Acrobatic exercises in school curriculum presented from 1st grade. They are of exceptional importance because... contribute to the general and special physical training of schoolchildren - develop strength, agility, speed, reaction, spatial orientation, and improve the vestibular apparatus. Acrobatic exercises contribute to the development of volitional qualities of students, and also promote and facilitate learning exercises on gymnastic apparatus.
Acrobatic exercises include: tucks, rolls, somersaults, stances, bridges, sideways rolls.
Grouping is the main exercise when teaching rolls and somersaults. You can perform the tuck from a standing, sitting, or lying position. In a tuck, the knees should be pressed to the chest, the back should be rounded, the head should be tilted forward, and the grip should be top part shins, elbows pressed to the hips. When performing somersaults to the side, a “wide” grouping is possible, in which bent legs separated to the sides. You can check the quality of the grouping as follows: lift the student who has completed the grouping while lying on his back, holding him by the ankles. If the student holds his legs, pressing them tightly to his chest, then there are no mistakes. The legs are straightened if the head is thrown back, the elbows are pulled to the sides, the back is straight. Tuck training is carried out in combination with rolling exercises.
Riffles - This rotational movements with consistent touching of the support without turning over the head. Rolls are performed forward, backward and to the side, on the back and stomach, in a group, bending over and bending over.
Bending rolls are performed from a position lying on your stomach, from a lying position, from a kneeling position. From a sitting position, tucked and bent after performing a bend.
Learning to roll should begin from a position lying on your back; in a tuck, in a bent position, as well as with a straightened body (in a “boat”), then perform a back roll from a crouched position - a forward roll, a crouched emphasis.
When performing back rolls, you should not raise your shoulders, bend over, or put your arms up or throw your head back. When rolling forward, the shoulders should catch up with the legs, the head should be kept on the chest while maintaining a tucked position.
Somersaults- these are rotational movements with sequential touching of the support and turning over the head. Somersaults are performed forward, backward, to the side, in a group, bending over and bending from various starting positions to various final positions. You can perform forward somersaults from a squat, half-squat, from a standing position, from a running start, and over an obstacle. Backward somersault from a crouching position, from a sitting position, from a standing position. Somersault to the side - crouching from emphasis, crouching from emphasis on the right, left to the left on the toe. Somersault training begins after mastering the tuck and roll.
Forward somersault- you should start learning somersaults in parts. From the emphasis, squatting on the left, right back on the toe, straightening the supporting leg, bending the arms and rounding the back, the student takes a bent position lying on his back. Next, roll forward - bend forward.
The same exercise, but instead of bending, the student takes a tuck. Performing a somersault as a whole from a sitting position on the heels, arms forward with inclined plane. Execution under standard conditions.
When learning and performing a somersault, the following mistakes can be made:
The student constantly keeps his arms straight (back strike);
The somersault is performed under oneself (lowering the arms and not pushing with the legs; if the push is completed completely, the legs should straighten);
The student takes the tuck while lying on his back (the tuck is taken in the second part of the forward roll).
Performing a long somersault, a somersault from a standing position, a running roll, and over an obstacle has no fundamental difference in technique. The only difference is the starting position and the strength of the kick. When performing long somersaults, your hands should be up while pushing with your feet. The main mistake that causes a student to hit his lower back is incorrect bending of the legs. The student does not tuck, pressing his knees to his chest and bending his legs, straightening his back under himself (the desire to get to his feet faster).
Back somersault.
It is advisable to start learning a back somersault by learning how to position your hands. From a position lying on your back, place your hands behind your head with your elbows up.
The movement should begin with straight arms:
From a crouching position, roll back and place your arms straight behind your head,
From an emphasis crouching with a tilted plane, somersault back through straight arms into a sit on the heels,
Same for squats
From a crouched position, roll back with your hands behind your head,
Backward somersault from an inclined plane, with belay
- back somersault under standard conditions.
When performing a back flip, you should avoid the following mistakes:
Do not raise your shoulders and head while crouching,
- don't lean back
From a crouched position, do not lower your arms and do not expose them,
Do not spread your elbows when placing your palms and place your palms shoulder-width apart,
When performing a somersault while lying on your back, do not straighten your legs. Backward somersault with feet apart.
From the squat, arms up on an inclined plane, somersault back, bent over.
From i.p. - O. With. leaning forward, move your arms back, actively unbending backwards, somersaulting backwards, bending over.
Backflip through handstand. Leading exercises during training:
After bending over in a sitting position, actively unbending, roll back into a stand on your shoulder blades with your hands behind your head,
The same exercise from an emphasis crouching and about. With.,
Performing an element with the help of a partner,
Self-execution.
Possible mistakes.
The student “breaks through” the stance (there is no extension or straightening of the legs into a stance on the shoulder blades). When performing a roll, the student takes the tuck with his hands, as a result of which he places his hands behind his head and straightens them after the legs and pelvis have passed the vertical position;
Straightening his arms, the student raises his shoulders;
The student does not reach the counter (when placing his arms, he bends too much).
When performing independently, in case of “breaking through”, the element should be performed at a low crossbar, having first hung a gymnastic mat on it.
Racks.
Stands in the school curriculum are presented: shoulder stand, handstand and headstand, handstand.
Shoulder stand. This item performed from the following positions - from a position lying on your back in a tuck and bent over, after rolling back, from a support crouching and sitting down, as well as from a support with your legs apart, somersaulting forward. The stand can be performed with your hands resting on your lower back and with your arms resting on the floor with straight arms. Start learning in pairs. In I.p. - lying on your back with your pelvis raised up , hands along the body, palms down, - the belayer lifts the partner’s straight body by the toes to the stand, then the performer places his hands under the lower back thumbs forward, but do not spread your elbows wide.
After the student has “felt” the straight position of the body in the stance, he can begin to perform independently from various starting positions. When performing a stand on the shoulder blades from a stop with your feet apart, somersaulting forward, your hands should be placed slightly forward, so that the main load is on your hands. After bending your arms and lowering them onto your shoulder blades, you should quickly move your arms forward and place them under your lower back, while your legs touch the toes of the floor behind your head. Then, straightening up hip joints, perform a stand on your shoulder blades.
Handstand and headstand. You can perform the stand from a sitting position on your heels, from a squatting position, from a standing position with your feet apart, in a tuck and bent position, with a push and force. When performing the stance, you should know that the arms and head (placed on the frontal part) should form an equilateral triangle.
An unstable position; there is no support with the hands, because the elbows are spread to the sides or the hands are almost in upright position due to the student placing his head too far forward). The head is not placed on the frontal part.
The student does not reach or falls from the stand (sharp straightening of the legs or extension, after positioning the head the student “looks” for support with his hands or rolls from the forehead to the back of the head, a strongly bent body position.)
At the beginning of training, you should perform a stand in a group of sitting heels and a crouched position; when performing a stand from a standing position, bent over, you should not straighten your legs backwards - in this case, the stance turns out to be diagonal. When performing, it is necessary to spread your legs to the sides and stand with your legs apart, and only then connect your legs. To improve stands on the shoulder blades, arms and head, you can perform the following exercises: spreading and bringing the legs together, both to the sides and forward and backward, bending and straightening the legs, lowering the legs until the toes touch the floor, followed by extension into a stance.
Handstand.
To successfully master a handstand, you should perform a number of leading exercises:
a) From the arm stance, moving your body forward, extend and bend your supporting leg so that your arms, body and swing leg form one straight line.
b) Continuing to bend the supporting leg and raising the fly leg, place your hands (do not lower your hands) - the arms, back and fly leg form one straight line.
c) From position (b), without lowering the swing leg, push with the supporting leg (the pushing leg should straighten) and lower it to the same place.
d) Performing a stance with belay (the belayer is on the side of the swing leg).
d.) Independently performing a stand against a support with your back and facing it.
Possible errors during execution:
The supporting leg is placed not forward, but under itself, as a result of which a fall occurs on the hands;
When placing hands, the student places his head on his chest;
When performing a push, the student pulls away from the stand;
After placing his hands, the student raises his shoulders and bends strongly;
Relaxed and spread legs in a standing position;
Handstand somersault forward.
Correct execution of a handstand with a somersault forward:
Incorrect execution.
Sideways rollover.
You should start learning the flip after becoming familiar with the handstand.
Preparatory exercises:
Handstand with legs apart at a support with safety net;
Standing with your right side to the wall, take a crouching position on your left, right leg up, and your right hand forward, swing and push into a standing position with your legs apart, while placing your right hand with your fingers inward. The exercise is performed with insurance;
From the standing position, but standing with your left side to the wall, with a swing of one and a push of the other, perform a stand with your legs apart, then lower yourself to the point of view, standing bent over, straighten up, arms to the sides and turn your shoulder back in the same direction;
Performing a coup with belay (the belayer is located on the back of the practitioner and supports him by the lower back).
Possible errors during training:
When performing a flip with the left foot, a strong shift to the left (the student lowers left hand, puts it under him, turning his shoulders);
Strong shift to the right - the swing leg “hangs”, the student places both hands at the same time, there is no complete push-off);
The student does not complete the turn (there is no push-off with the hands because the student places his second hand on the “break” - with his fingers outward, not inward);
You should finish the wheel in a wide stance, arms to the sides, and then put your foot down without changing direction
Bridge.
This exercise is performed from a position lying on your back and from a standing position; when performing a bridge from any position, your shoulders should be above your hands, your arms and legs should be fully straightened. Bridge training from a standing position should begin at a wall or gymnastic wall, bending backward as much as possible, placing your hands on the support, alternately moving your straight arms, lower yourself to the bridge position, and then rise and straighten again. From the arm position, bend upward as much as possible, moving your pelvis forward, without lowering your arms, lower yourself into the bridge (you need to see your arms). In order to get up from the bridge, you need to push with your arms so that the main body weight falls on your legs, pushing your pelvis forward to straighten up.
Learning to turn 180° in a “bridge” begins while leaning backwards against a wall. To more successfully master a turn, you should perform the bridge using one supporting hand.
Outstanding commander, hero of the Battle of the Neva and Battle on the Ice, Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky was a wise ruler and an experienced diplomat. Political path, chosen by him, did not allow Rus' to disappear, and for many centuries determined the vector of development of our state.
Alexander Yaroslavich was born on May 13, 1221 in Pereyaslavl-Zalessky. He was the direct heir of the great Kyiv princes, Vladimir, Baptist of Rus' and Yaroslav the Wise, among his famous ancestors were Yuri Dolgoruky and Vsevolod Big Nest.
By the time it started government activities Alexander Nevsky, the situation in Rus' was catastrophic. The invasion of Mongol nomads in 1237-1238 caused colossal damage to Russian lands. Cities and villages were devastated, thousands of peasants and artisans were overrun, trade relations between cities ceased. The Mongols absorbed the eastern and southern neighbors of Rus' - the Volga Bulgarians, Polovtsians, Pechenegs, Torks and Berendeys. A similar fate awaited the Russians.
To some extent, the previous structures of princely power, with the inclusion of the Golden Horde, were managed to be preserved by Alexander Yaroslavich’s father, Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich. After his death, his son Alexander had to continue this line. But besides the Mongolian question, the prince had to resolve the German question.
“The enmity of the German tribe with the Slavic tribe belongs to such worldwide historical phenomena,” according to the historian Nikolai Kostomarov, “the beginning of which is inaccessible to research, because it is hidden in the darkness of prehistoric times.”
The Livonian Order, which had as its patron one of the most powerful rulers of Europe, the Pope, in the first half of the 13th century launched an attack on Slavic lands. This offensive was not a simple attempt by one state to expand its territory at the expense of another, it was a real crusade, in which knights from all over Europe participated, and which aimed at the political, cultural and religious enslavement of Northwestern Rus'.
Except Livonian Order, Russian lands were threatened by the young Lithuanian state and Sweden. The Novgorod reign of Alexander Yaroslavich fell precisely on a period of serious foreign policy complications in the north-west of Rus'. And the appearance of the prince on the historical stage was already regarded by his contemporaries as providential.
“Without God’s command there would have been no reign,” the chronicle reports.
The young prince’s political intuition prompted him to make the right decision, to refuse illusory help against the Western Mongols, which certain conditions proposed by Pope Innocent IV. It was obvious that agreements with the West could not lead to a positive result. At the beginning of the 13th century, European rulers revealed their true intentions when, instead of liberating the Holy Land from the infidels, they captured Orthodox Constantinople in 1204.
Alexander will resist any attempts by his western neighbors to take advantage of the Mongol invasion and take possession of Russian lands. In 1240 he defeated the Swedes on the Neva, and for this brilliant victory he received the name Nevsky, in 1241 Alexander Yaroslavich would drive out the invaders from Koporye, in 1242 from Pskov and defeat the army of the Livonian Order and the Bishop of Dorpat on the ice of Lake Peipsi.
As Kostomarov notes, Alexander Nevsky saved the Russians from the fate of the Baltic Slavs, conquered by the Germans, and strengthened the northwestern borders of Rus'.
Having secured the western borders of Rus', Prince Alexander Yaroslavich set to work in the east. He traveled to the Horde four times to enlist the support of the khan. It was impossible to resolve the eastern question militarily; the forces of the nomads significantly exceeded the forces of the Russians, so Alexander Yaroslavich chose the diplomatic path.
“With his prudent policy,” historian Vladimir Pashuto wrote about Prince Alexander Nevsky, “he saved Rus' from final ruin by the armies of nomads. Through armed struggle, trade policy, and selective diplomacy, he avoided new wars in the North and West, a possible but disastrous alliance with the papacy for Rus', and a rapprochement between the Curia and the Crusaders and the Horde. He gained time, allowing Rus' to grow stronger and recover from the terrible devastation.”
The balanced policy of Alexander Nevsky saved Russian Orthodoxy from mutation - union with Rome, allowed the Church to continue its mission on Russian lands and even beyond its borders; in 1261, through the mediation of the Grand Duke, even the Sarai diocese was formed with a see in Sarai-Batu, the capital of the Golden Horde.
According to the historian Georgy Vernadsky, thanks to the surviving Orthodoxy “as the moral and political force of the Russian people,” the emergence of the Russian kingdom was possible.
The Russian Orthodox Church, highly appreciating the life feat of Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky, glorified him as a saint.
Current page: 27 (book has 42 pages total) [available reading passage: 28 pages]
Monument to Alexander Nevsky in Pskov
But the name of Alexander is exalted highly. M.D. Karateev writes about him this way: “As a commander, he can rightfully be considered great, because in his entire life he did not lose a single battle, with small forces he defeated the strongest and in his actions he combined military genius with personal courage. But there is something that does him special honor: in that dark era of incessant internecine wars his sword has never been stained with Russian blood, and his name has not been tarnished by participation in any strife.” But not all princes acted so wisely: in 1281 he brought Tatar army the son of Alexander Nevsky, Andrei Gorodetsky, to Rus' in order to overthrow his brother Dimitri from the Vladimir throne. Bad example contagious. Together with him, another khan’s henchman, Prince Fyodor Rostislavich Chermny, who lived for many years at the headquarters of the Golden Horde khans, the destroyers of Russia, went to plunder Rus'. This has happened and will happen more than once in Russian history. The sons of those who won great victory in a battle with a formidable and deadly enemy, in some cases they will become defeatists or even traitors to the Motherland. They will follow the lead of the “world hegemon”, serving him with everything possible ways, although, of course, they do not reflect the thoughts and aspirations of our great people. Thank God, the bitter era is behind us - we have different leaders and leaders, hence the different attitude of the world! Russia seems to have risen from the ashes!
V.M. Siberian. Alexander Nevskiy. 1993
Novgorod is lucky. The hordes of Batyeva did not burn it down, like other cities of Rus'. Maybe that’s why the Novgorod heroes did not stand out in the epics for performing feats of arms. Nevertheless, Novgorod, in the person of Alexander Nevsky, showed Rus' one of the associates of our land, but for everything and even for exploits for the glory of the Russian land, the heroes had to pay a high price. The brave Suzdal residents expelled the Besermen Tatars from the cities, and so Alexander, as the “owner of the land,” had to go to the Horde to pray for trouble. This visit was not sweet - to denounce our own people and call the filthy regiments to the land of their homeland. The prince fell ill and died on his way home, on the banks of the Volga (1263). But if he really called the Tatars to Rus', then how to explain the fact that after his death the people “were deeply in grief”... There was crying then throughout Great Rus', and the words were heard everywhere: “The sun of the fatherland has set!” And was it all like that? We will not paint the prince’s image with gold leaf, but the result of his policy is generally positive. “With his careful, prudent policy, he saved Rus' from final ruin by the armies of nomads. Through armed struggle, trade policy, and selective diplomacy, he avoided new wars in the North and West, a disastrous alliance with the papacy for Rus', and a rapprochement between the Curia and the Crusaders and the Horde. He gained time, allowing Rus' to grow stronger and recover from the terrible devastation. He is the founder of the policy of the Moscow princes, the policy of the revival of Russia” (V. Pashuto). He managed to secure a truce with the formidable Horde, and this “alliance” fulfilled its role quite successfully. Perhaps we can say that it was from the era of Alexander Nevsky that something like an alliance, even a military brotherhood of Rus' with the East began to take shape - in the person of the formidable Tatar-Mongol army. Of course, there have been isolated cases of joint military-political actions between Rus' and Asia before, but a sufficiently clear and well-thought-out course towards rapprochement between Rus' and the eastern giant has not yet been observed. Alexander’s wisdom is that he soberly assessed the potential of the parties, West and East, and did right choice. Who knows, perhaps Russia, at a new stage in history, will again be faced with the need to make such a choice, if the West, with tenacity worthy best use, will provoke us and push us into the abyss. After the battle of Rakovor (1268) won against the Germans, the army of Novgorod had to face a larger German army (1269). But we called the Tatars for help, fearing them, the Germans fled (“The Germans, having made peace according to the entire will of Novgorod, were extremely afraid of the name of the Tatar”).
Holy blessed prince. Alexander
Speaking about the reason for including Alexander Nevsky among the saints, L. Gumilyov writes: “An interesting question arises: why did the Orthodox Church declare Alexander Nevsky a saint? Winning two battles is a fairly simple matter; many princes have won battles. Alexander Nevsky was not a very kind person - he dealt harshly with his opponents - so this is not a reason to make him a saint and still venerate him. Obviously, the main thing was the correct political choice made by Alexander, which was of enormous importance. In his person, the Russians understood: they must look not for enemies, of which there are always enough, but for friends.” The Russian Church has shown itself to be a skillful and subtle diplomat. She benefited more than anyone from the power of the Horde. The decree of Khan Mengu-Timur says (1270): “In Rus', let no one dare to disgrace the churches and offend the metropolitans and archimandrites subordinate to him, archpriests, priests and other clergy. May their cities, regions, villages, lands, hunts, hives, meadows, forests, vegetable gardens, orchards, mills and dairy farms be free from all taxes.” The church also received one-time donations. Khan Berke gave a yearly rent to Metropolitan Kirill for the temple in the Rostov land (in gratitude for the organized mass prayer services for the recovery of the khan’s son). It is worth recalling that this happened a few years after Batu’s invasion. As a result, the church began to quickly become rich and turn into a strong political player, and politics is always based on financial resources. In the capital of the Golden Horde, Sarai, an episcopate was even organized. Is it possible to agree that the Horde and the Russian elite agreed? M. Krugov writes: “Not only the merchants, but also the Russian Orthodox Church relied on the Moscow Rurikovichs - they chose them as their strategic ally. The Church, through its activities, carried out the unification of the Russian people into a single nation - it developed the intellectual sphere of society, the basis of which is a common worldview. And I understood that for one nation a unified secular authority will be required. It was no coincidence that the Moscow princes and the Russian Orthodox Church became allies. Whatever our historians say about the patriotism of the Moscow princes, in fact they were the administrative support of the Horde in Rus'. Because it was impossible to be her deputy and not also be her support. Exactly the same pillars of the Horde in Rus' were the Russian Orthodox Church and the merchants. The first acted as an intellectual, and the second as an economic support.” Needless to say: in the church there is this servile and clearly unselfish readiness to serve strong of the world this is something that cannot but outrage patriots. If we move to our time, a contemporary, writer M. Nazarov, speaks about the same thing in his article “The Russian Church and Non-Russian Power,” expressing similar thoughts: “In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that the Russian Orthodox Church is the only remaining structure of the Third Rome that today still unites almost all of our former geopolitical space, including Little Russia, Belarus, Central Asia, even the Baltic states. Moreover, only the authority of the Russian Orthodox Church as a spiritual authority will be able to create a real patriotic opposition, uniting the most diverse circles, the most different groups already by putting in place their ambitious leaders who will not share the first places. The first is the church, not them. And it is the church that must become a collector today best forces of the people, its spiritual leader, must clearly analyze the course of events, calling good good and evil evil, in order to prevent these evils from masquerading as good and hiding behind deceptive slogans. The main problem of modern Russia is that the church does not take on this role, since it is sick with all the same diseases and reveals the same weaknesses as the entire post-Soviet society and its ruling stratum. This loses the authority of the church in the eyes of the people and especially its active part - patriotic opposition. As a justification, many clergy approved a whole series of certain conformist “truths” without delving into their meaning. For example: “The Church welcomes the separation of church and state because it gives freedom to the Church.” But this means that the forces of evil also gain greater freedom of influence on the spiritless state. Or: “The Church has no political sympathies or preferences regarding any social order" Does this mean that both the atheistic power and the power of the Antichrist himself are as good for fulfilling the mission of the church as the Orthodox monarchy? Bitter truth, but true. Wahreit gegen Feind und Freund (German - Truth in relation to foe and friend).
Assessing the events of 750 years ago, one cannot help but see the exceptional complexity of the situation. We were “in the ring of fronts.” We need to understand how this or that decision will turn out for Russia. We agree with the historian G. Artamonov: “Any emotional reaction to the establishment of Tatar domination, calling for a fight, turned into punitive expeditions, sweeping away both pockets of resistance and innocent populations along the way. The main condition for the revival of the country was peace, the possibility of restoration, the gradual gathering of forces for the decisive battle. It seems that in the middle of the 13th century state level Only two people understood this - Prince Alexander Nevsky and Metropolitan Kirill.
Alexander Nevskiy
That is why in the same 1252 Alexander, who received the label for the great reign of Vladimir, was met at the golden gate with crosses and banners by the metropolitan himself with the clergy and townspeople.” Let us formulate a hypothesis: the semi-conscious Eurasian orientation of Rus' began with Alexander. This prince is “the first Eurasian.” Although our ruling elite was still far from realizing the deep roots and connections with great Asia. More than one century will pass. The contribution of Novgorod, Pskov and Kyiv to the all-Russian cause is significant and weighty; the cities helped colonization, the development of culture and trade, but, alas, not the protection of all Russian lands. Novgorod and Pskov tried to maintain independence, but at the expense of the rest of Rus'. And back in the 17th century, under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, the Pskovites did not allow Moscow’s troops to come to them (1650) and even requisitioned Muscovy’s grain and money convoys that were passing to the Swedes. The final fall Novgorod Republic associated with the accession of Metropolitan Nikon (1649); he suppressed the Novgorod freemen and anarchy with cruel measures, the mission of a single center finally fell on the shoulders of Moscow.
VLADIMIRO-SUZDAL Rus' AND MOSCOW – THE HEART OF RUSSIA
Moscow, like a brave hero, bursts onto the scene at the last moment, when everything seemed to be lost - and holy Rus' is about to be torn apart by cruel and ruthless predators. "Moscow. how much has merged in this sound for the Russian heart! How much resonated with him!” This phrase by A.S. Pushkin from “Eugene Onegin” perhaps best reflects our attitude towards the capital. But before we talk about the role of Moscow, let's take a look at the state of the all-Russian lands. And it was unenviable. People close in blood, language, spirit and faith found themselves in the position of bitter enemies. Death and destruction were brought by their own people, who sometimes acted with greater cruelty, ferocity, and heartlessness than the Polovtsians, Pechenegs, Tatar-Mongols, Germans, Poles, Hungarians, and Lithuanians. It seems that that period of civil strife gave rise to the idea in the minds of our people as born “anti-stateists.” On top of that, the church was declared guilty of sins, giving it an unflattering description (“a manifestation of a stateless spirit”). Hence, they say, our hostility and blind obedience “in matters of state,” although it is Rus' that is characterized by a surprisingly integral symbiosis of state power and the church. Many of them, ministers of the church, served our Lord and the Fatherland with faith and truth. In their works and sermons they defended the interests of the Grand Duke, and then royal power and thereby, as it were, elevated the state above the church, putting it in first place. All Russian thinkers did not separate the state from the church and the church from the state, did not separate their functions, as Byzantine-Western European ideologists did, assigning secular affairs to the state, and religious ones to the churches. This is both the strength and weakness of the Russian Church, for under a strong and intelligent sovereign its power and energy increase a hundredfold, but under a weak, insignificant tsar or prince, its role becomes simply unenviable.
ON THE. Berdyaev
However, is it really all we really wanted, to destroy the state or do without its participation?! Are the Russian people really subjugated and passive?! For example, the philosopher N. Berdyaev declared: “Russia is a submissive, feminine land. Passive, receptive femininity in relation to state power is so characteristic of the Russian people and Russian history. There are no limits to the humble patience of the long-suffering Russian people.” History has repeatedly refuted this kind of erroneous ideas, and above all in relation to our great people. Is it the Russian people who “don’t want to be courageous builders”?! Yes, there is nothing that would be further from this “truth”. Russians are a builder people the likes of which the world has never seen! The patience of our great people may seem truly endless, but woe to those who abuse it. Berdyaev will return to the idea again, persistently repeating: “The Russian people cannot create a middle humanistic kingdom, they do not want a legal state in the European sense of the word. This is an apolitical people in the structure of their spirit; they are striving for the end of history, for the implementation of the Kingdom of God. He wants either the Kingdom of God, brotherhood in Christ, or fellowship in Antichrist, the kingdom of the prince of this world.” The point is different: Christ can become an instrument of the people’s wrath.
M.V. Dovnar-Zapolsky
Or maybe both?! After all, it was the Russian people who created the “middle kingdom,” although issues of humanism and legal culture could not be fully realized in those conditions. It would be as strange as preaching morals to a pack of predators. It should be taken into account that the geographical position of Moscow and Vladimir-Suzdal Rus' was much less favorable than, say, the same
Kyiv or Novgorod: it is no coincidence that these cities became the first capitals of Ancient Rus', and not Moscow, Rostov, Vladimir, Tver and Suzdal. The historian M.V. drew attention to the advantage of the position of Kiev, which stood on the deep Dnieper, or Novgorod, which lies on the Volkhov, in comparison with Moscow, which did not have such clearly expressed blessed conditions for trade and existence. Dovnar-Zapolsky. Follower S.M. Solovyov and V.O. Klyuchevsky, giving lectures at the University of St. Vladimir and the Kiev Commercial Institute (1911–1914), he emphasized that main role The geographical factor plays a role in the history of peoples, and he placed special emphasis on geosociological aspects. Speaking about the similarities and differences between Russia and Western Europe, he especially noted (for those who are accustomed to always and in everything follow the footsteps of Europe, this can become a kind of revelation): “I had to emphasize several times,” wrote M.V. Dovnar-Zapolsky, - the difference between the economic state of Ancient Rus' and those forms economic life, which can be observed during the same period in Western Europe. This difference is not a difference of laws economic development, which should be the same for all peoples. This development is chronological: Western Europe later entered into those forms of economic life that developed much earlier in Rus'. Economic system That's why there shouldn't be Ancient Rus' compare (emphasis added) with medieval Europe in this regard. Our antiquity, perhaps, could more accurately be compared with the development of ancient antiquity.” The scientist’s conclusions are also very significant. Characterizing ancient Rus' in the spirit of V.O. Klyuchevsky, as “merchant capitalism,” he especially emphasized the fact that this “capitalism” had to develop in different conditions: firstly, on much larger geo-ethnic spaces, and secondly, in extremely difficult combinations (“our country is great, but not abundant") and, thirdly, in a situation of continuous and expanding colonization, with the solution of problems of arranging colossal lands and the evolutionary assimilation of tens and even hundreds of completely different nations who are at different stages of development and adherents of different cultural habits, customs and religious beliefs.
Jerusalem on Moscow land
To build a “new Jerusalem” on such a vast territory is an extremely difficult task. Hence the “psychic structure of the Great Russian tribe”, and its life-value attitudes and habits, and even the nature of its socio-political structure (which is read between the lines). Tracing the directions of colonization, Dovnar-Zapolsky asked important issue: Why ancient Slav went from the fertile lands of the south to the barren lands of the north and northeast? He believed: “Only for trade purposes can one understand the reason for the colonization of a country that is not at all endowed with nature or poorly endowed for agricultural purposes, the movement from black soil and a fertile climate to a harsh climate, with loam, sandy loam and podzol, into the swamp jungle. Obviously, the colonist was not interested in agriculture, but in trades and trade.” Added to this was the fact that the colonist had to run an extensive farm, having neither the strength, nor the time, nor the knowledge for intensive forms management. But the point is not only this and not so much about this. After all, trading conditions were better on the Dnieper and Volkhov than in Muscovy. Being a Pole, the author, presumably, expressed his attitude towards the “Russian type”, declaring: “The colonialists lost unproductive strength in the fight against nature and people, which delayed their mental and moral development” (i.e. the development of Russians). In order to survive in those conditions, feeling like an ethnic group, it took a feat, which became the moment of birth of the state, the nation, the culture, and the military spirit, which allowed our ancestors to live and win, focusing, first of all, on themselves. “The Russian people had enough strength, because they were new forces, a new supply of energy.”
Moscow is under construction...
That is why history went in this direction and not in another direction. We can say that it was precisely the shift to the north, into more harsh conditions, “with wretched nature,” where not only the city, but the peasant and the village became the main person, and co-served great service Rus'. The movement was prepared economic reasons. Figuratively speaking, then the village, that is, the peasant, defeated the city. M.N. Pokrovsky wrote that “the fall of urban law and the triumph of rural law” for centuries determined “the political face of the future “Northern Monarchy.” These changes are based on material reasons: the depletion of the land by predatory management methods, the ruthless attitude of the prince towards the people, the movement of world trade routes from the well-trodden old roads. All this led to the rise of Moscow. And, in addition, Moscow has learned and secured for itself main idea- “responsibility for the entire Russian land.” Having inherited the idea of the “Russian land”, and in a clearer and more mature form than that of Kiev and Novgorod, Moscow took upon itself the implementation of the functions of “translatio imperii” (Latin - “transfer of imperium”, i.e. supreme power). In the depths of the Central Russian Upland, a state began to take shape that could soon stand in the way of the aggressors - the Mongol-Tatars, Germans, Poles, sometimes using the most severe methods, because others were simply ineffective. This does not mean that Moscow acted only with force, money, and treachery. Not at all. The main thing is to appeal to the mind and heart of Rus'! For example, when in 1452 Metropolitan Jonah sends a message to Bishop Ilya of Tver, asking the Tver prince for assistance in the campaign planned by Moscow against the Tatars, the thought is quite clearly visible: what is good for order and tranquility among Christians will also be “for these both great rulers and for everything Orthodox Christianity has a common good." At the end of the 14th century, after the Battle of Kulikovo, when it was necessary to gather all forces into a fist for the sake of liberation from the yoke, Muscovites turned to Tver, which played the role of a “third force,” and asked to act together against the opponents of Rus': “And if we, brother, against the Tatars, and against Lithuania, and against the Germans, and against the Poles together.” But Tver stubbornly refused to heed the voice of reason and unity, cherishing dreams of a grand ducal crown.
N.I. Belov. Battle of Bortenevskaya. Victory of the Tver squad of Mikhail Yaroslavich over the Tatar-Moscow army of the Temnik Kavdagy and Prince Yuri Danilovich
It's time to turn to the history of the emergence of Moscow. The beginning of the process of settlement of this territory dates back to the Neolithic era. The first chronicle record of Moscow as a city with this name dates back to 1147. The researcher of Moscow antiquity I.E. Zabelin we read: “Come to me, brother, in Moscow!..” “Come, brother, to me in Moscow!” This is the first chronicle word about Moscow. Citing the news of 1147, he paints before the reader a picture of a rich princely estate, to which many villages and hamlets were drawn that served this newly emerged princely economy. The first organizer of the Ancient Suzdal land, the Suzdal prince Yuri Vladimirovich Dolgoruky, decided to invite his dear guest and ally, the Seversk prince Svyatoslav Olgovich, to an honest feast. The dinner given by the prince-host in honor of Svyatoslav and his squad, as reported in the chronicle, was “strong.” All this does not at all fit with the idea of a small provincial place where there is nothing to treat and greet honored guests. I.E. Zabelin writes: “In these few words, as if prophetically, the entire history of Moscow, the true meaning and essential nature of its historical merit were outlined. Moscow became strong and was ahead of others because it constantly and steadily invited the scattered Russian lands to an honest feast of national unity and a strong state union.”
Historian-archaeologist I.E. Zabelin (1820–1908)
The world is a feast of red. Whether Moscow was already a city at that time or not cannot be said quite definitely, but everything rather inclines us to the idea that it had already become a city in the ancient Russian sense of the word, that is, it was surrounded by fortifications. There is no hint that this is happening in some remote or remote country, where dangers await travelers at every turn. This is also hinted at by the story about the abundant feast that the host-prince treats to the guests who gave him a pardus - a live leopard or just a leopard skin. However, that record does not entirely accurately reflect the main content of subsequent history, when the princes of Moscow, Ryazan, Tver, Novgorod, Pskov, Yaroslavl and others had to fight not so much feasts as military battles. and it’s also the hard labor of convicts for the entire people to settle down. According to archaeological excavations, a fortified settlement on the site of the modern Moscow Kremlin has existed since the late 11th – early 12th centuries. During the reign of Yuri Dolgoruky, around 1156, a new, more extensive fortress was built, which was devastated by the Mongols in 1237. But Moscow was rebuilt again, and finally, in the second half of the 13th century. the city becomes the capital city of the Moscow Principality... Importance geographical location Moscow, which arose along three main routes, the presence of a river that connected the area with the region, and an active influx of people from the end of the 13th century. predetermined that Muscovy becomes “the ethnographic center of Great Russia.” And here the rivers played their role, which, according to L. Mechnikov, are the main reason for the emergence and development of civilization, “an expression of living synthesis, the entire set of physical and geographical conditions: climate, soil, topography of the earth’s surface, and geological structure. " Alas, the author did not find a place for the great Russian rivers in his work, just as other “interpreters” do not find a place for the great Russian people today. modern culture and pro-Western stories.
V. Limarev. Hard labor of the people
As you know, one of the signs of Rome and Constantinople was the founding of cities on hills (Rome - 12, Constantinople - 7). The presence of 7 hills similar to the Roman ones in the landscape of Constantinople was perceived as such an important feature that it turned out to be included in all the legends about the founding of the new city and even became the reason for one of its names - Seven Hills. The main hills in the capitals were considered to be the sites of ancient citadels: in Rome - the Palatine Hill, in Constantinople - the Acropolis of Byzantium. The complexes of imperial palaces were located on these hills. In Moscow, such a hill became Borovitsky (Kremlin) Hill. In the urban planning understanding of Moscow as the Third Rome in the 16th–17th centuries. and they began to identify first of all the “seven hills”. True, there are no documents listing them. M. Lomonosov noted: “Moscow stands on many mountains and valleys, along which the elevated and lowly sides and buildings represent many cities that have united into one city... If we take three mountains for one hill, split into three, then it, together with other main will be seven hills, according to which Moscow is compared with the seven-hilled Rome and Constantinople.” Subsequent authors also talk about the same “hills”. So, M.P. Kudryavtsev wrote: “Like the First and Second Rome, Moscow stood “on seven hills.” There are no direct documents listing these hills; there are no clearly defined hills in the Moscow relief, which. emphasizes the purely symbolic similarity of the capital of Rus' to the capitals of the Western and Eastern Roman Empires.” All these similarities to Rome, as well as the attempts of the Russian princes, and then the tsars, to elevate the genealogy to the family of Emperor Augustus should be perceived rather as apocryphal. They served one purpose: to justify and secure for one or another center, the prince, the supreme authority of the difficult-to-form Russian national state.
Vasnetsov A.M. Monastery in Moscow Rus'
It is for these purposes that the literary geniuses of Ancient Rus' call up the legendary heroes of the past from the depths of history. The outstanding literary monument “The Word of Daniel the Imprisoner” says: “Lord, give our prince Samson’s strength and Alexander’s courage, Joseph’s mind, Solomon’s wisdom.” The Moscow princes managed better than anyone else to combine all these qualities, along with courage and bravery, if we take, of course, all their combined activities. This is how the Moscow Principality and then the Russian Empire came into being. A prominent place in the history of Rus' is occupied by Yuri Vladimirovich Dolgoruky (1090–1157), the son of Vladimir Monomakh, the founder of the capital of our homeland, Moscow. Yuri's mother was a Russian princess of humble origin, and not at all an Englishwoman (as was sometimes said). In 1096, his father gave him the Rostov-Suzdal land (when his son was only 6 years old). To help the heir, Monomakh sent his educated servant, Georgy Simanovich, who would become the prince not only an educator, but true friend and assistant, being a thousand and actually being a manager Rostov-Suzdal land. Yuri calmly left him to “care” for the principality in his absence. The prince grew up and went on campaigns with the formidable Vladimir Monomakh. After victories over the Polovtsians, Monomakh decided to strengthen ties with them and married 18-year-old Yuri to a Polovtsian princess (“Aepina’s daughter”). So the “Polovchanka,” whose name was lost in history, became his wife and mother of Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, which is easily discernible in his appearance. Yuri Dolgoruky is considered the founder of Moscow (1147). In the Tver Chronicle we read: “...prince great Yuri Volodimerich founded Moscow at the mouth of the Neglinnaya, above the Yauza River.” The fact that Yuri Dolgoruky settled in Moscow was only part of his extensive activities to develop the western outskirts Principality of Suzdal. “...The city of Pereyaslavl was moved from Kleshchin and created a larger one, and the church in it was erected on the stone of the Holy Savior.” In 1154, the city of Dmitrov was built, named after Dmitry-Vsevolod, one of his sons, who later became known in history as Vsevolod the Big Nest. The goal of Dolgoruky’s construction activities: to secure important strategic trading points. As for the nickname " Long Hand”, then different explanations are found for him. It is generally accepted that the nickname was given to him because he reached out from distant Suzdal to Kyiv, wanting to receive the Kiev throne.
Ivanov S. Court in the Moscow State
Some say it's a matter of anatomy (he has Long hands). Often this name is derived from his character. The historian M. Shcherbatov believed that Prince Dolgoruky could have received his nickname for his inherent “greed for acquisitions.” This version seemed to be supported by the story of the boyar Kuchka, who owned a family nest located on the site of the future Moscow, where there were beautiful and rich villages on both sides of the river. For some reason, Yuri Vladimirovich ordered “that boyar to be captured and put to death.” The reason, apparently, is the most trivial - the prince wanted to take over the estates he loved (“Love these villages”). He took the life of the owner of the estate, and sent the children to his son Andrei. Then he will advise his son to marry “Kuchkova’s daughter.” It is no wonder that the history of the birth of Moscow, which began with such a tragic, bloody, maliciously criminal act as the murder of the boyar Kuchka and the confiscation of his rightful land, prompted some to make sinister analogies. Later, when Moscow will be considered as an analogue of the Third Rome, they will remember the history of the emergence of Rome the First - with the murder of Romulus's half-brother Remus. In “The Tale of the Beginning of the Reigning Great City of Moscow” (XVII century), the bloody massacre of Kuchka is considered in the outline of “Roman history”, as a “sign” of the future bloody history"the last Rome". Just like the “first” - “old” Rome, and the “second” Rome - Constantinople, it is also true that “our third Rome, the Muscovite state, was conceived not without blood, but by the shedding and slaughter of many bloods.” It is unlikely that “mythological details” played a noticeable role in the process of distinguishing Moscow from other equal and even more prominent places, although there is a mystery as to why a city and a distant region, at first not at all prestigious, often called simply Zalesye, suddenly stood out among others, much more glorious lands and cities. As if in the famous fairy tale by A.S. Pushkin about the princess: Muscovy is like a young princess “everything is in the forest, she’s not bored with the seven heroes.” There really is some mystery here.
Suzdal land
It was the central part of the great Russian land, for the Rostov-Suzdal principality occupied the lands of a number of regions - Moscow, Vladimir, Yaroslavl, Ivanovo, Kostroma, partly Vologda, Tver, Nizhny Novgorod. The region was completely penetrated by water arteries (80 large tributaries of the Oka and Volga connected all these regions). In other words, the location of Moscow was extremely convenient, firstly, from the point of view of gaining freedom from the all-seeing eye of all kinds of townspeople, moneylenders, tiuns, who in new places were initially small in number and not so fierce, and secondly, it was more convenient to defend against enemies (foreign or friendly) and, thirdly, these places, from the point of view of location, were favorable for trade in all directions - to Western Europe, to the Russian North, East and South. The main aspect of Yuri Dolgoruky’s multilateral activities, as already noted, was construction. V.N. Tatishchev called him the “urban planner” of 10 cities. The prince is credited with the construction of Moscow, Yuryev-Polsky, Pereslavl-Zalessky, Dmitrov, Kostroma. Construction under him acquired an unprecedented scale, having a specific, definite - economic, political, cultural or defense - meaning, and often several. Efforts in this direction became the stone chronicle of his struggle against the boyars (N.N. Voronin). His son Andrei created the princely palace in Bogolyubovo, which had stone walls and resembled a fortress. A researcher of the prince’s activities, A. Yanovsky, wrote: “Before Yuri Dolgoruky stood three the most important tasks: firstly, the unification of Russian lands, as far as this was possible under the conditions of the time being described; secondly, protecting the Suzdal land from the corrupting forces of feudal separatism; thirdly, the salvation of central Rus' from a direct armed attack by Kyiv. In the current situation, these tasks could be solved in any satisfactory way only if central power were transferred to the Suzdal ruling house, to the house of Dolgoruky - strong, stable, the only one close to wide circles of people in political aspirations.” And it must be said that Yuri was able to generally implement these tasks, which not many succeeded in. Among other qualities, let's name his tenacity, which distinguishes Muscovites. He had to fight three times for the grand-ducal throne in Kyiv, until he took it for the third time - and this time for good. The battle for Kyiv was a kind of conditio sine qua pop (lat. - necessary condition, without which nothing can exist). After all, at that time the generally accepted political formula was: “Moscow is the second Kyiv, the Moscow princes are the descendants Kyiv princes, heirs of their virtues and lands." In such words, the idea of historical continuity of the Moscow state from Kievan Rus, which was expressed in Russian literature of the 14th–16th centuries, was embodied. “...And now the capital and Orthodox city of Moscow has risen, like a second Kyiv,” says the “History of the Kazan Khanate” ( mid XVI V.).
