries. As a result of the crusades, she got acquainted with the culture of the East as winners, then Russia, having a sad experience of defeat, experienced a strong influence of the East in the conditions of demoralization and crisis of traditional values.
In the Golden Horde, Russian princes learned new, unknown in Russia forms of political communication (“beat with a brow”, i.e. forehead). The concept of absolute, despotic power, with which the Russians were only theoretically familiar, on the example of Byzantium, entered the political culture of Russia on the example of the power of the Horde Khan. The weakening of the cities made it possible for the princes themselves to claim the same power and a similar expression of the feelings of their subjects.
Influenced by specifically Asian legal regulations and methods of punishment among the Russians, the traditional, still tribal idea of the punishing power of society ("flow and plunder", "blood feud") and the limitations of the princely right to punish people (preference for "vira", fines) were blurred. The punishing force was not society, but the state in the form of an executioner. It was at this time that Russia learned "Chinese executions" - a whip ("commercial execution"), cutting off parts of the face (nose, ears), torture during interrogation and investigation. It was a completely new attitude to man in comparison with the tenth century, the time of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich.
Under the conditions of the yoke, the idea of the need for a balance of rights and duties disappeared. Duties in relation to the Mongols were performed regardless of whether it gave any rights. This was fundamentally at odds with the class morality of the West, assimilated by Kievan Rus, where duties were the result of certain rights granted to a person. In Russia, the value of power has become higher than the value of law (we are still seeing this!). Power subordinated to itself the concepts of law, property, honor, dignity.
At the same time, there is a restriction of women's rights, characteristic of the eastern patriarchal society. If the medieval cult of a woman flourished in the West, the knightly custom of worshiping a certain Beautiful Lady, then in Russia girls were locked in high chambers, protected from communication with men, married women had to dress in a certain way (it was imperative to wear a headscarf), they were limited in property rights, in everyday life.
At the same time, the Russian people acutely felt the injustice of everything that was happening. Aggression from the East and the West forced foreigners to be blamed for everything "non-Christians". Under the conditions of the Horde yoke and the hostile attitude of the Catholic West, Russians developed national narrow-mindedness, a feeling of only being a true Christian, Orthodox people. The church remained the only nationwide public institution. Therefore, the unity of the nation was based on the awareness of belonging to a single faith, the idea of the Russian people being chosen by God. Subsequently, this will manifest itself in the theory of "Moscow-the third Rome."
Dependence on the Mongols, extensive trade and political ties with the Golden Horde and other eastern courts led to marriages of Russian princes with "Tatar princesses", the desire to imitate the customs of the khan's court. All this gave rise to the borrowing of oriental customs that spread from the top of society to the bottom.
Gradually, the Russian lands, not only politically, but to a certain extent and culturally, became part of the Great Steppe. At least the Europeans, who again became acquainted with the life of Russia in the 15th-17th centuries, had many reasons to call this land “Tataria”. Due to the difference in the pace and direction of social development in the life of Russia and Western Europe, which had similar forms in the 10th-12th centuries, qualitative differences arose by the 14th-15th centuries.
The choice of the East as an object of interaction for Russia turned out to be quite stable. It manifested itself not only in adaptation to the eastern forms of the state, society, culture in the 13th-15th centuries, but also in the direction of the expansion of the centralized Russian state in the 16th-17th centuries. Even in the 18th century, when the interaction between Russia and the West, Europe became the main thing, Europeans noted Russia's tendency to give Eastern "answers" to the "questions" of the West, which affected the strengthening of autocracy and serfdom as the basis for the country's Europeanization 31 .
V. Discussion about the degree of influence of the Mongol (Horde) yoke on the development, the fate of Russia.
Arguments are common in science. In fact, without them, there would be no science. In historical science, disputes are often endless. Such is the discussion about the degree of influence of the Mongol (Horde) yoke on the development of Russia for more than two centuries. At one time, in the 19th century, it was customary not to even notice this impact.
On the contrary, in historical science, as well as journalism of recent decades, it is believed that the yoke became a turning point in all spheres of public life, most of all in political life, since the movement towards a single state on the model of Western European countries was stopped, as well as in public consciousness, which formed, as a result of yoke, the soul of a Russian person, like the soul of a slave 32 .
Supporters of the traditional point of view, and these are historians of pre-revolutionary Russia, historians of the Soviet period and many modern historians, writers and publicists, i.e. the actual large majority assess the impact of the yoke on the most diverse aspects of the life of Russia extremely negatively. There was a mass movement of the population, and with it the agricultural culture, to the west and northwest, to less convenient territories with a less favorable climate. The political and social role cities. The power of the princes over the population increased. There was also a certain reorientation of the policy of the Russian princes to the east. Today it is not fashionable, and often considered inappropriate, to quote the classics of Marxism, but, in my opinion, sometimes it is worth it. According to Karl Marx, "the Mongol yoke not only suppressed, but insulted and withered the very soul of the people who became its victim" 33 .
Actually, in my work I adhere to the traditional point of view. But there is another, directly opposite point of view on the problem under consideration. She considers the Mongol invasion not as a conquest, but as a “great cavalry raid” (only those cities that stood in the way of the troops were destroyed; the Mongols did not leave garrisons; they did not establish permanent power; with the end of the campaign, Batu went to the Volga).
At the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, a new cultural-historiosophical (historiosophy-philosophy of history) and geopolitical theory-Eurasianism appeared in Russia. Among many other provisions, a completely new, extremely unusual, and often shocking was the interpretation by the theorists of Eurasianism (G.V. Vernadsky, P.N. Savitsky, N.S. Trubetskoy) of ancient Russian history and the so-called "Tatar" period of Russian history. To understand the essence of their statements, you need to delve into the essence of the idea of Eurasianism.
The “Eurasian idea” is based on the principle of the unity of the “soil” (territory) and affirms the originality and self-sufficiency of the Slavic-Turkic civilization, which first developed within the framework of the Golden Horde, then the Russian Empire, and later the USSR. And today, the current leadership of Russia, experiencing enormous difficulties in governing the country, in which there are Orthodox and Muslims nearby, moreover, having their own state formations (Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Ingushetia, and finally Chechnya (Ichkeria)) is objectively interested in spreading the idea of Eurasianism.
According to the theorists of Eurasianism, contrary to the tradition of Russian historical science to see in the Mongol yoke only “the oppression of the Russian people by the filthy Baskaks”, the Eurasianists saw in this fact of Russian history a largely positive result.
“Without the “Tatars” there would be no Russia,” wrote P.N. Savitsky in his work “The Steppe and Settlement.” could. Great is the happiness of Russia that it went to the Tatars ... The Tatars did not change the spiritual essence of Russia, but in their excellent capacity as the creators of states, as a military-organizing force, they undoubtedly influenced Russia in this era.
Another Eurasianist, S.G. Pushkarev, wrote: “Tatars not only did not show systematic aspirations to destroy the Russian faith and nationality, but on the contrary, showing complete religious tolerance, the Mongol khans issued labels to Russian metropolitans to protect the rights and advantages of the Russian church” 34 .
Developing this idea, S.G. Pushkarev contrasted the “Tatar neutral environment” with the Romano-Germanic “Drang nach Osten”, as a result of which “the Baltic and Polabian Slavs disappeared from the face of the earth” 35 .
This advantage of the East over the West was appreciated by many Russian statesmen of that time. G.V. Vernadsky cited Alexander Nevsky as a striking example of an “Old Russian Eurasian” (who, by the way, was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church). In contrast to Daniil Galitsky, who connected himself with the West, Alexander Nevsky, “with much less historical data, achieved much more lasting political results. Prince Alexander Yaroslavovich singled out a culturally friendly force in the Mongols that could help him preserve and establish Russian identity from the Latin West” 36 - this is how G.V. Vernadsky assessed the “Eastern” orientation of Alexander Nevsky and his stake on the Horde.
The thought of G.V. Vernadsky was deepened by another Eurasian historian, Boris Shiryaev. In one of his articles, he comes to the conclusion that “the Mongol yoke called the Russian people out of the provincialism of the historical existence of small disparate tribal and urban principalities of the so-called appanage period onto the wide road of statehood.” "In this intermediate epoch lies the genesis of Russian statehood," 37 he stated.
The well-known emigrant historian and ethnographer of Kalmyk origin E.D. Khara-Davan believed that it was during these years that the foundations of Russian political culture were laid, that the Mongols gave the conquered Russian lands “the main elements of the future Moscow statehood: autocracy (khanat), centralism, serfdom” 38. In addition, “under the influence of Mongol domination, the Russian principalities and tribes were merged together, forming first the Moscow kingdom, and subsequently Russian empire» 39 .
The personification of the supreme power, traditional for Russia, also goes back to this era.
Mongol rule made the Muscovite sovereign an absolute autocrat, and his subjects serfs. And if Genghis Khan and his successors ruled the name of the Eternal Blue Sky, then the Russian Tsar Autocrat ruled those subject to him as the Anointed of God. As a result, the Mongol conquest contributed to the transformation of urban and veche Russia into rural and princely Russia / from the author: from the modern point of view, all this looks sad, but ...\
Thus, according to the Eurasianists, “the Mongols gave Russia the ability to organize itself militarily, create a state-coercive center, achieve stability ... become a powerful “horde” 40 .
In addition, during the period of the 13th-15th centuries, the Eurasian authors noted in Russia, due to the introduction of the Turkic element into the Russian (Slavic) culture, a definitely new ethnotype was formed, which laid the foundations of the psychology of the Russian person 41 . So, Prince N.S. Trubetskoy believed that “the Turk loves symmetry. Clarity and stable balance; but he loves that all this be already given, and not given, that it determines by inertia his thoughts, actions and way of thinking” 42 .
Such a psyche imparts to the nation "cultural stability and strength, affirms cultural and historical continuity and creates conditions for the economy of national forces, favorable to any construction" 43 . Having flowed into the Slavic element during the Mongol yoke, these Turkic features of the Russian folk psyche determined both the strength of the Muscovite state (“not well-tailored, but tightly sewn”), and then “everyday confessionism, that impregnation of culture and life with religion, which were the result of the special properties of the Old Russian piety." True, according to the Eurasian theorist, the reverse side of these traits was "excessive sluggishness and inactivity of theoretical thinking."
According to the Eurasianists, the Russian religious consciousness received significant “feeding” from the East. So, E.D. Khara-Davan wrote that “Russian God-seeking”; “sectarianism”, pilgrimage to holy places with readiness for sacrifice and torment for the sake of spiritual burning could only come from the East, because in the West religion does not affect the life and does not touch the hearts and souls of its followers, for they are completely and without a trace absorbed only by their own material culture” 44 .
But the Eurasianists saw the merit of the Mongols not only in strengthening the spirit. In their opinion, from the East, Russia also borrowed the features of the military prowess of the Mongol conquerors: "courage, endurance in overcoming obstacles in the war, love of discipline." All this "gave the Russians the opportunity to create the Great Russian Empire after the Mongol school" 45 .
Eurasians saw the further development of national history as follows.
The gradual decomposition and then the fall of the Golden Horde lead to the fact that its traditions are picked up by the strengthened Russian lands, and the empire of Genghis Khan is reborn in the new guise of the Muscovite kingdom. After the relatively easy conquest of Kazan, Astrakhan and Siberia, the empire is practically restored to its former borders.
At the same time, the peaceful penetration of the Russian element into the eastern environment and the eastern into the Russian one takes place, thus cementing the integration processes. As B. Shiryaev noted: “The Russian state, without sacrificing its basic principle, Orthodox everyday religiosity, begins to apply the Genghis Khan method of religious tolerance, which it tested on itself, to the conquered Tatar khanates. This technique connected both peoples” 46 .
Thus, the period of the XVI-XVII centuries. considered by the Eurasians as the era of the best expression of the Eurasian statehood.
The Eurasian theory of the relationship between Russians and Mongols (Turks) caused a heated controversy among Russian émigré historians. Most of them, brought up on the classical works of Russian historical school, did not accept this interpretation and, above all, the concept of the Mongol influence on Russian history. And there was no unity among the Eurasians. Thus, for example, the prominent Eurasianist Ya.D. Another prominent Eurasian theorist, M. Chess.
"What can we say about the opponents of Eurasianism in general." So P.N. Milyukov countered the arguments of the Eurasianists with his theses about “the absence of a Eurasian culture common to Russians with the Mongols” and “the absence of any significant relationship between the eastern steppe life and the settled Russian” 48 . The prominent liberal historian A.A. Kizevetter saw the “Apotheosis of Tatarism” in the Eurasian theory. "Dmitry Donskoy and Sergius of Radonezh, from the point of view of an orthodox Eurasian, should be recognized as traitors to the national vocation of Russia," 49 he sneered.
One way or another, but despite a certain radicalism and subjectivism, Eurasianism is valuable in that it gives a new, in fact, interpretation of Russia's relations with both the West and the East. And this, in turn, enriched the theoretical basis of historical science.
The ideas of the Eurasianists in the second half of the twentieth century were developed by the famous scientist Lev Nikolayevich Gumilyov and his other followers. Here is how L.N. Gumilyov wrote on this issue:
“... Moreover, the purpose of this raid was not the conquest of Russia, but the war with the Polovtsians. Since the Polovtsians firmly held the line between the Don and the Volga, the Mongols used the well-known tactic of a long-range detour: they made a "cavalry raid" through the Ryazan and Vladimir principalities. And later, the Grand Duke of Vladimir (1252-1263) Alexander Nevsky concluded a mutually beneficial alliance with Batu: Alexander found an ally to resist German aggression, and Batu to emerge victorious in the fight against the great Khan Guyuk (Alexander Nevsky provided Batu with an army consisting of Russian and Alans).
The union existed as long as it was beneficial and necessary for both sides (LN Gumilyov) 50 . A. Golovatenko also writes about this: “... Russian princes themselves often turned to the Horde for help and did not even see anything shameful in using the Mongol-Tatar detachments in the fight against competitors. So ... Alexander Nevsky, with the support of the Horde cavalry, expelled his brother Andrei from the Vladimir-Suzdal principality (1252). Eight years later, Alexander again took advantage of the help of the Tatars, rendering them a reciprocal favor. The authoritative prince contributed to the census in Novgorod (similar censuses in all the Horde possessions served as the basis for taxation); the Horde also helped Alexander Nevsky to make his son (Dmitry Alexandrovich) a Novgorod prince.
Cooperation with the Mongols seemed to the princes of North-Eastern Russia as natural a means of achieving or consolidating power as allied relations with the Polovtsy-South Russian princes of the 12th century” 51 . It seems that it is worth listening in this discussion to the calm and balanced opinion of the famous Soviet historian N.Ya. Eidelman:
“It is impossible, of course, to agree with the paradoxical opinion of L.N. affect the identity of the people, as would have happened under the more cultured German invaders. I do not believe that such an erudite as Gumilyov does not know the facts with which it is easy to challenge him; fascinated by his theory, he goes to extremes and does not notice, for example, that the forces of the “dog-knights” were incomparably weaker than the Mongol ones; Alexander Nevsky stopped them with the army of one principality. Far from praising any foreign dominion at all, let me remind you that the Mongol yoke was terrible; that, first of all and most of all, it hit the ancient Russian cities, the magnificent centers of crafts and culture ...
But it was the cities that were the carriers of the commercial beginning, marketability, future bourgeoisness - an example of Europe is evident!
There is no need, we believe, to look for the positive aspects of such a yoke in comparison with the abstract, non-existent and impracticable then German yoke. First of all, because the result of Batu's arrival is simple and terrible; the population, which has decreased several times; ruin, oppression, humiliation; the decline of both princely power and the germs of freedom ...
List of used literature.
1.N.M. Karamzin "History of the Russian State". Kaluga, "Golden Alley" vols. 3,4.1993
2. Klyuchevsky V.O. Collected works v.2. Moscow "Thought". 1988.
3. Nechvolodov "The Legend of the Russian Land", a reprint edition of the Ural branch of the All-Union Cultural Center "Russian Encyclopedia", book 2.1991.
4. Orlov A.S., Georgiev V.A., Polunov A.Yu., Tereshchenko Yu.Ya. "The basis of the course of the history of Russia" Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov, and the Faculty of History. Moscow, Prostor. 2002
5. Pushkin A.S. Complete Works v.3. Moscow, 1958.
6.Sandulov Yu.A. etc. “History of Russia. People and power. St. Petersburg, Lan. 1997.
7. Zuev M.N. History of Russia since ancient times. Moscow, "Drofa". 1999.
8. Gumilyov L.N. From Russia to Russia. Essays on ethnic history. Moscow, "Economic Russia". 1992.
9. Ionov I.N. "Russian civilization" 9-10th centuries. Moscow, "Enlightenment".
10. "History of Russia 9-10 centuries." under the editorship of M.M. Shumilov, Ryabikin S.P., 5th edition corrected and supplemented. St. Petersburg, "Niva". 1997.
11. Golovatenko A. "History of Russia: controversial issues." Moscow, "School-press".
12. Zaikin I.A., Pochkaev I.N., “Russian History”. Moscow, "Thought". 1992.
13. Valkova V.G., Valkova O.A., “Rulers of Russia”. Moscow, Rolf, Iris-press. 1999.
14. Savitsky P.N. "Steppe and Settlement". Moscow-Berlin, 1925
15. Khara-Davan E. "Genghis Khan as a commander and his legacy." Elista, 1991
16. Eidelman N. Ya. "Revolution from above" in Russia. "Book", 1989
17. Vernadsky G.V. "Two Labors of St. Alexander Nevsky. Eurasian time book, book 4. Berlin, 1925
18. Shiryaev B. “A supranational state on the territory of Eurasia”, “Eurasian Chronicle”, issue 7. Paris, 1927.
19. Pushkarev S.G. "Russia and Europe in their historical past", "Eurasian Chronicle", book 2. Prague, 1925
20. Magazine "Motherland" No. 3-4 1997
21. Quote by Gessen S.I. "Eurasianism". Modern records v.23, 1925.
List of used literature, (footnotes).
1. I.A. Zaichkin, I.N. Pochkaev “Russian History”, Moscow, “Thought”, 1992; p.104.
2. Quote according to Jan V. “Selected Works”, v.1, Moscow, 1979; p.436.
3. Karamzin N.M. "History of the Russian State" v.4, Kaluga, "Golden Alley" 1993; p.419.
4. Klyuchevsky V.O. "Collected Works" vol. 2, Moscow, "Thought" 1988; pp.20,21,41,45 etc.
5. Nechvolodov A. "The Legend of the Russian Land", a reprint edition of the Ural branch of the All-Union Cultural Center "Russian Encyclopedia", 1991; pp. 262-269 and others.
6. I.A. Zaichkin, I.N. Pochkaev “Russian History”, Moscow, “Thought”, 1992; p.103.
7. "History of Russia IX-XX centuries." edited by M.M. Shumilov, S.P. Ryabikin, 5th edition, corrected and supplemented, St. Petersburg, Neva, 1997; p.34.
8. Magazine "Rodina" No. 3-4 for 1997, article by Mirkasim Usmanov, Doctor of Historical Sciences. Kazan University "Neighbors called them Tatars" pp. 40-44.
9. Zuev M.N. "History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the twentieth century", Moscow, "Drofa" 1999; page 48.
10. N.M. Karamzin "History of the Russian State" v.3, Kaluga, "Golden Rainbow"; pp. 380-381.
11. Magazine "Motherland" No. 3-4 for 1997; p.39.
12.N.M. Karamzin, ibid., p.397.
13. Ibid., p. 410.
14. Magazine "Rodina" No. 3-4 for 1997, article by A. Amelkin "When; Evpatiy Kolovrat was “born” pp. 48-52.
15. I.A. Zaichkin, I.N. Pochkaev “Russian History”, Moscow, “Thought”, 1992; p.115.
16. Ibid., p. 116.
17. Valkova V.G., Valkova O.A. "Rulers of Russia", Moscow, "Rolf, Iris press" 1999; page 69.
18. "History of Russia IX-XX centuries." edited by M.M. Shumilov, S.P. Ryabikin, 5th edition, corrected and supplemented, St. Petersburg, Neva, 1997; page 35.
19. I.A. Zaichkin, I.N. Pochkaev “Russian History”, Moscow, “Thought”, 1992; p.119.
20. Ibid., p. 121 and A. Nechvolodov “The Legend of the Russian Land”, reprint edition of the Ural branch of the Russian Encyclopedia, 1991; p.299.
21. N.M. Karamzin “History of the Russian State”, Kaluga, “Golden Alley” v.4, p.417 and A. Nechvolodov “The Legend of the Russian Land”, reprint edition of the Ural branch of the “Russian Encyclopedia” 1991, book 2 ; p.300.
22. Orlov A.S., Georgiev V.A., Polunov A.Yu., Tereshchenko Yu.Ya. Moscow State University M.V. Lomonosov Faculty of History, Moscow, Prostor, 2002; p.70.
23. Pushkin A.S. "Complete Works" v.6, Moscow, 1958; p.306.
24. N.M. Karamzin "History of the Russian State", Kaluga, "Golden Alley" 1993, v.3; p.396.
25. For example, Sandulov Yu.A. etc. “History of Russia. People and Power”, St. Petersburg, “Lan”, 1997; p.171.
26. Ionov I.N. "Russian civilization of the 9th-beginning of the 20th century", Moscow, "Prosveshchenie" 1994; page 77.
27. Zuev M.N., ibid.; p.53.
28. Zuev M.N., ibid.; p.53.
29. “History of Russia in the 9th-20th centuries”, edited by M.M. Shumilov, S.P. Ryabikin, 5th edition, corrected and supplemented, St. page 35.
30. Golovatenko A. "History of Russia: controversial issues", Moscow, "Shkola-Press" 1994; p.32.
31. Ionov I.N., ibid., pp. 82-84.
32. Sandulov Yu.A. etc. “History of Russia. People and Power”, St. Petersburg, “Lan”, 1997; 173.
33. Quote on the "History of Russia IX-XX centuries." under the editorship of M.M. Shumilov, S.P. Ryabikin, 5th edition, corrected and supplemented, St. Petersburg, "Neva", 1997; p.36.
34. Pushkarev S.G. "Russia and Europe in their historical past", "Eurasian Chronicle", book 2, Prague, 1925; page 12.
35. Ibid., p. 12.
36. Vernadsky G.V. "Two Feats of St. Alexander Nevsky", "Eurasian Contemporary", book 4, Berlin 1925; pp. 325-327.
37. Shiryaev B. “National state on the territory of Eurasia”, “Eurasian Chronicle”, issue 7, Paris, 1927; page 7.
38. Khara-Davan E. "Genghis Khan as a commander and his heritage", Elista, 1991; p.182.
39. Ibid., p. 181.
40. Ibid., p. 202.
41. Magazine "Rodina" No. 3-4, 1997, A. Shatilov "Peresvet and Chelubey-brothers forever"; p.101.
42. Quote by Gessen S.I. "Eurasianism", "Modern Notes" v.23, 1925; p.502.
45.See Khara-Davan E., specified composition; p.195.
46. Ibid; pp. 199-200.
47. Magazine "Motherland" No. 3-4, 1997; page 55.
48. Ibid; page 56.
49. Ibid; page 59.
50. Gumilyov L.N. From Russia to Russia. Essays on Ethnic History”, Moscow, “Ekopros”, 1992, part 2 “In Alliance with the Horde”, ch. 1i2; pp. 90-136.
51. Golovatenko A. "History of Russia: controversial issues", edition 2, supplemented, Moscow, "Shkola-Press" 1994; pp. 39-40.
52. Eidelman N. Ya. "Revolution from above" in Russia, "Book" 1989; pp.32-33.
Among historians studying the Mongol-Tatar invasion, there is no consensus on two main problems: 1) whether there was a Mongol-Tatar yoke; 2) what impact it had on the Russian lands. (See the diagram "The Mongol-Tatar Yoke in Russia: Judgment and Evaluation".)
In general, there are three opposing points of view on these issues:
a) Historian N.M. Karamzin believed that there was a Mongol-Tatar yoke, but he positively assessed the influence of the Khan's power on political development Russia, because internecine wars began to decline, and the supreme power was concentrated in one hand. (See in the anthology the article “The Significance of the Mongol-Tatar Invasion and the Yoke in the History of Russia”)
b) L.N. Gumilyov believed that there was no Mongol-Tatar yoke in Russia. Batu's invasions were only a military raid, and subsequent events are not directly related to him.
He argued that the Grand Duchy of Vladimir, represented by Alexander Nevsky, had achieved a profitable alliance with the Golden Horde.
As long as strong Byzantium existed, neither the Catholic nor the Muslim world were afraid of the Russian lands. But in 1204 Byzantium was destroyed by the crusaders. The same fate awaited Russia.
The peculiarity of Russian-Horde relations can only be understood in line with that historical time, when specific Russia was subjected to double aggression - from the East and from the West. At the same time, Western expansion had more serious consequences for Russia: the goal of the Crusaders was territorial seizures and the destruction of Orthodoxy, while the Horde, after the initial blow, retreated back to the steppe, and with regard to Orthodoxy, they showed not only tolerance, but even guaranteed the inviolability of the Orthodox faith, churches and church property. The choice of the foreign policy strategy implemented by A. Nevsky was connected with the defense of the "historical meaning of the originality of Russian culture - Orthodoxy." "The alliance with the Horde - not the yoke of the Horde, but a military alliance with it - predetermined the special path of Russia," says historian L. I. Gumilyov.
And in the southern Russian lands, which became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, not even traces of Russian culture remained. Those Russian lands where they refused the alliance with the Mongol-Tatars and chose the Catholic West as allies lost everything. (See the article “The Significance of the Mongol-Tatar Invasion and the Yoke in the History of Russia” in the anthology by L.N. Gumilyov.)
c) The majority of Russians, both pre-revolutionary (S.M. Solovyov, V.O. Klyuchevsky, and modern historians (in particular B.A. Rybakov), reject the point of view of L.N. Gumilyov. They argue that the Mongol-Tatar yoke on Russia was and had the most bad influence for its development. (See the article “The Significance of the Mongol-Tatar Invasion and the Yoke in the History of Russia” in the anthology by S.M. Solovyov, V.V. Kargalov).) The following arguments are given as evidence:
A system of dependence of Russia on the Golden Horde was created
1) Russian princes fell into political - vassalage to the Mongol khans, as they were supposed to receive a label - a khan's charter for rule. The label gave the right to political and military support from the Horde. The very procedure for obtaining the label was humiliating. Many Russian princes, especially in the first years of dependence, could not come to terms with this and died in the Horde.
Under such a system, politically, the Russian principalities retained autonomy and administration. The princes, as before, ruled over the subject population, but were forced to pay taxes and submit to the representatives of the khan. The Mongol khans exercised tight control over the activities of the Russian princes, not allowing them to consolidate;
2) The economic dependence of the Russian lands was expressed in the fact that every year the Russian people had to pay tribute. Economic coercion was carried out with the help of a clear system of taxes. In rural areas, a land tax was introduced - kharaj (plowing - to file from a plow), in cities - tamga (trade duty), etc. To streamline the collection of taxes, the Mongols conducted censuses of the solvent population three times, for which numerals were sent to the Russian land. Tribute from Russia, sent to the khan, was called the Horde output.
3) In addition to tribute, the Russian princes had to supply recruits for the khan's army (1 from every 10 households). Russian soldiers were supposed to participate in the military campaigns of the Mongols.
The consequences of the Mongol-Tatar yoke for the Russian lands:
1) Eastern political traditions of the Mongol-Tatars had a significant impact on the form of government of the centralized Russian state. Autocratic power, which subsequently established itself in Russia, largely inherited tyrannical, oriental features.
2) The Horde yoke led to a protracted economic decline and, as a result, to the enslavement of peasants who fled from feudal oppression to the outskirts of the country. As a result, the development of feudalism slowed down.
3) Russia for 250 years was separated from Europe, European culture and trade.
4) The basis of the system of Horde dominion in Russia was violence. For this, military detachments led by the Baskaks were sent to the Russian lands, who followed the princes and the preparations for the exit, and suppressed all attempts at resistance. Therefore, the Horde policy is a policy of terror. The constant military invasions of the Horde's armies (in the last quarter of the 13th century - 15 times) were disastrous for the country. Of the 74 Russian cities, 49 were destroyed, in 14 of them life did not resume, 15 became villages.
5) In an effort to strengthen the power of the Khan, the Horde constantly quarreled and pitted the Russian princes, i.e. feuds continued. The Mongol conquest preserved political fragmentation.
In general, the Horde yoke had a negative impact on the historical development of Russia
Great Definition
Incomplete definition ↓
Discussion about the degree of influence of the Mongol (Horde) yoke on the development, the fate of Russia
Arguments are common in science. In fact, without them, there would be no science. In historical science, disputes are often endless. Such is the discussion about the degree of influence of the Mongol (Horde) yoke on the development of Russia for more than two centuries. At one time in the 19th century, it was customary not to even notice this impact.
On the contrary, in historical science, as well as journalism of recent decades, it is believed that the yoke became a turning point in all spheres of public life, most of all in political life, since the movement towards a single state was stopped on the model of Western European countries, as well as in public consciousness, which formed, as a result of yoke, the soul of a Russian person, like the soul of a slave.
Supporters of the traditional point of view, and these are historians of pre-revolutionary Russia, historians of the Soviet period and many modern historians, writers and publicists, i.e. the actual large majority assess the impact of the yoke on the most diverse aspects of the life of Russia extremely negatively. There was a mass movement of the population, and with it the agricultural culture, to the west and northwest, to less convenient territories with a less favorable climate. The political and social role of cities has sharply decreased. The power of the princes over the population increased. There was also a certain reorientation of the policy of the Russian princes to the east. Today it is not fashionable, and often considered inappropriate, to quote the classics of Marxism, but, in my opinion, sometimes it is worth it. According to Karl Marx, "the Mongol yoke not only suppressed, but insulted and withered the very soul of the people who became its victim."
But there is another, directly opposite point of view on the problem under consideration. She considers the Mongol invasion not as a conquest, but as a "great cavalry raid" (only those cities that stood in the way of the troops were destroyed; the Mongols did not leave garrisons; they did not establish permanent power; with the end of the campaign, Batu went to the Volga).
At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century, a new cultural-historiosophical (historiosophy - philosophy of history) and geopolitical theory appeared in Russia - Eurasianism. Among many other provisions, a completely new, extremely unusual, and often shocking was the interpretation by the theorists of Eurasianism (G.V. Vernadsky, P.N. Savitsky, N.S. Trubetskoy) of ancient Russian history and the so-called "Tatar" period of Russian history. To understand the essence of their statements, you need to delve into the essence of the idea of Eurasianism.
The "Eurasian idea" is based on the principle of the unity of the "soil" (territory) and affirms the originality and self-sufficiency of the Slavic-Turkic civilization, which first developed within the framework of the Golden Horde, then the Russian Empire, and later the USSR. And today, the current leadership of Russia, experiencing enormous difficulties in governing the country, in which there are Orthodox and Muslims nearby, moreover, having their own state formations (Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Ingushetia, and finally Chechnya (Ichkeria)) is objectively interested in spreading the idea of Eurasianism.
According to the theorists of Eurasianism, contrary to the tradition of Russian historical science to see in the Mongol yoke only "the oppression of the Russian people by the filthy Baskaks", the Eurasianists saw in this fact of Russian history a largely positive result.
"Without the "Tatars" there would be no Russia," wrote P.N. Savitsky in the work "Steppe and Settlement". In the 11th-first half of the 13th centuries, the cultural and political crushing of Kievan Rus could not lead to anything other than a foreign yoke. Great is the happiness of Russia that it went to the Tatars. The Tatars did not change the spiritual essence of Russia, but in their capacity as the creators of states, as a military-organizing force, which was different for them in this era, they undoubtedly influenced Russia.
Another Eurasian S.G. Pushkarev wrote: "Tatars not only did not show systematic aspirations to destroy the Russian faith and nationality, but on the contrary, showing complete religious tolerance, the Mongol khans issued labels to Russian metropolitans to protect the rights and advantages of the Russian church."
Developing this idea, S.G. Pushkarev contrasted the "Tatar neutral environment" with the Romano-Germanic "Drang nach Osten", as a result of which "the Baltic and Polabian Slavs disappeared from the face of the earth."
This advantage of the East over the West was appreciated by many Russian statesmen of that time. As a striking example of the "Old Russian Eurasian" G.V. Vernadsky brought Alexander Nevsky (by the way, canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church). In contrast to Daniil Galitsky, who connected himself with the West, Alexander Nevsky, "with much less historical data, achieved much more lasting political results. Prince Alexander Yaroslavovich singled out a culturally friendly force in the Mongols that could help him preserve and establish Russian identity from the Latin West" - this is how G.V. Vernadsky "Eastern" orientation of Alexander Nevsky and his bet on the Horde.
The thought of G.V. Vernadsky was deepened by another Eurasian historian, Boris Shiryaev. In one of his articles, he concludes "that the Mongol yoke called the Russian people out of the provincialism of the historical existence of small disparate tribal and urban principalities of the so-called appanage period onto the wide road of statehood." "In this intermediate era lies the genesis of Russian statehood," he stated.
The well-known emigrant historian and ethnographer of Kalmyk origin E.D. Khara-Davan believed that it was during these years that the foundations of Russian political culture were laid, that the Mongols gave the conquered Russian lands "the main elements of the future Moscow statehood: autocracy (khanate), centralism, serfdom." In addition, "under the influence of the Mongol rule, the Russian principalities and tribes were merged together, forming first the Muscovite kingdom, and later the Russian Empire."
The personification of the supreme power, traditional for Russia, also goes back to this era. consequence Horde Tatar yoke
Mongol rule made the Muscovite sovereign an absolute autocrat, and his subjects serfs. And if Genghis Khan and his successors ruled the name of the Eternal Blue Sky, then the Russian Tsar Autocrat ruled those subject to him as the Anointed of God. As a result, the Mongol conquest contributed to the transformation of urban and veche Russia into rural and princely Russia / from the author: from the modern point of view, all this looks sad, but ...
Thus, according to the Eurasianists, "the Mongols gave Russia the ability to organize itself militarily, create a state-coercive center, achieve stability ... become a powerful" horde ".
According to the Eurasianists, the Russian religious consciousness received a significant "feed" from the East. So, E.D. Khara-Davan wrote that "Russian God-seeking"; "sectarianism", pilgrimage to holy places with readiness for sacrifice and torment for the sake of spiritual burning could only come from the East, because in the West religion does not affect the life and does not touch the hearts and souls of its followers, for they are completely and without a trace absorbed only by their own material culture."
But the Eurasianists saw the merit of the Mongols not only in strengthening the spirit. In their opinion, from the East, Russia also borrowed the features of the military prowess of the Mongol conquerors: "courage, endurance in overcoming obstacles in the war, love of discipline." All this "gave the Russians the opportunity to create the Great Russian Empire after the Mongol school."
Eurasians saw the further development of national history as follows.
The gradual decomposition and then the fall of the Golden Horde lead to the fact that its traditions are picked up by the strengthened Russian lands, and the empire of Genghis Khan is reborn in the new guise of the Muscovite kingdom. After the relatively easy conquest of Kazan, Astrakhan and Siberia, the empire is practically restored to its former borders.
At the same time, the peaceful penetration of the Russian element into the eastern environment and the eastern into the Russian one takes place, thus cementing the integration processes. As B. Shiryaev noted: "The Russian state, without sacrificing its basic principle - Orthodox everyday religiosity, begins to apply the Genghis Khan's method of religious tolerance to those conquered by the Tatar khanates. This method connected both peoples."
Thus, the period of the XVI-XVII centuries. considered by the Eurasians as the era of the best expression of the Eurasian statehood.
The Eurasian theory of the relationship between Russians and Mongols (Turks) caused a heated controversy among Russian émigré historians. Most of them, brought up on the classical works of the Russian historical school, did not accept this interpretation and, above all, the concept of the Mongol influence on Russian history. And there was no unity among the Eurasians. So, for example, a prominent Eurasian Ya.D. Sadovsky in his letter to P.N. Savitsky sharply criticized the book "The Legacy of Genghis Khan in the Russian Empire", published in 1925 for "praising the vile and vile slavery of the Tatars." Another prominent Eurasian theorist, M. Chess.
"What can we say about the opponents of Eurasianism in general." So P.N. Milyukov contrasted the arguments of the Eurasianists with his theses about "the absence of a Eurasian culture common to Russians and the Mongols" and "the absence of any significant relationship between the eastern steppe way of life and the settled Russian way of life." The "apotheosis of the Tatars" was seen in the Eurasian theory by the prominent liberal historian A.A. Kiesewetter. "Dmitry Donskoy and Sergius of Radonezh, from the point of view of an orthodox Eurasian, should be recognized as traitors to the national vocation of Russia," he ironically.
One way or another, but despite a certain radicalism and subjectivism, Eurasianism is valuable in that it gives a new, in fact, interpretation of Russia's relations with both the West and the East. And this, in turn, enriched the theoretical basis of historical science.
The ideas of the Eurasianists in the second half of the twentieth century were developed by the famous scientist Lev Nikolayevich Gumilyov and his other followers. That's how L.N. Gumilyov wrote on this issue:
"... Moreover, the purpose of this raid was not the conquest of Russia, but the war with the Polovtsy. Since the Polovtsy firmly held the line between the Don and the Volga, the Mongols used the well-known tactic of a long detour: they made a" cavalry raid "through the Ryazan, Vladimir principalities. And later the great Prince Vladimirsky (1252-1263) Alexander Nevsky concluded a mutually beneficial alliance with Batu: Alexander found an ally to resist German aggression, and Batu - to emerge victorious in the fight against the great Khan Guyuk (Alexander Nevsky provided Batu with an army consisting of Russians and Alans) .
The union existed as long as it was beneficial and necessary for both parties (L.N. Gumilyov). A. Golovatenko writes about the same: "... Russian princes themselves often turned to the Horde for help and did not even see anything shameful in using the Mongol-Tatar detachments in the fight against competitors. So ... Alexander Nevsky, with the support of the Horde cavalry, expelled his brother Andrei from the Vladimir-Suzdal principality (1252).Eight years later, Alexander again took advantage of the help of the Tatars, rendering them a reciprocal favor.The authoritative prince contributed to the census in Novgorod (similar censuses in all the Horde possessions served as the basis for taxation); the Horde also helped Alexander Nevsky to make his son (Dmitry Alexandrovich) a Novgorod prince.
Cooperation with the Mongols seemed to the princes of North-Eastern Russia as natural a means of achieving or consolidating power as allied relations with the Polovtsy-South Russian princes of the 12th century. "I think it is worth listening in this discussion to the calm and balanced opinion of the famous Soviet historian N. Ya .Eidelman:
"It is impossible, of course, to agree with the paradoxical opinion of L.N. Gumilyov (and other Eurasians!), As if the Mongol yoke was the best destiny for Russia, because, firstly, it saved it from the German yoke, and secondly, it could not be so painful affect the identity of the people, as would have happened under more cultured German invaders. I do not believe that such an erudite as Gumilyov does not know the facts with which it is easy to challenge him; carried away by his theory, he goes to extremes and does not notice, for example, that forces "dog-knights" were incomparably weaker than the Mongol ones; Alexander Nevsky stopped them with the army of one principality. Far from praising any foreign dominion in general, let me remind you that the Mongol yoke was terrible; that, first of all and most of all, it hit the ancient Russian cities, magnificent centers of crafts, culture ...
But it was the cities that were the bearers of the commercial principle, marketability, the future bourgeoisie - the example of Europe is obvious!
There is no need, we believe, to look for the positive aspects of such a yoke, first of all, because the result of the arrival of Batu is simple and terrible; the population, which has decreased several times; ruin, oppression, humiliation; the decline of both princely power and the germs of freedom.
Home > Document9. 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 Saray-Batu, founded in the lower reaches of the Volga. At the beginning of the XIV century. The capital was the city of Novy Sarai, 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, Siberian peoples- traditional hunting for them, the inhabitants of Central Asia weaved 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 unified 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.
main theme oral folk art was the struggle with the 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 sizes of structures, more modest wall decoration, and the use of limestone slabs and boulders along with bricks. 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 student 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 frescoed 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, 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,