What are the reasons for the collapse of the ancient Russian state. Question 5. Causes and consequences of the decline of the ancient Russian state. Some specific centers

The great Kyiv prince Mstislav the Great died in 1132. After his death, a period began that can be described as the collapse of Kievan Rus. The first sign was Polotsk, which separated from the unified state. In the year of Mstislav's death, the princes of Polotsk returned there from Byzantium. The inhabitants of the city accepted them, and Polotsk began to live an independent life. In 1135, Veliky Novgorod seceded and refused to send an annual monetary tribute to Kyiv.

In Kyiv, the brother of Mstislav Yaropolk sat on the reign until 1139. After his death, the next brother Vyacheslav began to reign. But here the prince of Chernigov Vsevolod intervened in the fate of the Kyiv grand-ducal table. He was the son of Prince Oleg, who in 1093 expelled Vladimir Monomakh from Chernigov and became a prince there.

Vsevolod attacked Kyiv, expelled Vyacheslav and declared himself the Grand Duke. The entire branch of the Monomakhs came out against the invader. The most energetic of them, Izyaslav, who was the nephew of Vyacheslav, tried to return the capital city to the offspring of the Monomakhs. However, Vsevolod, thanks to his intelligence and cruelty, remained the Grand Duke until his death in 1146.

After the death of Vsevolod, his brother Igor became the great prince of Kyiv. But he turned out to be a narrow-minded and untalented person. During the month of his reign, he restored all the people of Kiev against him. In the meantime, Izyaslav Mstislavovich, who was the grandson of Monomakh, came from Volyn at the head of detachments of Torks. The Kiev militia left Prince Igor. He tried to escape, but his horse got stuck in a swamp near the Lybid River. Igor was seized and imprisoned.

The third brother Svyatoslav Olegovich undertook to save him. He gathered a strong squad in Chernigov in order to rescue his brother from imprisonment. And he, being in prison, took the veil as a monk. But the hatred of the people of Kiev for the tonsured Igor was extremely great. So that the prisoner would not be killed, Izyaslav ordered that he be transported from the cut to the church of Hagia Sophia. It was a holy place enjoying the right of asylum. But when Igor was taken to the temple, the people of Kiev recaptured him from the guards and trampled underfoot. It happened in 1147.

After that, the war began between Kyiv and Chernigov. At the same time, the Rostov-Suzdal land separated and became independent. Monomakh's son Yuri Dolgoruky ruled there. He was considered the legitimate head of the older Monomakh line. But Prince Izyaslav, whom the people of Kiev loved, belonged to the younger line of the Monomakhs.

It makes no sense to enumerate the endless clashes of princes who are closely related. It should only be noted that Yuri Dolgoruky reigned in Kyiv in 1149-1151 and 1155-1157. He died of poison in 1157. The Rostov-Suzdal Principality was inherited by his son Andrei Yurievich Bogolyubsky. He got his nickname due to the fact that he lived in the village of Bogolyubovo. And Yuri Dolgoruky is officially considered the founder of Moscow. For the first time this city was mentioned in chronicles in 1147. It is also said that Andrey Bogolyubsky was engaged in its strengthening (moat, walls).

It should be noted that the collapse of Kievan Rus is characterized by internecine wars between the children and grandchildren of Vladimir Monomakh. The Rostov-Suzdal princes Yuri Dolgoruky and Andrey Bogolyubsky fought with the Volyn princes Izyaslav Mstislavovich, Mstislav and Roman for the throne of Kyiv. It was a fight between uncles and nephews. But it cannot be seen as a family quarrel.

In accordance with the generally accepted rules of that time, the chroniclers wrote: “the prince decided”, “the prince accomplished”, “the prince went” - regardless of the age of this prince. And that could be 7 years old, and 30, and 70. So, of course, it could not be. In reality, military-political groups fought among themselves. They expressed the interests of certain lands of the disintegrating Kievan Rus.

The process of disintegration began after the decision of the Lubech Congress of Princes, held in 1097. He laid the foundation for a confederation of independent states. After that, dozens of years passed, and by the beginning of the 13th century Kievan Rus was divided into several independent principalities.

Principalities of Kievan Rus on the map

The northeast of Russia, as well as the southwestern lands, including the Kiev region, Galicia and Volhynia, isolated themselves. The Chernihiv Principality became independent, where the Olegovichi and Davydovichi sat on the reign. Separated Smolensk and Turov-Pinsk land. Veliky Novgorod became completely independent. As for the conquered and subordinate Polovtsy, they retained autonomy, and the Russian princes did not even think of encroaching on it.

The state collapse of Kievan Rus can be explained by weak trade and economic ties and the loss of ethnic unity. So, for example, Andrei Bogolyubsky, who captured Kyiv in 1169, gave it to his warriors for 3-day plunder. Prior to this, in Russia they acted in this way only with foreign cities. But such a cruel practice never spread to Russian cities.

Bogolyubsky's decision to plunder shows that for him and his squad Kyiv in 1169 was as foreign a city as any Polish or German settlement. This indicates that people living in different principalities have ceased to consider themselves a single Russian people. That is why Kievan Rus turned out to be fragmented into separate destinies and principalities.

In turn, some principalities were also not united lands. So in the Smolensk land, there were about a dozen destinies. The same was observed in the territories of the Chernigov and Rostov-Suzdal principalities. In Galicia there was a region in which it was not the Rurikovichs and the Bolokhov princes, the descendants of the ancient Slavic leaders, who ruled. The pagan Baltic and Finno-Ugric tribes, which were subdivided into Mordovians, Yotvingians, Lithuanians, Zhmuds, Estonians, Zyryans, Cheremis, Zavolotsk Chud, remained alien to Russia.

In this state, Kievan Rus entered the 13th century. Fragmented and weakened by civil strife, it became a tasty morsel for the invaders. As a result, the invasion of Batu put a logical point in this matter.

Alexey Starikov

Feudal fragmentation is an obligatory historical period in the development of medieval statehood. Russia did not escape it either, and this phenomenon developed here for the same reasons and in the same ways as in other countries.

Shifted deadlines

Like everything in ancient Russian history, the period of fragmentation in our lands comes a little later than in Western Europe. If on average such a period dates back to the 10th-13th centuries, then in Russia fragmentation begins in the 11th century and actually continues until the middle of the 15th century. But this difference is not essential.

It is also not important that all the main local rulers in the era of fragmentation of Russia had some reason to be considered Rurikovich. In the west, too, all the major feudal lords were relatives.

Mistake of the Wise

By the time the Mongol conquests began (that is, already before), Russia was already completely fragmented, the prestige of the "Kyiv table" was purely formal. The decay process was not linear, there were periods of short-term centralization. There are several events that can serve as milestones in the study of this process.

Death (1054). This ruler made a not too wise decision - he officially divided his empire between his five sons. A struggle for power immediately began between them and their heirs.

The Lyubech congress (1097) (read about it) was called upon to put an end to civil strife. But instead, he officially consolidated the claims of one or another branch of the Yaroslavichs to certain territories: "... let each one keep his fatherland."

Separatist actions of the Galician and Vladimir-Suzdal princes (second half of the 12th century). They not only defiantly made efforts to prevent the strengthening of the Kyiv principality through an alliance with other rulers, but also inflicted direct military defeats on it (for example, Andrei Bogolyubsky in 1169 or Roman Mstislavovich of Galicia-Volynsky in 1202).

Temporary centralization of power was observed during the reign (1112-1125), but it was precisely that temporary, due to the personal qualities of this ruler.

The inevitability of decay

One can regret the collapse of the ancient Russian state, which led to the defeat of the Mongols, long dependence on them, and economic backwardness. But medieval empires were initially doomed to collapse.

It was almost impossible to manage a large territory from one center with the almost complete absence of passable roads. In Russia, the situation was aggravated by the winter cold and prolonged mudslides, when it was generally impossible to travel (it’s worth considering: this is not the 19th century with pit stations and shift drivers, what is it like to carry with you a supply of provisions and fodder for a journey of several weeks?). Accordingly, the state in Russia was initially centralized only conditionally, the governors and relatives of the prince sent full power locally. Naturally, they quickly had a question, why should they, at least formally, obey someone.

Trade was poorly developed, subsistence farming prevailed. Therefore, economic life did not cement the unity of the country. Culture, in the conditions of limited mobility of the majority of the population (well, where and for how long could a peasant go?) could not be such a force, although it retained ethnic unity as a result, which then facilitated a new unification.

Even the enemies of different regions of the huge state were different. The territories of modern Ukraine were annoyed by the Polovtsy, Novgorod and Pskov were afraid of the Germans and Swedes. And the same quickly got used to fear only their own neighbors - other Russian destinies. As a result, the external threat common to all could not prevent the collapse.

But now you should not regret the collapse of Kievan Rus. It was a normal stage of maturation of the state of that time.

Causes of the collapse of the ancient Russian state

The process of disintegration of the state into sovereign principalities (or feudal fragmentation) took place over several hundred years. Its prerequisites were laid down in the process of the formation of the ancient Russian state. As you remember, back in the 9th century, the system of political interactions was based on personal loyalty: a warrior / combatant (or, as historians say, a “vassal”) takes an oath of allegiance to his lord and is ready to die for his prince or lord at any moment, and he in turn gives him an inheritance (land). The economy in these respects is also quite simple: 2/3 of all polyudya fees should go to the prince who gave him this site (this is how taxes reached the center - Kyiv) through this pyramid. The possession itself was called the “patrimony” and had no conditions for its loss or possession (hence the patrimony is considered “unconditional land tenure”). This means that a vassal could easily divide his lot among his children, bequeath, sell, drink away or lose at cards, or give part of the land to his vassals / warriors who protect him and his family (depending on the place of a person in this emerging feudal hierarchy) . So this system, already at the beginning of its formation, had one important flaw - if the prince comes into conflict with the vassal, then he also has his own army. And over time, the princes who held large cities or principalities (Novgorod, Smolensk, Chernigov, etc.) as their inheritance only began to strengthen their political and economic significance. By the middle of the XI century. (the time of the death of Yaroslav the Wise), local urban military elites had already formed, the well-being and prosperity of which depended solely on the position of their lord. The richer he is, the richer they are. That is why this powder keg to XI does not withstand the stress and is already giving its failures.

In addition to such a primitive feeding system that was created back in the 9th century. (i.e., grants by the prince of territories to his vassals/combatants in exchange for service), had another major drawback: when a strong and influential person sits in the center, then all principalities regularly and almost always honestly pay taxes (polyudye), when in power weak - you can't wait for the money. Money settles in local centers and gradually by the 11th century. Novgorod, Smolensk and other cities are already competing with Kyiv.

The above two objective reasons made the process of feudal fragmentation inevitable, but those that arose in the 11th century. subjective reasons accelerated it.

Prince Yaroslav the Wise, during his lifetime, made a will, where he transferred the entire territory to his five sons, dividing it into "destinies". eldest son Izyaslav received Kyiv and Novgorod lands; Svyatoslav- Chernihiv and Murom, Tmutarakan; Vsevolod- Pereyaslavl, Rostov-Suzdal land, Vyacheslav- Smolensk, Igor - Volyn and Carpathian Rus. The brothers received their reigns rather as governorships, for a while, and had to honor their elder brother Izyaslav, who inherited the great reign, "in his father's place." Nevertheless, the brothers together had to observe the unity of the Russian land, protect it from alien enemies and stop attempts at internecine strife. Russia was then conceived by the Rurikoviches as their common patrimonial possession, where the eldest in the family, being the Grand Duke, acted as the supreme manager. To their credit, the Yaroslavichi brothers lived for almost two decades, guided by their father's will, preserving the unity of the Russian land and protecting its borders. In 1072, the Yaroslavichi continued the legislative work of their father. A number of laws under the general title " The Truth of the Yaroslavichs"Supplemented and developed the articles of Russkaya Pravda.

A year later, Svyatoslav, weighed down by his position as the ruler of the inheritance, albeit not a small one, and having lost respect for his elder brother, by force took away the great reign from Izyaslav. Izyaslav left Russia and embarked on joyless wanderings around Europe in a futile search for support. He asked for help from both the German emperor and the Pope, lost his treasury in the lands of the Polish king, and only after the death of Svyatoslav in 1076 was he able to return to Russia. The soft-hearted Vsevolod Yaroslavich generously returned to his elder brother his rightful great reign, but soon the nephews Oleg and Boris raised the sword against their uncle. AT 1078 in Battle of Nezhatina Niva near Chernigov, Izyaslav defeated the rebels, but he himself fell in battle. Vsevolod became the Grand Duke, but all 15 years of his reign (1078-1093) passed in incessant internecine strife, the main culprit of which was the energetic and cruel Prince Oleg Svyatoslavich, who received the nickname Gorislavich.

The trouble was nesting in the very Yaroslavl specific system, which could no longer satisfy the overgrown family of Rurikovich. Each branch of the clan - Izyaslavichi, Svyatoslavichi, Igorevichi, etc. - could consider itself infringed and demand a redistribution of principalities in its favor. No less confusing was the inheritance law. According to the old custom, the eldest in the family was supposed to inherit the reign, but along with Christianity, Byzantine law also comes to Russia, recognizing the inheritance of power only for direct offspring: the son must inherit the father, bypassing other relatives, even older ones. The inconsistency of hereditary rights, the uncertainty and confusion of destinies - this is the natural breeding ground that has nurtured many problems.

The situation was further complicated by the fact that new nomads, the Cumans, appeared on the southern border of Kievan Rus. They regularly raided the border lands (mainly in the autumn, when the harvest had already been harvested, but the polyudye had not yet been paid). The farmers could not fight back, and since political institutions were extremely weakened at that time, it was extremely difficult for combatants to protect these hard workers due to the high mobility of nomads and the slowness of the military structures of that time. The situation escalated to such an extent that the Polovtsy once again reached Kyiv and tried to take it. So, in 1068, an uprising broke out against the people of Kiev against their Grand Duke Izyaslav, who was afraid to go out and repulse the nomads, it was about to flee to the Poles, and therefore refused to arm the townspeople. Izyaslav expected reprisals against himself immediately after the people of Kiev dealt with the Polovtsy, and therefore the uprising began to be suppressed. The Polovtsians entered the city, Kyiv was plundered ...

Attempts to diplomatically resolve internecine conflicts

Gradually, many princes changed their minds and began to look for a way to end the strife. A particularly prominent role in this belonged to the son of Vsevolod Yaroslavich Vladimir Monomakh. At his suggestion, in 1097 the princes gathered in Lyubech for the first princely congress. This congress was considered by Monomakh and other princes as a means that would allow reaching a common agreement and finding a way to prevent further civil strife. At it, the most important decision was made, which read: "Let everyone keep his fatherland." Thus, each prince turned from a governor, always ready to leave his inheritance for the sake of a more honorable reign, into its permanent and hereditary owner. Being now confident in their rights to hereditary possessions, the princes should have stopped their former enmity. If earlier the Russian land was a common tribal possession of all the Ruriks, which was controlled by the Grand Duke, now Russia was turning into a collection of hereditary princely possessions. Since that time, the princes in their principalities are no longer governors by the will of the Grand Duke, as has been customary since the time of St. Vladimir, but full-fledged masters-rulers. The power of the Kyiv prince, who thus lost his former right to distribute destinies-governors throughout the Russian land, inevitably lost its all-Russian significance. Thus, Russia entered a historical period, the most important feature of which was political fragmentation. Many countries of Europe and Asia went through this period to one degree or another.

S.V. Ivanov. Congress of princes in Uvetiyechi

But Russia did not find itself in a state of fragmentation immediately after the Lyubech Congress. For a time, the principalities nevertheless united. In the first decades of the XII century. Russia goes on the offensive against the Polovtsy, inflicting crushing defeats on them. During the reign in Kyiv Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125) and his son Mstislav the Great (1125-1132), it seemed that the times of Saint Vladimir and Yaroslav the Wise had returned.

Vladimir Monomakh was born in 1053, a year before the death of Prince Yaroslav the Wise, who was his grandfather. Vladimir owes his nickname to his maternal grandfather, the Byzantine Emperor Constantine Monomakh. Camping life, however, did not prevent Vladimir from marrying. His wife was Gita, the daughter of the last king of the Saxons of England - Harold, who died at the Battle of Hastings (1066). During the campaign of Vladimir in the Czech Republic, his eldest son, Mstislav, was born. After Vsevolod Yaroslavich became the Grand Duke of Kyiv, his son occupied the throne of Chernigov, the second most important in the Russian land, for 16 years.

Having become the Grand Duke at the age of 60, Vladimir Vsevolodovich showed himself to be a wise statesman and legislator. Under him, Russkaya Pravda was supplemented with important articles limiting the abuses of usurers, protecting the rights of rural workers - "purchases". A number of articles protected the interests of the merchant class. For the first time in the history of Russia, Monomakh spoke out (although this was not reflected in the legislation) and was against the death penalty as a form of punishment in general, even for the most serious crimes. Using the huge military resources accumulated to fight the nomads, Monomakh controlled the entire Russian land and ruled it as a strict but wise sovereign. Vladimir was merciful to the rebels, but he punished mercilessly for repeated strife. His sons successfully fought with their neighbors. In the northwest, Mstislav built stone fortresses in Ladoga and Novgorod. In the northeast, Yuri repelled the attacks of the Volga Bulgars and improved Zalessky Rus - the future Russia, populating it, founding new cities and laying the first white-stone churches of the present Vladimir region. Prince Yaropolk of Pereyaslav, continuing the work of his father, went to the Polovtsy in 1116 and 1120, after which they fled to the Caucasus and Hungary. He also annexed the free Danubian cities to Russia. Polotsk land was completely subjugated. Since 1122, friendly relations with Byzantium were restored. Vladimir Monomakh died in 1125, at the age of 72, having bequeathed to his son Vsevolod a huge united state. But Monomakh died, Mstislav passed away, and from 1132. Russia finally collapsed.

The emergence of three centers of power

In the middle of the XII century. civil strife reached an unprecedented severity, and the number of their participants increased many times due to the fragmentation of princely possessions. At that time in Russia there were 15 principalities and separate lands; in the next century, on the eve of the Batu invasion, there were already 50, and during the reign of Ivan Kalita, the number of principalities of various ranks exceeded two and a half hundred. After the death of Mstislav the Great, one principality after another falls away from Kyiv. The year 1136 was marked by a real political upheaval in Novgorod the Great: Prince Vsevolod Mstislavich was accused by the "men of Novgorod" of cowardice, a negligent attitude towards the defense of the city, and also that a year earlier he wanted to change Novgorod to the more honorable Pereyaslavl. For two months, the prince, his children, wife and mother-in-law were in custody, after which they were expelled. Since that time, the Novgorod boyars themselves began to invite princes to themselves and finally freed themselves from the power of Kyiv.

After Lyubech Congress for princes, they are hereditary fatherlands, the prosperity of which should be taken care of most of all. From now on, if the prince looks longingly at Kyiv, then often without breaking off relations with his fatherland, the source of his power. At the same time, the struggle for the Kyiv table is often conducted not because some prince seeks to go there, but in order to prevent the rise of rivals. That is why the victorious princes in Kyiv plant their deputies, not wanting to leave their family nests. Next to the princely domain there are estates of boyars, senior combatants. They turn into feudal landowners, whose interests are closely connected with local ownership. From now on, not a tribute, but the income received from the estates, become their main means of subsistence. Land ownership under feudalism is a source of political and social strength, and the princes can no longer ignore their boyars. It is easy to see that all of the above is the result of the development of feudal relations.

The pressure from the steppe shifts the border to the north: Kyiv loses its central position, turns into an outpost of the struggle against the Polovtsians. The population begins to leave the Kyiv and neighboring regions in search of safe places, inaccessible to steppe nomads. One stream of migration rushes to the northeast, to the distant Zalesky region; the other goes to the southwest, to the Galician-Volyn lands. In the Middle Ages, population density and economic prosperity were interrelated concepts, so the movement of the population had a negative impact on the position of the center. The Polovtsy, having established themselves along the lower reaches of the Dnieper, undermined trade with Byzantium and the East. " The path from the Varangians to the Greeks ' is in decline. But the final blow was dealt to him by the displacement of world trade routes. The northern Italian cities, which were rapidly gaining strength, were taking trade with the East into their own hands. This does not pass without a trace for the ancient Russian cities. The future was for those cities that managed to find their place, to establish themselves on new paths. Novgorod focuses on trade with North German cities. Another route, bypassing Kyiv, ran through the relatively safe Galicia. Ancient Russia is losing its role as a participant and mediator in trade relations between the Byzantine, Western European and Eastern worlds.

The changes were reflected in the minds of the princes. Many of them no longer regard the defense of the Russian land as a common cause. Hence the endless strife between the princes. But at the same time they are a reflection of the economic and political isolation of the lands, a change in the orientation of fortified cities and feudal clans. The local prince, firmly settled in his own fatherland, suited them much more than the ruler of the Kievan state. He could better and more fully express the interests of the land. He took care to transfer it not to a stranger, a foreign prince, but to his direct heirs. In isolated principalities - new political and economic centers - handicrafts developed faster, construction was more intensive, culture flourished. After the death of Vladimir Monomakh and his son Mstislav, the Kyiv land began to disintegrate into independent political entities - destinies. By the middle of the XII century. there were 15 of them. Half a century later - already about 50. The largest were Vladimir-Suzdal , Galicia-Volyn principality and Novgorod land . These lands managed to maintain a single state territory for quite a long time, which predetermined their decisive political importance in comparison with other principalities. All of them had known differences in political structure. Different ratios of political elements determined the originality of the lands.

• In the north-east of Russia, power was concentrated in the hands of the prince. He managed to rise above the boyars, turning them into obedient executors of his will, and above the vech. With great power Vladimir-Suzdal princes strove for sovereignty. It is no coincidence that they were the first who tried to embark on the path of uniting the lands, overcoming feudal fragmentation: it was this authoritarian type of power that was most suitable for solving this problem.
• The South Russian princes faced the traditionally strong and united boyars. The struggle went on with varying success. But even at the moments of the highest successes, the South Russian princes had to reckon with the interests of the boyars. Here the ratio of the prince - the boyars was not so tangible in favor of the first, as in the northeast.
• Ancient Russia knew not only monarchies, but also republics. The main one is the Novgorod Republic. Here, the state structure and even real politics were determined by the powerful Novgorod boyars and a strong veche. The prince's influence was limited. He acted primarily as a military guard and defender of the Novgorod borders.

With the collapse of the Old Russian state into destinies, the consciousness of the unity of the Russian land was not lost. The principalities continued to live according to the general laws of Russian Pravda, within the framework of one Orthodox metropolis, united in culture and language. There was a kind of federation of Russian principalities, sometimes capable of joint action. However, in general, the disintegration into destinies and strife had a detrimental effect on military power. At the same time, fragmentation itself is the result of the upward development of feudalism. Associated with it is the strengthening of the economy, the growth of cities, and the development of culture. It is not difficult to see the contradictory nature of the consequences of fragmentation.

Vladimir-Suzdal Principality

North-Eastern Russia was the outskirts of the Kievan state, a distant Zalesky region. The Slavs arrived here relatively late, having faced mainly the Finno-Ugric population. From the northwest to the Volga-Oka interfluve in the 9th-10th centuries. Ilmen Slovenes came, from the west - Krivichi, from the south-west - Vyatichi. Remoteness and isolation predetermined the slower pace of development and Christianization of the local areas. There were almost no cities in the northeast. Initially, the capital of the land was Rostov, which arose as a tribal center of the Vyatichi. The northeastern lands were inferior in fertility to the southern lands. But the Slavs also found their advantages here: rich water meadows, a wide field - fertile podzolic fields near forests, forests themselves, countless lakes, lakes and rivers. Despite the harsher climate in comparison with the Dnieper region, it was possible to obtain relatively stable crops here, which, together with fishing, cattle breeding, and forestry, ensured their existence. Trade routes stretching across the northeast contributed to the growth of cities. In the XI century. Suzdal, Yaroslavl, Murom, Ryazan appear near Rostov. Colonization flows strengthened as the threat in the south from the nomads increased. The former shortcomings of the region - its remoteness and wildness - turned into indisputable advantages. The region was populated by immigrants from the south. The princes themselves rather late turned their attention to the Zalessky region - the thrones in the local cities were of little prestige, prepared for the younger princes in the family. Only under Vladimir Monomakh, at the end of the unity of Kievan Rus, did the gradual rise of North-Eastern Rus begin. Vladimir-Suzdal Rus became the hereditary "fatherland" of the Monomakhoviches. Strong ties were established between the local lands-volosts and the descendants of Vladimir Monomakh, here, earlier than in other lands, they got used to perceive the sons and grandsons of Monomakh as their princes. The influx of population, which caused intensive economic activity, the growth and emergence of new cities, predetermined the economic and political rise of the region. In the dispute for power, the Rostov-Suzdal princes had significant resources at their disposal.

Many cities owed their origin to the activity of princes. Veche traditions were not so strong in them and attachment to princes turned out to be stronger. The encroachment of the land determined the later migration flows: farmers settled on princely land, so that tributary relations arose immediately. The local boyars, which grew out of the tribal nobility, with rare exceptions, were not strong. The new boyars came along with the Monomakhoviches and received land from their hands. All this created the conditions for the emergence of a strong princely power, characteristic of this part of Ancient Russia. But the local princes themselves, who turned out to be ambitious and powerful people, put a lot of effort into this. Rostov-Suzdal Prince Yuri Vladimirovich (1125-1157), the son of Vladimir Monomakh, dreamed of the throne of Kiev all his life. Hence his nickname Dolgoruky. Under Yuri Dolgoruky, the Rostov-Suzdal principality turned into a vast and independent. It no longer sends its squads to the south to fight the Polovtsy. For them, the struggle with the Volga Bulgaria, which tried to control all trade on the Volga, was much more important. Yuri Vladimirovich went on campaigns against the Bulgars, fought with Novgorod for small, but strategically and commercially important border lands. This was an independent, without regard to Kyiv, policy that turned Dolgoruky in the eyes of the inhabitants of Rostov, Suzdal and Vladimir into his prince. The name of the prince is associated with the founding of new cities in the region - Dmitrov, Zvenigorod, Yuryev-Polsky and the first annalistic mention of Moscow under 1147 Then he feasted here with his ally, Chernigov prince Svyatoslav Olgovich. The first time he could not resist and was expelled. In 1155, he fulfilled his cherished dream and became a prince of Kyiv, but soon died.

Historians have long emphasized the convention of this date, which is correlated with the founding of Moscow. Already one logical conclusion - Dolgoruky's invitation to his guest not from scratch - makes one doubt the usual interpretation of the annalistic news. Yuri Dolgoruky twice occupied the throne of Kyiv. When did the ancient Russian city of Moscow really arise? Archaeologists argued about how the oldest layers of Moscow are dated. Some historians have spoken of the 11th and even the 10th centuries. However, studies of recent decades have shown that in Moscow there is no cultural layer older than the first third - the middle of the 12th century. In other words, in 1147 the town of Moscow found itself on the pages of the chronicle two or three decades after its inception. About Moscow XII-XIII centuries. Chronicles mention very rarely. Therefore, only thanks to archaeological work, it is possible to lift the veil of mystery over the early period of the city's history. The oldest core of Moscow was located on the cape of Borovitsky Hill, at the confluence of the Neglinnaya and Moscow Rivers.

The heyday of North-Eastern Russia fell on the reign of the sons of Yuri Dolgoruky - Andrei and Vsevolod Yuryevich. The age difference between the half-brothers was almost forty years, and when the name of Andrei thundered throughout Russia, Vsevolod took only the first steps in the princely career. Andrey Bogolyubsky was already a typical prince of the era of feudal fragmentation. With all his thoughts he was with the northeastern land, where he grew up and which he revered as his homeland. Yuri Dolgoruky, apparently, wanted to transfer the throne of Kyiv to him, therefore he kept it next to him, in Vyshgorod near Kyiv. But Andrei disobeyed his father and fled to Vladimir. From Vyshgorod, he took the miraculous icon of the Mother of God, painted, according to legend, by the evangelist Luke himself. In his political activities, Andrei Bogolyubsky preferred to rely not on Suzdal, and even more so not on Rostov, where the local boyar clans were strong, but on the relatively young Vladimir. There were no strong veche traditions here, the population, which competed with the old cities, more willingly supported the prince. The shift in emphasis in political life is reflected by historians in the title: Rostov-Suzdal Rus gives way to Vladimir-Suzdal Rus. Near Vladimir, the prince also founded his residence Bogolyubovo. According to legend, during his flight from Vyshgorod, at the entrance to Vladimir, the horses suddenly stood up. The “Mother of God”, which should have been transported to Rostov, the center of the diocese, chose Vladimir as her place of residence, about which Andrei had a vision. The icon consecrated Vladimir (hence its name - the icon of the Vladimir Mother of God), predicted his exaltation; on the place where she showed her will, Bogolyubovo was founded. Another phenomenon characteristic of the spiritual life of society in the 12th century goes back to this legend. Asserting his independence, Andrei Bogolyubsky also tried to gain a certain religious independence from the old lands. In the northeast, the Mother of God cult acquires special strength - the Mother of God opens her cover over North-Eastern Russia, becomes her intercessor and protector. Of course, the Mother of God was highly revered in all corners of Orthodox Russia. But we should not forget that the cathedral (main) cathedrals in Kyiv and Novgorod were built in honor of St. Sophia, and in Vladimir it was the Cathedral of the Assumption of the Virgin. Within the framework of the religious worldview, this means a certain opposition, emphasizing the difference. Andrei Bogolyubsky generally sought to achieve church independence from Kyiv. He turned to Constantinople with a request to raise Metropolitan Fyodor of Rostov to the rank of Metropolitan of Vladimir. But the division of the Kyiv Metropolis did not meet the interests of Byzantium. A ban followed. The prince achieved only the transfer of the episcopal diocese from Rostov to Vladimir.

Andrei Bogolyubsky gained a reputation as a brave and successful warrior. In his many wars, he knew both victories and failures. In 1164, the prince defeated the Volga Bulgaria; five years later, his troops took Kyiv. Andrei did not even express a desire to take advantage of his victory and establish himself on the throne. But the city was subjected to a brutal pogrom: the winners acted in full accordance with the logic of specific wars - having won, by all means weaken their rival. The prince began by driving his brothers from the Rostov-Suzdal tables. Subsequently, relatives dependent on him ruled under his supervision, not daring to disobey anything. This made it possible for the prince to temporarily consolidate North-Eastern Russia. It was not easy for the boyars either. He easily transgressed through it, cracking down on unwanted people and taking away property. A conspiracy was drawn up against the prince, uniting all the dissatisfied. In 1174, in Bogolyubov, the conspirators succeeded in carrying out their plans - the unarmed prince fell under their blows.

In the struggle for power, even close family ties did not always matter. Andrei Bogolyubsky looked at his younger brother as an unwanted rival, and he had to endure a lot from him. With the death of Andrei Yurievich, the situation changed. Vsevolod got the opportunity to fight for the throne of Vladimir. He did not immediately manage to establish himself in Vladimir. The conspirators, out of fear of revenge and the power-hungry inclinations of Andrei's brothers, looked for more complaisant princes. But Yaropolk Rostislavich, the grandson of Monomakh, who had established himself in Vladimir, very soon made the local residents feel the difference with the former princes. He looked at the new reign as a temporary refuge. This led to a conflict with the Vladimirites. Vladimirians are ready to support not just a prince, but their permanent prince-patrimony, who would protect his possessions for his family. In their eyes, such princes were the children of Yuri, who really looked at the Vladimir-Suzdal lands as their hereditary ones. Michael, as the eldest, sat in Vladimir, but did not rule for long - in 1176 he died, and the people of Vladimir called him to the throne Vsevolod Yurievich (1176-1212).

The new Prince of Vladimir was very different from Andrei Yurievich. It was a prince hot, impatient, quick-tempered. Vsevolod, no less than his half-brother, craved power, but he was cautious and prudent. Andrei and Vsevolod Yuryevich complemented each other: one laid down, the other continued and strengthened the traditions of princely autocracy, which largely determined the further historical fate of North-Eastern Russia. Vsevolod expelled all his nephews. Kievan and Ryazan princes turned out to be dependent on Vsevolod. Novgorod, which preferred to maintain friendly relations with the most powerful princes, began to invite the prince of Vladimir to reign. Vsevolod cared about the prosperity of his fatherland. Under him, active construction was going on, the inhabitants of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality began to wean themselves from inter-princely strife. The boyars, which raised their heads after the death of Andrei Bogolyubsky, were again brought to submission. Vsevolod, more than other princes, relied on younger combatants. During the long reign of Vsevolod, few dared to challenge him. At the beginning of the XIII century. Prince Mstislav Udaloy, a native of the Smolensk princely house, tried to challenge the rights of Vsevolod in Novgorod. In Russia, Mstislav early gained a reputation as a skilled warrior, a daring warrior. Having support among part of the Novgorod boyars, he began to lay claim to the Novgorod reign. Supporters of Mstislav the Udaly, due to the discontent of the Novgorodians, were forced to temporarily abandon their plans. Protecting their liberties, in 1209 they expelled the sons of Vsevolod and called for the reign of Mstislav the Udaly. The death of Vsevolod Yurievich in 1212 showed how fragile the state formations of the specific period were.

A.M. Vasnetsov. Construction of the wooden walls of the Kremlin. 12th century (1906)

Galicia-Volyn Rus

The Galicia-Volyn land was rapidly rising due to the same reasons as the marginal North-Eastern Russia. Important trade routes passed through it - to the Danube, to Central and Southern Europe, Byzantium. This contributed to the growth of cities, such as Galich, who became rich in the salt trade. The relative remoteness from the nomads affected, which influenced the direction of migration flows from the Dnieper region. But there were also significant differences. In the south-west of Russia lived a wealthy and independent boyars, whose ambitions were reinforced by constant communication with the masterful aristocracy of neighboring countries. Cities behaved more independently, the population of which could sit behind strong fortifications both from princely wrath and from foreign troops. Unlike the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, the Galician land was constantly subjected to invasions by Polish and Hungarian feudal lords. As a result, the prince had to look for military support and encourage the strengthening of the boyars, who, in turn, could fight for their rights with great success and limit the power of the prince. In the south, princes from various lines of Yaroslavich ruled. This gave the princely strife a special urgency. In the second half of the XII century. the most powerful was the Galician principality, on the throne of which sat Yaroslav Osmomysl (1152-1187). But after his death, strife began, and with the death of his energetic son Vladimir, the dynasty of Galician princes came to an end. In 1199, Volyn prince took possession of the principality Roman Mstislavich, uniting Volhynia and Galicia under his rule. Roman Mstislavich, throughout his reign, waged constant wars with Hungary, Poland, went on campaigns to Lithuania and tirelessly fought against the boyars. But he failed to overcome boyar self-will and separatism. After the death of the prince, the boyars drove away his young sons and hurried to call on the sons of Igor Seversky (the hero of The Tale of Igor's Campaign), nephews of Vladimir Yaroslavich, in the hope of making them obedient executors of their will. The Igoreviches, however, showed their strong temper, began reprisals against the boyars. In response, they called on the Hungarians. Two of Igor's three sons were captured and hanged. In 1211, the Galicians returned for a while the exiled son of Roman Mstislavich - Daniel. But this time, he did not sit still. Instead, the boyar Vladislav sat on the princely table. This enthronement of a person who does not belong to the princely family of Rurikovich is the only case in the entire history of Ancient Russia.

events were increasingly influenced by Daniel Romanovich- a talented and brave warrior who fought both with the Tatars on Kalka and with the Teutonic Order. At the end of the 20s. he united the Volyn lands, and then Galicia. In the struggle against the dominance of the boyars, he relies on the small service people, the younger squad, and the urban population. Under Daniil Romanovich, Kholm, Lvov and other cities were built. In 1240 Galicia-Volyn land survived the invasion of the Mongols. But Daniel did everything to prevent new raids. In 1245, he managed to defeat the combined forces of the Hungarians, Poles and Galician boyars in the battle near Yaroslavl. An attempt to destroy the unity of Galicia-Volyn Rus ended in failure. But it was only a temporary reprieve. With the death of Daniel in the presence of his sons and grandsons, centrifugal forces take over, especially since Southwestern Russia, weakened by the invasion, could not resist strong neighbors. The Galicia-Volyn principality did not just fall apart, it was literally pulled apart in “pieces”: Volyn was under the rule of Lithuania, Galicia submitted to Poland.

Mr Veliky Novgorod

The most extensive Russian possession in the specific era was Novgorod land, which included the suburbs of Novgorod - Pskov, Staraya Russa, Velikiye Luki, Torzhok, Ladoga, vast northern and eastern territories, where mainly Finno-Ugric tribes lived. By the end of the XII century. Novgorod belonged to Perm, Pechora, Ugra (a region on both slopes of the Northern Urals). Novgorod dominated the most important trade routes. Merchant caravans from the Dnieper went along the Lovat across Lake Ilmen along the Volkhov to Ladoga; here the path forked - along the Neva to the Baltic, to Sweden, Denmark, to the Hansa - the trade union of the North German cities; along the Svir and Sheksna to the Volga to the northeastern principalities, to Bulgaria and further to the east. For Novgorod, a city of trade and crafts, such a location was vital. Novgorod has always occupied a special place in the history of Kievan Rus. He competed with Kyiv for a long time. True, Kyiv gained the upper hand, but Novgorod managed to maintain a certain isolation and independence. Princely power has never been strong here and depended on the position of the Novgorod "husbands". In Novgorod, there was a tradition of concluding an agreement with the prince. After the death of Vladimir Monomakh, the boyars ensured that the governors (in Novgorod they were called posadniks) were not sent from Kyiv, but were chosen at a veche from among the Novgorodians. In 1136, having expelled the objectionable prince Vsevolod Mstislavich, the Novgorodians made the veche their supreme authority and began to call on the prince they liked to reign. Novgorod turned, in essence, into a medieval republic. Such a peculiar development of Novgorod history has encouraged and continues to encourage researchers to explain it. It is clear that the reasons should be sought in the peculiarities of the socio-economic and political way of life of Novgorodians. A more severe climate and poor soils gave low yields here even in comparison with central Russia. Novgorod often, especially in lean years, found itself dependent on the northeastern principalities - suppliers of bread. The Vladimir-Suzdal princes quickly learned this simple truth and, not having the strength to conquer the Novgorodians by force, frightened them with hunger - a grain blockade. It does not follow from this that the rural population was not engaged in arable farming. Hundreds of smerds, engaged in rural labor, lived in the vast possessions of the Novgorod boyars. Cattle breeding, horticulture and horticulture were relatively developed. Nature itself, with its numerous rivers and vast forests, encouraged Novgorodians to craft. Furs, "fish tooth" - walrus bone, even exotic hunting falcons and many other natural resources - all this made them go to the taiga and the polar tundra. The Novgorodians forced the Finno-Ugric tribes to pay tribute. However, relations between them developed relatively peacefully - with the payment of tribute, bargaining began with the Novgorodians, which gave much-needed goods. Novgorodians brought agriculture and cattle breeding to the north, thus influencing the way of life of local tribes.

Novgorod itself early became a major trade and craft center. Archaeological excavations have revealed a multi-meter cultural layer in the center of the city. By the XIII century. it was a large, well-organized, comfortable and fortified city, spread out on both sides of the Volkhov. The sides - Trade and Sofia - were connected by the Great Bridge, which, however, played a role not only connecting, but also separating. Warring parties often converged on it to sort things out, and from the bridge to the Volkhov, the rebellious Novgorodians threw rulers they did not like. The population of the city was made up of artisans of various specialties. Just listing them would make a solid list. The craft was quite specialized, which made it possible to produce goods that went far beyond the city. Other craftsmen left signatures on their products: “Costa did”, “Bratilo did”. The craft character of the city was also reflected in its toponymy. The city was divided into ends, one of which was called Carpentry. Many streets got their names according to the professions of the artisans who settled here - Shieldnaya, Goncharnaya, Kuznetskaya, etc. The artisans brought their products to the crowded auction. Researchers have not come to a consensus on whether the Novgorod artisans had workshops similar to those in Western Europe. Apparently, some rudiments of associations on a professional basis existed. This not only facilitated handicraft activities, but also made it possible to defend the interests of artisans in state affairs. Undoubtedly, the artisans were richer and more organized in Novgorod in comparison with other cities of Russia. Hence their greater weight at the veche.

Trade played an important role in the life of the city. Its geography was very diverse - from Kyiv, Byzantium to Central and Northern Europe. In the city itself there were foreign trading yards - German and Gothic. In turn, the Novgorod merchants had courts in other principalities and countries - Kyiv, Lubeck, on the island of Gotland.

The Novgorod merchant class was not only an economic, but also a political force. It had its own corporate associations - guilds. Wealthy merchants at the church of Ivan on Opochki established their own council with elected officials, had their own treasury - in a word, all the necessary elements of self-government to protect their interests. The Novgorod boyars trace their origins to the local tribal nobility. It managed to defend its isolation from the princes. Early birch bark documents showed that state taxes in the Novgorod land were collected not by the prince and his retinue during the polyud, as was the case in other areas, but by the boyars themselves. The prince, on the basis of the contract, received the part of the income due to him. Simplifying somewhat, we can say that it was not the boyars who fed from the hands of the prince, but the prince from the hands of the boyars. Thus, the boyars created an economic advantage for themselves, which subsequently served as the basis for a political advantage in conflicts with the princes. The boyars became large landowners. The size of their estates exceeded the size of other principalities. However, the boyars themselves preferred to live in the city and often engaged in trading operations. In the vast estates of the boyars lived many artisans who found themselves in debt bondage to their masters. The interests of the city and the boyars were closely intertwined.

A.M. Vasnetsov. "Novgorodsky Torg"

Another feature of the Novgorod boyars is their isolation, corporatism. Unlike the rest of the lands of Ancient Russia, where one could rise to the rank of boyars, in Novgorod this title was hereditary. As a result, 30-40 boyar families occupied a leading position in the political life of the city. This does not mean that there were no feudal lords of non-Yar origin in the republic. This category was rather motley, among them there were many large landowners. They were called "living people". Performing various functions, including military ones, "living people" also sought to influence events. Both the boyars and the “living people” used the labor of smerds in their possessions. By the time of the conflict with the princely authorities, the position of the latter had been seriously undermined. In the fight against the strong boyars, the prince could not rely either on the inhabitants of the city - "black people", or on the church. In Novgorod, an acute internal struggle was in full swing, the people more than once took up arms against the boyars, merchants and usurers, but as soon as a threat arose from the prince, all Novgorodians acted unitedly. And the point here is not only in traditions: in the representation of all segments of the population, the existing order more fully met their interests. Many-voiced, valued vechem, they laid down their lives for it, they boasted of it in reproach to the rest, who dutifully bowed before the princely power. For Novgorod, the calling of the prince to the throne became characteristic. At the same time, his appearance was formalized by an agreement, the violation of which entailed the exile of the prince. The rights of the prince were significantly limited: under the control of the Novgorodians, he was engaged in military affairs, participated in court. The Novgorodians kept a close watch so that the prince did not strengthen his position. The prince was deprived of the right to have land holdings and even more so to grant estates to his entourage. Even the residence of the prince was not in the citadel - the city fortress, but outside it, on the Settlement. One may ask: why did the Novgorodians still need a prince and why did the princes go to reign in Novgorod? In the view of the people of that time, the prince was a military leader, a defender of the frontiers. A professional warrior, he appeared in Novgorod with his people, for whom war was a matter of habit.

In addition, the prince was the recipient of the tribute that was sent to Novgorod. He also resolved many lawsuits, was the highest court. In real life, the prince acted as a symbol of the unity of the republic, equalized it in communication with the surrounding monarchical states. The princes, in turn, were attracted not only by the tribute they received under the contract - the reign in Novgorod opened up new opportunities in communicating with rivals, gave an advantage over neighboring principalities.

The highest authority in Novgorod was veche - National Assembly. The owners of city estates gathered there. Veche called or, on the contrary, drove the princes from the throne, approved the most important decisions. At the veche, the highest officials of the republic were elected - the posadnik, the thousand, the lord (archbishop). Posadnik was the central figure in the administration. He controlled the activities of the prince and communicated with him, the main threads of domestic and foreign policy were concentrated in his hands. Only boyars could be posadniks. The position of the mayor was temporary. After the expiration of the term, they gave way to new ones. Over time, the number of posadniks increased - this reflected the acute internal struggle in the city, the desire of each of the boyar groups to influence the affairs of the republic. Tysyatsky exercised control over the collection of taxes, participated in the commercial court, was one of the leaders of the militia, defended merchants and "living people". The Archbishop of Novgorod possessed not only ecclesiastical, but also secular power. Under his chairmanship, a meeting of posadniks was held. Veche order permeated the entire structure of Novgorod. Five administrative and political units of the city - the ends - bell ringing gathered black people for the Konchan veche. Here, local issues were resolved, the heads of self-government were elected - the Koncha elders. The ends, in turn, were divided into streets with their street elders. Of course, one should not exaggerate veche democracy. She was limited. First of all, the boyars, who concentrated executive power in their hands, led the veche. Novgorod was a feudal republic. Novgorod was not alone. Soon, one of its suburbs, Pskov, was freed from dependence, creating its own sovereign Pskov Republic. Veche orders were strong in Vyatka. All this testifies to the fact that not only autocratic development prospects were present in the national history. However, when the time came for the gathering of lands, Novgorod and Pskov, torn apart by internal contradictions, clashes between black people and the boyars, could not resist the strong and monolithic monarchical power.

Any state in its history is going through three stages - the birth and development, golden age, decline and cessation of existence. Kievan Rus - a powerful formation of the Eastern Slavs - was no exception, therefore, after its triumph on the world stage during the time of Yaroslav the Wise, it gradually lost its influence and disappeared from the political map. The reason for the collapse of the Old Russian state today is known to schoolchildren and adults, but it is not the only one: Kievan Rus died due to external and internal factors that together led it to such an outcome. But we will tell about everything in order.

A bit of history

What is the reason for which, during its heyday, occupied a vast territory from the Taman Peninsula to the upper reaches of the Northern Dvina, from the tributaries of the Volga to the Dniester and Vistula? Before considering it, let us briefly recall the history of Kievan Rus.

Traditionally, the year 862 is considered to be the formation of the state - the date of calling on. Having strengthened his power in Kyiv, his successor Oleg the Prophet united the nearest lands under his hand. Many historians do not agree with this theory, because before the arrival of Oleg in Russia, there were well-fortified cities, an organized army, ships, temples were built, a calendar was kept, there was its own culture, religion and language. The stronghold and capital was the city of Kyiv, favorably located on the trade routes.

The golden age of the East Slavic state came after the adoption of Christianity in 988 and fell on the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, whose daughters became queens of three countries and under whom the first constitution "Russian Truth" was approved. Gradually, enmity between numerous specific princes also developed in Kievan Rus. This is the first and main reason for the collapse of the Old Russian state. The Mongolian bulk erased it from the political map of Europe, turning it into a remote ulus of the Golden Horde.

Internal factors of the collapse of Russia

The main reason for the collapse of the Old Russian state was the feudal fragmentation of Kievan Rus and the enmity between the princes. This is the traditional version of most historians, who also draw attention to the fact that this is a normal phenomenon for European countries of those times. Contributed to the deepening of fragmentation and the following:

• were surrounded by enemies - numerous tribes that were at different stages of development. Each destiny had its own enemy, so it fought off him with its own forces.
• Each specific prince relied on new, but influential strata of the population, which included representatives of the church, boyars, and merchants.
• Uneven economic development of the regions: the wealthy principalities did not want to share their resources with the Grand Duke of Kyiv and the poorer destinies.
• Frequent civil strife over the throne of Kyiv between the heirs, in which a large number of ordinary people died.

External causes of the death of Kievan Rus

We briefly outlined the internal reasons for the collapse of the Old Russian state, now we will consider external factors. During the period of prosperity, the princes did a lot to ensure the security of their borders. Vladimir baptized Russia, while receiving the favor of Byzantium and the support of European countries, Yaroslav arranged dynastic marriages, developed architecture, culture, crafts, education and other aspects. At the beginning of the 13th century, the foreign policy situation changed dramatically: the Mongols began to actively claim dominance in the world. Iron discipline and absolute obedience to elders, the large number and good weapons obtained by previous campaigns, made the nomads invincible. After the conquest of Russia, the Mongols completely changed their way of life, introduced new rules, elevated some cities and wiped others off the face of the earth. In addition to all this, a large part of the population, both the ruling elite and ordinary people, died or was driven into slavery.

The collapse of the Old Russian state: causes and consequences

We examined the factors of the political collapse of Kievan Rus, now we will find out what consequences this phenomenon had for the state. At the very beginning, the feudal fragmentation of the Old Russian state had a positive character: agriculture and crafts were actively developing, trade was briskly conducted, and cities were growing.

But then the destinies turned into separate states, whose rulers were constantly fighting for power and the main bone of contention was Kyiv. The capital city and its lands lost their influence, which passed into the hands of richer and more powerful regions. These include the Galicia-Volyn, Vladimir-Suzdal principalities and Novgorod, which are considered to be the political heirs of the first Old Russian state. The enmity greatly weakened the lands and did not allow the Russian princes to unite before the blows of the Horde, because of which Kievan Rus ceased to exist.

Instead of an afterword

We examined the causes and consequences of the political collapse of the Old Russian state. Such an excursion into history teaches us the main lesson: only together people and rulers can build a strong and rich state that can survive all the hardships of life.

The collapse of Kievan Rus

In the middle 12th century Kievan Rus broke up into independent principalities, however, formally limited existed until Mongol-Tatar invasion(1237-1240) and Kyiv continued to be considered the main table of Russia. Epoch XII-XVI centuries called specific period or political fragmentation(in Soviet Marxist historiography - feudal fragmentation). The breakup is considered 1132 - the year of death of the last powerful Kyiv prince Mstislav the Great. The result of the collapse was the emergence of new political formations on the site of the Old Russian state, a distant consequence - the formation of modern peoples: Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians.

Reasons for the collapse

Like most of the early medieval powers, the collapse of Kievan Rus was natural. The period of disintegration is usually interpreted not simply as strife of overgrown offspring Rurik, but as an objective and even progressive process associated with an increase in boyar land ownership . In the principalities, their own nobility arose, which was more profitable to have its own prince protecting its rights than to support Grand Duke Kyiv.

Causes of the collapse of the Old Russian state. Mongol-Tatar invasion and its consequences

The collapse of the Old Russian state is a completely natural phenomenon in the context of the development of medieval Europe. It was primarily due to the development of feudal relations and the system of feudal immunities. However, some researchers consider the main reason for the fragmentation of Kievan Rus to be changes in princely inheritance law, when each princely son received a certain part of his father's reign - an inheritance - for independent control. The specific system progressed rapidly in the 12th-13th centuries. Sovereign principalities arose, fighting for political leadership. At the same time, Kyiv gradually lost its role as an all-Russian center, and the economic potential of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, located in the north-east of Russia, increased. The rulers of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, as well as the princes of Kyiv, began to call themselves grand dukes.

The sovereignization of individual lands, on the one hand, had positive consequences. The movements of princes in search of a richer and more honorable throne almost ceased, and, consequently, power became more efficient.

On the other hand, each of the lands, taken separately, did not have sufficient human and material resources to protect its sovereignty. Therefore, the Russian principalities were conquered by the Mongol-Tatars during the campaign against Russia Batu Khan in 1237-1240.

The forcible inclusion of the Russian principalities into the world of political relations that had developed in the nomadic empire of the Mongols had a negative impact on the internal development of the Russian lands, led to significant differences between local state-political traditions and European ones. In Mongolian society, the power of the supreme ruler was absolute and demanded unquestioning obedience from his subjects. Having become vassals of the khans, the Russian princes borrowed the political traditions of allegiance in their relations with the feudal lords. This remark concerns, first of all, the lands of North-Eastern Russia, which formed the core of the future Muscovy.

REASONS FOR THE DECLINE OF KIEVAN RUSSIA.

Many have the wrong idea that the fall of Kievan Rus is connected with the invasion of the Tatars. A hundred years before them, Kyiv tends to decline. The reasons were internal and external. Firstly, the ancient Kievan Rus was a rich and European cultured country, a European country. This is the front side of life. But he also had a downside. The economic condition was bought at the cost of enslaving the lower classes: serfs, purchases. Not even a Marxist thinks so, but V. O. Klyuchevsky. The discontent of the oppressed classes oppressed the social order and well-being of Kievan Rus. Secondly, princely strife ravaged the Russian land. They were preoccupied with the desire to rob and burn a hostile country, to take the population in full. The captives were turned into slaves. Even Vladimir Monomakh, the kindest and most intelligent of the princes, was no stranger to this predation. In his "Instruction for Children" he tells how, having attacked Minsk (Mensk), "he did not leave a servant or a cattle there." He took everything with him. After the unsuccessful attack of the troops of Andrei Bogolyubsky on Novgorod in 1169, a prisoner was sold in Novgorod at a price lower than the price of a ram. So many have been taken! (“two legs” is a monetary unit) The Russian princes were not ashamed to bring Polovtsy to Russia to ruin their neighbors. Princely strife further exacerbated the position of the lower classes. Thirdly, the external reason, the Polovtsian invasions. Russia lived on the edge of European civilization, further extended the Wild Field, which, according to Klyuchevsky, was "the historical scourge of ancient Russia." Since 1061, continuous attacks of the Polovtsy (Kuman) began. In 1096, Khan Bonyak Sheludivy almost entered Kyiv, broke into the Caves Monastery when the monks were sleeping after matins. Bonyak robbed and set fire to the monastery. The Pereyaslav principality was gradually emptying from the raids of the Polovtsy. In Kievan Rus, there was even a doubt: is it possible to live next door to the Polovtsians. In 1069, Izyaslav Yaroslavich was expelled from Kyiv due to indecision in the fight against the Polovtsy. He went to Kyiv with the Polish army. The Kievans asked the brothers to protect the city, and in case of refusal, they said that they would set fire to their city and leave for the Greek land. So the attacks of the Polovtsians were continuous, like the Germanic tribes on Rome. Only Vladimir Monomakh concluded 19 contracts with them, but it was all in vain. To prevent attacks, Russian princes married khan's daughters. And the father-in-law continued to plunder the Russian land. A very interesting speech by Prince Vladimir Monomakh at the princely congress in 1103. He said: “In the spring, the smerd will go to the field to plow on a horse – the Polovchin will come, hit the smerd with an arrow and take his horse. Then he will come to the village, take his wife, children, and all his property, and set it on fire in the threshing floor. "Russia has a historical mission to defend Europe from the steppe, from nomads; protection of the left flank of the European offensive to the East. This is how Klyuchevsky and Solovyov think. This the time of the beginning of the crusades, which began in 1096. This is the beginning of the movement Reconquest on the Iberian Peninsula. This is a movement against Muslims and Arabs in Europe. The defense of Russia cost her dearly. The ebb of the Russian population to new places began. From the middle of the 12th century, traces of desolation are noticeable in the Middle Dnieper. In 1159, according to the chronicle, psari and Polovtsy (peaceful Polovtsy who came to Russia) live in Chernigov and its younger cities. Lubech, once rich, also became deserted. There is also an economic downturn. This is evidenced by the devaluation of the hryvnia. At the end of the 11th and beginning of the 12th century, the hryvnia weighed 1/2 pound, and at the end of the 12th century - 1/4 pound, and in the 13th - even lighter. The reason for the decline is this. One prince in 1167 invited to a campaign against the steppes. "Take pity on the Russian land, on your fatherland. Every summer, the filthy ones take Christians to their tents (tents. Hence the White Towers, the capital of the Khazars). But the paths are taken away from us (trade routes)," and lists the Black Sea routes of Russian trade. At the end of the 12th century, the Russian princes could no longer restrain the pressure of the Polovtsy and the exodus of the Russian population began. But Grushevsky saw the reasons for the decline of Kievan Rus in the intrigues and evil intentions of Vladimir-Suzdal princes. He writes: "The Suzdal princes deliberately wanted to weaken the Kyiv land. The Suzdal prince made a campaign in 1169 against Kyiv. And the army, having taken Kyiv, mercilessly devastated it. For several days they plundered the city, monasteries, churches sparing nothing. They took away icons, books, robes from churches, even the bells were removed and taken to their northern regions; people were beaten and taken prisoner "This is the first invasion in 1169. "Then Andrei's brother, Vsevolod the Big Nest, deliberately quarreled with the Ukrainian princes. Kyiv was again mercilessly plundered and devastated in 1203. Such a struggle ensued around it that it was very difficult for anyone to sit." Then the migration began. Grushevsky finishes: "After this, the complete decline of Kyiv begins and the later Tatar pogrom added a little to the previous pogroms. Vernadsky writes:" The importance of Kyiv was shaken in 1169 (recognizes the significance of the campaign of Andrei Bogolyubsky). The second reason was that the city suffered from the termination of trade relations with Constantinople after it was sacked by the crusaders in 1204. Shmurlo’s book says: “They robbed together with the Polovtsy in order to increase the disaster. All the youth of the city, men and women, were taken captive, nuns and monks were driven into the steppe for hard, and even shameful work. Only foreign merchants survived. They locked themselves in stone churches and bought life and freedom for themselves by giving half of the good to the Polovtsy.Since then, dishonored, broken and frail Kyiv sadly eked out its days in anticipation of the third even bitterer defeat of the Tatars in 1240. So the exodus of the people of Kiev begins. All historical schools agree on this. But where do they come from? Grushevsky points out the path of the people of Kiev to the West and only there, through Galicia to Poland, to the south-east of Poland. This is generally recognized. Klyuchevsky, on the other hand, writes that the outflow of the population went in two directions, in two streams. One jet was directed beyond the Western Buk, to the West, to the region of the upper Dniester and upper Vistula, deep into Galicia and Poland. So the Slavs returned to their historical homeland - the northern slopes of the Carpathians, abandoned in the 7th century. Another stream of colonization was directed in the other direction - to the northeast in the interfluve of the Oka and Volga. Thus, we are at the source of the division of a single ancient Russian people into two tribes - Little Russian and Russian.

Let us turn to the first vector - the ebb to the West. In the second half of the 12th century, the Galician principality was greatly strengthened. At the end of the century, Roman Mstislavich annexed Volyn to Galich. Chronicle calls him the autocrat of the whole Russian land. Not in vain. Under his son Daniil Romanovich, the principality grew noticeably, densely populated. The princes manage the affairs of the Kyiv land and Kyiv. Klyuchevsky writes: “Historical documents mention temples in the Krakow region and other places in Poland. The Tatars gave a new impetus to the exodus. Kyiv was burned by the Tatars in 1240 and about 200 houses remained there. In 1246, the missionary Plano Carpini passed through these lands. went to Tarataria. The Europeans called the Tatars the fiends of hell (the name of the Tatars comes from the Chinese "ta-ta"). Plano writes: "There is very little Russia left here. Most of them were killed or taken prisoner. (In Kyiv and Pereyaslav land, he met countless human skulls and bones scattered across the fields) ". The second blow to Kyiv was inflicted by the Tatars in 1299, after which its inhabitants fled again. The city was deserted. In the 14th century, Galicia was captured by Poland ( c. 1340), and the rest of the Dnieper region was captured by Lithuania. There are different opinions about the latter. Grushevsky avoids the idea that Kyiv was captured by Lithuania in the 60s of the 14th century. He writes: "After that, the Dnieper deserts became southeastern Ukraine the united Polish-Lithuanian state (1386, the year of the marriage of Jogaila and Jadwiga)". In the documents of the 14th century, and according to Fassmer - from 1292, a new name appears for southwestern Russia - Little Russia. These are documents of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Grushevsky and Evfimenko (a woman who married a Ukrainian) hold the view that: "The historical tradition of the ancient Kiev region was not interrupted, but continued to live among the Ukrainian people and in the institutions of the Grand Duke gestures of Lithuanian. Therefore, it was a continuation of Kievan Rus. "In their opinion, the Ukrainian princes of the Lithuanian dynasty ruled in this region. All of them are Rurikovich. This is the concept of all Ukrainian nationalists. raids after the overthrow of the yoke of the Golden Horde (after 1480). On the other hand, the Polish magnates acquired huge estates in the Ukraine of the Polish state and populated them with their people, bringing them out of the depths of Poland. yoke. The re-emigrants retained their language, their nationality and met with the remnants of the former nomads. There was assimilation with Torks, Berendeys, Pechenegs and others. This is how the Little Russian people is formed. That is why many Ukrainians have black eyes and black hair.

The inhabitants of Kyiv leave under the threat of Polovtsian robberies, and then the Mongol-Tatars. One direction of the outflow of the Kyiv population to the east, to Galicia, to Poland. Then the return and mixing of the Kyivans with the remnants of the ancient nomads took place: with Torks, Berendeys, Pechenegs. This is how Klyuchevsky talks about the formation of the Little Russian people by the 14th-15th centuries. Hrushevsky, on the other hand, begins the history of the Ukrainian people from the 4th century of the Christian era. He believes that Ukrainians, Belarusians and Great Russians, leaving their ancestral home, which was located on the northern slopes of the Carpathians, ended up in different physical, cultural and economic conditions, in a different ethnic environment. The Great Russians were formed mainly on Finnish soil. Belarusians are in close contact with Lithuanians, Ukrainians are in eternal neighborhood with the Turks. These peoples have more differences than similarities. This is Grushevsky's opinion. As a result, "people's well-being was formed, which now quite instinctively distinguishes Ukrainians, Belarusians and Great Russians. Or, in common parlance, Ukrainians, Litvins and Katsaps." The origin of the word crest according to Grushevsky (Russian historians agree with him). Khokhol is a derisive name for a Ukrainian among the Great Russians. It originates from the hairstyle of the Ukrainians of the 17th century, when they shaved their hair and left their heads in the middle. The name Litvin originated from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, when Belarus was within the boundaries of the Lithuanian Principality. The origin of the word "katsap" is not so clear. Velikorosy produces from the derisive "like a goat" because of the beard. Grushevsky writes: "it is now produced quite plausibly from the Turkic word kasap, which means a butcher, a cutter, an executioner."

According to Grushevsky, the Little Russian differs from the Great Russian and Belarusian in anthropological features, external physical appearance: the shape of the skull, height, and the ratio of body parts. It is distinguished by psychophysical features, manifested in the national character, psychology, in the warehouse of family and social relations. In our opinion, Grushevsky somewhat exaggerates the anthropological features of related tribes. In addition, the Ukrainian people are heterogeneous in their anthropological composition. Without denying the influence of the neighbors: the Turks, Finns, Litvins, we note that the formation of these peoples took place on a common Old Russian basis, that is, Kievan Rus is the cradle of the Great Russians, Little Russians, and Belarusians. Grushevsky considered. That Kievan Rus and its culture belongs only to the history of Ukraine. The period of Proto-Slavic unity lasted until the 6th century.

The second flow of the people from Kievan Rus was to the northeast in the interfluve of the Oka and Volga. This vector, according to Klyuchevsky, is poorly noted in the literature and contemporary observers of that period. Therefore, Klyuchevsky, in order to prove that there was an ebb of the population in this direction, resorts to indirect evidence: the most obvious argument is toponymy, geographical names, the toponymic similarity of the northeast with southern Russia. Klyuchevsky writes: “You need to listen carefully to the names of the new Suzdal cities: Pereyaslavl, Zvenigorod, Starodub, Vyshgorod, Galich. All these are South Russian names that flash almost on every page of the chronicle. There were several Zvenigorods in the land of Kyiv and Galicia. Names of Kyiv rivers Lybyadi and Pochainy are found in Ryazan, in Nizhny Novgorod, in Vladimir on the Klyazma.The name of Kyiv is not forgotten in Suzdal land, for example, the village of Kievo in the Moscow district, Kievka - a tributary of the Oka in the Kaluga district, the village of Kievtsy in the Tula Province.Three Pereyaslavl are known to ancient Russia : southern, Ryazan - this is the current Ryazan (the inhabitants of the old, pre-Mongol, Ryazan burned by the Tatars moved here), Pereyaslavl-Zalessky. Each of them stands on the Trubezh River, as well as in Kievan Rus. It is easy to guess that this is the work of settlers.

Until the middle of the 12th century, there was no direct communication between Kyiv and the Rostov-Suzdal Territory. They were separated by dense forests. There is a legend about this. The Bryn robbers are known (a village on the Bryn River). The name of the city of Bryansk comes from debryansk (wilds). And the Suzdal land was called Zalesskaya. This name belongs to Kievan Rus. The jungle began to be cleared and cut through the middle of the 12th century. If Vladimir Monomakh still had difficulty driving here to Rostov even with a small retinue, then his son Yuri Dolgoruky led entire regiments from the middle of the 12th century on a direct road from Rostov to Kyiv. From this we can assume that there was some kind of colonization, some kind of movement of grain growers. Peasants pierced this road. This is a quiet but spontaneous colonization, so the writers did not notice it.

While the desolation of the land is noted in the south, the construction of cities by Yuri Dolgoruky and his son Andrei Bogolyubsky is observed in the northeast: Moscow (1147), Yuryev-Polskaya (1180), Pereyaslavl Zalessky (1150-1152), Dmitrov (1154), Bogolyubov (1155), Gorodets on the Volga (1152), Kostroma (1152), Starodub on the Klyazma, Galich, Zvenigorod, Vyshgorod, Kolomna (1177). Andrei Bogolyubsky was proud of his colonial activities. Thinking of founding a metropolis independent of Kyiv, he said: "I have populated the whole of Russia with great cities and villages and made them populous." The Kievan people in the second half of the 12th century was torn in two, and the main mass of the people went to the northeast, where, according to Klyuchevsky, "gathered their defeated forces, strengthened in the forests of central Russia, saved their people and armed them with the power of a cohesive state, again came to the south West, in order to save the weakest part of the Russian people who remained there from the foreign yoke. Klyuchevsky rapped out: “Through centuries of efforts and sacrifices, Russia has formed a state similar to which, in terms of composition, size and world position, we have not seen since the fall of the Roman Empire.