It was terrible time filled with grief and human blood. Tsar Ivan the Terrible created a ruthless repressive apparatus directed not only against representatives of the upper class, but also against ordinary people. Oprichniki carried out the will of the king. But among the people they were most often called pitchmen, from the words "pitch darkness" or "hell."
The image of Malyuta Skuratov according to the description of contemporaries
The most cruel guardsman was Malyuta Skuratov. Contemporaries described this man as follows: “Already only his appearance inspired terror in the most daring and desperate. His forehead was low, and his hair began almost above his eyebrows. The cheekbones and jaw, on the contrary, were strongly developed. The skull, narrow in front, passed into a wide cauldron towards the back of the head. There were such bulges behind the ears that the ears seemed sunken.
The eyes were of an indeterminate color. They never looked directly at anyone, but it was terrifying for anyone who accidentally met Malyuta's dull gaze. It seemed that no thoughts and human feelings could not penetrate the narrow brain, covered with a thick skull and thick hair. There was something hopeless and implacable in his expression.
He secluded himself from all people, lived among them apart, renounced all friendship, all attachments. It seemed that he ceased to be a man and made himself a royal dog. And she was ready to tear indiscriminately anyone whom the king would take it into his head to point out.
He was of low birth, and therefore he tried by cruelty to achieve honors inaccessible to him by birth. With particular pleasure, he executed the hated noble boyars, thereby trying to rise above them. Malyuta killed a lot, and sometimes, after executions, he cut up dead bodies with his own hands and threw human pieces to dogs to eat.
At the same time, despite his mental limitations, he was extremely cunning and practical, and in battle he was distinguished by desperate courage. In relations with other people, he was painfully suspicious, like any slave who fell into an undeserved honor. No one knew how to remember insults like Malyuta Skuratov.
in the service of the king
The full real name of this person is Grigory Lukyanovich Skuratov-Belsky. Where he was born, in what year - is unknown. His father, Lukyan Afanasyevich Belsky, had the nickname "Skurat" (worn suede). Therefore, the son received a prefix to the surname, but the nickname “Malyuta” most likely came from the phrase that the royal guardsman liked to repeat often: “I pray you ...” (I beg you). And this man went down in history precisely as Malyuta Skuratov.
He was from a poor noble family. He served in the royal army, and before the advent of the oprichnina, he rose to the rank of centurion. By our standards, this is approximately a company commander with military rank captain. And there were no prospects for the centurion Skuratov. He was waiting for a long service in one of the royal regiments and, possibly, death in some battle. But Ivan the Terrible, introducing the oprichnina, drastically changed the fate of many petty nobles. He brought close to himself precisely the poor, in order to strengthen his power over the princes and other proud Russian nobility with their help.
As soon as the oprichnina began, Malyuta immediately expressed a desire to serve in the oprichnina army. But in the beginning, he was one of the many petty nobles who dreamed of better share. However, the main thing among the Kromeshniks was to look for treason among the noble and rich people. Confessions were obtained with the help of torture, and Skuratov was extremely successful in this matter.
Torturing people, he showed pathological cruelty and did not know pity. Already in 1567, the tsar himself drew attention to the zealous guardsman. He tortured 40 yard people of the boyar Fedorov-Chelyadin and obtained under torture their confession that the boyar was allegedly plotting against the tsar. After that, Malyuta's career went uphill.
Oprichnina reached its greatest revelry in 1568. Then hundreds of people of different social status went to the chopping block. Torture and executions became commonplace, and any person could be thrown into a torture chamber simply on a denunciation. At this time, Skuratov reached the highest power, since no one could surpass him in cruelty and the ability to beat the necessary testimony out of people. Those accused of treason were beheaded on the chopping block, and Malyuta's authority grew by leaps and bounds.
He became so arrogant and believed in his indispensability that he decided to ask the tsar for the boyar rank. Once Ivan the Terrible was leaving his bedchamber, and Malyuta appeared before him. He listed all his merits and asked for a boyar hat as a reward. But the tsar sometimes respected customs, and therefore did not want to humiliate the supreme Russian rank by assigning it to an inferior pet. The sovereign laughed and called Skuratov a dog. But he was not offended, but began to serve his master even more faithfully.
Metropolitan Philip of Moscow and All Rus' spoke out against the oprichnina. But the tsar wanted to give legal status to murders and pogroms from outside Orthodox Church. Philip himself stayed in the Otroch Monastery in Tver, where he retired in protest against the oprichnina in 1568. In 1569, the sovereign sent Malyuta Skuratov to him for negotiations. He arrived at the monastery and entered the cell when the Metropolitan was praying.
Malyuta Skuratov and monks near the body of Metropolitan Philip
It is not known what conversation took place between these two people, but apparently the minister of the church categorically refused to bless the lawlessness that is happening on Russian soil. Realizing that there would be no positive answer, Ivan the Terrible's beloved guardsman strangled the metropolitan. And when he left the cell, he said that he had died of intoxication. The king did not scold and even more so punish his pet for the initiative shown.
In 1570, Ivan the Terrible suspected treason in Veliky Novgorod. There the sovereign sent Malyuta at the head of a large army. But the beloved oprichnik did not reach Novgorod. He only fought in Tver and Torzhok, where hundreds of people were killed. In Torzhok, Skuratov ran into the Tatars. They resisted the royal people, while Malyuta received several serious injuries, and he was taken to Moscow. So he was not in Novgorod, and all the atrocities there passed without royal favorite.
But the rout carried out in Veliky Novgorod frightened the tsar himself. He saw that the guardsmen had turned into a formidable force that could break out of obedience at any moment. Therefore, the period of "crackdown" began. Such leaders of the oprichnina as Alexei Basmanov and Afanasy Vyazemsky fell out of favor. They were accused of conspiring with the Poles, and soon these people lost their lives.
In addition to them, about 200 guardsmen were executed. The mass execution was carried out right in Moscow on Red Square, and the main executioner was none other than Malyuta Skuratov. It was the beloved oprichnik of Ivan the Terrible who took the lives of many of his colleagues.
And in the spring of 1571, the oprichnina showed its complete failure in the defense of the fatherland. Moscow was attacked and burned by the Crimean Khan Devlet Giray. The oprichnina army at the same time showed complete cowardice and inability to resist. After this disgrace, the main leader of the guardsmen, Mikhail Cherkassky, was executed. Heads and his assistants flew. But Grigory Lukyanovich Skuratov-Belsky remained in favor with the king.
Ivan the Terrible bestowed on him the rank of duma nobleman, who was considered the third among duma ranks. Only the boyar and the roundabout were older. And in 1572, the oprichnina was abolished. But Malyuta did not suffer from this in any way. He continued to be near the sovereign among his favorites. Apparently the tsar appreciated his former beloved guardsman for his canine devotion and readiness to carry out any order.
In the spring of 1572, he went to the Livonian War together with Ivan the Terrible. The king entrusted him with the command of the sovereign's regiment. On January 1, 1573, Malyuta Skuratov died during the assault on the Weissenstein fortress (central Estonia). The body was buried in the Joseph-Volokolamsk Assumption Monastery (16 km from Volokolamsk). The sovereign allocated 150 rubles for the funeral and ordered to be commemorated in churches every year.
Family of Malyuta Skuratov
It has already been said that Grigory Lukyanovich, in the absence of intelligence, possessed extreme cunning and practicality. He had 3 daughters, but God did not give sons. However, the Russian classic A. K. Tolstoy in his work “Prince Silver” showed the image of Maxim, the son of Malyuta. I must say that A. K. Tolstoy wrote a lot about that time and apparently used different historical sources. Therefore, it is unlikely that he just invented Maxim; there were probably some reasons for that.
Ivan the Terrible and Malyuta Skuratov
But officially Skuratov-Belsky had three daughters: Anna, Maria and Ekaterina. It is said that there was a fourth daughter, whose name is unknown. And now about cunning and practicality. The tsar's favorite gave the eldest daughter to the cousin of Tsar Ivan Glinsky. The middle daughter married Boris Godunov and later became the queen. And the youngest married Prince Dmitry Ivanovich Shuisky. As for the fourth daughter, she became the wife of the Tatar prince Ivan Kelmamaev. So a nobleman from a seedy family brilliantly arranged the fate of each of his daughters.
But that's not all. Grigory Lukyanovich had a relative, Marfa Sobakina. And the beloved guardsman arranged so that she caught the eye of Ivan the Terrible, who at that moment was a widower. And this woman became the third wife of the sovereign. True, she stayed in this capacity for only 15 days. The wedding took place on October 28, 1571, and on November 13, his wife died. Apparently, she was poisoned by envious people. At that time at royal court it was commonplace.
As for the wife of Skuratov-Belsky, very little is known about her. Her name was Matryona, and she outlived her husband by many years. She lived on a widow's pension, which was granted to her by the king. At that time, only a few could boast of such mercy.
This is the fate of the family of the royal favorite. He himself went down in history as a soulless executor of cruel royal orders. And the very name "Malyuta Skuratov" has become a household name. So they began to call executioners and murderers, causing only hatred and disgust in the souls of people..
Malyuta Skuratov- Russian statesman, military and political figure, duma boyar, one of the leaders of the oprichnina, as well as the beloved guardsman and assistant to Ivan the Terrible (see).
The name of Malyuta Skuratov has become a household name in history. People remember him as one of the most merciless killers and punishers.
Nevertheless, a number of Skuratov's researchers believe that some facts from his life are overgrown with legends and fiction. About who the famous guardsman actually was, we will tell in this article.
So in front of you short biography Malyuta Skuratov.
Biography of Malyuta Skuratov
To date, nothing is known about the date and place of birth of Malyuta Skuratov. For the first time his name is found in one of the books dated 1567. The book speaks of him as the "head" of the oprichnina army.
The real name of Malyuta Skuratov is Grigory Lukyanovich Skuratov-Belsky. It is known that he came from a noble family.
Most biographers agree that Skuratov received his nickname "Malyuta" for his short stature or for the saying "I pray you ..." that he often uses.
Oprichnik
It is worth noting that Malyuta Skuratov was not the founder of the oprichnina, as many believe. Initially, he occupied lower positions, and only over time he managed to become what he became.
In the late 1560s, the "chief oprichnik" lived in constant fear in all my life. He was terrified of various conspiracies and uprisings.
For this reason, in 1569, Malyuta Skuratov gave the order to organize an oprichnina detective department, which was the "high police for high treason." In fact, it was the first state security service in history.
From the biography of Malyuta Skuratov it is reliably known that he liked to conduct interrogations on his own, often resorting to sophisticated torture.
Having enormous power in his hands, he repeatedly gave orders to execute various high-ranking officials, after which the land allotments went to the king, and the property went to him.
During the riots in Novgorod, Tver and Torzhok, the cruelty and brutality of Malyuta Skuratov manifested itself in full. He caused the deaths of many civilians. He and his henchmen rarely tried to look for any evidence that this or that person was involved in treason.
One denunciation was enough to take the life of anyone. Interestingly, he ordered Malyuta to imprison his cousin, Prince Vladimir Staritsky, suspecting that he allegedly wants to take the throne instead of him.
In 1568, Metropolitan Philip refused to bless the numerous pogroms of the guardsmen, and also condemned Ivan the Terrible for excessive cruelty.
For this, he was removed from his post and exiled to the Dormition Monastery. A year later, on December 23, 1562, the metropolitan died.
There is a version according to which Malyuta Skuratov was guilty of his death. Some biographers believe that it was he who strangled Philip with a pillow.
Wax figure of Malyuta Skuratov in the museum-reserve "Alexandrovskaya Sloboda" The same opinion is shared by many reputable historians, including (see), Nikolai Kostomarov and Sergei Solovyov.
It is worth noting that Malyuta Skuratov gained fame not only as a cruel guardsman. In addition, he participated in many military campaigns, and also conducted diplomatic negotiations with high-ranking officials.
Personal life
ABOUT personal life Little is known about Malyuta Skuratov. In his biography there was only one wife named Maria. In this marriage, they had 3 daughters, who later became the wives of famous statesmen.
The husband of the first daughter turned out to be the tsar's cousin Ivan Glinsky, and the second -. He married his youngest daughter, Catherine, to Prince Dmitry Shuisky.
Malyuta Skuratov had no direct male heirs.
Interestingly, Skuratov was not only one of the close associates of the Russian Tsar, but also his relative.
When Ivan the Terrible's second wife died, Malyuta Skuratov did everything to marry him to his distant relative Martha Sobakina. However, Marfa did not stay long as the wife of the Russian Tsar. Within a couple of weeks after the wedding, she was poisoned.
Death
Despite the fact that Malyuta Skuratov was remembered as a notorious monster and villain, guilty of shedding the blood of thousands of innocent people, he died a completely heroic death.
On January 1, 1573, he took part in the assault on the Weissenstein fortress. In one of the battles, he received a gunshot wound, from which he soon died.
At the direction of Ivan the Terrible, Malyuta Skuratov was taken to the Joseph-Volokolamsky Monastery for a funeral service. According to some sources, he was buried next to his father's grave.
Ivan the Terrible and Malyuta Skuratov Since the tsar loved Skuratov and cherished him, he donated a substantial sum for his burial. At the same time, it is worth noting that when his relatives or wives died, he allocated much less money for them.
Moreover, Ivan the Terrible ordered that the widow of Malyuta Skuratov be paid a pension for life, which was very unusual at that time.
An interesting fact is that because of his extraordinary biography, Malyuta Skuratov was surrounded by legends even after his death. So a legend appeared among the people that Skuratov lived to arrive at the monastery, where he repented of all his sins and after death asked to be buried at the entrance to the sacred monastery. Now the feet of every incoming trample on the ashes of the great sinner.
Photo by Malyuta Skuratov
The last minutes of the life of Metropolitan Philip 
Malyuta Skuratov from Rimsky-Korsakov's The Tsar's Bride If you liked the short biography of Malyuta Skuratov, share it in in social networks. If you like biographies of great people in general and in particular, subscribe to the site. It's always interesting with us!
Historians have long pondered the reasons why the Kievan state, indestructible to external enemies, suddenly crumbled like a house of cards. Of course, much, as always, was explained by ordinary human egoism. Each prince thought only of increasing his power and property, covering his greed with arguments about "truth" and "justice." Everyone wanted to be freed from the unpleasant need to obey the supreme authority of the Kyiv Grand Duke and pay him the established tribute. (The fact that Kyiv, thanks to this tribute and this power, ensures internal order and security from external enemies, is it preferable not to remember.)
However, it was not only a matter of blind selfishness, which is inherent in the rulers of all times. There were also deeper reasons for the collapse.
Grand Dukes of Kyiv
The unity of Rus' was very fragile. It rested mainly on the personal authority and military superiority of the Grand Duke of Kyiv. However, the authority quickly melted away, if only because the more Rurikovich appeared on the political stage, the more difficult it was for one of them to prove his dynastic primacy. The military power of the owner of the "golden table" became more and more doubtful. In the XI - the beginning of the XII century. the growth of many provincial centers continued. Their population is rapidly increasing both due to natural growth and due to the relocation of residents from the outskirts of Kyiv, who were often subjected to raids by nomads.
Economic decentralization
An important prerequisite for political separatism was the fact that in the conditions of a subsistence economy, when almost everything necessary for life was produced on the spot, the rulers of the regions did not particularly need economic interaction with the central government.
No external threat
The collapse of the Kievan state was also facilitated by the absence in the middle of the 12th century. serious external threat. Contradictions with the Western neighbors (Poland and Hungary) did not go beyond border disputes. After the crushing blows inflicted on them by the Russian princes in the first quarter of the 12th century, the Polovtsy cease to be the mortal danger to Rus' that they were before. The princes of Southern Rus' learned to jointly defend the steppe border. If necessary, they met at congresses and worked out common measures to fight the enemy. In general, Southern Rus' managed to repel the Polovtsian threat. The Polovtsy themselves have also changed. They began to gradually move to a settled way of life. This made them more vulnerable to retaliatory strikes by Russian troops, and therefore more peaceful.
The path "from the Varangians to the Greeks"
A kind of core of the entire state territory of Kievan Rus was the path "from the Varangians to the Greeks." Trade along this route, ensuring the safety of merchants and collecting trade duties strengthened the supreme power Kyiv princes. However, in the XII century. in connection with the movement of world trade routes, it is rapidly losing its significance. Accordingly, the national significance of Kyiv as the main "caretaker" of this ancient path also falls.
Fragmentation, like any political system, had its pros and cons.
Development of feudal relations
The main plus of the collapse of the Old Russian state was that it opened up new opportunities for the development of feudal relations. This was a forward movement along the path of historical progress.
The specific mechanics of the process was as follows. IN Kievan Rus there was no permanent and strong local authority. The princes often moved from one princely table to another. The real power was in the hands of the local aristocracy (boyars), which, however, did not have a developed system of control over the population in their hands. Meanwhile, such a system became more and more indispensable with the development of patrimonial land tenure. Capturing the lands of peasant communities, turning free community members into dependent people, obliged to bear the burden of duties, the nobility faced fierce resistance from the rural population. To suppress it, the iron hand of the monarchy was needed. Only the prince, with his indisputable authority, with his numerous retinue and quick trial, could ensure the obedience of the people and stop the strife within the ruling class.
The local aristocracy needed "their" princes, who permanently lived in the region, linking their personal interests with its prosperity. But the princes, in turn, were drawn to the earth. They willingly arranged their own princely patrimony (domain) and preferred a peaceful life in a castle to eternal wanderings around Rus' in pursuit of the ghost of unprecedented luck.
Thus, the interests of the parties coincided. The princes "settle on the ground", forming permanent local dynasties. The Kievan monarchy seems to be reborn in numerous regional monarchies. Having united their efforts, the monarchy and the aristocracy harness the people to the cart of feudalism. However, very soon the aristocracy will groan from the heavy grip of the iron hand of their new ally... material from the site
Princely strife
The main disadvantage new system after the collapse of the Old Russian state, princely strife began. Of course, they have happened before. However, now their number has increased in direct proportion to the number of independent rulers. The strife was accompanied by the death of people, the ruin of cities and villages, the capture of prisoners, who were then turned into slaves.
The great Kiev prince Mstislav the Great died in 1132. After his death, a period began that can be described as the collapse of Kievan Rus. The first sign was Polotsk, which separated from the unified state. In the year of Mstislav's death, the princes of Polotsk returned there from Byzantium. The inhabitants of the city accepted them, and Polotsk healed independent life. In 1135, Veliky Novgorod seceded and refused to send an annual monetary tribute to Kyiv.
In Kyiv, the brother of Mstislav Yaropolk sat on the reign until 1139. After his death, the next brother Vyacheslav began to reign. But here the prince of Chernigov Vsevolod intervened in the fate of the Kyiv grand-ducal table. He was the son of Prince Oleg, who in 1093 expelled Vladimir Monomakh from Chernigov and became a prince there.
Vsevolod attacked Kyiv, expelled Vyacheslav and declared himself the Grand Duke. The entire branch of the Monomakhs came out against the invader. The most energetic of them, Izyaslav, who was the nephew of Vyacheslav, tried to return the capital city to the offspring of the Monomakhs. However, Vsevolod, thanks to his intelligence and cruelty, remained the Grand Duke until his death in 1146.
After the death of Vsevolod, his brother Igor became the great prince of Kyiv. But he turned out to be a narrow-minded and untalented person. During the month of his reign, he restored all the people of Kiev against him. In the meantime, Izyaslav Mstislavovich, who was the grandson of Monomakh, came from Volyn at the head of detachments of Torks. The Kiev militia left Prince Igor. He tried to escape, but his horse got stuck in a swamp near the Lybid river. Igor was seized and imprisoned.
The third brother Svyatoslav Olegovich undertook to save him. He gathered a strong squad in Chernigov in order to rescue his brother from imprisonment. And he, being in prison, took the veil as a monk. But the hatred of the people of Kiev for the tonsured Igor was extremely great. So that the prisoner would not be killed, Izyaslav ordered that he be transported from the cut to the church of Hagia Sophia. It was a holy place enjoying the right of asylum. But when Igor was taken to the temple, the people of Kiev recaptured him from the guards and trampled underfoot. It happened in 1147.
After that, the war began between Kiev and Chernigov. At the same time, the Rostov-Suzdal land separated and became independent. Monomakh's son Yuri Dolgoruky ruled there. He was considered the legitimate head of the older Monomakh line. But Prince Izyaslav, whom the people of Kiev loved, belonged to the younger line of the Monomakhs.
It makes no sense to enumerate the endless clashes of princes who are closely related. It should only be noted that Yuri Dolgoruky reigned in Kyiv in 1149-1151 and 1155-1157. He died of poison in 1157. The Rostov-Suzdal Principality was inherited by his son Andrei Yurievich Bogolyubsky. He got his nickname due to the fact that he lived in the village of Bogolyubovo. And Yuri Dolgoruky is officially considered the founder of Moscow. For the first time this city was mentioned in chronicles in 1147. It is also said that Andrey Bogolyubsky was engaged in its strengthening (moat, walls).
It should be noted that the collapse of Kievan Rus is characterized by internecine wars between the children and grandchildren of Vladimir Monomakh. The Rostov-Suzdal princes Yuri Dolgoruky and Andrey Bogolyubsky fought with the Volyn princes Izyaslav Mstislavovich, Mstislav and Roman for the throne of Kiev. It was a fight between uncles and nephews. But it cannot be seen as a family quarrel.
In accordance with the generally accepted rules of that time, the chroniclers wrote: “the prince decided”, “the prince accomplished”, “the prince went” - regardless of the age of this prince. And that could be 7 years old, and 30, and 70. So, of course, it could not be. In reality, military-political groups fought among themselves. They expressed the interests of certain lands of the disintegrating Kievan Rus.
The process of disintegration began after the decision of the Lubech Congress of Princes, held in 1097. He laid the foundation for a confederation of independent states. After that, dozens of years passed, and by the beginning of the 13th century Kievan Rus was divided into several independent principalities.
Principalities of Kievan Rus on the map
The northeast of Rus', as well as the southwestern lands, including the Kiev region, Galicia and Volhynia, isolated themselves. became independent Chernihiv Principality, where Olegovichi and Davydovichi sat on the reign. Separated Smolensk and Turov-Pinsk land. Veliky Novgorod became completely independent. As for the conquered and subordinate Polovtsy, they retained autonomy, and the Russian princes did not even think of encroaching on it.
The state collapse of Kievan Rus can be explained by weak trade and economic ties and the loss of ethnic unity. So, for example, Andrei Bogolyubsky, who captured Kyiv in 1169, gave it to his warriors for 3-day plunder. Prior to this, in Rus' they acted in this way only with foreign cities. But such a cruel practice never spread to Russian cities.
Bogolyubsky's decision to plunder shows that for him and his squad Kyiv in 1169 was as foreign a city as any Polish or German locality. This indicates that people living in different principalities have ceased to consider themselves a single Russian people. That is why Kievan Rus turned out to be fragmented into separate destinies and principalities.
In turn, some principalities were also not united lands. So in the Smolensk land, there were about a dozen destinies. The same was observed in the territories of the Chernigov and Rostov-Suzdal principalities. In Galicia there was a region in which it was not the Rurikovichs and the Bolokhov princes, the descendants of the ancient Slavic leaders, who ruled. The pagan Baltic and Finno-Ugric tribes, which were subdivided into Mordovians, Yotvingians, Lithuanians, Zhmuds, Estonians, Zyryans, Cheremis, Zavolotsk Chud, remained alien to Rus'.
In this state, Kievan Rus entered the 13th century. Fragmented and weakened by civil strife, it became a tasty morsel for the invaders. As a result, the invasion of Batu put a logical point in this matter.
Alexey Starikov
The collapse of Kievan Rus
In the middle 12th century Kievan Rus broke up into independent principalities, however, formally limited existed until Mongol-Tatar invasion(1237-1240) and Kyiv continued to be considered the main table of Rus'. Epoch XII-XVI centuries called specific period or political fragmentation(in Soviet Marxist historiography - feudal fragmentation). The breakup is considered 1132 - the year of death of the last powerful Kyiv prince Mstislav the Great. The result of the collapse was the emergence of new political formations on the site of the Old Russian state, a distant consequence - the formation of modern peoples: Russians, Ukrainians And Belarusians.
Reasons for the collapse
Like most of the early medieval powers, the collapse of Kievan Rus was natural. The period of disintegration is usually interpreted not simply as strife of overgrown offspring Rurik, but as an objective and even progressive process associated with an increase in boyar land ownership . In the principalities, their own nobility arose, which was more profitable to have its own prince protecting its rights than to support Grand Duke Kyiv.
Causes of the collapse of the Old Russian state. Mongol-Tatar invasion and its consequences
The collapse of the Old Russian state is a completely natural phenomenon in the context of the development of medieval Europe. It was primarily driven by the development feudal relations and systems of feudal immunities. However, some researchers consider the main reason for the fragmentation of Kievan Rus to be changes in princely inheritance law, when each princely son received a certain part of his father's reign - an inheritance - for independent control. The specific system progressed rapidly in the 12th-13th centuries. Sovereign principalities arose, fighting for political leadership. At the same time, Kyiv gradually lost its role as an all-Russian center, and the economic potential of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, located in the north-east of Rus', increased. The rulers of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, as well as the princes of Kyiv, began to call themselves grand dukes.
The sovereignization of individual lands, on the one hand, had positive consequences. The movements of princes in search of a richer and more honorable throne almost ceased, and, consequently, power became more efficient.
On the other hand, each of the lands, taken separately, did not have sufficient human and material resources to protect its sovereignty. Therefore, the Russian principalities were conquered by the Mongol-Tatars during the campaign against Rus' Batu Khan in 1237-1240.
The forcible inclusion of the Russian principalities into the world of political relations that had developed in the nomadic empire of the Mongols had a negative impact on the internal development of the Russian lands, led to significant differences between local state-political traditions and European ones. In Mongolian society, the power of the supreme ruler was absolute and demanded unquestioning obedience from his subjects. Having become vassals of the khans, the Russian princes borrowed the political traditions of allegiance in their relations with the feudal lords. This remark concerns, first of all, the lands of North-Eastern Rus', which formed the core of the future Muscovy.
|
Rus' By the middle of the XII century. The Old Russian state actually breaks up into 15 independent principalities, within which smaller principalities are formed, which are in vassal dependence in relation to the First. Large principalities, which were, in fact, independent states, receive the name of the land by analogy with other foreign countries (Ugric land (Hungary), Greek land (Byzantium), etc.). The subject principalities that were part of the lands were called volosts. Thus, the two-level structure of a single early medieval Rus' was copied, as it were, and a new geopolitical reality was formed - specific Rus, where Kyiv only formally retained the status of the "first-throne city". There comes a natural stage for most of the early feudal monarchies of both Europe and Asia, the stage of fragmentation of a large state and the loss of centralized control. During this period, the grand princely family of Rurikovich loses the principle of seniority in the dynasty, and it is replaced by seniority in each of the branches that have established themselves in the sovereign Russian principalities-lands. Created with high quality new form state-political organization of ancient Russian society, a kind of federation of lands under the nominal auspices of the Grand Duke of Kiev, due to a number of factors that became the main prerequisites for feudal fragmentation. The formal and external reason for the fragmentation of Russia was political prerequisites: endless inter-princely feuds and a long fierce internecine struggle among the Rurikovich (in just the period from the death of Yaroslav the Wise to Mongol invasion recorded at least one and a half hundred military clashes) for the right to own more significant princely domains with rich lands, which made it possible to have a large amount of tax-rent. It is more important, however, to note something else. During long process development of feudal relations and the social division of labor in Rus', there is a noticeable progress both in agriculture and in handicraft production, independent economic regions are formed with their own specifics of farming. Cities of independent principalities-lands are growing, which are becoming not only economic, but also political and cultural centers of the regions. Their number during the century under consideration reaches two hundred. Cities in the period of fragmentation of Rus' are the support bases for regional separatism. In the context of the growing economic specialization of the regions and handicraft production, both domestic and foreign trade is expanding. In the principalities-lands, large patrimonial farms are developing, not only secular, but also spiritual feudal lords. The feudal estates, who are at the same time boyars-vassals of local princely families (the regional elite), are striving to expand their possessions more and more at the expense of the smerds, increase income from their possessions and secure immunity rights. The boyar corporations of the principalities-lands are becoming less and less dependent on the will of the Grand Duke of Kyiv. It is more beneficial for them to focus on their local prince, who, in turn, cannot but take into account the interests of the regional patrimonial aristocracy. In addition, by the middle of the XII century. the social structure of Russian society, which also has its own regional characteristics, is more clearly defined. Along with the boyar clans, layers of urban settlements are formed - merchants, merchants and artisans, and finally, master servants-serfs. Urban population to a certain extent, it influenced the relationship between the princely power and the boyars, in some way balancing their relationship. The townspeople also gravitated towards the isolation of local interests, not linking themselves with the all-Russian ideas of unity. Specificity social structure and economic relations in different lands of Rus' determined and various models political organization of the emerging states-Lands. Finally, the decline of Kyiv and the Kyiv principality as the center of Rus' was also due to a number of foreign policy circumstances. Thus, the constant raids of the Polovtsy nomads on the southern Russian lands significantly weakened their economic potential. The same factor had an impact on the migration of the population of Rus', its outflow to the calmer regions of the Zalessky region of the northeastern Vladimir-Suzdal land and the southwestern Galicia-Volyn land. At the same time, the Polovtsian danger significantly reduced the attractiveness of the trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks." Centers through which trade was carried out. Europe with the East, thanks to the Crusades, are gradually moving to Southern Europe and the Mediterranean, and the rapidly growing northern Italian cities establish control over this trade. International trade is developing quite rapidly in the north of Europe, where the German coastal "free" cities acquire a leading position. The merchants of the north-west of Rus', first of all Veliky Novgorod and Pskov, begin to orient themselves towards them. However, one should not evaluate the collapse of the Old Russian state as an absolutely negative phenomenon. On the contrary, in the era of fragmentation, there is a genuine flourishing of medieval Russian society, the progressive development of the economic potential of the principalities-lands, the formation of various socio-political structures and the development of an original culture. It is impossible not to take into account the fact that political fragmentation was a natural historical period in the framework of the emerging centrifugal processes on the way to further consolidation on the future civilizational turn. At the same time, strong centripetal tendencies remained in the Russian lands, which had a powerful unifying potential. Firstly, the state-political unity of Rus' was not even formally lost, and the authority of the great Kyiv princes, even nominal, was still preserved. Secondly, the unity of the entire church organization and the absolute predominance of the Orthodox faith continued to exist - the main spiritual and moral bond of Rus'. The supremacy of the Kyiv Metropolitan as the head of the Orthodox Church was undeniable. Thirdly, in the Russian lands a single the legislative framework, the basis of which were the norms of Russian Truth. Finally, the Old Russian language common to all lands was an important cementing factor of unity. In addition to all this, in the era of fragmentation in the Russian lands, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe unity of all forces to combat external danger was constantly preserved. |
|
REASONS FOR THE DECLINE OF KIEVAN Rus'.
Many have the wrong idea that the fall of Kievan Rus is connected with the invasion of the Tatars. A hundred years before them, Kyiv tends to decline. The reasons were internal and external. Firstly, the ancient Kievan Rus was a rich and European cultured country, a European country. This is the front side of life. But he also had a downside. The economic condition was bought at the cost of enslaving the lower classes: serfs, purchases. Not even a Marxist thinks so, but V. O. Klyuchevsky. The discontent of the oppressed classes oppressed the social order and well-being of Kievan Rus. Secondly, princely strife ravaged the Russian land. They were preoccupied with the desire to rob and burn a hostile country, to take the population in full. The captives were turned into slaves. Even Vladimir Monomakh, the kindest and most intelligent of the princes, was no stranger to this predation. In his "Instruction for Children" he tells how, having attacked Minsk (Mensk), "he did not leave a servant or a cattle there." He took everything with him. After the unsuccessful attack of the troops of Andrei Bogolyubsky on Novgorod in 1169, a prisoner was sold in Novgorod at a price lower than the price of a ram. So many have been taken! (“two legs” is a monetary unit) The Russian princes were not ashamed to bring Polovtsy to Rus' to ruin their neighbors. Princely strife further exacerbated the position of the lower classes. Thirdly, the external reason, the Polovtsian invasions. Rus' lived on the edge of European civilization, further extended the Wild Field, which, according to Klyuchevsky, was "the historical scourge of ancient Rus'." Since 1061, continuous attacks of the Polovtsy (Kuman) began. In 1096, Khan Bonyak Sheludivy almost entered Kyiv, broke into the Caves Monastery when the monks were sleeping after matins. Bonyak robbed and set fire to the monastery. The Pereyaslav principality was gradually emptying from the raids of the Polovtsy. In Kievan Rus, there was even a doubt: is it possible to live next door to the Polovtsians. In 1069, Izyaslav Yaroslavich was expelled from Kyiv due to indecision in the fight against the Polovtsy. He went to Kyiv with the Polish army. The Kievans asked the brothers to protect the city, and in case of refusal, they said that they would set fire to their city and leave for the Greek land. So the attacks of the Polovtsians were continuous, like the Germanic tribes on Rome. Only Vladimir Monomakh concluded 19 contracts with them, but it was all in vain. To prevent attacks, Russian princes married khan's daughters. And the father-in-law continued to plunder the Russian land. A very interesting speech by Prince Vladimir Monomakh at the princely congress in 1103. He said: “In the spring, the smerd will go to the field to plow on a horse – the Polovchin will come, hit the smerd with an arrow and take his horse. Then he will come to the village, take his wife, children, and all his property, and set it on fire in the threshing floor. "Russia has a historical mission to defend Europe from the steppe, from nomads; protection of the left flank of the European offensive to the East. This is how Klyuchevsky and Solovyov think. This the time of the beginning of the crusades, which began in 1096. This is the beginning of the movement Reconquest on the Iberian Peninsula. This is a movement against Muslims and Arabs in Europe. The defense of Rus' cost her dearly. The ebb of the Russian population to new places began. From the middle of the 12th century, traces of desolation are noticeable in the Middle Dnieper. In 1159, according to the chronicle, psari and Polovtsy (peaceful Polovtsy who came to Rus') live in Chernigov and its younger cities. Lubech, once rich, also became deserted. There is also an economic downturn. This is evidenced by the devaluation of the hryvnia. At the end of the 11th and beginning of the 12th century, the hryvnia weighed 1/2 pound, and at the end of the 12th century - 1/4 pound, and in the 13th - even lighter. The reason for the decline is this. One prince in 1167 invited to a campaign against the steppes. "Take pity on the Russian land, on your fatherland. Every summer, the filthy ones take Christians to their tents (tents. Hence the White Towers, the capital of the Khazars). But the paths are taken away from us (trade routes)," and lists the Black Sea routes of Russian trade. At the end of the 12th century, the Russian princes could no longer restrain the pressure of the Polovtsy and the exodus of the Russian population began. But Grushevsky saw the reasons for the decline of Kievan Rus in the intrigues and evil intentions of Vladimir-Suzdal princes. He writes: "The Suzdal princes deliberately wanted to weaken the Kiev land. The Suzdal prince made a campaign in 1169 against Kiev. And the army, having taken Kiev, mercilessly devastated it. For several days they plundered the city, monasteries, churches sparing nothing. They took away icons, books, robes from churches, even the bells were removed and taken to their northern regions; people were beaten and taken prisoner "This is the first invasion in 1169. "Then Andrei's brother, Vsevolod the Big Nest, deliberately quarreled with the Ukrainian princes. Kyiv was again mercilessly plundered and devastated in 1203. Such a struggle ensued around it that it was very difficult for anyone to sit." Then the migration began. Grushevsky finishes: "After this, the complete decline of Kiev begins and the later Tatar pogrom added a little to the previous pogroms. Vernadsky writes:" The importance of Kiev was shaken in 1169 (recognizes the significance of the campaign of Andrei Bogolyubsky). The second reason is that the city suffered from the termination of trade relations with Constantinople after it was sacked by the crusaders in 1204. Shmurlo’s book says: “They robbed together with the Polovtsy in order to increase the disaster. All the youth of the city, men and women, were taken captive, nuns and monks were driven into the steppe for hard, and even shameful work. Only foreign merchants survived. They locked themselves in stone churches and bought life and freedom for themselves by giving half of the goods to the Polovtsy.Since then, dishonored, broken and frail, Kiev sadly eked out its days in anticipation of the third even bitterer defeat of the Tatars in 1240. So the exodus of the people of Kiev begins. All historical schools agree on this. But where do they come from? Grushevsky points out the path of the people of Kiev to the West and only there, through Galicia to Poland, to the south-east of Poland. This is generally recognized. Klyuchevsky, on the other hand, writes that the outflow of the population went in two directions, in two streams. One jet was directed beyond the Western Buk, to the West, to the region of the upper Dniester and upper Vistula, deep into Galicia and Poland. So the Slavs returned to their historical homeland - the northern slopes of the Carpathians, abandoned in the 7th century. Another stream of colonization was directed in the other direction - to the northeast in the interfluve of the Oka and Volga. Thus, we are at the source of the division of a single ancient Russian people into two tribes - Little Russian and Russian.
Let us turn to the first vector - the ebb to the West. In the second half of the 12th century, the Galician principality was greatly strengthened. At the end of the century, Roman Mstislavich annexed Volyn to Galich. Chronicle calls him the autocrat of the whole Russian land. Not in vain. Under his son Daniil Romanovich, the principality grew noticeably, densely populated. The princes manage the affairs of the Kyiv land and Kiev. Klyuchevsky writes: “Historical documents mention temples in the Krakow region and other places in Poland. The Tatars gave a new impetus to the exodus. Kiev was burned by the Tatars in 1240 and about 200 houses remained there. In 1246, the missionary Plano Carpini passed through these lands. went to Tarataria. The Europeans called the Tatars the fiends of hell (the name of the Tatars comes from the Chinese "ta-ta"). Plano writes: "There is very little Russia left here. Most of them were killed or taken prisoner. (In Kiev and Pereyaslav land, he met countless human skulls and bones scattered across the fields) ". The second blow to Kiev was inflicted by the Tatars in 1299, after which its inhabitants fled again. The city was deserted. In the 14th century, Galicia was captured by Poland ( c. 1340), and the rest of the Dnieper region was captured by Lithuania. There are different opinions about the latter. Grushevsky avoids the idea that Kiev was captured by Lithuania in the 60s of the 14th century. He writes: "After that, the Dnieper deserts became southeastern Ukraine the united Polish-Lithuanian state (1386, the year of the marriage of Jogaila and Jadwiga)". In the documents of the 14th century, and according to Fassmer - from 1292, a new name appears for southwestern Russia - Little Russia. These are documents of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Grushevsky and Evfimenko (a woman who married a Ukrainian) hold the view that: "The historical tradition of the ancient Kiev region was not interrupted, but continued to live among the Ukrainian people and in the institutions of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Therefore, it was a continuation of Kievan Rus. "In their opinion, the Ukrainian princes of the Lithuanian dynasty ruled in this region. All of them are Rurikovich. This is the concept of all Ukrainian nationalists. raids after the overthrow of the yoke of the Golden Horde (after 1480). On the other hand, the Polish magnates acquired huge estates in the Ukraine of the Polish state and populated them with their people, taking them out of the depths of Poland. yoke. The re-emigrants retained their language, their nationality and met with the remnants of the former nomads. There was assimilation with Torks, Berendeys, Pechenegs and others. This is how the Little Russian people is formed. That is why many Ukrainians have black eyes and black hair.
The inhabitants of Kyiv leave under the threat of Polovtsian robberies, and then the Mongol-Tatars. One direction of the outflow of the Kyiv population to the east, to Galicia, to Poland. Then the return and mixing of the Kyivans with the remnants of the ancient nomads took place: with Torks, Berendeys, Pechenegs. This is how Klyuchevsky talks about the formation of the Little Russian people by the 14th-15th centuries. Hrushevsky, on the other hand, begins the history of the Ukrainian people from the 4th century of the Christian era. He believes that Ukrainians, Belarusians and Great Russians, leaving their ancestral home, which was located on the northern slopes of the Carpathians, ended up in different physical, cultural and economic conditions, in a different ethnic environment. The Great Russians were formed mainly on Finnish soil. Belarusians are in close contact with Lithuanians, Ukrainians are in eternal neighborhood with the Turks. These peoples have more differences than similarities. This is Grushevsky's opinion. As a result, "people's well-being was formed, which now quite instinctively distinguishes Ukrainians, Belarusians and Great Russians. Or, in common parlance, Ukrainians, Litvins and Katsaps." The origin of the word crest according to Grushevsky (Russian historians agree with him). Khokhol is a derisive name for a crest among the Great Russians. It originates from the hairstyle of the Ukrainians of the 17th century, when they shaved their hair and left their heads in the middle. The name Litvin originates from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, when Belarus was within the boundaries of the Lithuanian Principality. The origin of the word "katsap" is not so clear. Velikorosy produces from the derisive "like a goat" because of the beard. Grushevsky writes: "it is now produced quite plausibly from the Turkic word kasap, which means a butcher, a cutter, an executioner."
According to Grushevsky, the Little Russian differs from the Great Russian and Belarusian in anthropological features, external physical appearance: the shape of the skull, height, and the ratio of body parts. It is distinguished by psychophysical features, manifested in the national character, psychology, in the warehouse of family and social relations. In our opinion, Grushevsky somewhat exaggerates the anthropological features of related tribes. In addition, the Ukrainian people are heterogeneous in their anthropological composition. Without denying the influence of the neighbors: the Turks, Finns, Litvins, we note that the formation of these peoples took place on a common Old Russian basis, that is, Kievan Rus is the cradle of the Great Russians, Little Russians, and Belarusians. Grushevsky considered. That Kievan Rus and its culture belongs only to the history of Ukraine. The period of Proto-Slavic unity lasted until the 6th century.
The second flow of the people from Kievan Rus was to the northeast in the interfluve of the Oka and Volga. This vector, according to Klyuchevsky, is poorly noted in the literature and contemporary observers of that period. Therefore, Klyuchevsky, in order to prove that there was an ebb of the population in this direction, resorts to indirect evidence: the most obvious argument is toponymy, geographical names, the toponymic similarity of the northeast with southern Russia. Klyuchevsky writes: “You need to listen carefully to the names of the new Suzdal cities: Pereyaslavl, Zvenigorod, Starodub, Vyshgorod, Galich. All these are South Russian names that flash almost on every page of the chronicle. There were several Zvenigorods in the land of Kiev and Galicia. Names of Kiev rivers Lybyadi and Pochainy are found in Ryazan, in Nizhny Novgorod, in Vladimir on the Klyazma.The name of Kiev is not forgotten in Suzdal land, for example, the village of Kievo in the Moscow district, Kievka - a tributary of the Oka in the Kaluga district, the village of Kievtsy in the Tula Province.Three Pereyaslavl are known to ancient Russia : southern, Ryazan - this is the current Ryazan (the inhabitants of the old, pre-Mongol, Ryazan burned by the Tatars moved here), Pereyaslavl-Zalessky. Each of them stands on the Trubezh River, as well as in Kievan Rus. It is easy to guess that this is the work of settlers.
Until the middle of the 12th century, there was no direct communication between Kyiv and the Rostov-Suzdal Territory. They were separated by dense forests. There is a legend about this. The Bryn robbers are known (a village on the Bryn River). The name of the city of Bryansk comes from debryansk (wilds). And the Suzdal land was called Zalesskaya. This name belongs to Kievan Rus. The jungle began to be cleared and cut through the middle of the 12th century. If Vladimir Monomakh still had difficulty driving here to Rostov even with a small retinue, then his son Yuri Dolgoruky led entire regiments from the middle of the 12th century on a direct road from Rostov to Kyiv. From this we can assume that there was some kind of colonization, some kind of movement of grain growers. Peasants pierced this road. This is a quiet but spontaneous colonization, so the writers did not notice it.
While the desolation of the land is noted in the south, in the northeast there is the construction of cities by Yuri Dolgoruky and his son Andrei Bogolyubsky: Moscow (1147), Yuryev-Polskaya (1180), Pereyaslavl Zalessky (1150-1152), Dmitrov (1154), Bogolyubov (1155), Gorodets on the Volga (1152), Kostroma (1152), Starodub on the Klyazma, Galich, Zvenigorod, Vyshgorod, Kolomna (1177). Andrei Bogolyubsky was proud of his colonial activities. Thinking of founding a metropolis independent of Kyiv, he said: "I have populated the whole of Rus' with great cities and villages and made them populous." The Kievan people in the second half of the 12th century was torn in two, and the main mass of the people went to the northeast, where, according to Klyuchevsky, "gathered their defeated forces, strengthened in the forests of central Russia, saved their people and armed them with the power of a cohesive state, again came to the south West, in order to save the weakest part of the Russian people who remained there from the foreign yoke. Klyuchevsky rapped out: “With centuries of efforts and sacrifices, Russia has formed a state similar to which in composition, size and world position we have not seen since the fall of the Roman Empire.
