Home Diseases and pests Feudal fragmentation in Rus'. Chronology, features, main political centers. Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation: history, stages, interesting facts

Diseases and pests

Feudal fragmentation in Rus'. Chronology, features, main political centers. Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation: history, stages, interesting facts

Feudal fragmentation of Rus'. MIDDLE 12-15 centuries.

· CAUSES OF FEPUDAL FRONTATION

· MAIN CENTERS OF THE RUSSIAN LAND DURING THE PERIOD OF FRAGRANCE:

GENERAL AND SPECIFIC IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT

· SOCIO-POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF Fragmentation.

The first division of lands took place under Vladimir Svyatoslavich; from his reign, princely feuds began to flare up, the peak of which occurred in 1015-1024, when only three of Vladimir’s twelve sons remained alive. Divisions of land between princes and strife only accompanied the development of Rus', but did not determine one or another political form government organization. They did not create a new phenomenon in political life Rus'. Economic basis and main reason feudal

fragmentation is often considered natural economy, the consequence of which was the absence economic ties. Subsistence economy is the sum of economically independent, closed economic units

stages in which a product goes from its manufacture to consumption. The reference to natural farming is only a correct statement of the fact that took place. However, his dominance, which for the feudal

lism is characteristic, does not yet explain the reasons for the collapse of Rus', since natural economy dominated in united Rus', and in the XIV-XV centuries, when the process of forming a single state was underway in the Russian lands

states based political centralization.

The essence of feudal fragmentation is that it was new form state-political organization of society. It was this form that corresponded to the complex of comparisons.

specifically small feudal worlds not connected with each other and the state-political separatism of local boyar unions.

Feudal fragmentation is a progressive phenomenon in the development of feudal relations. The collapse of early feudal empires into independent principalities-kingdoms was an inevitable stage in the development

orbits feudal society, whether it concerned Rus' in Eastern Europe, France in Western Europe or the Golden Horde in the East.

Feudal fragmentation was progressive because it was a consequence of the development of feudal relations, the deepening of the social division of labor, which resulted in the rise of agriculture

lia, the flourishing of crafts, the growth of cities. For the development of feudalism, a different scale and structure of the state was needed, adapted to the needs and aspirations of the feudal lords, especially the boyars.

The first reason for feudal fragmentation was the growth of boyar estates and the number of smerds dependent on them. The 12th and early 13th centuries were characterized by further development boyar land ownership in

various principalities of Rus'. The boyars expanded their possessions by seizing the lands of free community members, enslaving them, and buying lands. In an effort to obtain a larger surplus product, they

increased the in-kind dues and labor that were performed by dependent stinkers. The increase in surplus product received by the boyars due to this made them economically powerful and independent.

telny. In various lands of Rus', economically powerful boyar corporations began to take shape, striving to become sovereign masters of the lands where their estates were located. They wanted to administer justice to their peasants themselves and receive fines from them. Many boyars had feudal immunity (the right of non-interference in the affairs of the estate), "Russkaya Pravda" determined the rights

va boyars. However, the Grand Duke (and such is the nature of princely power) sought to retain full power in his hands. He interfered in the affairs of the boyar estates, sought to retain his

the right to judge peasants and receive vir from them in all lands of Rus'. The Grand Duke, considered the supreme owner of all the lands of Rus', and their supreme ruler, continued to consider everyone

princes and boyars as his servants, and therefore forced them to participate in the numerous campaigns he organized. These campaigns often did not coincide with the interests of the boyars; they separated them from their native lands.

rank The boyars began to feel burdened by serving the Grand Duke and tried to evade it, which led to numerous conflicts. Contradictions between the local boyars and the Grand Duke of Kyiv

led to an increase in the desire of the former for political independence. The boyars were also driven to this by the need for their own, close princely power, which could quickly implement the norms

we are "Russian Truth", since the power of the grand ducal virniks, governors, warriors could not provide quick real help boyars of lands remote from Kyiv. The strong power of the local prince was

necessary for the boyars and in connection with the growing resistance of the townspeople, smerds to the seizure of their lands, enslavement, and increased extortions.

The increase in clashes between the smerds and townspeople and the boyars became the second reason for feudal fragmentation. The need for princely power locally and the creation of a state apparatus forced

local boyars to invite the prince and his retinue to their lands. But when inviting the prince, the boyars were inclined to see in him only a police and military force that did not interfere in boyar affairs. To the princes and squad

such an invitation was also beneficial. The prince received a permanent reign, his land patrimony, and stopped rushing from one princely table to another. The squad was also pleased, which

I’m tired of following from table to table with the prince. Princes and warriors had the opportunity to receive a stable rent-tax. At the same time, the prince, having settled in one land or another, as a rule, does not

was satisfied with the role that the boyars assigned to him, and sought to concentrate all power in his hands, limiting the rights and privileges of the boyars. This inevitably led to a struggle between

prince and boyars.

The third reason for feudal fragmentation was the growth and strengthening of cities, as new political and cultural centers. During the period of feudal fragmentation, the number of cities in Russian lands reached 224. Their economic and political role, as the centers of this or that earth. It was on the cities that the local boyars and the prince relied in the fight against the great Kyiv

prince The increasing role of the boyars and local princes led to the revival of city veche meetings. The veche, a unique form of feudal democracy, was a political body. In fact, it is

was in the hands of the boyars, which excluded real decisive participation in government by ordinary townspeople. The boyars, controlling the veche, tried to use political activity citizens in their own interests

sah. Very often the veche was used as an instrument of pressure not only on the great, but also on the local prince, forcing him to act in the interests of the local nobility. Thus, cities, as local political and economic centers that gravitated towards their lands, were a stronghold for the decentralization aspirations of local princes and nobility.

The reasons for feudal fragmentation should also include the decline of the Kyiv land from constant Polovtsian raids and the decline of the power of the Grand Duke, whose land patrimony in the 12th century

decreased.

Rus' broke up into 14 principalities, and was established in Novgorod republican uniform board. In each principality, the princes, together with the boyars, “thought about the land system and the rath.” Princes declared wars, made peace and various alliances. The Grand Duke was the first (senior) among equal princes. Princely congresses have survived, where issues of all-Russian politics were discussed. The princes were

connected by a system of vassal relations. It should be noted that with all the progressiveness of feudal development

Being fragmented, it had one significant negative aspect. Constantly subsiding, then flaring up with new strength strife between the princes depleted the strength of the Russian lands and weakened their defense capability in the face of external danger. The collapse of Rus', however, did not lead to the disintegration of the ancient Russian nationality, a historically established linguistic, territorial, economic and cultural community. Continued to exist in Russian lands single concept Rus', Russian land. “Oh, Russian land, you were already behind the hill proclaiming the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” During the period of feudal fragmentation in the Russian lands, three centers stood out: Vladimir-Suzdal, Galician-Volyn princes -

They are sharply reduced (as, for example, in Novgorod at the beginning of the 15th century), or they are eliminated completely (as in Vladimir - Principality of Suzdal from the end of the 12th century). 2.6. Summary In the political life of Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation, cities played a dual role. On the one hand, cities, as local political and economic centers, were a stronghold of regional separatism, decentralization...

The verst of the period of feudal fragmentation was slightly more than 1 km and approximately corresponded to the later verst, equal to 1066 m. Conclusions. During the period of feudal fragmentation, the measures of length found in the ancient Russian state continued to be used. The old division of large units into small ones is preserved: cubit = 2 spans; fathom = 4 cubits = 8 spans. The elbow was sometimes called the foot, the span...

Feudal fragmentation of Rus'.
MIDDLE 12-15 centuries.

PLAN:

CAUSES OF FEUDAL FRONTATION
MAIN CENTERS OF THE RUSSIAN LAND DURING THE PERIOD OF FRAGRANCE:
AND SPECIAL IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT
SOCIO-POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF Fragmentation.

The first division of lands took place under Vladimir Svyatoslavich; from his reign, princely feuds began to flare up, the peak of which occurred in 1015-1024, when only three of Vladimir’s twelve sons remained alive. Divisions of land between princes and strife only accompanied the development of Rus', but did not determine one or another political form of state organization. They did not create a new phenomenon in the political life of Rus'. The economic basis and main reason for feudal dis-

fragmentation is often considered a subsistence economy, the consequence of which was the lack of economic ties. Subsistence economy is the sum of economically independent, closed economic units

lism is characteristic, does not yet explain the reasons for the collapse of Rus', since subsistence farming dominated both in united Rus' and in the 14th-15th centuries, when the process of forming a single state was underway in the Russian lands.

states based on political centralization.

The essence of feudal fragmentation lies in the fact that it was a new form of state-political organization of society. It was this form that corresponded to the complex of comparisons.

specifically small feudal worlds not connected with each other and the state-political separatism of local boyar unions.

the development of feudal society, whether it concerned Rus' in Eastern Europe, France in Western Europe or the Golden Horde in the East.

Feudal fragmentation was progressive because it was a consequence of the development of feudal relations, the deepening of the social division of labor, which resulted in the rise of agriculture

The first reason for feudal fragmentation was the growth of boyar estates and the number of smerds dependent on them. The 12th and early 13th centuries were characterized by the further development of boyar land ownership in

increased the in-kind dues and labor that were performed by dependent stinkers. The increase in surplus product received by the boyars due to this made them economically powerful and independent.

va boyars. However, the Grand Duke (and such is the nature of princely power) sought to retain full power in his hands. He interfered in the affairs of the boyar estates, sought to retain his

rank The boyars began to feel burdened by serving the Grand Duke and tried to evade it, which led to numerous conflicts. Contradictions between the local boyars and the Grand Duke of Kyiv

led to an increase in the desire of the former for political independence. The boyars were also driven to this by the need for their own, close princely power, which could quickly implement the norms

we are “Russian Truth”, since the power of the grand ducal virniks, governors, and warriors could not provide quick, real assistance to the boyars of lands remote from Kyiv. The strong power of the local prince was

necessary for the boyars and in connection with the growing resistance of the townspeople, smerds to the seizure of their lands, enslavement, and increased extortions.

such an invitation was also beneficial. The prince received a permanent reign, his land patrimony, and stopped rushing from one princely table to another. The squad was also pleased, which

I’m tired of following from table to table with the prince. Princes and warriors had the opportunity to receive a stable rent-tax. At the same time, the prince, having settled in a particular land, as a rule, does not

prince and boyars.

The third reason for feudal fragmentation was the growth and strengthening of cities as new political and cultural centers. During the period of feudal fragmentation, the number of cities in Russian lands reached 224. Their economic and political role as centers of a particular land increased. It was on the cities that the local boyars and the prince relied in the fight against the great Kyiv

prince The increasing role of the boyars and local princes led to the revival of city veche meetings. The veche, a unique form of feudal democracy, was a political body. In fact, it is

was in the hands of the boyars, which excluded real decisive participation in government by ordinary townspeople. The boyars, controlling the veche, tried to use the political activity of the townspeople in their interests.

decreased.

Rus' broke up into 14 principalities, and a republican form of government was established in Novgorod. In each principality, the princes, together with the boyars, “thought about the land system and the rath.” Princes declared wars, made peace and various alliances. The Grand Duke was the first (senior) among equal princes. Princely congresses have survived, where issues of all-Russian politics were discussed. The princes were

connected by a system of vassal relations. It should be noted that with all the progressiveness of feudal development

Being fragmented, it had one significant negative aspect. Constant strife between the princes, which either subsided or flared up with renewed vigor, exhausted the strength of the Russian lands and weakened their defense capability in the face of external danger. The collapse of Rus', however, did not lead to the disintegration of the ancient Russian nationality, a historically established linguistic, territorial, economic and cultural community. In the Russian lands, a single concept of Rus', the Russian land, continued to exist. “Oh, Russian land, you were already behind the hill proclaiming the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.” During the period of feudal fragmentation in the Russian lands, three centers stood out: Vladimir-Suzdal, Galician-Volyn princes -

deities and the Novgorod feudal republic.

2. Vladimir-Suzdal Principality.

The Rostov-Suzdal principality went to the youngest son of Yaroslav the Wise, Vsevolod of Pereyaslavl, and was assigned to his descendants as a family possession. In the XII - first half of the XIII century

The Rostov-Suzdal land was experiencing an economic boom. Fertile lands, huge forests, numerous rivers and lakes created the opportunity for the development of agriculture and cattle breeding.

The iron ore deposits available for mining contributed to the development of handicraft production. The most important trade routes to the south, east and west ran in the Rostov-Suzdal land, which

determined the strong development of trade here. The northeastern lands of Rus' were well protected by forests and rivers from Polovtsian raids, which attracted residents of the southern lands who suffered from the

ty attacks of nomads. Population growth in the Rostov-Suzdal principality had great importance for his economic development. The number of cities grew. Before the invasion of Batu, the following cities arose:

like Vladimir, Pereyaslavl-Zalessky, Kostroma, Tver, Nizhny Novgorod and others. In the chronicle of 1147, Moscow is mentioned for the first time, a small town built by Yuri Dolgoruky on

the site of the estate of boyar Kuchka. Cities in the Rostov-Suzdal land were created both inside and on the borders, as fortresses, centers of administrative power. They, overgrown with trade and craft villages,

ladies, also turned into centers for the development of crafts and trade. In the 11th-12th centuries, large princely, boyar and church land ownership developed here. The feudal lords seized the lands of rural neighboring communities and enslaved the Smerds. The Rostov-Suzdal land was separated from Kyiv in the 30s of the 12th century under the son of Vladimir Monomakh, Yuri Vladimirovich Dolgoruk, who ruled from 1125 to 1157. Prince Yuri received the nickname Dolgoruky for his military and political activity. He was always at the center of all the strife and strife of the Russian princes. Yuri Dolgoruky began the fight against Novgorod and Volga Bulgaria, trying to expand the lands of his principality. Under the influence of the Rostov-Suzdal prince

Ryazan and Murom hit. For many years, Yuri Dolgoruky waged a grueling and completely unnecessary struggle for his principality for the Kiev grand-ducal table. Although the power of the Grand Duke was irrevocably a thing of the past, the reign in Kyiv emphasized the seniority of the prince. For the generation of princes Yuri Dolgoruky, this was still important in the political struggle. Subsequent generations of Russian princes, called

those who considered their principalities “great” and themselves “great princes” no longer felt such reverence for the title of the Grand Duke of Kyiv.

After Yuri's death Dolgoruky Prince Rostov-Suzdal

His son Andrei Yuryevich Bogolyubsky, who ruled until 1174, became the principality. He, like his father, continued the fight against Novgorod and Volga Bulgaria, and sought to expand the borders of his principality.

It was Andrei Bogolyubsky who began the struggle for the hegemony of the Rostov-Suzdal princes in the Russian lands. He, claiming the title of Grand Duke of all lands of Rus', captured Kyiv in 1169 and committed

complete defeat, surpassing the Polovtsians in this. But, having taken possession of the title of Grand Duke of Kyiv, Andrei Bogolyubsky, unlike his father, did not remain to reign in Kyiv, but returned to his principality. Attempts

The ambitious and power-hungry prince's attempt to subjugate Novgorod, the princes of all Russian lands, and unite them around the Rostov-Suzdal principality failed. It was in these actions of Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky that the idea of unifying the lands was manifested, i.e. establishing state unity. But not all princes realized it. Andrei Bogolyubsky pursued a policy of power in his principality. Strengthening his power, he attacked the rights and privileges of the boyars. A serious struggle unfolded between them and the prince. Andrei Bogolyubsky dealt with the rebellious boyars, expelled them from the principality, and deprived them of their estates. In the fight against the boyars, he relied on the trade and craft population of the cities, on service people - vigilantes. In an effort to further separate himself from the boyars and rely on the townspeople, Andrei moved the capital from boyar Rostov to the young trade and craft city of Vladimir. The prince set up his residence in Bogolyubovo near Vladimir, for which he received the nickname Bogolyubsky. The powerful prince failed to break the boyars. A boyar conspiracy arose as a result of which Andrei Bogolyubsky was killed in his residence in 1174. After this, boyar strife raged in the Vladimir-Suzdal principality. In 1176, Andrei's brother Vsevolod took the princely throne. Big Nest, reigned until 1212. He received this nickname for his large family. Under Vsevolod, the Vladimir-Suzdal principality reached its greatest power and prosperity.

The prince continued his brother's policies. He spoke with the Ryazan princes by force of arms, and resolved the issue with the South Russian princes and Novgorod using political methods. The name of Vsevolod was known in

all Russian lands. About power Prince of Vladimir wrote the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” noting that Vsevolod’s numerous regiments could splash the Volga with oars and scoop up the Don with their helmets. After the death of Vsevolod the Big Nest, strife began between his sons over the most profitable reign for the princes and their warriors to receive taxes in the Vladimir-Suzdal land. In the second quarter of the 12th century, there were 7 principalities on its territory. All of them eventually united politically under the leadership of the Vladimir prince.

3. Galicia-Volyn principality.

Galicia-Volyn principality with its fertile soils, mild climate, steppe space interspersed with rivers and forests, was the center of highly developed agriculture and cattle breeding. The fishing industry was actively developing in this land. A consequence of the further deepening of the social division of labor was the development of crafts, which led to the growth of cities. Largest cities The Galicia-Volyn principality were Vladimir-Volynsky, Przemysl, Terebovl, Galich, Berestye, Kholm. Numerous trade routes passed through the Galich and Volyn lands. Waterway from Baltic Sea to Chernoe passed along the Vistula - Western Bug - Dniester rivers, overland trade routes led to the countries of South-Eastern Europe. There was a land trade route with the countries of the East along the Danube. In the Galicia-Volyn land, large princely and boyar land ownership developed early.

Until the middle of the 12th century, the Galician land was divided into small principalities. In 1141, Prince Vladimir Volodarevich of Przemysl united them, moving the capital to Galich. The Galich principality reached its highest power under his son Yaroslav Osmysl (1151-1187), who received this nickname for his high education and knowledge of eight foreign languages. Yaroslav Osmysl had unquestioned authority, both in domestic Russian affairs and in international affairs. The author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” aptly spoke about his power:

"Galich Osmyslovs to Yaroslav!

Sitting high on your gold-plated table,

Supported the Ugorkyi Mountains (Carpathians)

With your iron shelves,

Having stepped in the queen's way...

Your thunderstorms are flowing across the lands."

After the death of Osmysl, the Galician land became the arena of a long internecine struggle between the princes and the local boyars. Its duration and complexity is explained by the relative weakness of the Galician princes,

whose landownership lagged behind the boyars in size. The huge estates of the Galician boyars and numerous servants-vassals allowed them to fight the princes they disliked, since

The latter, having a smaller estate, could not, due to a lack of land, increase the number of service people, their supporters, on whom they relied in the fight against the boyars.

The situation was different in the Volyn land, which in the middle of the 12th century became the family domain of the descendants of Izyaslav Mstislavich. A powerful princely fiefdom developed here early on. Increasing due to

distribution of lands to the number of service people, the Volyn princes began to fight against the boyars for the unification of the Galician and Volyn lands, the strengthening of their power. In 1189, the Volyn prince Roman Mstislavich

united the Galician and Volyn lands. In 1203 he occupied Kyiv. Under the rule of Roman Mstislavich, Southern and Southwestern Rus' united. The period of his reign was marked by the strengthening of the positions of the Galicia-Volyn principality within the Russian lands and on international arena. In 1205, Roman Mstislavich died in Poland, which led to the weakening of princely power in the Galicia-Volyn principality and its

disintegration The Galician boyars began a long and ruinous feudal war that lasted about 30 years. The boyars entered into an agreement with the Hungarian and Polish feudal lords, who captured Galicia

land and part of Volyn. The national liberation struggle began against the Polish and Hungarian invaders. This struggle served as the basis for the consolidation of forces in Southwestern Rus'. Prince Daniil

Romanovich, relying on the townspeople and his service people, managed to strengthen his power, establish himself in Volyn, and in 1238 take Galich and reunite the Galician and Volyn lands. In 1240

he took Kyiv and united Southern and Southwestern Rus' again. The economic and cultural rise of the Galicia-Volyn principality during the reign of Daniil Romanovich was interrupted by the invasion of Batu.

4. Novgorod feudal republic.

In the Novgorod land, unlike other Russian lands, a boyar republic was established. It was one of the most developed Russian lands. Its main territory was located between Lake Ilmen and Lake Peipsi, along the banks of the Volkhov, Lovat, Velikaya, Msta rivers. The territory of the Novgorod land was divided into Pyatina, which in turn were administratively divided into hundreds and graveyards. On the borders of the Novgorod land, military strongholds were Pskov, Ladoga, Staraya Rusa, Torzhok, Velikiye Luki, Yuryev. Important trade routes passed through these cities. The largest of these cities was Pskov, which by the end of the 13th century became virtually an independent republic. Since the 15th century, residents of the Novgorod and Rostov-Suzdal lands began active colonization of the lands of Karelia, along the Dvina River, around Lake Onega and Northern Pomerania. As a result of colonization, the Karelians, Vods, and Zavolochskaya Chud (Finno-Ugric tribes) became part of the Novgorod land. The Sami and Nenets paid tribute to Novgorod, mainly in furs. Novgorod was the largest commercial and industrial center. The city was located at the center of trade routes that connected the Baltic Sea with the Black and Caspian Seas. Active trade was conducted with Volga Bulgaria and eastern countries. Novgorod, in which archaeologists have found the remains of a German trading court, was a major center of trade with the Baltic states, Scandinavia, and northern German cities that entered into the Hanseatic trade and political union in the 14th century. Craft production in Novgorod was distinguished by a wide range of

cialization. In general, artisans worked to order, but blacksmiths, weavers, tanners and representatives of a number of other specialties already at that time began to work for the market, both domestic and

to external. The Volkhov River divided Novgorod into two sides - Sofia and Torgovaya. The city was divided into five ends - districts. The ends were divided into streets. Craftsmen and merchants created their own street

There are hundreds of people by profession and brothers. The most significant influence on the life of Novgorod was the merchant association "Ivanskoye Sto", whose merchants traded in honey and wax. Despite

a large percentage of the trade and craft population; the basis of the economy of the Novgorod land was agriculture. True, climatic conditions did not make it possible to obtain high yields.

In the Novgorod land, boyar agriculture developed early. All fertile lands were actually redistributed among the boyars, which did not lead to the creation of a large princely fiefdom. Its fold-

The situation was also not helped by the position of the princes sent as prince-deputies. This weakened the prince’s position in the fight against the Novgorod boyars, who actually turned the prince into a military

but police force. The Novgorod land separated from Kyiv after the uprising of 1136.

The rebellious townspeople expelled Prince Vsevolod Mstislavich for “neglecting” the city’s interests. A republican system was established in Novgorod. The highest authority in Novgorod was the assembly

free citizens - owners of courtyards and estates in the city - veche.

It gathered either on Sophia Square or on the Yaroslav Courtyard of the Trade Side. The meeting was public. It was very often attended by the mass of the urban population (feudal-dependent, ka-

of foreign and foreign policy, invited the prince and concluded an agreement with him. At the meeting, the mayor, thousand, and archbishop were elected. The mayor administered the administration and court, and controlled the activities of the prince.

Tysyatsky headed civil uprising and held court in commercial matters. In order to make the Novgorod bishopric their ally, the boyars in 1156 achieved the election of an archbishop, who did not

He only headed the church in Novgorod, but was also in charge of the republic’s treasury and its foreign relations.

The five ends were self-governing, territorial-administrative and political units. At the ends, Konchan veche gathered, where Konchan elders were elected. Bottom step

The Novgorod organization and management were associations of “street residents”, residents of each street, headed by elected elders, elected at street meetings. The veche system of Novgorod was a form of feudal “democracy”, where the democratic principles of popular representation, public

ity and election of officials, created the illusion of democracy.

The actual power in the republic was in the hands of the boyars and the elite of the merchant class. Throughout its history, the positions of mayors, thousand and Konchan elders were occupied only by representatives of the elite

nobility, called "300 golden belts". The “lesser” or “black” people of Novgorod were subjected to arbitrary exactions from the “better” people, i.e. boyars and the elite of the privileged merchants. The response to this was frequent uprisings of ordinary Novgorodians. The largest of them was the uprising of 1207 against the mayor Dmitry Miroshkinich and his relatives. Novgorod waged a constant struggle for its independence against neighboring principalities, primarily against Vladimir-Suzdal, who sought to subjugate the rich and free city. Novgorod was an outpost of defense of Russian lands from crusading aggression German and Swedish feudal lords.

Thus, the following picture emerges in Rus' until the beginning of the 13th century (before the Tatar-Mongol invasion). We must imagine all of feudal Rus' as one and a half dozen sa-

sovereign principalities. They all lived independently, independent from each other, representing microscopic states, little connected to each other and to a certain extent free.

free from state control. But it is not correct to consider feudal fragmentation as a time of decline and regression or to identify it with the princely strife that began in the 10th century. For a young Russian

of feudalism, the united Kievan Rus was, as it were, a nanny who raised and protected the whole family of Russian principalities from all troubles and misfortunes. They survived in its composition the two-century onslaught of the liver-

gov, and invasions of the Varangian troops, the turmoil of princely strife, and several wars with the Polovtsian khans. By the end of the 12th century they had grown so much that they were able to start an independent life. And this process

was natural for all European countries, the misfortune of Rus' was that the processes of unification of Russian lands that had begun were disrupted by the Tatar-Mongol invasion, which Rus'

spent more than 150 years.

6. Books and other literature.

Kobrin V.B. "History of the USSR from ancient times to 1861",

"History of the Fatherland: people, ideas, decisions.",

vol. 1-2. M., 1991

"Our Fatherland, the experience of political history.",

vol. 1-2. M., 1991

Kulenov G.V. “Our Fatherland.”, M.: Terra, 1991.

Syrov S.N. "Pages of history.", M.: Russian language, 1977

Maikov A. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", Yaroslavl, 1971

Karamzin N.M. "History of the Russian State.", M., 1991.

One of the most dramatic periods in the history of Rus' is the period of feudal fragmentation, otherwise called “appanage”. It was characterized by dependence on the Tatar-Mongols and the disintegration of Rus' into separate principalities. The centuries of the period of feudal fragmentation in Rus' are the XII-XV centuries inclusive. It lasted about 350 years. By the middle of the 12th century, there were about 15 principalities and lands in the state. In the XII-XIII centuries there were already 50 of them, and in the XIV - as many as 250. Each of them was ruled by a separate Rurik clan.

Vladimir Monomakh managed to slow down this process somewhat, and then his son, Mstislav the Great, who continued his father’s policy of preserving what had been achieved. However, after Mstislav passed away, internecine wars began. Next we will talk briefly about Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation.

Reasons for fragmentation

By the period of feudal fragmentation in Rus', the years of which are indicated above, researchers understand the time when several hundred separate states were formed and operated in the territory where Kievan Rus previously existed.

Such fragmentation was a natural result of the development of society (economic and political) in the previous period - the period of the early feudal monarchy. Let's talk about the most significant reasons for this phenomenon in life Old Russian state.

Among the economic reasons for the onset of the period of feudal fragmentation Ancient Rus' are located:

Success in cultivating the land.
The development of crafts (there were more than 60 specialties) and trade, the growth of cities as centers of concentration of these types of activities and as territorial centers.
The dominance of the natural farming system.

TO political reasons include such as:

The desire to transfer the wealth, the “fatherland”, into the hands of his son, to make him an heir.
Wish military elite, turning into boyars-landowners, that is, feudal lords, to expand their holdings and gain independence.
Formation of immunities by transferring the Kyiv princes to vassals such rights as the right to court and collect taxes.
Transformation of tribute into If tribute was paid to the prince for military protection, then rent is paid to the owner for the use of the land.
The final formation of the squad into the apparatus of power.
The growth of the power of some feudal lords who did not want to obey Kyiv.
Decline Principality of Kyiv due to the raids of Polovtsian nomads.

Features of the period

One of the important features Kievan Rus during the period of feudal fragmentation there was the following. Everyone has experienced similar periods. large states Western Europe, but there the driving force of the process was mainly economics. Whereas in Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation the main thing was the political component. To obtain material benefits, local princes and boyars needed to gain political independence, strengthen themselves in the territory of their own fief, and acquire sovereignty. The main force in the disunity process was the boyars.

At the first stage of feudal fragmentation, it contributed to the development of agriculture throughout the Russian land, the flourishing of crafts, the rapid development of trade, and the growth of urban formations. But due to the fact that in the vast expanse of the East European Plain lived a large number of tribes that had both Slavic and non-Slavic origin, which were at different stages of development, this contributed to the decentralization government system.

Specific separatism

The appanage princes, as well as the local nobility - the boyars - over time began to destroy the foundation under the state building with their separatist actions. Although their desire to become more independent from the Grand Duke is understandable, because the center developed at the expense of other regions of the state, often actually ignoring their urgent needs. However negative side This desire for independence resulted in an unprecedented manifestation of selfishness on both sides, which ultimately led to anarchic sentiments. No one wanted to sacrifice their interests - neither Prince of Kyiv, nor appanage princes.

Often such interests were confrontational in nature, and the means of resolving conflicts were direct clashes, conspiracies, intrigues, intrigues, brutal wars, and fratricide. This inevitably led to further civil strife, disputes over lands, trade benefits, princely titles, inheritances, cities, tribute - in a word, for levers of influence and domination - power and economic.

Decline of central government

In order to keep the state organism from disintegrating, strong power was needed. However, due to the above reasons, the Kiev prince was no longer able to fully manage the local policies of the princes from the center. More and more of them left his power. In the 30s of the 12th century, the center controlled only the territory adjacent to the capital.

Appanage princes, feeling weak central government, no longer wanted to share their income with her, and the local boyars most actively supported them in this. In addition, local boyars needed independent local princes, which also helped the formation of their own separate state structures and the withering away of central power as an institution.

Weakening in the face of invaders

However, over time, the incessant strife observed between the princes caused the depletion of the forces of the Russian lands, weakening their defense capability in the face of an external enemy.

Constant hostility and disunity led to the fact that many ceased to exist during the period of feudal fragmentation. But the most important thing is that this became the cause of unprecedented popular suffering caused by the Mongol-Tatar invasion.

Three centers

Among the new states that emerged after Kievan Rus during the period of feudal fragmentation, there were three largest, these are two principalities - Vladimir-Suzdal, Galicia-Volyn and the Novgorod Republic. They became the political successors of Kyiv. That is, they had the role of becoming centers of gravity for common Russian life.

In each of these lands, during the period of feudal fragmentation of Rus', its own original political tradition was formed, each with its own political destiny. Each of the lands in the future had the opportunity to turn into the center of the unification of all other lands. However, the situation became incredibly complicated in 1237-1240, which marked the beginning of the Mongol-Tatar yoke.

The suffering of the people

Despite the fact that the struggle against the yoke began from the very moment of its establishment, it had dire consequences for Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation. In 1262, in many Russian cities there were uprisings against the Bessermen, tax farmers of the Horde tribute. As a result, they were expelled, and tribute began to be collected and transported to Golden Horde by the princes themselves. However, despite constant acts of resistance, massacres and captivity of Russian people continued.

Enormous damage was caused to cities, crafts, and culture; stone construction was stopped for more than a century. In addition, the Horde khans created a whole system of robbing the country they conquered in the form of collecting regular tribute. In total, they collected 14 types of “burdens” and “tributes” that depleted the Russian economy, preventing it from recovering from devastation. The constant leakage of silver, which was the main monetary metal in Rus', was an obstacle to the development of market relations.

The power of the Horde khans over the Russian lands also led to increased feudal oppression. The people came under double exploitation - both from the local and from the Mongol-Tatar feudal lords. In order to prevent the country from uniting, the khans pursued a policy of inciting feudal strife.

State of Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation

From the above it is clear that feudal fragmentation contributed to the conquest of Rus' by the Tatar-Mongols, and this conquest, in turn, contributed to the conservation of the feudal nature of the economy for a long period, the strengthening of the isolation of Russian lands, and the weakening of the western and southern principalities. As a result, they became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, an early feudal state that arose in the 13th century. Over time, the pattern of entry looked like this:

At the end of the 13th century. - Turovo-Pinsk and
In the middle of the 14th century. - Volynskoe.
In the 2nd half of the 14th century. - Chernigovskoe and Kyiv.
At the beginning of the 15th century. - Smolensk.

As a result, Russian statehood (which was under the suzerainty of the Golden Horde) was preserved only in the Vladimir-Suzdal land, and also in Murom, Ryazan and Novgorod.

It was the North-East of Rus', starting approximately from the 2nd half of the 14th century, that became the core of the formation of the Russian state. This marked the beginning of a departure from the old political structure, characterized by the presence of independent principalities of Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation. As already mentioned, they were ruled by various representatives of the Rurik family, and they included vassal, smaller principalities.

Law of Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation

After the seizure of Russian lands by the Mongol-Tatars, Rus' became one of components Golden Horde. The prevailing system of domination over Russia (political and economic) is considered as the Golden Horde yoke. All sovereign rights were seized by the supreme ruler - the Khan of the Golden Horde, whom the Russians called the Tsar.

The princes, as before, ruled over local population. The previous order of inheritance was preserved, but only if there was consent of the Horde. The princes began to go there to receive a label for reign. The power of the princes was built into the system according to which the Mongol empire was governed, which presupposed strictly fixed subordination.

At the same time, the appanage princes were subordinate to the senior princes, who, in turn, were subordinate to the Grand Duke (although this was only a formality). And the latter quite realistically depended on the Horde khan, being considered his “ulusnik”.

This system contributed to the strengthening of the authoritarian traditions inherent in North-Eastern Rus'. Being absolutely powerless in the face of the khan, the princes could completely control their subjects. The veche as an institution of power lost its significance, since the only source of power was now the khan's label. The warriors and boyars gradually turned into servants who were entirely dependent on the mercy of the prince.

Shortcut to reign

In 1243, Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, who ruled in Vladimir, received a special letter from Batu. She testified to his permission to rule in Rus' on behalf of the khan. This permission took the form of the so-called label for the great reign. This event was of great importance for the subsequent history of Rus'. The fact that the prince was for the first time given the right to become a representative of the interests of the Golden Horde in the Russian lands meant the recognition of complete dependence on the Mongol-Tatars, as well as the inclusion of Rus' in the Mongol empire.

When Yaroslav Vsevolodovich left Batu's headquarters, he was forced to leave his son Svyatoslav there as a hostage. This practice in great Mongol Empire was widespread. In relations between Rus' and the Golden Horde, it will become the norm for a long time.

Cultural aspect

The culture of Rus' during the period of feudal fragmentation has its own distinctive features. This is explained by the duality of its origins. The first of these was the pagan worldview Eastern Slavs, which was multicomponent in its composition. After all, it was formed with the participation of such ethnic groups as Baltic, Turkic, Finno-Ugric, Turkic, Norman, Iranian.

The second source is Eastern Christian patristics, which is a set of theological ideas, doctrines and works of church writing.

Russia's adoption of Christianity as an official ideology contributed to the displacement of the pagan vision of the world to the periphery of consciousness. At the same time, domestic thought absorbed and creatively processed the attitudes, theoretical positions and concepts of Eastern Christianity. She did this through the assimilation of Byzantine and South Slavic cultures.

As you know, Byzantium, the custodian of the ancient heritage, was the most developed of countries early Middle Ages. From her, Russia received a large number of concepts, names and images that were fundamental for the entire European culture that emerged from Hellenic civilization.

However, they were not received well pure form and not completely, but only partially and through the prism of Christianity. This was explained by the fact that ownership Greek was not the lot of many, and the translations that existed at that time concerned, first of all, the body of literature about the holy fathers.

Sources of ancient thought

As for the works of ancient philosophers, they were known for the most part in fragments, from retellings and collections, sometimes only by name. One of these was the Byzantine collection “Bees,” which included sayings of a philosophical and religious nature. Researchers attribute its appearance to the 11th-12th centuries, and they consider Anthony Melissa, a Greek Christian monk and spiritual writer, as the author of the original Greek edition. In Rus', this book was published in the 13th century.

This was one of the main sources giving an idea of the philosophy of the ancient Greeks and the political thought of Antiquity in Ancient Rus'. Among the passages contained in The Bee are lines of Scripture from the following authors:

John the Theologian.
Basil the Great.
John Chrysostom.

Aristotle.
Anaxagoras.
Pythagoras.
Democritus
Socrates.
Plutarch.
Sophocles
Euripides.

Alexander the Great.
Philip, his father.
Agesilaus and Leonidas, kings of Sparta.
Alcibiades, statesman of Athens.
Darius, Artaxerxes, Cyrus, Croesus, kings of the East.

One of the exceptions is the work of the ancient Greek philosopher Epictetus “Enchidrion”, which was detailed and provided with comments by Maximus the Confessor. It was translated in the Balkans and published under the title “Sotnitsy”, under which it was introduced into use by monks as an ascetic instruction.

In the second half of the 11th century. In Rus', signs of increasing feudal fragmentation are becoming more and more clearly evident.

Bloody feuds were aggravated by continuous raids, which skillfully exploited the disunity of the Russian princes. Other princes took the Polovtsians as allies and brought them to Rus'.

In 1097, on the initiative of Vladimir Vsevolodovich Monomakh, the son of Vsevolod Yaroslavovich, it took place in Lyubech. To stop civil strife, it was decided to install new order organization of power in Rus'. In accordance with the new principle, each principality became the hereditary property of the local princely family.

The adopted law became the main cause of feudal fragmentation and destroyed the integrity of the Old Russian state. It became a turning point, as there was a change in distribution land ownership in Rus'.

The disastrous mistake in lawmaking did not immediately make itself felt. The need for a joint struggle against the Polovtsians, the strong power and patriotism of Vladimir Monomakh (1113-1125) postponed the inevitable for a while. His work was continued by his son - (1125-1132). However, from 1132, the former counties, having become hereditary “fatherlands,” gradually turned into independent principalities.

In the middle of the 12th century. civil strife reached unprecedented severity, the number of participants increased as a result of the fragmentation of the princely possessions. At that time there were 15 principalities in Rus', in the next century - 50, and during the reign - 250. Many historians consider one of the reasons underlying these events to be the large number of children of princely families: by distributing lands by inheritance, they multiplied the number of principalities.

The largest state entities were:

Principality of Kiev (despite the loss of all-Russian status, the struggle for its possession continued until the invasion of the Mongol-Tatars);
Vladimir-Suzdal Principality (in the 12th-13th centuries, economic growth began, the cities of Vladimir, Dmitrov Pereyaslavl-Zalessky, Gorodets, Kostroma, Tver, Nizhny Novgorod arose);
Chernigov and Smolensk principalities (the most important trade routes to the upper reaches of the Volga and Dnieper);
Galicia-Volyn principality (located between the Bug and Dniester rivers, the center of arable land-owning culture);
Polotsk-Minsk land (had an advantageous location at the crossroads of trade routes).

Feudal fragmentation was characteristic of the history of many states of the Middle Ages. The uniqueness and grave consequences for the Old Russian state lay in its duration - about 3.5 centuries.