7. Alexander Nevsky - military leader and statesman.
Russian statesman, commander, Prince of Novgorod (1236-51), Grand Duke of Vladimir from 1252, son of Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich.
He led the Russian troops that defended the northwestern lands of Rus' from being captured by Swedish and German feudal lords. After the landing of the Swedish knights at the confluence of the Izhora River with the Neva River, Alexander Nevsky with a small squad, united with the Ladoga residents, on July 15, 1240, suddenly attacked the Swedes and completely defeated their large army, revealing exceptional courage in battle.
In the Battle of the Neva in 1240, the troops of Alexander Nevsky won a major victory, suffering small losses. The threat of an enemy invasion from the North was averted. For this battle, the people nicknamed him "Nevsky".
This victory, increasing the political influence Alexander Nevsky, at the same time contributed to the aggravation of his relations with the boyars, as a result of clashes with which Alexander was forced to leave Novgorod. However, after the invasion of the Livonian knights into Rus', the Novgorodians sent a delegation to Alexander in the spring of 1241. Alexander Nevsky returned and quickly created a strong army that expelled the invaders from Russian cities (the assault on Konorye and Pskov is an example of the high military art of capturing fortresses).
Alexander Nevsky was opposed by a large cavalry army led by the master of the order, which suffered a decisive defeat on April 5, 1242 on the ice of Lake Peipus (Battle on the Ice).
The victory in this battle put Alexander among the largest military leaders of his time.
The aggression of the German knights against Rus' was stopped. Alexander Nevsky continued to strengthen the northwestern borders of Rus': sending an embassy to Norway, which resulted in the first peace agreement between Russia and Norway (1251), a successful campaign in Finland against the Swedes, who made a new attempt to close the Russian access to the Baltic Sea (1256).
Alexander showed himself to be a cautious and far-sighted politician. He resolutely rejected the attempts of the panorama curia to provoke a war between Rus' and the Golden Horde, because. understood the failure of the war with the Tatars at that time.
With a skillful policy, Alexander Nevsky contributed to the prevention of devastating invasions of the Tatars in Rus'. Several times he went to the Horde, achieved the release of the Russians from the obligation to act as an army on the side of the Tatar khans in their wars with other peoples.
Under Alexander Nevsky, the ousting of agents of the khan's power in Rus' and the transfer of their functions to the Grand Duke began. Alexander made a lot of efforts to strengthen the grand ducal power in the country to the detriment of the influence of the boyars, at the same time he resolutely suppressed anti-feudal uprisings (the uprising in Novgorod in 1259).
He died in Gorodets, returning from the Golden Horde. By order of Peter I, the remains of Alexander Nevsky were transported to St. Petersburg. In pre-revolutionary Russia, on May 21, 1725, the Order of Alexander Nevsky was established. July 29, 1942 In honor of Alexander Nevsky, the Soviet military order of Alexander Nevsky was established.
8. The invasion of the Mongol-Tatars on Russian lands in the 18th century. The relationship between Rus' and the Horde.
In 1243 great khan made senior among the Russian princes Yaroslav Vsevolodovich of Vladimir. After his death in 1246, the struggle for the Vladimir table began, in which the Horde intervened, ruining the Suzdal land. Alexander Nevsky sat in Vladimir. For political purposes, he helped the Horde impose tribute on Rus'. In 1262, uprisings against the Tatars broke out in Suzdal, but Alexander convinced the khan not to smash the rebellious cities. In 1263 he died. Later, the Tatars attacked Rus' more than once, interfering in the feuds of the princes. At this time, Tver and Moscow rose, under Daniil Alexandrovich, they became independent principalities. Soon the struggle for the Vladimir table began between Yuri Danilovich of Moscow and Mikhail Yaroslavich of Tverskoy. The Horde intervened. In 1327, Tver rebelled against the Tatars. Ivan Kalita, the prince of Moscow, took part in the defeat of the uprising, and for this he received the reign of Vladimir and the right to collect tribute from Russian lands. He acquired a number of lands (Beloozero, Uglich, Galich Mersky). The metropolitan moved to Moscow from Vladimir, which increased her influence. Under Dmitry Ivanovich (1359-1389), Moscow began to crush Tver, Nizhny Novgorod, Ryazan. In the 1370s the ruler of the Horde, Mamai, decided to weaken Moscow, but in 1378 the Tatars were defeated on the river. Vozhe, and in 1380 Dmitry Donskoy and other princes defeated Mamai on the Kulikovo field. However, Khan Tokhtamysh ravaged Moscow in 1382 and returned it to the rule of the Horde. After the defeat of the Horde by Timur in 1395, Vasily I (1389-1425) did not pay tribute to her for several years. In 1408, the ruler of the Horde, Yedigei, again laid siege to Moscow, did not take it, but terribly ruined the surrounding cities. The power of the Tatars was strengthened. In 1425-1462. in the Moscow principality there was a feudal war - the struggle of Vasily II against Uncle Yuri and his sons Vasily Kosoy and Dmitry Shemyaki. In the course of it, Vasily Kosoy was blinded in 1436, Vasily II (“Dark”) in 1446, and Shemyaka was poisoned in 1452, Vasily II won.
SOURCES
Gabriel Buzhinsky. A word in praise of St. Petersburg and its founder, Emperor Peter the Great // Antiquity and Novelty. SPb., 1772. Part 1.
Henry of Latvia. Chronicle of Livonia. M.; L., 1938.
Diplomas of Veliky Novgorod and Pskov. Ed. S. N. Valka. M.; L., 1949.
Life of Alexander Nevsky //Begunov Yu.K. Monument of Russian literature of the XIII century "The Word about the destruction of the Russian land". M.; L., 1965. S. 185–194.
Life of Alexander Nevsky // Izbornik. Collection of works of literature Ancient Rus'/ Comp. D. S. Likhachev and L. A. Dmitriev. (Preparation of the text and comments of KZ. K. Begunov) // Library of World Literature. Series one. T. 15. M., 1969. S. 328–343.
Life of Alexander Nevsky // Who is with the sword. Three works of ancient Russian literature of the XIII-XV centuries. Translation from Old Russian / Consultant D.S. Likhachev. Compiled by A. D. Shmarinov. (Prepared text and comments by Yu. K. Begunov.) M., 1973, pp. 41–53; 2nd ed. 1975, pp. 73–85.
Life of Alexander Nevsky. Text and miniatures of the Facial Vault of the 16th century. State Public Library named after M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Fax playback. L. 1990. 2nd ed. SPb., 1992. 44 sheets. fax, 24 p.
Iman Bahshi. Jagfar Tarihy. Collection of Bulgarian chronicles. T. 1. Orenburg, 1993.
Lavrentiev and Suzdal chronicles according to the Academic list // Complete collection of Russian chronicles. T. 1. M., 1962.
Battle on the Ice of 1242 Proceedings of a comprehensive expedition to clarify the location of the Battle on the Ice. M.; L., 1966.
Chronicler of Pereyaslavl of Suzdal. M., 1851.
Mansikka V. Life of Alexander Nevsky. Analysis of editions and text. Monuments of ancient writing and art. T.CLXXX. SPb., 1913.
Novgorod First Chronicle of the Senior and Junior Editions. Ed. and with a preface by A. N. Nasonov. M.; L., 1950.
Plano Carpini, John, de. History of the Mongols. Ed. A. I. Maleina. SPb., 1911.
Complete collection of Russian chronicles. St. Petersburg; M, 1846–1995. T. 1-XLI.
Rubrukvis, Wilhelm, de. Journey to the Eastern countries. Ed. A. I. Maleina. SPb., 1911. The same with the addition: Travels to the eastern countries of Plano de Carpini and Wilhelm de Rubruquis. M., 1957; 1997.
Rashidad Dean. Collection of annals. M; L., 1960. T. 2.
Serebryansky N.I. Old Russian princely lives. M., 1915. S. 192–212.
The word on the day of the holy blessed Prince Alexander Nevsky, preached by Feofan, Bishop of Pskov, in the Alexander Nevsky Monastery near St. Petersburg in 1710.
Tizengauzen V.G. Collection of materials relating to the history of the Golden Horde. T. 1–2. SPb. - L., 1884, 1941.
Cheshikhin E.V. Collection of materials and articles on the history of the Baltic region. Riga, 1879, vol. 2, pp. 89–90, 196–197, 351–357.
LITERATURE
Azbelev S. N. Secular processing of the Life of Alexander Nevsky // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. M.; L., 1958. T. XIV. pp. 147–153.
Alexander Nevskiy. St. Petersburg: type. Stauf, 1876.
Alexander Nevsky and his time. To the 750th anniversary of the Battle of the Ice. Materials of the round table // Ancient Pskov / Research of the medieval city. Conference materials. Saint Petersburg. May 20–21. 1992. St. Petersburg, 1994. P. 105–149. Contents: Yu. Kirpichnikov A.N. Battle on the Ice of 1242 and its tactical features (pp. 106–121). Shishov A. V. Alexander Nevsky's military leadership in the Battle on the Ice (pp. 121–124). Jaxon T. N. Information about Alexander Nevsky in the "Saga of Hakon Hakonarson" (p. 124-126). Fonyakov D. I. Toropets in the life of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 126–130). Petrov Yu. Yu. On the issue of dating armor from excavations in the Dovmont city of Pskov (pp. 130–132). Lebedev G. S. "The Year of Alexander Nevsky" in Leningrad - a prologue to the revival of St. Petersburg (pp. 132–135). Discussion - Yu. K. Begunov, S. V. Beletsky, Yu. Yu. Petrov, G. S. Lebedev, Yu. M. Lesman, A. N. Kirpichnikov, N. N. Maslennikova (p. 136–149).
Alexander Nevsky and the history of Russia. Materials of the scientific-practical conference September 26–28, 1995. Novgorod, 1996. P. 102 (Novgorod State United Museum-Reserve). Contents: Kuchkin V.A. Alexander Nevsky - statesman and commander of medieval Rus' (p. 3-28). Kirpichnikov A. N. Two great battles of Alexander Nevsky (S. 29–41). Egorov V. A. Alexander Nevsky and Golden Horde(S. 42–63). Gorsky A. A. Two “uncomfortable” facts from the biography of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 64–74). Popova M.P. History and activities of the “Orthodox Brotherhood of St. Alexander Nevsky” at the Nativity Monastery in Vladimir (1879–1918) (p. 75–83). Zavadskaya L. A. Cancer of Alexander Nevsky in the collection of the Hermitage (pp. 84–93). Klimov P. Yu. St. Alexander Nevsky in Russian church-monumental painting of the second half of XIX- beginning of XX century. (G.I. Semiradsky, V.M. Vasnetsov, M.V. Nesterov).
Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky // Boguslavsky V. V., Burminov V. V. Rus. Rurikovich. M., 2000. S. 17–19.
Angarsky M.S. On the question of finding a place for the Battle of the Ice // Military History Journal. M., 1960. No. 6. S. 110–118.
Andreev A.R. Grand Duke Yaroslav Vsevolodovich Pereyaslavsky. Documentary biography. Historical chronicle of the XIII century. M., 1998.
Andreev V. F. Alexander Nevsky in Novgorod // Medieval and New Russia. Collection of scientific articles. To the 60th anniversary of Professor Igor Yakovlevich Froyanov. SPb., 1996.
Andreev M. Alexander Nevsky. M., 1941.
Anninsky S.A. Alexander Nevsky. 1220–1263. L., 1941.
Antonova V. I. Alexander Nevsky. M., 1966.
Artamonov G. A. Metropolitan Kirill of Kiev // Great spiritual pastors of Russia. Ed. prof. A. F. Kiseleva. M., 1999. S. 110–138.
Artemiev A.I. The solution to the old anagram, placed in the afterword to the Life of St. Alexander Nevsky // Notes of the imp. Russian Archaeological Society. St. Petersburg, 1851, vol. 4, pp. 140–143.
Artsikhovsky A.V. Old Russian miniatures historical source. M., 1944.
Artsybashev N.S. Narratives about Russia. T. 1. M., 1837.
Baumgarten H.A. To the Genealogy of the Grand Dukes of Vladimir. Mother of Alexander Nevsky // Chronicle of the Historical and Genealogical Society in Moscow. M., 1908. Issue. 4 (16). pp. 21–23.
Bakhrushin S.V. Alexander Nevsky and the fight against German aggression in the XIII century. // Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences. M., 1942. No. 4. S. 62–68.
Begunov Yu.K. Alexander Nevsky and modernity // Russian. M., 1992. No. 5–6.
Begunov Yu.K. Alexander Nevsky: man and myth (to the 750th anniversary of his birth) // Science and religion. M., 1970. No. 5. S. 52–57.
Begunov Yu.K. Alexander Nevsky in Pskov Literature of the 15th–16th Centuries. // Zeitschrift der Slawistik. Berlin, 1976. Bd. 21. H. 3. S. 311–318.
Begunov Yu.K. The choice of Alexander Nevsky and the significance of the Choice for the fate of Russian statehood and civilization // Twenty-fifth miles from St. Petersburg (Historical and literary portrait of Kolpin). Pushkin - Kolpino. 1998. S. 3-14. The same in the book: St. Alexander Nevsky. Sat. articles for the 760th anniversary of the Battle of the Neva, which is being performed in 2000. Compiled by A. M. Sushko. Rep. ed. Yu. K. Begunov. Ust-Izho-ra, 1999, pp. 6–18.
Begunov Yu.K. Genealogy of Alexander Nevsky. Earth and clan // Cavalier. Dedicated to the 750th anniversary of the Battle of the Neva. July 1990. L., 1990. S. 7. The same in the book: St. Alexander Nevsky ... Ust-Izhora, 1999. S. 99.
Begunov Yu.K. Ancient image of Alexander Nevsky // Byzantinoslavica. Praha, 1981, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 39–43.
Begunov Yu.K. Ancient Russian sources about the Izhorian Pelgusia-Philippe, a participant in the Battle of the Neva in 1240 // Ancient states on the territory of the USSR: Materials and research. 1982 M., 1984. S. 76–85. The same for him. in: Forschungen zur osteuropäischen Geschichte. Berlin, 1981. Bd. 28. S. 7-16, ill.
Begunov Yu.K. Old Russian traditions in the works of the first quarter of the 18th century about Alexander Nevsky // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. M.; L., 1971. T. XXVI. pp. 72–84.
Begunov Yu.K. Life of Alexander Nevsky as part of the Novgorod 1st and Sofia 1st Chronicles // Novgorod historical collection. Novgorod, 1959. Issue. 9. S. 229–238.
Begunov Yu.K. Life of Alexander Nevsky in the collection from the collection of N.P. Likhachev // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. L., 1976. T. XXX. pp. 60–72.
Begunov Yu.K. Life of Alexander Nevsky in easel painting of the 17th century // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. M.; L., 1966. T. XXII. pp. 311–326.
Begunov Yu.K. West and East of Alexander Nevsky // Cavalier: Dedicated to the 750th anniversary of the Battle of Neva. Supplement to the newspaper "Nevsky Prospekt". L., 1990. July. S. 7.
Begunov Yu.K. Defender of the Russian land. Alexander Nevsky and his era // On guard of the Motherland. L., 1990. No. 165. 7.07. C. 4.
Begunov Yu.K. Defender of the Russian land. Alexander Nevsky and the Battle of the Ice // Ibid. No. 117. 23.05. C. 4.
Begunov Yu.K. Defender of the Russian land. Alexander Nevsky and the Neva battle // Ibid. No. 160. 13.07. C. 2.
Begunov Yu.K. On the issue of studying the Life of Alexander Nevsky // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. M; L., 1961. T. XVII. pp. 248–257.
Begunov Yu.K. Kirillo-Belozersky excerpts from the Life of Alexander Nevsky // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. M; L., 1969. T. XXIV. pp. 105–107.
Begunov Yu.K. When did the Life of Alexander Nevsky become part of the Laurentian Chronicle? // Die Welt der Slaven. Wiesbaden, 1971. Bd. 16. S. 111–120.
Begunov Yu.K. Battle of the Neva (Miniatures). Kolpino, 1994.20p. (Spoonbill. No. 20).
Belyaev I.D. Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky // Vremennik of the Society for the History and Antiquities of Russia at the Moscow Emperor. university. M., 1849. T. IV. pp. 1-42.
Belyaev N.I. Alexander Nevskiy. M., 1954.
Bernyakovich Z.A. Russian artistic silver XVII - beg. 20th century in the collection of the State Hermitage. L., 1977. S. 264.
Berkhin I. B. Alexander Nevsky. Molotov, 1942.
Beskrovny L.G. Atlas of maps and diagrams on Russian military history. M., 1946.
Bogusevich V.A. Destruction by Alexander Nevsky of the German Knights in Koporye // Novgorod Historical Collection. Novgorod, 1938. Issue. 3–4. pp. 24–38.
Borisov N.G. Russian commanders of the XIII-XVI centuries. M., 1993.
Bochkarev V. Alexander Nevsky // Historical Pregnancy. Year. 2. Sofia, 1945. Book. 3. S. 317–335.
Bochkarev V.N. Alexander Nevsky // Historical magazine. M., 1942. No. 3–4. pp. 119–120.
Bochkarev V.N. Alexander Nevsky and his victories over the Swedes and Germans // The heroic past of the Russian people. M., 1946.
Bronze. Saint Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky // Wanderer. SPb., 1880. June-July.
Budovnits I.U. Socio-political thought of Ancient Rus'. M., 1960. S. 314.
Bulanin D.M. Vladimirsky Nativity Monastery as a cultural center of Ancient Rus' // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. L., 1981. T. XXXVI. pp. 73–74.
Bunin A.I. On the site of the battle between the Russians and the Germans, which took place on April 5, 1242, on the ice of Lake Peipsi // Proceedings of the X Archaeological Congress in Riga in 1896. M., 1899. T. 1. P. 214–219.
Bushuev S.V. History of the Russian State: Historical and Bibliographic Essays. Book one. IX-XVI centuries Moscow: Book Chamber, 1991.
Bychkov L. Neva battle // Historical magazine. M., 1946. No. 7.
Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich and Grand Duke Alexander Alexandrovich, heir to the Tsarevich // Literate. SPb., 1865. No. 6.
Vernadsky G.V. Two labors of St. Right-Believing Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky // Eurasian Vremennik. Paris, 1925. Book. 4. S. 318–337. The same // Our contemporary. M., 1992. No. 3.
Vernadsky G.V. Mongols and Rus'. Tver; Moscow, 1997.
Vernadsky G.V. Mongolian yoke in Russian history // Evraziyskiy vremennik. Paris, 1927. Book. 5.
Werner S. Alexander Nevsky. Saransk, 1942.
Vinogradov V.V. On the style of the Life of the Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky // Questions of Russian Linguistics. M., 1976. Issue. I. S. 21–36.
Vladimir Nativity Monastery (Materials for history and archeology). Biography of St. Grand Duke Alexander and the decree on the transfer of his relics to St. Petersburg // Vladimirskiye Gubernskie Vedomosti. Vladimir, 1896. No. 24, 26, 31, 32, 34, 39, 40.
Vodovozov N.V. The story of the XIII century about Alexander Nevsky (to the question of the composition of the story and its author) // Uchenye zapiski Moskovsky Gorodskogo Pedagogical Institute them. V. P. Potemkin. M., 1957. T. 67. Issue. 6. P. 21–45.
Vodovozov N.V. Russian military story of the XIII century//Scientific notes of the Moscow City Pedagogical Institute. V. P. Potemkin. T. 87. Department of Russian literature. Issue. 7. M., 1958. S. 180.
Voeikov H.H. Church, Rus' and Rome. Ch. 1–2. Holy Trinity Monastery. Jordanville; New York, 1983. 2nd ed.: Minsk, 2000.
Voskresensky N. Holy noble Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. SPb., 1898.
Gadzyatsky S.S. Vodskaya and Izhora lands of the Novgorod state // Historical notes. M., 1940. No. 6.
Gadzyatsky S.S. Karelia and Karelia in the Novgorod time. Petrozavodsk, 1941.
Galko V. I. Some source studies aspects of the "Life of Alexander Nevsky" // Proceedings of the XX All-Union Scientific Student Conference. Philology. Novosibirsk, 1982, pp. 61–65.
Galko V.I. The Tale of the Life and Courage of Prince Alexander Nevsky // Old Russian written sources: Information materials for the meeting of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Institute of History of the USSR, Academy of Sciences of the USSR. M., 1988. S. 17–20.
Gipping A. I. Neva and Nyenschantz. Part 1. St. Petersburg, 1909. S. 88–89.
Glazer S. Battle on Lake Peipus. M., 1938.
Golubinsky E.E. The history of the canonization of saints in the Russian Church. M., 1903. S. 102–103.
Golubinsky E.E. History of the Russian Church. T. 1–2. M., 1880–1900.
Golubinsky E.E. Metropolitan of All Rus' Kirill III. Sergiev Posad, 1894.
Gorsky A.A. “The Russian land is filled with everything ...”. Personalities and mentality of the Russian Middle Ages. Moscow, 2001, pp. 41–46, 161.
Gorsky A.A. Between Rome and Karakorum: Daniil Galitsky and Alexander Nevsky // Pages of National History. M., 1993.
Gorsky A.A. Moscow and the Horde. Moscow, 2000, pp. 87–89, 113–115.
Gorsky A.A. Political struggle in Rus' at the end of the thirteenth century. and relations with the Horde // National history. 1996. № 3.
Gorsky A.A. Russian lands in the 13th–14th centuries: ways political development. M., 1996.
Gratsiansky N.P. German aggression in the Baltic in the XII-XV centuries. // Marxist historian. M., 1938. No. 6. S. 95–97.
Grekov B.D., Yakubovsky A.Yu. Golden Horde and its fall. M.; L., 1950. 2nd ed. M., 1998.
Grekov B.D., Yakubovsky A.Yu. Golden Horde: Essay on the history of the Jochi ulus in the period of formation and flourishing in the XIII-XIV centuries. L., 1937.
Grekov I.B., Shakhmatov F.F. The world of history. Russian lands in the XIII-XV centuries. M., 1982.
Gudziy N.K. Reader on ancient Russian literature of the XI-XVII centuries. Ed. Moscow, 1962, pp. 156–162.
Gulyaev V. About the Holy Blessed and Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky // Worldly Word. SPb., 1876. No. 34, 35, 36.
Gumilyov L.N. Ancient Rus' and the Great Steppe. M., 1989.
Gumilyov L.N. From Rus' to Russia. M., 1992. S. 127–133.
Danilevsky V.V. Alexander Nevskiy. M., 1946.
Danilevsky V.V. Alexander Nevsky and Dmitry Donskoy. Irkutsk, 1946.
Danilevsky I.N. Russian lands through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (XII-XIV centuries). M., 2001. S. 183–194.
Janitor F. Slavs in European history and civilization / Per. I. I. Sokolova et al. M., 2001. S. 265–269, 336.
Degtyarev A.Ya. Defender of the fatherland. L., 1990.
Degtyarev A.Ya. Can't you change the location of the battle? // Historical experience of the Russian people and the present. Mavrodinsky readings. Materials for reports. Petersburg University. October 10–12, 1994 St. Petersburg, 1994.
Degtyarev A.Ya. Neva battle. L., 1991.
Delbrück G. The history of military art within the framework of political history. M., 1933. T. 3.
Jackson T.N. Icelandic royal sagas as a source on the history of Ancient Rus' and its neighbors: X-XIII centuries. // The most ancient states on the territory of the USSR. Materials and research. 1988–1989 M., 1990.
Dmitriev L.A. The Tale of the Life of Alexander Nevsky // History of Russian Literature X-XVII centuries. M., 1980. S. 173–177. 2nd ed. 1985.
Dobroklonsky A.P. Guide to the history of the Russian Church. Issue. 1–2. M., 1999. S. 195, 197.
Drizul A.A. An outstanding event in the history of the Latvian people // Bolshevik of Soviet Latvia. Riga, 1949, No. 6, pp. 29–37.
Eugene (Bolkhovitinov), Metropolitan. History of the Principality of Pskov. Kyiv, 1831, part 1, pp. 84–85.
Egorov V.L. Alexander Nevsky and Genghisides // Domestic History. M., 1997. No. 2.
Egorov V.L. Historical geography of the Golden Horde in the XIII-XIV centuries. M., 1983.
Eremin I.P. Life of Alexander Nevsky // Artistic prose Kievan Rus XI-XIII centuries. Comp., trans. and approx. I. P. Eremina and D. S. Likhachev. M., 1957. S. 257–263.
Biography of the Grand Duke Alexander and the decree on the transfer of relics to St. Petersburg // Vladimir provincial sheets. Vladimir, 1869. No. 24, 26, 31, 32, 34, 39, 40.
Biographies of memorable people of the Russian land. M., 1992.
The life of the holy noble Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky in monasticism Alexy // Christian Readings. SPb., 1852. Part 2. The same section. ed.: St. Petersburg, 1853. 103 p.
Life of the Holy Right-Believing Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky // Lives of the Saints of the Russian Church, also Iberian and Slavic. November. SPb., 1856.
Life of the Holy Right-Believing Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. M., 1880.
The Life of the Holy Right-Believing Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky with the Appendix of Poems in Honor of the Right-Believing Prince. Edition of Hierodeacon Seraphim. SPb., 1888.
Lives of the Saints. Collected by nun Taisiya. Ed. Holy Trinity Monastery. Jordanville, 1984.
For the Russian land! Old Russian military stories / Translation, compilation by M. E. Ustinov. Introductory article A. Ya. Degtyareva. Chelyabinsk, 1991.
For the Russian land! Monuments of literature of Ancient Rus' of the XI-XV centuries. Compilation, entry. article, commentary and selection of miniatures by Yu. K. Begunov. M., 1981. S. 198–219 (Life of Alexander Nevsky).
Ivanov K.I. Museum of Alexander Nevsky in the city of Pereslavl-Zalessky. Yaroslavl, 1951. 40 s, illustration.
Ivanov P.I. Information about the unknown writer of the Life of St. Alexander Nevsky, hidden in an anagram // Zapiski imp. Russian Archaeological Society. St. Petersburg, 1851, vol. 3, pp. 146–149.
Ilovaisky D.I. History of Russia. M., 1880. T. 2. S. 425–426.
John, Metropolitan of St. Petersburg and Ladoga (Snychev). Alexander Nevsky // Holy Rus'. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Russian Civilization / Comp. O. A. Platonov. M., 2000. S. 20–22.
Historical and philosophical readings dedicated to the 775th anniversary of the birth of Alexander Nevsky. Reading materials. May 1995 Ivanovo, 1995. Contents: Augustine, abbot (Anisimov). Alexander Nevsky and holiness. Cherkassky V. M. Saint Alexander Nevsky. Brief essay.
History of military art. Collection of materials. Issue. I. The military art of the slave-owning and feudal society. M., 1951. S. 182.
Cavalier. Dedicated to the 750th anniversary of the Battle of the Neva. July 1990 Ed. newspaper "Nevsky Prospekt". L., 1990.
Karaev G.N. New data on the location of the Battle of the Ice in 1242 // Military History Journal. M., 1959. No. 3. S. 117–122.
Karaev G.N. New data explaining the indications of the chronicle about the place of the Battle on the Ice // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. M.; L., 1958. T. XIV. pp. 154–158.
Karaev G.N. New data on the site of the Battle of the Ice (Towards the completion of the complex expedition of the Institute of Archeology of the USSR Academy of Sciences) // History of the USSR. M., 1963. No. 6. S. 57–75.
Karaev G.N., Potresov A.A. The way of Alexander Nevsky. M., 1970.
Karamzin N.M. History of Russian Goverment. Book. I. Part 4. SPb., 1842. Stb. 16–21.
Kargalov V.V. Foreign policy factors in the development of feudal Rus'. Feudal Rus' and nomads. Moscow, 1967, pp. 145–147.
Kargalov V. V. The Mongol-Tatar invasion of Rus' in the XIII century. M., 1966.
Kargalov V.V. Stand strong on the borders of Rus'! Great Rus' and Wild Field. Opposition XIII-XVIII centuries. M.: Russian panorama, 1998. S. 10–41.
Kargalov V. V. Generals of the X-XVI centuries. M., 1989.
Kelsiev V. Alexander Nevsky and Dmitry Donskoy // Niva. SPb., 1872. No. 3, 11.
Kirpichnikov A.N. Alexander Nevsky between West and East // Domestic History. M., 1996. No. 11.
Kirpichnikov A.N. Military affairs in Rus' in the XIII-XV centuries. L., 1976.
Kirpichnikov A.N. Ancient Russian weapons. Issue. 1–3. L., 1966–1971.
Kirpichnikov A.N. Ice battle of 1242 (new understanding) // Questions of history. M., 1994. No. 5. S. 162–166.
Kirpichnikov A.N. Equipment of a rider and a riding horse in Rus' in the 9th–13th centuries. L., 1973.
Klepinin H.A. Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. Paris, YMCA-Press, 1927; reissue Paris, 1936; M., 1993, 1994.
Klyuchevsky V.O. Ancient Russian Lives of Saints as a Historical Source. M., 1871. Republished. Moscow, 1988, pp. 65–71, 238–240, 251, 258, 312.
Prince Alexander Nevsky and his era. Research and materials. Ed. Yu. K. Begunov and A. N. Kirpichnikov. St. Petersburg: D. Bulanin, 1995. 214 p. (Mayor's office of St. Petersburg. Russian Academy Sciences. Institute of the History of Material Culture). Contents: Sobchak A.A. Alexander Nevsky is the patron saint of St. Petersburg (pp. 3–5). From the editors - p. 7-11. Likhachev D.S. Word about Alexander Nevsky (S. 13-14). Sh as Kolsky I. P. The Battle of the Neva in 1240 in the light of data modern science (S. 15–23). Kirpichnikov A.N. Battle of the Neva in 1240 and its tactical features (pp. 24–30). Shitov A.V. Military leadership of Prince Alexander Yaroslavich in the Battle of the Neva (pp. 31–37). Sokolov Yu.F. Alexander Nevsky: the formation of personality and tradition (pp. 38–43). Lind D. G. Some considerations about the Battle of the Neva and its significance (S. 44-54). Begunov Yu.K. Russian sources about the Neva battle. A Few Remarks on John Lind's Report (pp. 55-58). Matkhauzerova S. Alexander Nevsky and his era (p. 58–64). Hesh E. Eastern policy of the German Order in the XIII century. (S. 65–74). Cernak K. Alexander Nevsky and the “window on Europe” (p. 75–80). Beletsky SV, Satyreva D.N. Pskov and the Order in the first third of the 13th century (pp. 81–85). Dubov I.V. Pereyaslavl-Zalessky is the birthplace of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 86–92). Froyanov I.Ya. On princely power in Novgorod in the 9th - the first half of the 13th century (pp. 93–99). Andreev V.F. Was there a princely domain in the Novgorod land of the XII-XV centuries? (S. 100–107). Lebedev G.S. North-West of the Novgorod Land: Stages and Results of Development by the Middle of the 13th Century (According to Archaeological Data) (pp. 108–113). Saksa A.I. Northern Baltic-Finnish tribes in the era of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 114–122). Ryabinin E.A. Vodskaya land of Veliky Novgorod and Alexander Nevsky. Historical and archaeological realities (pp. 123–127). Yanin V.L. Birch bark documents on the defense of the Novgorod frontiers in the 13th century (pp. 128–133). Jackson TN. Alexander Nevsky and Hakon the Old: An Exchange of Embassies (pp. 134–139). Khoroshkevich A.L. "Horse seals" by Alexander Nevsky and the traditions of modern sphragistics (pp. 140–145). Ziborov V.K. On a new copy of the seal of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 146–150). Ioannisyan O.M. XIII century in the history of ancient Russian architecture. The main trends in the development of the architectural process (pp. 151–156). Blankov Zh. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign", The Life of Alexander Nevsky and the Embroidery of Queen Mathilde of Bayo as a Reflection of the Life of Feudal Society (pp. 157–162). Begunov Yu.K. The Life of Alexander Nevsky in Russian Literature of the 13th–18th Centuries (pp. 163–171). Begunov Yu.K. Iconography of the Holy Right-Believing Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky (S. 172-176). Moiseeva G.N. The image of Alexander Nevsky in the works of M. V. Lomonosov (pp. 177–180). Bratchikova E.K. Alexander Nevsky and the art of Palekh icon painters (p. 181–184). Ioannisyan O.M., Tomsinsky C.V. Information about the exhibition "Alexander Nevsky in the monuments of Russian culture in the State Hermitage" (pp. 185–186). Begunov Yu K. Edition without a textual critic. [Review) (S. 187-189). Texts. Sources and biography. Life of Alexander Nevsky. First edition. 1280s. Translation and comments; Annalistic story about the battle on the Neva (S. 190-204). Genealogy of Alexander Nevsky (p. 205). Chronicle of the life and work of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 206–209).
Prince Alexander Nevsky. Proceedings of scientific and practical conferences in 1989 and 1994. Rep. Ed.: Yu. K. Begunov and A. N. Kirpichnikov. SPb., 1995. 111s. (Administration of the Kolpinsky district of St. Petersburg, Kolpitsa). Contents: Part one. introduction head of the administration of the Kolpinsky district V.D. Kolosov (S. 4). Kirpichnikov A.N. Prince Alexander Nevsky. History and Modernity (S. 5–8). Begunov Yu.K. Alexander Nevsky and Russian statehood (S. 8-12). Dubov I.V. The role of the historical and cultural environment in the formation of the personality of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 12–19). Krivosheev Yu.V. Russian princes and khans of the Horde (S. 19-21). Mayorov A.V. Alexander Nevsky and Daniil Galitsky (On the issue of the relationship of Russian princes with the Tatars) (pp. 21–24). Sazanov SV. On the monastic name of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 25–27). Shishkin A.A., Gulyaev Yu.N. Alexander Nevsky and the Golenishchev-Kutuzovs (pp. 27–30). Sorokin P.E. From the history of the wooden churches of Ust-Izhora (pp. 31–33). Toropov G.V. Izhora legend (S. 33–35). Sushko A.M. Alexander Nevsky in the work of Evgeny Orlov (pp. 35–38).
Part two. Alexander Nevsky: personality and deeds. Materials of the scientific-practical conference. Leningrad. December 6, 1989 Martyugov G.M. Memorial of the Neva battle in Ust-Izhora (p. 40). Appeal to compatriots in connection with the 750th anniversary of the Battle of the Neva (pp. 41–42). Begunov Yu.K. Alexander Nevsky and Modernity (pp. 42–48). Kirpichnikov A.N. 750th anniversary of the Neva battle and its historical meaning(S. 48–55). Lebedev G.S. Crusades of the Swedes in Finland, Ingria and Karelia - the chapter of the prehistory of St. Petersburg (pp. 55–61). Shaskolye cius I. P. Battle on the Neva (on the occasion of the 750th anniversary) (S. 61–69). Ziborov V.K. Monuments of ancient Russian writing - the main source of our knowledge about the era of Alexander Nevsky (p. 69–73). Gumilyov L.N. Alexander Nevsky and Eastern Christianity (pp. 73–78). Degtyarev A.Ya. Can't you change the location of the battle? (S. 78–82). Rozov A.A. Memorial Complex"Battle of the Neva" (S. 83-85). Begunov Yu.K., Sapunov B.V. The history of the relics and cancer of the holy noble Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky (S. 85–90). Applications. Comp. Yu.K. Runners. The Tale of the Battle on the Neva from the Life of Alexander Nevsky, First Edition. 1280s. Reconstruction text. Annalistic story about the battle on the Neva. From the Synodal list of the XIV century of the Novgorod 1st chronicle of the senior version. memory tree. A. Maikov. In Gorodets in 1263. Chronology of the life and work of Alexander Nevsky. Brief bibliography (pp. 91-109).
Kozachenko A.I. Battle on the Ice. M., 1938. The same / / People-heroes. IX-XIII centuries M., 1948. S. 73–98.
Kolotilova S.I. Russian sources of the XIII century about Alexander Nevsky // Historical sciences. Scientific notes of the State Pedagogical Institute. A. I. Herzen. No. 502. Pskov, 1971. S. 99-107.
Colucci M. The original edition of the Life of Alexander Nevsky: notes on the history of the text // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. SPb., 1997. V. 50. S. 252–260. Reviewer: Begunov Yu.K. Falsification of Professor Colucci // St. Alexander Nevsky. Ust-Izhora, 1999, pp. 95–97.
Komarovich V.L. The Tale of Alexander Nevsky // History of Russian Literature. T. 2. Part I. M.; L., 1946. Ch. eleven.
Kosminsky E.A. Battle on the Ice // Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences. M., 1942. No. 4. S. 89–95.
Kostomarov N.I. History of Novgorod, Pskov and Vyatka. SPb., 1868. T. 1.
Kostomarov N.I. Prince Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky // Kostomarov N.I. Russian history in the biographies of its main figures. Issue. I. St. Petersburg, 1873, pp. 153–170.
Kostomarov N.I. The Beginning of Autocracy in Ancient Rus'//Bulletin of Europe. SPb., 1876. No. 11–12.
Kotsyubinsky D. The historical flesh of St. Alexander Nevsky // Rush hour. SPb., 1997. 19.02. No. 24 (753). P. 14. Responses: Ya Kovlev O.A. Alexander Nevsky is a national hero. It's hard to argue with this // Rush hour. SPb., 1997. 26.03. Vernadsky S. The historical flesh of Alexander Nevsky // Rush hour. SPb., 1997. 2.04. No. 47 (776). S. 12.
Brief biographies of Russian saints, compiled by Archimandrite Ignatius. SPb., 1875.
Krivosheev Yu.V. Mongols in Novgorod in 1257–1259 // Petersburg Readings-97. Petersburg and Russia. Materials of the Encyclopedic Library "St. Petersburg-2003". SPb., 1997.
Krivosheev Yu.V. Rus' and the Mongols. Research on the history of North-Eastern Rus' X1I-XIV centuries. St. Petersburg, 1999, pp. 140, 159, 162, 166, 170–171, 174–175, 178, 187–189, 192, 196–199, 203, 236–237, 240, 246, 310, 317, 331 , 348, 373, 376, 379, 384.
Krivosheev Yu.V. "Tamgy" and "Tuska": to the events of 1257-1259. in Novgorod // Past of Novgorod and the Novgorod land. Abstracts of reports and reports of the scientific conference November 12–14, 1996, Novgorod, 1996.
Krotkov S. The Battle of the Neva and the Battle of the Ice. M., 1897.
Kuznetsova I.M. The artistic value of "The Life of Alexander Nevsky" // Abstracts of the X Conference of the Moscow City Pedagogical Institute. Moscow, May 25–27, 1967. Moscow, 1967, pp. 36–38.
Kuzmin A.G. Alexander Nevsky // Great statesmen of Russia. M., 1996.
Kuchkin V.A. Alexander Nevsky - statesman and commander of Medieval Rus' // Domestic History. M., 1996. No. 5. S. 18–33. The same // Alexander Nevsky and the history of Russia. Materials of the scientific-practical conference September 26–28, 1995. Novgorod, 1996, pp. 3–28.
Kuchkin V. A. To the biography of Alexander Nevsky // The most ancient states on the territory of the USSR. 1985. M., 1986. S. 71–80.
Kuchkin V.A. The Mongol-Tatar yoke in the coverage of ancient Russian scribes (XIII - the first quarter of the XIV century) // Russian culture in the conditions of foreign invasions and wars. X - the beginning of the XX century. M., 1990. Issue. I. S. 36–39.
Kuchkin V.A. On the date of birth of Alexander Nevsky // Questions of history. M., 1986. No. 2. S. 174–176.
Kuchkin V.A. Rus' under the yoke of the Tatar-Mongols. How it was? M., 1995.
Kuchkin V.A. Difficult years of Alexander Nevsky // Eastern Europe in antiquity and the Middle Ages. Ancient Rus' in the system of ethnopolitical and cultural ties. Memory Readings… V. T. Pashuto. Abstracts of reports. M., 1994.
Kuchkin V.A. Formation of the state territory of North-Eastern Rus' in the X-XIV centuries. M., 1984.
Battle on the Ice in 1242. Proceedings of a comprehensive expedition to clarify the location of the Battle of the Ice. M.; L., 1966. 254 p. (AN USSR. Institute of Archeology).
Lerberg A.Kh. Studies that serve to explain ancient Russian history. SPb., 1819. S. 125–126.
Limonov Yu.A. Vladimir-Suzdal Rus. L., 1987.
Lipitsky S.V. Battle on the Ice. M., 1964.
Likhachev D.S. Galician literary tradition in the Life of Alexander Nevsky // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. M.; L., 1947. T. V. S. 49–52.
Lukovsky I.V. Alexander Nevskiy. 1220–1263. L., 1942.
Lurie A.Ya. Alexander Nevskiy. M., 1939.
Lurie Ya.S. Criticism of the source and the likelihood of news // Culture of Ancient Rus'. M., 1966. S. 123–125.
Lurie Ya.S. Ancient Russia and New Russia (selected). SPb., 1997.
Mavrodin V.V. Battle on the Ice. M., 1941.
Madorsky A. Russian chronograph. All Orthodox Russia from Rurik to Nicholas H. M., 1999, pp. 103–117.
Macarius (Bulgakov), Met. History of the Russian Church. St. Petersburg, 1886, vol. 5, pp. 147–150; T. 7. St. Petersburg, 1891, pp. 438–439, 442–443.
Maksimov V. Holy Warrior Alexander // Soviet Russia. M., 2000. 1.06. No. 62(11957). S. 5.
Malinina G. The history of the Novgorod land in ancient Russian singing art // Musical culture of the Middle Ages. M., 1990.
Malyshev V.I. Life of Alexander Nevsky (according to the manuscript of the middle of the 16th century Grebenshchikovskaya Old Believer community in Riga) // Proceedings of the Department of Old Russian Literature. M.; L., 1947. T. V. C. 185–193.
Mansikka V.I. Life of Alexander Nevsky. Analysis of editions and text. Monuments of ancient writing and art. T.CLXXX. SPb., 1913. 137 p. Reviewer: Bugoslavsky SP. To the question of the original text of the Life of the Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky // Proceedings of the Department of the Russian Language and Literature imp. Academy of Sciences. SPb., 1914. T. XIX. No. 1. S. 261–290.
Martyshin O.V. Volny Novgorod. M., 1992.
Matuzova V.I., Pashuto V.T. Message of Pope Innocent IV to Prince Alexander Nevsky // Studia historica in honorem Hans Kruus. Tallinn, 1971, pp. 136–138.
Makhnach V. Essays on the Orthodox Tradition. M., 2000. S. 5–8.
Mayasova H.A. Two works of artistic sewing of the 17th century. // Communications of the Zagorsk State Historical and Artistic Museum-Reserve. Zagorsk, 1958. No. 2, pp. 39–42.
Melnikov-Pechersky P.I. Historical notes. Where did St. Alexander Nevsky? // Melnikov-Pechersky P.I. Sobr. op. 2nd ed. SPb., 1909. T. VII.
Moiseeva G.N. New list stories about Alexander Nevsky / / Russian literature. L., 1964. No. 1. S. 87–97.
Moskvitina O.N. Alexander Nevsky in the mirror of the latest English historiography // Criticism of the concepts of modern bourgeois historiography. Issue. 2. L., 1987.
Nasonov A.N. Mongols and Rus' (history of the Tatar policy in Rus'). M.; L., 1940. S. 47–49.
Nekrasov V. Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky // Journal of the Moscow Patriarchy. M., 1963. August. pp. 56–62.
Orlov A.S. Alexander Nevsky in medieval literature // Bulletin of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. M., 1942. No. 4. S. 72–79.
Orlov A.S. Heroic themes of ancient Russian literature // Anniversary session of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Moscow, June 15 - July 3, 1945 M.; L., 1947. T. 2. S. 710. The same: Otd. ed: M.; L., 1947. 143 p. (AN USSR. Popular science series).
Orlov A.S. Old Russian literature. M.; L., 1937. 2nd ed. M.; L., 1945.
Okhotnikova V.I. The Tale of the Life of Alexander Nevsky // Dictionary of scribes and bookishness of Ancient Rus'. Issue. I (XI - the first half of the XIV century) / Responsible. ed. D. S. Likhachev. L., 1987. S. 354–363.
Okhotnikova V.I. The story of Dovmont and princely biographies // Source study of the literature of Ancient Rus'. L., 1980. S. 115–128.
Essays on the history of the USSR. IX-XIII centuries M., 1953. S. 845–852.
Pavlov A. Description of the Holy Trinity Alexander Nevsky Lavra with chronological lists of persons buried in the churches and cemeteries of the Lavra. St. Petersburg, 1842, pp. 13–17.
Paklar E.K. Where did the Battle of the Ice take place? // Historical notes. M., 1951. No. 37. S. 304–316.
parabellum. Military-historical review. SPb., 1998. June-July. #4–6. Contents: No. 4. To the 756th anniversary of the Battle on the Ice. Reconstruction of the armor of Russian and order soldiers. Reconstruction by A.I. Ivanov and P.A. Vasin. Drawing and commentary by P. A. Vasin. Cover. pp. 188–190. Vasin P. A. Fracture during the battle. pp. 20–23. No. 5. Heavy boyar cavalry. (Senior squad.) Rus', 1220-1270. Reconstruction by A. I. Ivanov and P. A. Vasin, artist P. A. Vasin. pp. 18–19. No. 6. Vasin P. A. Auxiliary troops - archers, light cavalry. Rus', 1200–1250. pp. 12–15.
Pashkov B.G. Rus. Russia. Russian empire. Chronicle of reigns and events. 862-1917. Ed. 2. M., 1997. S. 97–100.
Pashuto V.T. Alexander Nevsky // Scientific Notes of Leningradsky state university. L., 1939. No. 36, pp. 62–84.
Pashuto V.T. Alexander Nevskiy. Series "Life of Remarkable People". No. 10 (542). M., 1974. 2nd ed. 1975. 3rd ed. M.; Yekaterinburg, 1995.
Pashuto V.T. Alexander Nevsky and the struggle of the Russian people for independence in the 13th century. M., 1951.
Pashuto V.T. Foreign policy of Ancient Rus'. M., 1968.
Pashuto V.T. The heroic struggle of the Russian people for independence (XIII century). M., 1956.
Pashuto V.T. To disputes about the authenticity of the Life of Alexander Nevsky // History of the USSR. 1974. No. 1. S. 208–209.
Pashuto V.T. On the policy of the papal curia in Rus' (XIII century) // Questions of history. 1949. No. 5. S. 52–57.
Pashuto V.T. Formation of the Lithuanian state. M., 1959.
Pashuto V.T. Essays on the history of the USSR. IX-XIII centuries M., 1952. S. 845–852.
Pashuto V.T. Essays on the history of the USSR. XII-XIII centuries A guide for teachers. M., 1960. S. 155–156.
Pashuto V.T. Essays on the history of Galicia-Volyn Rus. M., 1980.
Pashuto V.T. Essays on the history of the USSR. The period of feudalism: IX-XV centuries. M., 1953. Part I. Ch. 5.
Pashuto V.T. Rhymed chronicle as a source for Russian history // Problems of the socio-political history of Russia and the Slavic countries. M., 1964. S. 102–108.
Transfer of the relics of the Holy Right-Believing and Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky from Vladimir to St. Petersburg // Vladimir Diocesan Gazette. Vladimir, 1868. No. 17. Part of the unofficial. pp. 843–856.
Petrov A.V. On the struggle of the “oldest” with the “lesser” and the performances of the “seditious” in Novgorod in the second half of the 13th century. // Bulletin of the Leningrad State University. Series 2. History, linguistics, literary criticism. L., 1991. Issue. 1.
Petrov P.N. The history of St. Petersburg from the founding of the city to the introduction of an elected city government for institutions about the provinces. 1703–1782 SPb., 1885.
Petrushevsky A. The legend of the holy noble Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. SPb., 1885.
Picheta V.I. Alexander Nevskiy. Tashkent, 1942.
Platonov O.A. Crown of Thorns of Russia. Holy Rus'. Discovery of Russian civilization. M., 2001. S. 27–28, 542.
Porshnev B.F. Ice battle and The World History// Reports and messages of the Faculty of History of Moscow State University. M., 1947. Issue. 5.
Podorozhny N.E. Battle on the Ice. M., 1938.
Porfiridov N.G. Ancient Novgorod. M.; L., 1947. S. 122, 130, 141.
Potemkin A.N. The great Russian commander Alexander Nevsky. Public lecture transcript. M., 1952.
Pokhlebkin V.V. Tatars and Rus'. 360 years of Rus''s relations with the Tatar states in the XIII-XVI centuries. 1238–1598 Directory. M., 2000. S. 29–31,46-47.
Orthodox Encyclopedia / Under the general editorship of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Alexy II. Russian Orthodox Church. M., 2000.
Priselkov M.D. Alexander Nevsky Lavra under Peter the Great (on the upcoming bicentenary of St. Petersburg // Wanderer. St. Petersburg, 1903. No. 4. P. 569–597. No. 5. P. 681–703. No. 6. P. 41–861. No. 7. pp. 16–30.
Pyatnov P.V. To the question of genre originality"Lives of Alexander Nevsky" // Bulletin of the Moscow State University. Philology. M., 1979. No. 1. S. 33–41.
Razin E. History of military art from ancient times to the first imperialist war of 1914–1918. Part 2. Military Art of the Medieval Feudal Society of the 6th–18th Centuries. M., 1940. S. 107–109.
Razin E.A. History of military art. T. II. Military art of the feudal period of the war. M., 1957. S. 159–161.
Razin E.A., Krupenchenko I.E., Sinelnikov P.S. History of military art. T. I. Ed. E. A. Razina. Ed. Military Academy of Armored Forces. M., 1956. S. 58–59.
Ramm B.Ya. Papacy and Rus' in the XXV centuries. Moscow, 1959, pp. 111–134.
Rapov O. M. Princely possessions in Rus' in the first half of the 13th century. M., 1977. S. 170, 184–185.
Remezov P.S. The legend of the exploits of the holy noble Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. 3rd ed. SPb., 1874.
Rogov A. I. Alexander Nevsky and the struggle of the Russian people against German feudal aggression in ancient Russian literature and art // "Drang nah Osten" and historical development countries of Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe. M., 1967. S. 32–58.
Rogov P. Tatar pogrom and holy noble Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. SPb., 1890.
Roshko G. Innocent IV and the threat of the Tatar-Mongol invasion. Pope's message to Daniel of Galicia and Alexander Nevsky // Symbol. Paris, 1988. No. 20, pp. 92–114.
Runkevich S. G. Alexander Nevsky Lavra. 1733–1913 SPb., 1913.
Rybakov B.D. Military Art // Essays on Russian Culture XHI–XVbb. Part 1. M., 1969.
Rydzevskaya E.A. Ancient Rus' and Scandinavia in the IX-XIV centuries. M., 1978.
Rykin P.O. Alexander Nevskiy. Novgorod and the system of co-government in Rus' in 1249–1252. // Past of Novgorod and Novgorod land. Novgorod, 1996.
Savich A.A. The struggle of the Russian people for their independence in the northwestern outskirts in the middle of the XIII century (1240–1242) K. Liebknecht. No. 4. Historical series. Issue. Moscow, 1939, pp. 22–26.
Sazonov S.V. The monastic name of Alexander Nevsky and the traditions of monastic naming in medieval Rus' // Communications of the Rostov Museum. Rostov, 1994. Issue. 4.
Samoilova T.E. Portrait painting cycles // Historical Bulletin. M.; Voronezh, 1999. No. 3–4. pp. 171–172.
Sakharov A.M. Battle of the Neva // Soviet Historical Encyclopedia. M., 1967. T. 10. Stlb. 92–93.
Sakharov A.N. Alexander Nevsky: Historical essay. For middle school age. M., 1998.
Sakharov A.N. The main stages of the foreign policy of Rus' since ancient times in the XV century. // History of Russia's foreign policy. Con. XV-XVII centuries M., 1999.
Holy Rus', or the All-People's History of the Great Russian State, with an indication of how it was founded, who the Russian peoples were before and where they came from. Compiled according to the sources of Kostomarov, Solovyov, Zabelin and rare works by Tatishchev, Prince Shcherbatov and ancient manuscripts. Edited by Konstantin Solovyov. M., 1898. Republished. M.: Sovremennik, 1994. S. 53–57.
Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. SPb., 1885.
Holy Blessed and Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky. Vyazniki: ed. Orthodox Brotherhood of St. Alexander Nevsky in Vladimir, 1888.
Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. Ed. Presnova. M., 1876.
Holy and faithful Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. Comp. T. A. Sokolova. M.: Novator, 1998 (series "ROSS"). 392 p., ill. Contents: A word about the destruction of the Russian land (S. 9-10). The Tale of the Life and Courage of the Blessed and Grand Duke Alexander. Translation by V. I. Okhotnikova (S. 11–18). The saga of Hakon, son of Hakon (excerpt). Translated by T. N. Jackson (pp. 19–20). Mikhail Khitrov. Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky (S. 21-213). Nikolai Karamzin. Sun of the Fatherland. From the "History of the Russian State" (p. 214-247). Apollo Mike. Victory of Alexander Nevsky over the Swedes (1240) (pp. 248–251). Nikolay Klepinin. Holy and faithful Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky (S. 252-364). George Vernadsky. Two labors of St. Alexander Nevsky (S. 365–380). His Eminence John, Metropolitan of St. Petersburg and Ladoga. Blessed is the husband (Holy Blessed Prince Alexander Nevsky) (S. 381–387). Events from the life of St. Alexandra (p. 388).
Saint Alexander Nevsky. Collection of articles for the 760th anniversary of the Battle of the Neva, executing in 2000 / Compiled by A.M. Sush co. Rep. ed. Yu. K. Begunov. Ust-Izhora, 1999. 99 p. Contents: Begunov Yu.K. Saint Alexander Nevsky (S. 3-5). Begunov Yu.K. The choice of Alexander Nevsky and the significance of the Choice for the fate of Russian statehood and civilization (pp. 6-17). Levintov A. I. The Battle of the Neva (S. 18–24) Titov S. The battle of knightly times (once again about the Battle of the Ice) (S. 25–44). Sapunov B. V. Rak Alexander Nevsky (p. 45–49). Sushko A.M. How do I see the future of Ust-Izhora (Museum and park zone) (pp. 50–53). Sorokin P.E. Ust-Izhora. The program for the creation of a museum-reserve (pp. 54–67). Sokolov P.A. Alexander Nevsky, Battle of the Neva, Battle on the Ice: a panorama of opinions (pp. 68–83). Begunov Yu.K. Chronology of the life and work of Alexander Nevsky (pp. 84–94). Begunov Yu.K. The Falsification of Professor Colucci (pp. 95–97). Genealogy of Alexander Nevsky (p. 98).
Saint Alexander Nevsky // Niva. SPb., 1870. No. 9.
Seleznev A.A. Way to Alexander Nevsky // Cultural Heritage of the Russian State. Issue. 3. St. Petersburg, 2002, pp. 284–289.
Seregina N.S. The final concert of the Year of Alexander Nevsky. Annotation for the concert on December 6, 1990. The Great Hall of the Leningrad Philharmonic. L., 1990.
Seregina N.S. Chants to Russian saints. Based on materials from the manuscript singing book of the 11th–19th centuries. Stihirar monthly. SPb., 1994, pp. 179–188, 278–279, 376–383.
Seregina N.S. Stichera to Alexander Nevsky // Musica antigua. Bydgoszcz, 1985, vol. 7, pp. 695–706.
The legend of the exploits and life of St. Alexander Nevsky. Remarks by Archimandrite Leonid and the text of the Life. Monuments of ancient writing and art. T. XXXVI. SPb., 1867.
A historical dictionary about the saints glorified in the Russian Church, and about some ascetics of piety, locally revered. SPb., 1862. Republished. M., 1990. S. 9–12.
Sokolov Yu.F. For the Russian land! (To the 770th anniversary of the birth of Alexander Nevsky). M., 1990.
Soloviev S.M. History of Russia since ancient times. SPB., 1853. T. 3. S. 186.
Soloviev S.M. On the attitude of Novgorod to the great princes. M., 1846.
Soloviev S.M. Pskov and Livonia // Moscow collection. M., 1982.
Sorokin P.E. Pages of the history of the Izhora land. Ust-Izhora, 1993.
Stasov V.V. Sewn veil with the image of St. Alexander Nevsky 1613 // Izvestiya imp. Archaeological Society. SPb., 1864. No. 4. S. 74–76.
The pillar is the warrior of the Earth and the Russian Church, the holy noble Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. Life, deeds and miracles of the right-believing prince and his purple-born associates: Vasily, Konstantin, Theodore, David and Konstantin the miracle workers of Yaroslavl. M., 1901. Reissue: Mytishchi, b. G.
Pages of the combat past: Essays on the military history of Russia. M., 1968.
Strokov A.A. Military art of Alexander Nevsky // About early stages development of Russian military art. M., 1951. S. 92–100.
Strokov A.A. History of military art. M. 1955. T. I. S. 254–267.
Strokov A.A. General course of military art. M, 1951.
Strokov A.A. The defeat of the German "dog-knights" on the ice of Lake Peipus in 1242 // Novgorod Historical Collection. Novgorod, 1938. Issue. 3–4. pp. 3–23.
Sutt N.I. Alexander Nevskiy. Yaroslavl, 1940.
Sushko A. Ust-Izhora. SPb., 2001.
Tatar-Mongols in Asia and Europe. Ed. S. G. Tikhvinsky. M., 1970.
Tatishchev V.N. Russian history. M.; L., 1994. T. 5.
Telpukhovsky B.S. Battle on the Ice // Military Bulletin. M., 1946. No. 5–6. pp. 43–46.
Telpukhovsky B.S. Neva battle // Military Bulletin. M., 1946. No. 13.
Terekhov V.P. Alexander Nevskiy. M., 1990. 15 p.
Tikhomirov M.N. The struggle of the Russian people against the German interventionists in the XII-XV centuries. Moscow, 1942, pp. 30–34.
Tikhomirov M.N. The struggle of the Russian people against German aggression (XII-XIII centuries) // Znamya. M., 1939. No. 3. S. 220–229.
Tikhomirov M.N. On the place of the Battle of the Ice // Izvestia of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. History and Philosophy Series. M., 1950. T. VII. No. 1, pp. 88–91.
Tikhomirov M.N. Battle on the Neva // Military History Journal. M., 1940. No. 7. S. 96–102.
Tolstoy M.V. History of the Russian Church. Stories from the history of the Russian church. SPb., 1887. The same: ed. Spaso-Preobrazhensky Valaam Monastery. M., 1991. Book. 1, ch. 7; Book. 2, ch. 1.
Trepavlov V. V. State structure of the Mongolian Empire. 13th century M., 1993. S. 79–81.
Trubnikov G. That we should build a temple. Chronicle. SPb., 2001.
Trusman Yu.I. On the site of the Battle of the Ice in 1242 // Journal of the Ministry of National Education. SPb., 1884. No. 1. S. 44–46.
Tumansky F. Contemplation of the Glorious Life of the Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky. I dedicate to His Imperial Highness Grand Duke Alexander Pavlovich. SPb., 1789.
Ustryalov N.G. Russian history. Part 1. St. Petersburg, 1837.
Fedotov G.P. Alexander Nevsky and Karl Marx // New Russia. Paris, 1937. 21.02. No. 22, pp. 9–10.
Fedotov G.P. Saints of Ancient Rus' (X-XVII centuries). 4th ed. Paris: YMCA-Press, 1989. pp. 30–31, 83–85, 88, 93. See also ed. 1931 and 1959, 1990
Fennell D. The Crisis of Medieval Rus'. 1200–1304. Translation from English. Introductory article and general edition by A. L. Khoroshkevich and A. I. Pliguzov. M., 1989.
Philaret (Gumilev), archbishop. History of the Russian Church in five periods. M., 1988. T. 1. Republished: M., 2001.
Filaret (Gumilevsky), archbishop. Russian saints honored by all Russia or locally. November. SPb., 1852.
Florov V., Yakovlev O. Alexander Nevsky - defender of the Russian land. L., 1991.
Khilkov A.Ya., prince. The core of Russian history. SPb., 1768 (
Khitrov M.I. Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky. Detailed biography with drawings, plans and maps. M., 1893. Republished: M., 1991. The same title: Khitrov M.I. Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. SPb., 1992.
Khmyrev M.D. Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky. SPb., 1871.
Kholodny G. M. The life and work of the Grand Duke Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky in connection with the events in Rus' in the XIII century. Tambov, 1883.
Khoroshev A.S. Political history Russian canonization (XI-XVI centuries). M., 1986.
Khrushchov I.P. Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. SPb., 1903.
Chukaeva V.A. Russian principalities and the Golden Horde. 1243–1350. Dnepropetrovsk, 1998.
Chuluun Dalai. Mongolia in the XIII-XIV centuries. M., 1983.
Shaskolsky I.P. Struggle of Alexander Nevsky against Crusader aggression in the late 40s-50s // Historical Notes. M., 1953. No. 43. S. 182–200.
Shaskolsky I.P. Struggle of Novgorod with Sweden before the Battle of Neva // Military History Journal. M., 1940. No. 7. S. 90–95.
Shaskolsky I.P. Struggle of Rus' against crusader aggression on the shores of the Baltic in the XII-XIII centuries. L., 1978.
Shaskolsky I.P. The struggle of the Russian people for the Neva banks. M., 1940.
Shaskolsky I.P. The struggle of the Swedish crusaders against Finland (XII-XIV centuries) // Historical magazine. M., 1940. No. 4–5.
Shaskolsky I.P. Yem and Novgorod in the XI-XIII centuries.// Uchenye zapiski Leningradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Series of historical sciences. Issue. 10. L., 1941. S. 93–115.
Shaskolsky I.P. Battle of the Neva (to the 750th anniversary) // Eastern Europe in antiquity and the Middle Ages. Problems of source study. Readings in memory of Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences V. T. Pashuto. Moscow, April 18–20, 1990. M., 1990.
Shaskolsky I.P. New materials about the Swedish campaign of 1240 against Rus' // Izvestiya AN SSSR. History and Philosophy Series. M., 1951. No. 3. S. 267–276.
Shaskolsky I.P. Papal curia - organizer of aggression in 1240–1242 // Historical notes. M., 1951. T. 37. S. 169–188.
Shataev V.G. Life and deeds of the holy noble and Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. SPb., 1866.
Shiropaev A. Prison of the people. Russian view of Russia. Moscow, 2001, pp. 11–13.
Shishov A.V. Alexander Nevskiy. Rostov-on-Don, 1999.
Shishov A.V. Russian princes. Rostov-on-Don, 1999, pp. 217–272.
Shlyapkin I.A. Iconography of the Holy and Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky. SPb., 1915.
Instance A.B. Great and appanage princes of Northern Rus' in the Tatar period from 1238 to 1505. St. Petersburg, 1889. T. 1. Reprinted: M., 1998.
Engelman A. Chronological research in the field of Russian and Livonian history in the XIII and XIV centuries. SPb., 1858.
Yakovlev A.I. The defeat of the German knight dogs in the XIII century. Alexander Nevskiy. From a series of lectures on the history of the USSR. M., 1944.
Yanin V.L. To the chronology and topography of the Horde campaign against Novgorod in 1238 // Studies in the history and historiography of feudalism: On the 100th anniversary of the birth of Academician B. D. Grekov. M., 1982.
Yanin V.L. Novgorod feudal patrimony. M., 1981.
Yanin V.L. Novgorod posadniks. M., 1962.
Yanin V.L. Essays on the Comprehensive Source Studies of Medieval Novgorod. M., 1977.
Yanin VL Problems of the social organization of the Novgorod Republic // History of the USSR. M., 1970. No. 1.
Yanin VL Socio-political structure of Novgorod in the light of archaeological research // Novgorod Historical Collection. L., 1982. Issue. I (II).
Yanin V.L. The Church of Boris and Gleb in the Novgorod Detinets (about the Novgorod source of "The Life of Alexander Nevsky") // Culture of Medieval Rus'. To the 70th anniversary of M.K. Karger. L., 1974. S. 92–93.
Yaroshevsky E. Alexander Nevsky. Novosibirsk, 1942.
FICTION
Alexander Nevskiy. Collection… N. Chmyrev. Alexander Nevskiy. V. Klepikov. Alexander Nevskiy. Historical novels. Moscow: New school, 1996.
Belov V.I. Alexander Nevsky. Play//Soviet dramaturgy. M., 1988. No. 1. S. 112–152.
Grigoriev 3. About the film "Alexander Nevsky". M., 1938. 32 p., illustration.
Makarikhin V.P. Knight of Northern Rus'. The story of Alexander Nevsky. M., 1993.
Mosiyash S.P. Alexander Nevskiy. Trilogy. L.: Detlit, 1982. 272 p. Republished: Chisinau: Literature Artistike, 1888. 416 p. ill. M., 1993, 1994.
Naumov N. Alexander Nevsky. 1220–1263. Screenplay. M., 1993.
Nepiev I. V. [Cantata] "Alexander Nevsky" by Prokofiev. M. 1968. 50 p.
Pavlenko P.A., Eisenstein S.M. Alexander Nevskiy. Screenplay. M .: Goskinoizdat, 1938. The same / / Banner. M., 1937. No. 12. The same: Pavlenko P.A. Alexander Nevskiy. Film story // Pavlenko P.A. Sobr. op. in six volumes. M., 1954. T. 4. S. 225; Eisenstein S.M. Selected articles. M., 1955. Responses: Tikhomirov M.N. A mockery of history (About the scenario "Rus") // Historian-Marxist. M., 1938. No. 2. Literary newspaper. M., 1938. 26.04. No. 23 (730) (answer to P. Evstafiev).
Sayanov V. The Life of Alexander Nevsky // Heroic Poetry of Ancient Rus'. L., 1944. From 81–92.
Subbotin A.A. For the Russian land! A novel about Alexander Nevsky. M., 1957; 1963; 1988.
Tikhomirov O.N. On guard of Rus'. A word about the campaigns of Alexander Nevsky. M., 1982. P. 4-33.
1240. Poem // Kolpinsky interest. Kolpino, 1994. 9-16.09. No. 37 (80). S. 5.
Khokhlenko Yu. The Legend of Pushkin's Ancestors. M., 2000.
Yugov A.K. Fighters. Daniel Galitsky. Alexander Nevsky // Collected. op. A. K. Yugova. M., 1985. Vol. 3. The novel was published in 1949, 1956, 1962, 1972, 1978, 1983, 1986.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexander Nevsky: index of literature. (To the 750th anniversary of the Battle of the Neva.) Compiled by E. G. Vinogradova. L., 1990.
Brief bibliography. Compiled by Yu. K. Begunov // Prince Alexander Nevsky. Proceedings of scientific and practical conferences in 1989 and 1994. SPb., 1995. S. 106–108.
Soldiers. Alexander Nevsky and Daniil Galitsky. Recommended index. Compiled by M. M. Znamensky. M., 1991.
V. A. Kuchkiy
A huge thickness of years separates us from the era of Alexander Nevsky. The famous prince is better known to people of the 20th century from historical novels, fictionalized biographies, paintings by Henrik Semiradsky, Nicholas Roerich, Pavel Korin, and a film by Sergei Eisenstein. However, complete scientific biography Alexander Nevsky has not yet been written. And it is difficult to write it.1 The fact is that very little evidence of Alexander's activity has survived, and his posthumous characteristics suffer from annoying laconicism, incompleteness, or even just various kinds of inaccuracies and errors. It would seem a simple question - who was the mother of Alexander Nevsky. In the Life of the Prince, compiled by his contemporary, a monk of the Vladimir Nativity Monastery around 1264, but not in 1282-83, as is stated in most modern publications and studies,2 the birth of Alexander seems to be said clearly: the father of a merciful and lover of man, and even more meek, the great prince Yaroslav, and from mother Theodosius. However, nothing is reported about the origin of Theodosius. In Russian historical science For a long time it was recognized that Theodosius was the daughter of Prince Mstislav Mstislavich Udatny of Toropets, that is, Lucky, who later was a Novgorod prince for a long time, then reigned in Galich and became famous as a brave and talented commander. However, in 1908, N. A. Baumgarten, a prominent specialist in the field of princely genealogy, published an article in which he argued that Theodosia was the daughter of the Ryazan prince Igor Glebovich, who died back in 1195. According to N. A. Baumgarten, Theodosia became the third wife father of Alexander Nevsky Pereyaslavsky (Pereyaslavl Zalessky) Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich and the mother of all his children / This point of view was shared by historians for several decades, who trusted the authority of the author more than the system of his evidence.6 And the system turned out to be flawed- In fact, no sources do not indicate the birth of daughters in the family of Igor Glebovich Ryazan. There were sons, as many as five, but there were no daughters. According to N. A. Baumgarten, Theodosia married Yaroslav in 1218, that is, when she was at least 23 years old. For the Middle Ages, this is the age of an overripe girl, since girls were usually given in marriage when they were 12-17 years old. It is also known that the wife of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, the mother of his sons, willingly stayed with her husband in Novgorod, lived for a long time! there alone, she took the haircut in the Yuriev Monastery, died there and was buried there. She showed no interest in Ryazan. At the same time, her daughter-in-law (Yatrov), the wife of Prince Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich, a Murom princess, having decided to become a nun, went to the monastery in her homeland in Murom “to the brothers.” that she "was not a Ryazan princess, but was the daughter of Prince Mstislav Mstislavich. Her baptismal name was Theodosia, in everyday life she was called the pagan name Rostislav. It was Rostislav-Feodosia who became the mother of all the sons of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich). 8
The Pereyaslav prince had nine of them. The chronicles preserved the news of the births of only the first and last sons of Prince Yaroslav. When the other seven were born is unknown. The ninth son of Yaroslav, Vasily, was born in 1241.9 And the news of the birth of the first-born in the family of Yaroslav and Rostislava concludes in the Laurentian Chronicle an article of 6727: “The son of Yaroslav was born the same summer and called his name Theodore.”10 6727 year of the chronicle, calculated from t n. the creation of the world, which, according to the Bible, took place 5508 years before the birth of Christ, March. "The chronicle article, marked this year, describes the events that occurred in March - December 1219 and January - February 1220. His name is little Fedor Yaroslavich could receive either in honor of Fyodor Stratilat, or in honor of Fyodor Tyrone.The memory of these two most revered Fedorovs in Russia was celebrated on February 8 (Fyodor Stratilat) and February 17 (Fedor Tiron), in other words, Fedor Yaroslaich should have been born in February. with the place of his birth in the article of the Laurentian Chronicle of 6727. It is the last one there and should describe the events of January-February 1220. Thus, we can firmly say that the elder brother of Alexander Nevsky was born in February 1220. And although in In 1995, the public of our country celebrated the 775th anniversary of the birth of Alexander Nevsky, he could not have been born in 1220. When was Alexander born?
The oldest surviving murals of the sons of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich indicate Alexander either in the first place as the eldest son, or in the second place. It all depends on the nature of the murals themselves. If they record in general all the sons born to Yaroslav, then they indicate Alexander in second place.12 In the first place, of course, Fedor. If the paintings speak of the sons of Yaroslav, who survived after the conquest of the Russian lands by Batu, then! they place Alexander first,13 which is also true: Fedor died before the Mongol invasion. Based on the testimony of the oldest lists of the sons of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, it should be recognized that Alexander was his second son. Since the eldest son of Yaroslav Fedor, as independently actor for the first time in the annals it is mentioned together with Alexander, one can think that there was not a big age difference between the brothers, for example, at 3-4 years. Alexander was born, most likely, the next summer after Fedor.
The surviving seals of Alexander Nevsky on the front side have an image of a mounted or foot soldier, accompanied by the inscription "Alexander", and on the reverse side - also a warrior and the inscription "Fedor". On the front side of the seals, the heavenly patron of Prince Alexander was depicted, on the reverse - his father, who was baptized Fyodor in honor of Fyodor Stratilat.14 In honor of which Alexander the warrior did the parents of the future winner of the Battle of Neva name? At one time, NP Likhachev expressed the idea that in honor of Alexander of Egypt. VL Yanin will not support this conjecture, leaving the question open. Indeed, the solution proposed by N.P. Likhachev raises an objection. In ancient (before the 13th century) Byzantine and Slavic minologies, 21 Saint Alexanders are mentioned, but only four of them were warriors. Alexander of Egypt was commemorated on July 9, along with two other saints: Patermuth and Kopriy, whose memory was celebrated on that day in the first place - on September 28, the memory of another soldier Alexander was celebrated, but together with 30 other saints. Nevsky's parents could hardly name their son Alexander after the name of the sheep, who was celebrated along with other saints and was not even the main one among them. Moreover, in the princely name-book of pre-Mongolian Rus', the name Alexander was very! rare, his stretcher is only three Rurikovich. Obviously, Alexander Yaroslavich got his name from that Alexander the warrior, whose memory was specially noted. Two more saints may be named here. On June 10, the memory of a warrior was celebrated! Alexander and the virgin Antonina, and on May 13 - the memory of the warrior Alexander of Rome. The celebration of the latter was much more widespread. A contemporary of Nevsky noted that in 1243 there was a sign that occurred in May "in memory of the holy martyr Alexander"
I meant Alexander of Rome. Obviously, of the two possible heavenly patrons of Alexander Nevsky, Alexander of Rome should be preferred. And in this case, the time of birth of Alexander Nevsky should be May 13, 1221,16 and anniversary date appearance on. the light of an outstanding figure of the 13th century should be celebrated in 1996.
The first indirect chronicle information about Alexander dates back to 1223. Under this year, the Novgorod chronicle reports: “Prince Yaroslav went with the princess and children to Pereyasall.”17 Among these children of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, most likely, was Alexander.
The first direct mention of Alexander dates back to 1228. Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, who continued to rule in Novgorod, at the end of the summer of 1228 left the city for his Pereyaslavl, leaving in Novgorod “his 2 sons, Theodore and Alksandr, with Fedorom Danilovitsem, with tiunom Yaki-mom »-18 8-year-old Fyodor and 7-year-old Alexander were left as their father's deputies, but in fact they had to act on the prompts of the Yaroslavl boyars - Fyodor Danilovich and Tiun Yakim. The reign of little prince Alexander, together with his brother, did not last long. Already on February 20, 1229, the Yaroslavichi fled from Novgorod, fearing the unrest that had begun in the city.19
However, in January 1231, Yaroslav again left his two eldest sons in Novgorod as governors. They replaced their father during his absences from Novgorod in 11 Oreyaslavl.20
In the summer of 1233, during the preparations for the wedding, 13-year-old Fyodor Yaroslavich unexpectedly died.21 Now Alexander has become! eldest among his brothers
In 1236 Alexander's father! Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, taking advantage of the fact that a fierce struggle flared up for Kiev between the South Russian princes, in which the Kievans themselves suffered the most, left Novgorod and, with the help of the Novgorodians, settled in Kiev.22 But Yaroslav did not want to lose control over Novgorod either. Instead of himself, he left his eldest son Alexander on the Novgorod table. Tom was already 15 years old, according to the ideas of those times, he was already sleeping as an adult, he had experience of ruling in Novgorod, but now he could reign quite independently, not always listening to the advice of his father's boyars. In the very first years of his rule in Novgorod, Alexander had to face a number of serious problems.
These problems concerned Novgorod's relations with its western neighbors. On the northwestern borders, Novgorod and the prince who ruled in it had to become althea with the Kingdom of Sweden, in the west - with the German Order of the Sword-bearers and various German bishoprics in the Baltic states, which had significant military power. The southwestern borders of Novgorod were constantly violated by the forces of the growing Lithuanian state.
Conflicts between Novgorod and Sweden began as early as the middle of the 12th century, when the Swedish kings launched an offensive against the tribes inhabiting Finland. In those days, this country! far from all was inhabited. Its southwestern part was inhabited by the Suomi tribe, which the ancient Russian people called the sum, and the Swedes and other Western European peoples called the Finns. The inner regions of southern Finland, the region of neutral Finnish lakes, were inhabited by another large Finnish tribe - Heme, or Em in Old Russian, Tavasts in Swedish. Novgorodians had long-standing contacts with the Em tribe. Gradually extending its power to the Baltic tribes of the Od, Chud-Ests, the whole (Vepsians), Izhora, Livs, Korela, the Novgorod Republic also came into contact with them. Attracting the emerging local nobility to their side, the Novgorod boyars began to subjugate them, forcing this tribe to pay tribute. True, Novgorodian rule was limited to this. There were no fortified strongholds, no religious centers from where it was possible to spread Christianity among the pagan Yemi, near Novgorod in the land of this tribe. This circumstance was used by the Swedish feudal lords when, having established their dominance over the Sum tribe, they in the 40s of the XII century. moved their actions to the inner regions of southern Finland, inhabited by Emyu. In contrast to Novgorod, Swedish expansion into Finnish lands had a slightly different character. The Swedish feudal lords were not limited to receiving tribute, they sought to gain a foothold in new lands, erecting fortresses there, subordinating the local population to the alien administration, introducing Swedish legislation, ideologically preparing and securing all this by forcibly converting tavasts to Catholicism. Initially, the city took the propaganda of the Swedish missionaries very favorably, hoping with Swedish help to get rid of the payment of tribute to Novgorod, which, in turn, caused the campaigns of the father of Alexander Nevsky Yaroslav Vsevolodovich against the city in 1226-1228, but when the Swedes began to introduce their own orders and destroy the local pagan temples, this Finnish tribe responded with an uprising."
The scale, nature and partly the time of this uprising can be judged from the bull of the famous Pope Gregory IX of December 9, 1237, addressed to the head of the Swedish Catholic Church, Uppsala Archbishop Jarler: “According to your letters that have come down to us, the people called Tavasts, who was once converted to the Catholic faith through the labor and cares of you and your predecessors, now through the efforts of the enemies of the cross, his close neighbors, is again converted to the error of the former faith and, together with some barbarians and with the help of the devil, is destroying the young planting of the church of God in Ta -vastia. The minors, to whom the light of Christ shone at baptism, they, forcibly depriving this light, mortify; some adults, having previously taken out their insides, are sacrificed to demons, while others are forced to circle around trees until they lose consciousness; some priests are blinded, while others of their number are severely interrupted by the hands and other limbs, the rest, wrapped in straw, are burned; thus, with the fury of these pagans, the Swedish dominion is overthrown, which is why the complete fall of Christianity can easily occur if the help of God and his apostolic throne is not resorted to.
But in order that God-fearing men would rise with all the more eagerness against the advancing apostates and barbarians, who thirst for the Church of God to decline with such great losses, who destroy the Catholic faith with such disgusting cruelty, we entrust the brotherhood with your apostolic epistle: wherever in the aforementioned state or there were no Catholic men in the neighboring islands, so that they would raise the banner of the cross against these apostates and barbarians and drive them out with strength and courage, on the prompting of the beneficent doctrine.”24
Of course, in the papal message, designed to be read in churches with numerous believers, the colors were thickened, but from the appeal of the pope it indisputably follows that a major uprising against Swedish domination took place in the land of Emi, that in order to suppress it, the Roman church organizes a crusade of "God-fearing men" that the Tavasts opposed the Swedes not alone, but "through the efforts of their close neighbors, ... together with some barbarians." The Sumi and Korel tribes were their immediate neighbors. If the Sumi lands had been under the rule of the Swedish crown and the influence of the Catholic Church for a long time, this tribe could not help the Yemi-tavasts, then there remains the Korela. But the Korela was part of the Novgorod state, and the intervention of the Korela meant the intervention of Novgorod, which was striving to regain its positions in the Emi lands. When did this intervention take place?
The Bull of Gregory IX was compiled on the basis of letters from the Archbishop of Uisala, which in turn were based on reports from the latter's subordinate, Bishop of Finland Thomas. The Pope received messages from the head of the Swedish Church, most likely from his legate William of Modena, who arrived in the Baltics in the summer of 1237. dad lost its meaning. And the “efforts of the enemies of the cross-., close neighbors” of the emi, directed against the penetration of the Swedes into the lands of the emi, took place somewhat earlier than the uprising, that is, approximately in 1236-1237. In other words, opposition from Novgorod to the Swedish expansion to the east fell on the beginning of Alexander Yaroslavich's reign in Novgorod. No matter how one evaluates the efforts of the Novgorod Republic aimed at maintaining its influence in the lands of Emi, it is clear that it was impossible to manage without the support and approval of these efforts from the princely authorities. The young prince made decisions, and responsible decisions.
Relations with the Baltic Germans developed differently at that time. The Germans appeared on the lands of the Eastern Baltic in the 80s. In the 12th century, at first simply preaching Christianity, and then, having made sure that the local population was difficult to Christianize, they began to back up their sermons with armed force. At the beginning of the XIII century. An associate of the Bishop of Riga, Albert Theoderich, founded the Order of the Sword-bearers in the Baltic States, which was recognized by Pope Innocent III by a bull of October 20, 1210.26 After that, through the efforts of the Sword-bearers - "monks in spirit, fighters in arms" - German possessions in the Baltic began to expand rapidly. The Order and the Bishop of Riga managed to seize lands along the lower and middle reaches of the river. The Dvins, which belonged to the Russian Principality of Polotsk or were controlled by it.27 In 1210, the knights transferred military operations to the lands of the Estonians, where there were also the possessions of Novgorod the Great. In 1224, the sword-bearers, together with the troops of the Bishop of Riga, captured the main stronghold of Novgorod in the Chud (Estonian) land - Yuryev (modern Tartu).28 The subsequent fierce struggle led in 1234 to a peace agreement between the Germans and Novgorod, beneficial for the Russian side.29 The treaty of 1234 crowned the efforts of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, who then reigned in Novgorod, to prevent the German offensive on the Novgorod and Pskov lands -
When Alexander entered the Novgorod table, the treaty of 1234 continued to operate. Neither the crusaders nor the Novgorodians took any hostile actions against each other. Written in Vladimir on the Klyazma immediately after the death of Alexander Nevsky, his Life reports Alexander's earliest contact with the Order of the Sword. A contemporary of the prince reported that at one time to Alexander “someone strong from the Western country, who are called the servants of God, from tex came, aotfl to see his wondrous growth ... in the name of Andreyash.” 30 Since the arrival of Andreyash was explained in the Life solely by the desire of the knight to look at the Russian prince, many scientists believed that the whole episode was a simple speculation of the author of the Life, who sought to glorify Nevsky in various ways. However, the contemporary of Alexander Yaroslavich, the knight Andreyash, actually existed. We should be talking about Andreas von Velven, who in 1241 held the high post of Livonian vice-master. According to the German researcher F. Be-ninghoven, Andreas von Velven was a knight of the Order of the Sword.31 In the Life, the arrival of a knight “from the Western country” is mentioned before the story of the Battle of the Neva. Consequently, Andreas' meeting with Alexander took place between 1236, when Alexander became Prince of Novgorod, and 1240, when the Battle of the Neva took place. In the period 1236-1240. the only time when the Order of the Swordsmen had to conduct important negotiations with the Prince of Novgorod was 1236. The Order was preparing a big campaign against the Lithuanians and was looking for allies. Judging by the Life of Alexander Nevsky, Andreas' arrival did not give any results. According to the author of the Life, the sword-bearer only marveled at the age of the prince, which is very significant, since in 1236 Alexander was very young, "and left home. German sources confirm that the Novgorodians did not take part in the German campaign against Lithuanian lands, but they did take part The Novgorod chronicle testifies to the latter.32 Obviously, Alexander did not support the Order with the forces of Novgorod and ciiЈfcfi squads for the reason that at that time there was already a struggle for the subjugation of the Yemi-tavasts. On the other hand, he did not prevent the Order from being helped Thus, normal relations with the Order, stipulated by the treaty of 1234, were preserved, and therefore the participation of the order’s “God-fearing men” in that crusade against the tavasts, to which, at the request of the Swedish bishops, the Pope called, was difficult. Prince Alexander turned out to be quite realistic and far-sighted.
The campaign against Lithuania, organized by the Order of the Swordsmen in 1236, ended in the most severe defeat of the German crusaders and their allies from the Lithuanian prince Vykint. In the Battle of Soule, the Master of the Order and 48 knights fell, not counting the infantry. The Order of the Sword-bearers actually ceased to exist. Its remnants in 1237 were urgently united with the Teutonic Order and subordinated to it. The Teutonic Order, founded by the German crusaders in Jerusalem in 1191, in the late 20s. 13th century by request Polish prince Konrad of Mazovia moved to the Helminsky land and began to conquer the lands of the Lithuanian Prussian tribe. After the Order of the Swordsmen merged with it, the Teutonic Order became the most powerful force of the German crusaders in the Baltics. It was with this order that Alexander Nevsky subsequently had to face.
Prince Alexander had to endure serious upheavals at the beginning of 1238. A few months earlier, the Mongol hordes fell upon the eastern Russian lands. Having taken the Ryazan and Pronsk principalities, they transferred hostilities to the possessions of the princes - the descendants of Vsevolod the Big Nest. In January-February 1238, they subjugated the Grand Duchy of Vladimir, the Principality of Pereyaslav Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, the principalities of Yuryev, Rostov, Yaroslavl and Uglitz. small river City, a tributary of the river. Mologa. He was waiting for the approach of the regiments of his brother Yaroslav, but they did not appear. But the Mongols suddenly came. In a fierce battle, they prevailed. Grand Duke Yuri was killed, Prince Vasilko of Rostov was taken prisoner, and the rest of the Russian princes fled.35 Batu transferred military operations to the territory of the Novgorod Republic. After a long siege, at the beginning of March 1238 he took Torzhok and went to Novgorod by the Seliger route. But at Ignach Krest the Mongols stopped and turned back.36 Alexander did not help either the Grand Duke Yuri, when he was in the City, or the inhabitants of Torzhok. Whether this was an independent decision of the young prince, whether the position of the Novgorodians turned out to be here, who did not want to weaken their forces in the fight against a formidable enemy on foreign territory, or these were the intentions of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, who continued to rule in Kiev, it is difficult to say. The latter seems more likely, since Yuri was waiting at the river. City "of his brother Yaroslav from the shelf",37 i.e. he had an agreement with Yaroslav, which he did not fulfill.
In the summer of 1239, Batu took the southern Pereyaslav principality, and then one of the largest ancient Russian principalities- Chernigov.38 His troops did not leave Rus', paralyzing the actions of the Russian princes who had not yet been defeated. The Lithuanians took advantage of this. In 1239 they captured Smolensk. Realizing that hostilities could easily spread to the Novgorod lands, Alexander fortified the Lithuanian border by setting up defensive towns along the river. She-loni.39 However, these fears were not justified. autumn
1239 Alexander's father Yaroslav, who became after 1beli on the river. The city of Yuri, the Grand Duke of Vladimir, drove the Lithuanians out of Smolensk40 and thus prevented their possible attack on Novgorod.
Trouble came to the people of Novgorod from the other side. In the summer of 1240, the fleet of the Swedish king Eric Lespe invaded Novgorod. The timing of the invasion was well chosen. Batu still did not leave the Russian borders, his search in the winter of 1239/1240 captured another Russian principality - Murom and devastated the great principality of Vladimir for the second time.41 Novgorodians and their prince Alexander had no one to expect serious military help from. In fact, if we analyze the composition of the princes who occupied the Novgorod table from 1136, when Novgorod achieved independence from the Kiev princes and became a republic, and until 1236, when Alexander occupied the Novgorod table, then this composition will turn out to be essentially unchanged. Only princes from Chernigov, Suzdal, Kiev and Smolensk sat on the Novgorod table.42 Obviously, only these principalities could support Novgorod militarily, and only they were able to provide financial assistance Novgorodians during crop failures and famine that often occurred at that time in the Novgorod land. But in 1240 Chernihiv Principality lay in ruins, the Suzdal land and the Smolensk principality were severely devastated, Kyiv remained untouched by Batu, but he was preparing for defense from the obvious Mongol siege. With its opponents, Novgorod remained alone against many.
The news of the appearance at the mouth of the river. The Neva of the Swedish fleet was received in Novgorod in a timely manner. Having learned about this, in Novgorod they decided that the goal of the campaign of the Swedes and the Norwegians who sailed with them, sumi and emi, is Ladoga, This has already happened in Novgorod history. In 1164, 55 Swedish augers entered the Neva, climbed along it to Lake Ladoga and reached Ladoga. True, the siege of the city for the sailing Swedish army then ended in great failure. This was described in detail by the Novgorod chroniclers. Novgorod troops, immediately marched to Ladoga. The Russian regiments were most likely cavalry and could reach Ladoga in about 3-4 days. However, the Swedes did not appear at Ladoga. The calculations of the Novgorodians and Prince Alexander turned out to be false, the enemy pursued completely different goals than in 1164. The Swedish ships stopped near the mouth of the Neva at the mouth of another river - the Izhora, the left tributary of the Neva. The stay of the Swedes in this place, and the stay for many days, is not explained in any way in sources and in the writings of subsequent historians. Only in the earliest fragment of the Life of Alexander Nevsky, preserved by the Laurentian Chronicle of the 14th century, is it reported that in his report to Alexander moving against the Swedes, the elder of the Izhora land (the Izhora tribe inhabited the banks of the Neva in those days and was subordinate to Novgorod) Pelgui-Philipp pointed to the Swedish “camps and cliffs.”44 “Clubs” are battle ditches. Obviously, the plans of the Swedes included the construction in the Izhora land in a strategically important place of the same stronghold that they built in the lands of the Sumi and Emi-tavasts. The mouth of the Neva and in later times was of strategic interest to the Swedes. In 1300 they tried to build a fortress here at the confluence of the Okhtn settlement with the Neva. built it, calling it Landskrona, but this mighty Crown of the Earth, as the Russian chronicler accurately translated the Swedish name, was completely destroyed by Russian troops the following year. to the mouth of the Neva, reinforcing his army with a detachment of Ladoga. Having received from Pelguy clarifying data on the location of the Swedish camp, having managed not to find himself, Alexander dealt an unexpected blow to the camp. It was Sunday, July 15, relatively early - half past eight in the morning according to the modern hour, 4 "when the Russian regiments fell upon the unsuspecting Swedes. Their sudden appearance caused panic among the Swedes. Some of them rushed to the ships that were standing on the left bank of the Neva, the other tried to cross to the left bank of the river. Izhora. The leader of the Swedish troops tried to resist by building the remaining ones in battle formations, but all was in vain. Constantly attacking, the Russians forced them to flee. The Vladimir biographer of Alexander Nevsky preserved vivid stories about the participants in the battle and individual combat episodes. Suffering heavy losses, the Swedes nevertheless managed to get to their ships, load the bodies of the fallen most noble warriors on them and hastily sail into the sea. The first major military clash of the young prince of Novgorod ended in his complete triumph. The Novgorod chronicler noted that on the Russian side, along with the Ladoga residents, “20 husbands ... or me (less)” fell. Rus'. 1200-1304", based on the number of those who fell from the Russian side, wrote that the Battle of the Neva was an ordinary battle and Alexander's victory in it was "small". the man is not so small. For example, during the capture of Torzhok by Batu in 1238, only 4 noble Novotorzhets were killed.50 In 1262, during the assault on the German city of Yuryev, Russian regiments lost 2 noble warriors51, etc. Of course, the Battle of the Neva was inferior in scale to the battles of Borodino or Waterloo, but for the XIII century it was a major battle, in which several thousand people participated.52 The victory on the Neva did not allow the Swedish feudal lord! corel. However, this military success was soon overshadowed by other events.
A month and a half after the battle on the Neva, the combined forces of the Teutonic Order, the Danish king, the Derpt (Yurievsky) bishop and the Russian prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich, who served the Germans, captured the Pskov border fortress of Izborsk with an unexpected blow. The Pskov army, which came to the defense of Izborsk, was defeated, its governor Gavrila Gorislavich fell in battle. The crusaders laid siege to Pskov. Not receiving help from anywhere, the Pskovites were forced to capitulate on September 16, 1240. Two German Vogts were planted in Pskov. They were supported by an influential part of the Pskov population, headed by the boyar Tverdila Ivankovich. But there were also many who were dissatisfied with the established German domination. Some of them, together with their families, fled to Novgorod.
Strange things happened there. Alexander Nevsky left Novgorod, having quarreled with the Novgorodians.54 The causes of the conflict have not been disclosed either by the chronicle or by historians. Meanwhile, they can be specified. Having expelled the Swedes from the banks of the Neva, Prince Alexander nevertheless did not prevent the capture of Pskov by German and Danish feudal lords. Naturally, this caused a sharp discontent of part of the Novgorodians and especially the Pskovites who fled to Novgorod. However, after the Neva victory, Alexander was unable to resist the aggression of new enemies. The victory over the Swedes was achieved mainly by the forces of the squad of Prince Alexander himself. No wonder the Novgorod chronicler, writing about 20 Russian men who died in the battle, noted the death of only 4 Novgorodians. The compiler of the Life of Alexander, naming the six brave men of the Nevsky battle, pointed out only two Novgorodians. The rest represented Alexander's squad, one of them was killed. It is quite obvious that the main burden of the Nevsky battle fell on the shoulders of the prince's squad and it was she who suffered the greatest losses. And with a greatly weakened squad, not receiving help from other Russian principalities, the prince-defender of the Novgorod Republic was simply unable to fulfill his duties. Mutual accusations became so sharp that Alexander was forced to leave Novgorod and go to his father in Peredelavl. The Germans immediately took advantage of this. In the winter of 1240/1241, they seized the Chud and Vodka possessions of Novgorod, built a fortress in Koporye, and, fighting Novgorod proper, approached at a distance of 30 versts from Novgorod itself.55 A direct threat arose to the city. At the same time, it turned out that the Novgorodians were not able to cope with the ever-increasing German aggression on their own. The necessity of inviting a new prince to the Novgorod table became obvious.
Novgorodians had little choice. They were forced to ask for help from the same Yaroslav Vsevolodovich. He sent them instead of Alexander another son - Andrei - But even with him, the German attacks on the Novgorod lands continued. Moreover, attacks by Estonians and Lithuanians were added to them. Then the Novgorodians decided to ask Yaroslav instead of Andrei again Alexander. The request was granted.
Alexander entered Novgorod in March 1241. He acted prudently and clearly. Having gathered all the Novgorod forces, Ladoga, Korel, Izhora, he moved to Koporye. The fortress erected by the Germans was taken and destroyed, traitors from among the Vodi and Estonians were hanged, hostages were taken, but some who supported the Germans were pardoned.67 Thus ended the year 1241.
At the beginning of 1242, Alexander received military assistance from his father. Brother Andrei came to him with the Vladimir regiments. Now it was possible to fight the actual German possessions. Alexander and Andrey invaded the Chudskaya land. Having cut off all the routes that connected the Order and the German bishoprics in the Baltic with Pskov, Alexander captured Pskov with an unexpected blow from the west.88 Now his rear was secured. Returning again to the land of the Estonians, he began to devastate it. However, the Germans had already begun to gather forces. Their troops near the town of Mooste near the river. Luts succeeded in defeating Alexander's advance detachment under the command of Domash Tverdislavich, brother of the Novgorod posadnik, and Dmitrov's governor, Grand Duke Yaroslav Vsevolodovich Kerbet.59 Domash fell in battle. This defeat forced Alexander Nevsky to retreat to Lake Peipus.
The crusaders and their auxiliary troops began to pursue the RUSSIAN regiments. Alexander deployed his army “on Uzmeni near Vorontei Kameni.”60 The Germans formed their battle formations as a “pig”, led by heavily armed knightly cavalry, and rushed to the Russian regiments. Alexander fortified the flanks of the regiments, and in front of the troops he placed archers who shot at a distance the crusading cavalry.61 However, the Germans managed to break through the line of Russian warriors. The battle took on an extremely stubborn character. In the end, the auxiliary troops of the Crusaders, recruited from the Estonians, could not stand the battle and fled. The nemi also ran after them. The victory on April 5, 1242 on the ice of Lake Peipus of the Russian regiments was complete. In the same year, the Germans sent an embassy to Novgorod, which made peace with Prince Alexander. The order renounced all its conquests of 1240-1241. in the Novgorod land, released the Pskov hostages and exchanged prisoners
The terms of this treaty were effective even in the 15th century. The Order remembered the victory of Alexander Nevsky in the Battle of the Ice for a long time.
The military talent of Alexander, so clearly manifested in the hostilities of 1240-1242, strengthened the authority of the prince in political affairs. In Novgorod, where Alexander Yaroslavich continued to reign, for many years the question of replacing him with another prince was not raised. Alexander himself accurately performed his functions as a military defender of the Novgorod Republic. When in 1245 the Lithuanians unexpectedly attacked the lands of Torzhok and Bezhetsky Verkh that belonged to Novgorod, Alexander, at the head of his squad and Novgorodians, successfully repelled this raid, and then only with his squad defeated the Lithuanians near Zhizhich and Usvyat.
For the time being, the rule in Novgorod allowed Alexander Nevsky to avoid any contact with the Mongols, who in the summer of 1242 established their power over most of the Russian principalities. However, the close connection with Vladimir Rus, where his father, uncle Svyatoslav, as well as the descendants of the elder Vsevolodovich Konstantin, ruled, made relations with the Horde inevitable. In 1245, Alexander's father, the Grand Duke of Vladimir Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, went there. The capital of the Mongol Empire was then Karakorum on the river. Orion in Mongolia. Yaroslav made a long journey, lived for some time at the court of the great Khan Guyuk, until one day Guyuk Turakin's mother invited him to her place. She gave him food and drink from her own hands, but after this reception, Yaroslav died. His strangely blue body indicated that he had been poisoned. This happened on September 30, 1246." Yaroslav's relatives had to decide which of them would become the Grand Duke of Vladimir. At the Khan's court in Karakorum, it was believed that the most authoritative (and dangerous for Karakorum) in Russia was Yaroslav's eldest son Alexander. Turakina sent to him his messengers, offering Alexander to come to the khan's court and get his father's land, at the same time hatching secret plans to kill Nevsky, but Alexander, sensing danger, did not go to Guyuk. Yaroslav's brother Svyatoslav became the Grand Duke of Vladimir, who distributed various "principalities" to Yaroslav's children. Alexander received the principality of Tver, which bordered on Novgorod, and remained prince of Novgorod.67 However, Alexander's brothers were dissatisfied with the division made by their uncle. One of the Yaroslavichs, Mikhail Khorobrit, soon drove Svyatoslav off the Vladimir table and took it himself. But he did not stay as the Grand Duke for long: in 1248 he was killed in a clash with the Lithuanians on the river. 68 Another Yaroslavich, Andrei, who was older than Mikhail, was also dissatisfied with the division, but he did not resort to force, but went to Batu in 1247 in order to take the Vladimir table with his support. Such a turn of affairs forced Alexander, who had more rights to his father's legacy than his brothers, to follow Andrei to the Horde. Batu did not independently resolve the issue of the possessions of Andrei and Alexander, but sent them to Karakorum.69 By that time, certain political changes had apparently taken place there. Baty did not get along with Khan Guyuk and his mother Turaniva, he did not go to Karakorum himself and followed with apprehension the decisions of the Great Khanyuk court regarding the Russian ulus. 70 Having apparently detained Andrei and Alexander, who had left Rus' for different time, Batu let them go to Karakorum, perhaps when Khan Gu-yuk died and Turakina lost power.71 Thus, Alexander avoided the danger that threatened him in 1246. Nevertheless, major troubles lay in wait for him in Karakorum. There, the brothers reasoned in a very peculiar way - Alexander, as the elder brother, received Kyiv and “the whole Russian land”, and Andrei received the Grand Duchy of Vladimir. 72 Outwardly, everything was decent. Formally, Alexander received more than his brother, Kyiv was considered a more significant city than Vladimir. But this was the case in pre-Mongolian times. In the 40s. 13th century Kyiv was a settlement of 200 households,73 the “Russian Land”, which was part of the Kyiv territory, was also devastated. In addition, before his death, Yaroslav Vsevolodovich reigned not in Kyiv, but in Vladimir, and the eldest son was supposed to receive his father's inheritance. However, in Karakorum they decided differently, apparently fearing the strengthening of the most authoritative prince in North-Eastern Rus'. With such a distribution of tables, the position of Andrei Yaroslavich is unclear: whether he himself sought the reign of Vladimir, and then he acted clearly against Alexander, or dutifully followed the decisions of the Mongols. The latter seems more likely
The brothers returned to Rus' at the end of 1249. Alexander spent several months in Vladimir. The chronicle reports that when the Uglich prince Vladimir Konstantinovich died in Vladimir in the winter of 1249/1250, he was mourned and escorted from the Golden Gate by “Prince Oleksandr and his brother”. In the same winter, another prince died in Vladimir - Vladimir Vsevolodovich Yaroslavsky. The funeral procession, heading from Vladimir to Yaroslavl, was accompanied by Alexander, Prince Boris of Rostov, his brother, Prince Gleb of Belozersky, and their mother. Vladimir Vsevolodovich died "in memory of St. Theodore",74 i.e. in February 1250. "Stay in Vladimir, the capital city of Andrei Yaroslavich, from the end of 1249 to February 1250, Alexander Nevsky, his brothers, princes of Uglich, Yaroslavl , Rostov, Belozersky, suggests that when the two elder Yaroslavichs returned from Karakorum1, a congress of Russian princes was convened in Vladimir, at which questions of relations with foreign authorities and the distribution of tables between the princes in the present and future were to be discussed. that there were no quarrels between the princes, Andrei did not interfere with the elder brother’s sufficiently long stay in his capital, the princes managed to agree on the division of power and their rights.Only after that, in 1250, Alexander returned to reign in Novgorod.75 His reign there continued without Only when it became known in Russia about the ascension to the Karakoram table in 1251 of the new great Khan Mengu (Munke), a protege of Batu,76 Alexander Nevsky again went to the Horde (1252). The purpose of his trip, apparently, was to obtain the Vladimir Grand Duchy. It is possible that this action was discussed in advance by Alexander with his brothers and other princes during his stay in Vladimir in 1249/1250. After his departure, Andrei and Yaroslav Yaroslavich raised an uprising against the Mongols, hoping that the change of khan in Karakorum would allow them to get rid of interference Hordes in Russian affairs. According to the chronicle, Grand Duke Andrei of Vladimir and those who supported him did not want to “serve as tsar”,77 i.e. Mengu and Batu. However, their calculations did not materialize. A supporter of Mengu, Batu, sent troops to Rus', led by Nevryuy, who crushed the uprising. Andrei fled to Sweden, Yaroslav remained in Rus'.
These events, described in various chronicles with some nuances, gave rise to historians to believe that Alexander Nevsky, having waited until his brother Andrei raised a bold uprising against foreign oppression, treacherously took advantage of the circumstances and achieved the right to the Vladimir Grand Duke's table in the Horde, sending at the same time to Rus’ Horde punitive expedition under the command of Nevryuy.78 However, the most ancient description of the events of 1252, preserved by the Lavrentiev Chronicle, says that Alexander went to Batu to obtain the rights to the Vladimir grand prince’s table before Andrei’s speech. In this case, Nevsky could act according to the old agreement with the princes about the grand prince's table, especially since his brother] Andrei received his father's inheritance from the hands of the khan's power, and not according to the old Russian norms of princely inheritance, bypassing his elder brother. Andrey, after Alexander's departure to the Horde, apparently, opposed the khans, hoping to retain the great reign of Vladimir, but he miscalculated. Even before the return of Nevsky, he fled from Rus'. Alexander, sitting on the Vladimir table, forced another troublemaker, brother Yaroslav, to exchange his Pereyaslav principality for his Tver principality. 79 By this action, Alexander further strengthened his position as the Grand Duke.
Although Andrei Yaroslavich found refuge in Sweden, which, having finally conquered the Em-tavasts in 1249, thereby got into very tense relations with Novgorod and Alexander Nevsky, who reigned there, the latter managed not to turn his brother into a sworn enemy, but to make him his ally. Alexander called Andrey to Rus', allocating to him the Suzdal principality from his Grand Duchy of Vladimir.80 In 1257, Andrei, as a sovereign prince, went with Alexander to the Horde to honor Khan Ulag-chi.
In addition to the Grand Duchy of Vladimir, Novgorod still remained under the rule of Alexander Nevsky. True, now Nevsky no longer reigned there himself, but kept his eldest son Vasily as governor. Novgorodians, free to choose princes, were dissatisfied with this circumstance. In 1255, they expelled the young prince from the city, inviting Yaroslav Yaroslavich, who had left his Tver principality, to their place from Pskov. Alexander immediately gathered the regiments and marched with them against Novgorod.
The Novgorodians also decided to fight, but things were resolved amicably. Prince Yaroslav was forced to leave the city, Vasily was returned to the Novgorod table, there was a change of posadnik, people who supported Alexander Nevsky came to rule Novgorod
This connection with the powerful prince helped Novgorod to stop the attempt of the Swedish feudal lords and, apparently, the vogt of Vironia (the region of Northern Estonia, subordinate to the Danish king) Dietrich von Kivel (Didman of the Russian chronicle) to build a stronghold on the eastern bank of the river that belonged to Novgorod. Narova.83 Based here, the Swedes and the Danish feudal lord expected to launch an offensive against Votland and Ingria, that is, the lands of the Vodi and Izhora, which were part of the Novgorod Republic. Having learned about the actions of the Swedes and Didman, the Novgorodians sent ambassadors with a request for military assistance to Vladimir to Alexander Nevsky and began to assemble their own militia. When this became known to the Swedes and von Kivel, they hastily boarded ships and fled across the sea. Alexander brought his regiments to Novgorod, but there were no more opponents. Then the prince undertook a campaign against Koporye, and from there he went to the land conquered by the Swedes 7 years before. Nevsky's campaign against this tribe in 1256, the last military campaign of the commander, took place in harsh winter conditions, but ended successfully.
Upon returning to Vladimir, Alexander Nevsky was forced to go along with other Russian princes to the Volga Horde to honor Khan Ulagchi. At the end of the same 1257, the Grand Duke of Vladimir had to deal with the Mongols once again. Officials from Karakorum arrived in Rus', who, on the orders of the Great Khan, carried out the calculation and taxation of the entire population subject to him. 86 If for the inhabitants of North-Eastern Rus' the collection of various taxes and fees by the Mongols became a matter of habit, then for Novgorod such payments were new and unpleasant. When a rumor reached the people of Novgorod that the Mongols would take tamga and tithes from them, the city became terribly excited. On the side of the Novgorodians was the son of Alexander Nevsky, Vasily, who ruled with them. Alexander was forced to help foreigners. His arrival with the clergy in Novgorod in the winter of 1257/1258 ended with the expulsion of his son Vasily from Novgorod and the cruel torture of people who inspired him to oppose the Mongols and his father. Probably, Alexander took over the administration of Novgorod, exercising his power through his own governors. Nevertheless, the prince failed to completely pacify the Novgorodians. When in the winter of 1259/1260 * g. Mongol numerals arrived in Novgorod for the second time, strong unrest began here again, which did not develop into an armed struggle only because of the intervention of Alexander. He managed, apparently, to find some kind of compromise that satisfied the people of Novgorod.
In the early 60s. 13th century The Volga Horde separated from the Mongol Empire, becoming a sovereign state.89 The discord between the Karakorum and Saransk governments was immediately taken advantage of in Rus'. In many Russian cities, uprisings took place against the imperial officials who were sitting here. Alexander Nevsky supported these speeches, sending out letters with an appeal to “beat the Totar”. In Sarai, these actions were looked at through their fingers, since it was a matter of liquidating a power structure that had turned into an alien structure. However, having become independent, the Sarai khans began to experience a lack of armed forces. Daoke during the existence of a single Mongol Empire, such a shortcoming was covered by the mobilization of the population subject to the Mongols into the Mongol troops. Sarai Khan Berke followed the beaten path. In 1262, he demanded a military recruitment among the inhabitants of Rus', since there was a threat to his possessions from the Iranian ruler Hulagu-91 Alexander Nevsky was forced to go to the Horde in order to somehow soften the requirements of the khan. Berke detained the Russian prince in the Horde for several months.92 Alexander fell ill there. Already being sick, he went to Rus'. Having hardly reached Gorodets on the Volga, the prince realized that he could not reach Vladimir. On the afternoon of November 14, 1263, he took the vows as a monk, and by the evening of the same day he died.93 After 9 days, the body of the prince was taken to capital Vladimir and, with a large gathering of people, was buried in the Nativity monastery founded by Alexander's grandfather Vsevolod Vsevolod the Big Nest.94
The life of Alexander Nevsky ended early. He was not even forty-three years old. But this life from adolescence was filled with major events, complex diplomatic negotiations, bold campaigns, decisive battles. As a commander, Alexander Nevsky is hardly equal among other princes of medieval Rus'. But he was a man of his era, whose character bizarrely combined cruelty to traitors and disobedients with the denial of an exclusive princely struggle and the desire to alleviate the situation of the people conquered by foreign conquerors. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that Alexander, unlike his grandfather, father, siblings, even his own children, never participated in bloody internecine battles. , decided the threat of the use of force, and not force itself. It is quite obvious that this was the conscious policy of Alexander Nevsky, who was well aware that in the conditions of the post-Batiev pogrom of Russian lands and foreign domination, internal wars, even in the event of a complete victory of one of the parties, can only lead to a general weakening of Rus' and the destruction of its working and military-capable population . The biographer of Alexander Nevsky, who wrote his Life, who was not only a “self-evident” of the growing up of the prince, but also an eyewitness to at least the consequences of the Mongol conquest, specifically drew attention to the fact that Nevsky, having become the Grand Duke of Vladimir, “I will raise churches, fill cities, people will dissolve -wives go home.”95 Securing the borders, maintaining the integrity of the territory, caring for its population - these are the main features! activities of Prince Alexander in this critical period of Russian history. If we say briefly about Alexander Nevsky, then we must say in the words of a chronicler of the 13th century: “work hard for Novgorod and for the whole Russian land.”96
1 Even in the recently compiled Chronicle of the Life and Work of Alexander Nevsky, where, it would seem, the latest research on the biography of the famous prince should have been taken into account, facts are given! that are not supported by the sources. So, the birth of Alexander Nevsky is attributed to May 30, 1220; the rite of princely tonsure - by 1223, the Spassky Cathedral in Pereyaslavl is indicated as the place of tonsure, although early sources do not contain such facts, but they report that Alexander's father Yaroslav spent almost the entire year 1223 in Novgorod, and without him the vows are unlikely were possible; in 1238 Alexander was not Prince of Dmitrovsky and Tver; in October 1246, he could not bury his father in Vladimir, because he died on September 30 of that year in Karakorum, from where his body could not be delivered to Vladimir in a month; there is no evidence that Alexander received Pereyaslavl, Zubtsov and Nerekhta in 1247; the second marriage of Alexander Nevsky, referred to in the "Chronicle of Life and Activities" by the autumn of 1252, is clearly unreliable, and it is not explained how Alexander married Daria, the daughter of the Ryazan prince Izyaslav Vladimirovich, who is unknown to the sources and who, if she existed in reality , should have been at least 35 years old (4 years older than her husband), etc. See: Begunov Yu. K - Chronicle of the life and work of Alexander Nevsky. // Prince Alexander Nevsky and his era. SPb., 1995, p. 206-209.
2 About the time of writing two types of the older edition of the Life of Alexander Nevsky, see: Kuchki n V. A. The Mongol-Tatar yoke in the illumination of ancient Russian scribes (XIII - first quarter of the XIV century). // Russian culture in the conditions of foreign invasions and wars. X - the beginning of the XX century. M., 1990, issue. !:, With. 36-39.
3 Beg at the new Yu.K. Monument of Russian literature of the XIII century. "A word about the destruction of the Russian land". M.-L., 1965, p. 160.
4Baumgarten N.A. To the Genealogy of the Grand Dukes of Vladimir, Mother of Alexander Nevsky. // Chronicle of the Historical and Genealogical Society in Moscow. M., 1908, no. 4 (16), p. 21-23.
5 It was accepted, in particular, by such a prominent biography researcher
Alexander Nevsky, as D. T. Pashuto - see: Pasha then V, T. Alexander Nevsky. ZhZL. M., 1974, p. 10.
6 Novgorod first chronicle of the senior and junior editions. Edited and with a preface by A. N. Nasonov. M.-L., 1950 (hereinafter - NPL), p. 61, 66, 78, 79, under 6731, 6736, 6748 and 6752
7 Complete collection of Russian chronicles (hereinafter - PSRL), vol. I, L., 1926-1928, stb. 450, under 6736
8 For more information about the mother of Alexander Nevsky, see: KuchkinV. A. K
biography of Alexander Nevsky. // The most ancient states on the territory of the USSR. 1985. M ., 1986, With. 71-80.
9 PSRL, T. Istb. 470,. "" There, stb. 444.
10 Berezhkov N. G. Chronology of Russian chronicle writing. M., 1963, p. 106.
12 PSRL, vol. XXIV, Ptg., 1921 p. 227. The list was compiled at the end of the 15th century,
13 PSRL, vol. I, stb. 469.
14 Ya nin V. L. Assembly seals of Ancient Rus' of the X-XV centuries, vol. II, M., 1970, p. 7-8.
15 NPL, p. 79.
16 For more details about the time of Alexander Nevsky's birth, see: Kuchki and V.A. On the date of Alexander Nevsky's birth. // Questions of History, 1986, No. 2. V.K. Ziborov also tends to date May 13 as the birthday of Alexander Nevsky, pointing out some literary parallels between the Life of Alexander Nevsky and the service to Alexander of Rome in support of his opinion. Unfortunately, V.K. Ziborov did not know our note of 1986 about the time of the birth of Alexander Nevsky, See; Ziborov V. K. On a new copy of the seal of Alexander Nevsky. // Prince Alexander Nevsky and his era, p. 149-150.
17 NPL, p. 61.
Prince of Novgorod (1236-1240, 1241-1252 and 1257-1259), and later the Grand Duke of Kiev (1249-1263), and then Vladimir (1252-1263), Alexander Yaroslavich, known in our historical memory as Alexander Nevsky, - one of the most popular heroes of the history of Ancient Rus'. Only Dmitry Donskoy and Ivan the Terrible can compete with him. A great role in this was played by Sergei Eisenstein's brilliant film "Alexander Nevsky", which turned out to be consonant with the events of the 40s of the last century, and in Lately also the competition "Name of Russia", in which the prince won a posthumous victory over other heroes of Russian history.
It is also important that the Russian Orthodox Church glorifies Alexander Yaroslavich as a noble prince. Meanwhile, the popular veneration of Alexander Nevsky as a hero began only after the Great Patriotic War. Prior to this, even professional historians paid much less attention to it. For example, in the pre-revolutionary general courses of the history of Russia, the Battle of the Neva and the Battle of the Ice are often not mentioned at all.
Now a critical and even neutral attitude towards the hero and the saint is perceived by many in society (both in professional circles and among history buffs) as very painful. However, active controversy continues among historians. The situation is complicated not only by the subjectivity of the view of each scientist, but also by the extreme complexity of working with medieval sources.
All information in them can be divided into repetitive (citations and paraphrases), unique and verifiable. Accordingly, these three types of information need to be trusted to varying degrees. Among other things, the period from about the middle of the 13th to the middle of the 14th century is sometimes called “dark” by professionals precisely because of the scarcity of the source base.
In this article, we will try to consider how historians evaluate the events associated with Alexander Nevsky, and what, in their opinion, his role in history. Without delving too deeply into the arguments of the parties, nevertheless, we present the main conclusions. Here and there, for convenience, we will divide part of our text about each major event into two sections: “for” and “against”. In fact, of course, on each specific issue, the range of opinions is much greater.
Neva battle
The Battle of the Neva took place on July 15, 1240 at the mouth of the Neva River between the Swedish landing (the Swedish detachment also included a small group of Norwegians and warriors of the Finnish tribe Em) and the Novgorod-Ladoga squad in alliance with the local Izhora tribe. Estimates of this clash, as well as the Battle on the Ice, depend on the interpretation of the data of the Novgorod First Chronicle and the Life of Alexander Nevsky. Many researchers treat the information in the life with great distrust. Scientists also disagree on the issue of dating this work, on which the reconstruction of events greatly depends.
Behind
The Battle of the Neva is a rather large battle that had great importance. Some historians even spoke of an attempt to blockade Novgorod economically and close the exit to the Baltic. The Swedes were led by the son-in-law of the Swedish king, the future Jarl Birger and / or his cousin, Jarl Ulf Fasi. A sudden and quick attack by the Novgorod squad and the Izhora warriors on the Swedish detachment prevented the creation of a stronghold on the banks of the Neva, and, possibly, a subsequent attack on Ladoga and Novgorod. It was a turning point in the fight against the Swedes.
In the battle, 6 Novgorod warriors distinguished themselves, whose exploits are described in the Life of Alexander Nevsky (there are even attempts to connect these heroes with specific people known from other Russian sources). During the battle, the young prince Alexander "placed a seal on his face", that is, he wounded the commander of the Swedes in the face. For the victory in this battle, Alexander Yaroslavich subsequently received the nickname "Nevsky".
Against
The scale and significance of this battle is clearly exaggerated. There was no talk of a blockade. The skirmish was clearly small, since, according to the sources, 20 or less people died in it from the side of Rus'. True, we can only talk about noble warriors, but this hypothetical assumption is unprovable. Swedish sources do not mention the Battle of Neva at all.
It is characteristic that the first large Swedish chronicle - "Eric's Chronicle", which was written much later than these events, mentioning many Swedish-Novgorod conflicts, in particular, the destruction of the Swedish capital Sigtuna in 1187 by the Karelians, incited by the Novgorodians, is silent about this event.
Naturally, there was no talk of an attack on Ladoga or Novgorod either. It is impossible to say exactly who led the Swedes, but Magnus Birger, apparently, was in a different place during this battle. It is difficult to call the actions of Russian soldiers fast. The exact place of the battle is unknown, but it was located on the territory of modern St. Petersburg, and from it to Novgorod 200 km in a straight line, and it takes longer to go over rough terrain. But it was still necessary to assemble the Novgorod squad and somewhere to connect with the Ladoga residents. This would take at least a month.
It is strange that the Swedish camp was poorly fortified. Most likely, the Swedes were not going to go deep into the territory, but to baptize the local population, for which they had priests with them. This determines the great attention paid to the description of this battle in the Life of Alexander Nevsky. The story about the Battle of the Neva in the life is twice as long as about the Battle on the Ice.
For the author of the life, whose task is not to describe the exploits of the prince, but to show his piety, it is, first of all, not a military, but a spiritual victory. It is hardly possible to speak of this clash as a turning point, if the struggle between Novgorod and Sweden continued for a very long time.
In 1256, the Swedes again tried to gain a foothold on the coast. In 1300, they managed to build the Landskronu fortress on the Neva, but a year later they left it because of the constant enemy raids and the difficult climate. The confrontation went on not only on the banks of the Neva, but also on the territory of Finland and Karelia. Suffice it to recall the Finnish winter campaign of Alexander Yaroslavich in 1256-1257. and campaigns against the Finns Jarl Birger. Thus, at best, we can talk about the stabilization of the situation for several years.
The description of the battle as a whole in the annals and in the "Life of Alexander Nevsky" should not be taken literally, as it is full of quotations from other texts: "Jewish War" by Josephus, "Eugene's Acts", "Trojan Tales", etc. As for the duel between Prince Alexander and the leader of the Swedes, there is practically the same episode with a wound in the face in The Life of Prince Dovmont, so this plot is most likely a passing one.
Some scientists believe that the life of the Pskov prince Dovmont was written earlier than the life of Alexander and, accordingly, the borrowing came from there. The role of Alexander is also unclear in the scene of the death of part of the Swedes on the other side of the river - where the prince's squad was "impassable".
Perhaps the enemy was destroyed by Izhora. The sources speak of the death of the Swedes from the angels of the Lord, which is very reminiscent of an episode from old testament(19th chapter of the Fourth Book of Kings) about the destruction of the Assyrian army of King Sennacherib by an angel.
The name "Nevsky" appears only in the 15th century. More importantly, there is a text in which the two sons of Prince Alexander are also called “Nevsky”. Perhaps these were the owner's nicknames, that is, the family owned land in the area. In sources close in time to the events, Prince Alexander is nicknamed "The Brave".
Russian-Livonian conflict 1240 - 1242 and Battle of the Ice
The famous battle, known to us as the "Battle on the Ice", took place in 1242. In it, troops under the command of Alexander Nevsky and German knights with Estonians subordinate to them (chud) converged on the ice of Lake Peipus. There are more sources for this battle than for the Battle of the Neva: several Russian chronicles, the Life of Alexander Nevsky and the Livonian Rhymed Chronicle, reflecting the position of the Teutonic Order.
Behind
In the 40s of the XIII century, the papacy organized a crusade to the Baltic states, in which Sweden (the Battle of the Neva), Denmark and the Teutonic Order took part. During this campaign in 1240, the Germans captured the Izborsk fortress, and then on September 16, 1240, the Pskov army was defeated there. Killed, according to the chronicles, from 600 to 800 people. Then Pskov was besieged, which soon capitulated.
As a result, the Pskov political group headed by Tverdila Ivankovich is subordinate to the Order. The Germans rebuild the Koporye fortress, raid the Vodka land, controlled by Novgorod. The Novgorod boyars are asking the Grand Duke of Vladimir Yaroslav Vsevolodovich to return to them the reign of the young Alexander Yaroslavich, who was expelled by "lesser people" for reasons unknown to us.
Prince Yaroslav first offers them his other son Andrei, but they prefer to return Alexander. In 1241, Alexander, apparently, with an army of Novgorodians, Ladoga, Izhors and Karelians, conquers the Novgorod territories and takes Koporye by storm. In March 1242, Alexander with a large army, including the Suzdal regiments brought by his brother Andrei, expels the Germans from Pskov. Then the fighting is transferred to the territory of the enemy in Livonia.
The Germans defeat the advance detachment of the Novgorodians under the command of Domash Tverdislavich and Kerbet. Alexander's main troops retreat to the ice of Lake Peipus. There, on Uzmeni, at the Raven Stone (scientists do not know the exact place, there are discussions) on April 5, 1242, and the battle takes place.
The number of troops of Alexander Yaroslavich is at least 10,000 people (3 regiments - Novgorod, Pskov and Suzdal). The Livonian Rhymed Chronicle says that there were fewer Germans than Russians. True, the text uses rhetorical hyperbole that there were 60 times fewer Germans.
Apparently, the encirclement maneuver was carried out by the Russians, and the Order was defeated. German sources report that 20 knights died and 6 were taken prisoner, and Russian sources tell of German losses of 400-500 people and 50 prisoners. Chudi died "innumerable". The battle on the ice is a major battle that significantly influenced the political situation. In Soviet historiography, it was even customary to speak of "the largest battle of the early Middle Ages."
Against
The version of a common crusade is doubtful. The West at that time had neither sufficient forces nor a common strategy, as evidenced by the significant time difference between the actions of the Swedes and the Germans. In addition, the territory, which historians conventionally call the Livonian Confederation, was not united. Here were the lands of the archbishoprics of Riga and Dorpat, the possessions of the Danes and the Order of the Swordsmen (since 1237, the Livonian Landmaster of the Teutonic Order). All these forces were in very complex, often conflicting relations with each other.
The knights of the order, by the way, received only a third of the lands they conquered, and the rest went to the church. There were difficult relations within the order between the former sword-bearers and the Teutonic knights who arrived to reinforce them. The policy of the Teutons and the former swordsmen in the Russian direction was different. So, having learned about the beginning of the war with the Russians, the head of the Teutonic Order in Prussia, Hanrik von Winda, dissatisfied with these actions, removed the Landmaster of Livonia Andreas von Wölven from power. The new Landmaster of Livonia, Dietrich von Gröningen, already after the Battle of the Ice, made peace with the Russians, freeing all occupied lands and exchanging prisoners.
In such a situation, there could be no question of any united “Onslaught on the East”. Clash 1240-1242 - this is the usual struggle for spheres of influence, which either escalated or subsided. Among other things, the conflict between Novgorod and the Germans is directly related to the Pskov-Novgorod politics, first of all, with the history of the exile of the Pskov prince Yaroslav Vladimirovich, who found refuge with the Dorpat bishop German and tried to regain the throne with his help.
The scale of events seems to be somewhat exaggerated by some modern scientists. Alexander acted carefully so as not to completely spoil relations with Livonia. So, having taken Koporye, he executed only the Estonians and Vozhan, and let the Germans go. The capture of Pskov by Alexander is actually the expulsion of two knights of the Vogts (that is, judges) with a retinue (hardly more than 30 people), who were sitting there under an agreement with the Pskovites. By the way, some historians believe that this treaty was actually concluded against Novgorod.
In general, relations between Pskov and the Germans were less conflicting than those of Novgorod. For example, the people of Pskov participated in the battle of Siauliai against the Lithuanians in 1236 on the side of the Order of the Sword. In addition, Pskov often suffered from German-Novgorod border conflicts, since German troops sent against Novgorod often did not reach Novgorod lands and plundered the closer Pskov possessions.
The “Battle on the Ice” itself took place on the lands not of the Order, but of the Dorpat Archbishop, so most of the troops most likely consisted of his vassals. There is reason to believe that a significant part of the Order's troops were simultaneously preparing for war with the Semigallians and Curonians. In addition, it is usually not customary to mention that Alexander sent his troops to "disperse" and "heal" that is, by saying modern language, rob the local population. The main way of conducting a medieval war is to inflict maximum economic damage on the enemy and capture booty. It was in the "dispersal" that the Germans defeated the advance detachment of the Russians.
It is difficult to reconstruct the specific details of the battle. Many modern historians believe that the German army did not exceed 2000 people. Some historians speak of only 35 knights and 500 foot soldiers. The Russian army may have been somewhat larger, but hardly significantly. The Livonian Rhymed Chronicle only reports that the Germans used the "pig", that is, the formation of a wedge, and that the "pig" broke through the formation of the Russians, who had many archers. The knights fought bravely, but they were defeated, and some of the Dorpatians fled to escape.
As for the losses, the only explanation why the data of the annals and the Livonian Rhymed Chronicle differ is the assumption that the Germans counted only the losses among the full-fledged knights of the Order, while the Russians counted the total losses of all Germans. Most likely, here, as in other medieval texts, reports on the number of dead are very conditional.
Even the exact date of the "Battle on the Ice" is unknown. The Novgorod chronicle gives the date April 5, the Pskov chronicle - April 1, 1242. And whether it was "ice" is unclear. In the "Livonian Rhymed Chronicle" there are the words: "On both sides, the dead fell on the grass." The political and military significance of the "Battle on the Ice" is also exaggerated, especially in comparison with more major battles under Siauliai (1236) and Rakovor (1268).
Alexander Nevsky and the Pope
One of the key episodes in the biography of Alexander Yaroslavich is his contacts with Pope Innocent IV. There is information about this in two bulls of Innocent IV and the Life of Alexander Nevsky. The first bull is dated January 22, 1248, the second - September 15, 1248.
Many believe that the fact of the prince's contacts with the Roman Curia greatly harms his image as an implacable defender of Orthodoxy. Therefore, some researchers even tried to find other addressees for the Pope's messages. They offered either Yaroslav Vladimirovich, an ally of the Germans in the war of 1240 against Novgorod, or the Lithuanian Tovtivil, who reigned in Polotsk. However, most researchers consider these versions unfounded.
What was written in these two documents? In the first message, the Pope asked Alexander to notify him through the brothers of the Teutonic Order in Livonia about the advance of the Tatars in order to prepare for a rebuff. In the second bull to Alexander "the Most Serene Prince of Novgorod", the Pope mentions that his addressee agreed to join the true faith and even allowed to build a cathedral in Pleskov, that is, in Pskov, and, possibly, even establish an episcopal chair.
No response letters have been preserved. But from the "Life of Alexander Nevsky" it is known that two cardinals came to the prince to persuade him to convert to Catholicism, but received a categorical refusal. However, apparently, for some time Alexander Yaroslavich maneuvered between the West and the Horde.
What influenced his final decision? It is impossible to give an exact answer, but the explanation of the historian A. A. Gorsky seems interesting. The fact is that, most likely, the second letter from the Pope did not catch Alexander; at that moment he was on his way to Karakorum, the capital of the Mongol Empire. The prince spent two years on the trip (1247 - 1249) and saw the power of the Mongolian state.
When he returned, he learned that Daniel of Galicia, who received the royal crown from the Pope, did not wait for the promised help from the Catholics against the Mongols. In the same year, the Catholic Swedish ruler, Jarl Birger, began the conquest of Central Finland - the lands of the tribal union em, formerly part of the sphere of influence of Novgorod. And, finally, the mention of the Catholic Cathedral in Pskov should have evoked unpleasant memories of the conflict of 1240-1242.
Alexander Nevsky and the Horde
The most painful moment in the discussion of the life of Alexander Nevsky is his relationship with the Horde. Alexander did travel to Saray (1247, 1252, 1258 and 1262) and Karakorum (1247-1249). Some hotheads declare him almost a collaborator, a traitor to the fatherland and Motherland. But, firstly, such a formulation of the question is an obvious anachronism, since such concepts did not even exist in the Old Russian language of the 13th century. Secondly, all the princes went to the Horde for shortcuts to reign or for other reasons, even Daniil of Galitsky, who had been directly resisting her for the longest time.
The Horde, as a rule, accepted them with honor, although the chronicle of Daniel of Galicia stipulates that "Tatar honor is worse than evil." The princes had to observe certain rituals, go through kindled fires, drink koumiss, worship the image of Genghis Khan - that is, do something that defiled a person according to the concepts of a Christian of that time. Most of the princes, and, apparently, Alexander, too, obeyed these requirements.
Only one exception is known: Mikhail Vsevolodovich Chernigovsky, who in 1246 refused to obey, and was killed for this (ranked among the saints by the order of martyrs at the cathedral of 1547). In general, the events in Rus', starting from the 40s of the XIII century, cannot be considered in isolation from the political situation in the Horde.
One of the most dramatic episodes of Russian-Horde relations took place in 1252. The course of events was as follows. Alexander Yaroslavich goes to Sarai, after which Batu sends an army led by the commander Nevryuy (“Nevryuev’s army”) against Andrey Yaroslavich, Prince Vladimirsky, Alexander’s brother. Andrei flees from Vladimir to Pereyaslavl-Zalessky, where their younger brother Yaroslav Yaroslavich rules.
The princes manage to escape from the Tatars, but Yaroslav's wife dies, the children are captured, and ordinary people"countless" killed. After the departure of Nevruy, Alexander returns to Rus' and sits on the throne in Vladimir. There are still discussions whether Alexander was involved in the campaign of Nevruy.
Behind
The English historian Fennel has the harshest assessment of these events: "Alexander betrayed his brothers." Many historians believe that Alexander specifically went to the Horde to complain to the khan about Andrei, especially since such cases are known from a later time. Complaints could be as follows: Andrei, the younger brother, unjustly received the great reign of Vladimir, taking his father's cities, which should belong to the eldest of the brothers; he pays no tribute.
The subtlety here was that Alexander Yaroslavich, being the great Prince of Kiev, formally had more power than the Grand Duke of Vladimir Andrey, but in fact Kiev, devastated in the XII century by Andrei Bogolyubsky, and then by the Mongols, had lost its significance by that time , and so Alexander was sitting in Novgorod. This distribution of power corresponded to the Mongolian tradition, according to which the younger brother receives the father's possession, and the older brothers conquer the lands themselves. As a result, the conflict between the brothers was resolved in such a dramatic way.
Against
There are no direct indications of Alexander's complaint in the sources. The exception is Tatishchev's text. But recent research has shown that this historian did not use, as previously believed, unknown sources; he did not distinguish between the retelling of chronicles and his comments. The statement of complaint appears to be a commentary by the writer. Analogies with a later time are incomplete, since later the princes, who successfully complained to the Horde, themselves participated in punitive campaigns.
Historian A. A. Gorsky offers the following version of events. Apparently, Andrei Yaroslavich, relying on the label of the reign of Vladimir, received in 1249 in Karakorum from Khansha Ogul-Gamish, hostile to Sarai, tried to behave independently of Batu. But in 1251 the situation changed.
Khan Munke (Mengu) comes to power in Karakorum with the support of Batu. Apparently, Batu decides to redistribute power in Rus' and summons the princes to his capital. Alexander is going, but Andrey is not. Then Batu sends the army of Nevruy against Andrei and at the same time the army of Kuremsa against his father-in-law, the recalcitrant Daniel of Galicia. However, for the final resolution of this controversial issue, as usual, there are not enough sources.
In 1256-1257, a population census was held throughout the Great Mongol Empire in order to streamline taxation, but it was disrupted in Novgorod. By 1259 Alexander Nevsky suppressed Novgorod uprising(for which some in this city still do not like him; for example, the outstanding historian and leader of the Novgorod archaeological expedition V. L. Yanin spoke very harshly about him). The prince ensured the conduct of the census and the payment of "exit" (as the sources call tribute to the Horde).
As you can see, Alexander Yaroslavich was very loyal to the Horde, but then it was the policy of almost all princes. In a difficult situation, they had to compromise with the irresistible power of the Great Mongol Empire, about which the papal legate Plano Carpini, who visited Karakorum, noted that only God could defeat them.
Canonization of Alexander Nevsky
Prince Alexander was canonized at the Moscow Cathedral in 1547 in the guise of the faithful.
Why was he revered as a saint? There are different opinions on this matter. So F.B. Shenk, who wrote fundamental research about the change in the image of Alexander Nevsky over time, states: "Alexander became the father and founder of a special type of Orthodox holy princes who earned their position, first of all, by secular deeds for the benefit of the community ...".
Many researchers prioritize the military successes of the prince and believe that he was revered as a saint who defended the "Russian land". The interpretation of I.N. Danilevsky: “In the conditions of the terrible trials that befell the Orthodox lands, Alexander was almost the only secular ruler who did not doubt his spiritual rightness, did not waver in his faith, did not depart from his God. Refusing to take joint actions with the Catholics against the Horde, he unexpectedly becomes the last powerful bulwark of Orthodoxy, the last defender of the entire Orthodox world.
Could such a ruler Orthodox Church not be recognized as a saint? Apparently, therefore, he was canonized not as a righteous man, but as a noble (listen to this word!) Prince. The victories of his direct heirs in the political arena consolidated and developed this image. And the people understood and accepted this, forgiving the real Alexander all the cruelties and injustices.
And, finally, there is the opinion of A. E. Musin, a researcher with two educations - historical and theological. He denies the importance of the "anti-Latin" policy of the prince, loyalty to the Orthodox faith and social activities in his canonization, and tries to understand what qualities of Alexander's personality and features of life caused him to be revered by the people of medieval Rus'; it began much earlier than official canonization.
It is known that by 1380 the veneration of the prince had already taken shape in Vladimir. The main thing that, according to the scientist, was appreciated by his contemporaries is “the combination of the courage of a Christian warrior and the sobriety of a Christian monk.” Other an important factor was the very singularity of his life and death. Alexander may have died of illness in 1230 or 1251, but he recovered. He was not supposed to become a Grand Duke, since he originally occupied the second place in the family hierarchy, but his older brother Fedor died at the age of thirteen. Nevsky strangely died, taking tonsure before his death (this custom spread to Rus' in the 12th century).
Loved in the Middle Ages unusual people and passion-bearers. The sources describe the miracles associated with Alexander Nevsky. The incorruptibility of his remains also played a role. Unfortunately, we do not even know for sure whether the real relics of the prince have been preserved. The fact is that in the lists of the Nikon and Resurrection chronicles of the 16th century it is said that the body burned down in a fire in 1491, and in the lists of the same chronicles for the 17th century it is written that it was miraculously preserved, which leads to sad suspicions.
Choice of Alexander Nevsky
Recently, the main merit of Alexander Nevsky is not the defense of the northwestern borders of Rus', but, so to speak, the conceptual choice between the West and the East in favor of the latter.
Behind
Many historians think so. The famous statement of the Eurasian historian G.V. Vernadsky is often cited from his publicistic article “Two exploits of St. Alexander Nevsky": "... with a deep and ingenious hereditary historical instinct, Alexander realized that in his historical era the main danger to Orthodoxy and the originality of Russian culture threatens from the west, and not from the east, from Latinism, and not from Mongolianism."
Further, Vernadsky writes: “The subordination of Alexander to the Horde cannot otherwise be assessed as a feat of humility. When the times and dates were fulfilled, when Rus' gained strength, and the Horde, on the contrary, shrank, weakened and weakened, and then Alexander’s policy of subjugation to the Horde became unnecessary ... then the policy of Alexander Nevsky naturally had to turn into the policy of Dmitry Donskoy.
Against
Firstly, such an assessment of the motives of Nevsky's activities - an assessment of the consequences - suffers from the point of view of logic. He couldn't have foreseen what would happen next. In addition, as I. N. Danilevsky ironically noted, Alexander was not chosen, but he was chosen (Batiy chose), and the choice of the prince was “a choice for survival”.
In some places, Danilevsky speaks even more harshly, believing that Nevsky's policy influenced the duration of Rus''s dependence on the Horde (he refers to the successful struggle of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania with the Horde) and, along with the earlier policy of Andrei Bogolyubsky, the formation of the type of statehood of the North-Eastern Rus' as a "despotic monarchy". Here it is worth giving a more neutral opinion of the historian A. A. Gorsky:
“In general, it can be stated that in the actions of Alexander Yaroslavich there is no reason to look for some kind of conscious fateful choice. He was a man of his era, acted in accordance with the worldview of that time and personal experience. Alexander was, in modern terms, a "pragmatist": he chose the path that seemed to him more profitable for strengthening his land and for himself personally. When it was a decisive battle, he fought; when an agreement with one of the enemies of Rus' seemed most useful, he went to an agreement.
"Favorite Childhood Hero"
So called one of the sections of a very critical article about Alexander Nevsky, historian I.N. Danilevsky. I confess that for the author of these lines, along with Richard I Lion Heart he was a favorite character. "Battle on the Ice" was "reconstructed" in detail with the help of soldiers. So the author knows exactly how it all happened in reality. But speaking coldly and seriously, then, as mentioned above, we do not have enough data for a holistic assessment of the personality of Alexander Nevsky.
As is often the case when studying early history, we are more or less aware that something happened, but often we do not know and will never know how. The author's personal opinion is that the argumentation of the position, which we conditionally designated as "against", looks more serious. Perhaps the exception is the episode with "Nevryuev's army" - nothing can be said for sure there. The final conclusion is left to the reader.
Soviet Order of Alexander Nevsky, established in 1942.
Bibliography
Texts
1. Alexander Nevsky and the history of Russia. Novgorod. 1996.
2. Bakhtin A.P. Internal and foreign policy problems of the Teutonic Order, in Prussia and Livonia in the late 1230s - early 1240s. Ice battle in the mirror of the era//Collection scientific works dedicated 770th anniversary of the battle on Lake Peipus. Comp. M.B. Bessudnova. Lipetsk. 2013 pp. 166-181.
3. Begunov Yu.K. Alexander Nevskiy. The life and deeds of the holy noble grand duke. M., 2003.
4. Vernadsky G.V. Two labors of St. Alexander Nevsky // Eurasian Vremennik. Book. IV. Prague, 1925.
5. Gorsky A.A. Alexander Nevskiy.
6. Danilevsky I.N. Alexander Nevsky: Paradoxes of historical memory // "The chain of times": Problems of historical consciousness. M.: IVI RAN, 2005, p. 119-132.
7. Danilevsky I.N. Historical reconstruction: between text and reality (thesis).
8. Danilevsky I.N. Ice battle: change of image // Otechestvennye zapiski. 2004. - No. 5.
9. Danilevsky I.N. Alexander Nevsky and the Teutonic Order.
10. Danilevsky I.N. Russian lands through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (XII-XIV centuries). M. 2001.
11. Danilevsky I.N. Modern Russian discussions about Prince Alexander Nevsky.
12. Egorov V.L. Alexander Nevsky and Genghisides // Domestic History. 1997. No. 2.
13. Prince Alexander Nevsky and his era: Research and materials. SPb. 1995.
14. Kuchkin A.V. Alexander Nevsky - statesman and commander of medieval Rus' // Patriotic history. 1996. No. 5.
15. Matuzova E. I., Nazarova E. L. Crusaders and Rus'. End of XII - 1270. Texts, translation, commentary. M. 2002.
16. Musin A.E. Alexander Nevskiy. The mystery of holiness.// Almanac "Chelo", Veliky Novgorod. 2007. No. 1. pp.11-25.
17. Rudakov V.N. “I worked hard for Novgorod and for the whole Russian land” Review of the book: Alexander Nevsky. Sovereign. Diplomat. Warrior. M. 2010.
18. Uzhankov A.N. Between two evils. The historical choice of Alexander Nevsky.
19. Fennel. D. The Crisis of Medieval Rus'. 1200-1304. M. 1989.
20. Florya B.N. At the origins of the confessional schism Slavic world(Ancient Rus' and its western neighbors in the XIII century). In: From the history of Russian culture. T. 1. (Ancient Rus'). - M. 2000.
21. Khrustalev D.G. Rus' and the Mongol invasion (20-50s of the XIII century) St. Petersburg. 2013.
22. Khrustalev D.G. Northern crusaders. Rus' in the struggle for spheres of influence in the Eastern Baltic in the 12th - 13th centuries. vol. 1, 2. St. Petersburg. 2009.
23. Shenk F. B. Alexander Nevsky in Russian cultural memory: Saint, ruler, national hero (1263-2000) / Authorized translation. with him. E. Zemskova and M. Lavrinovich. M. 2007.
24. Urban. W.L. The Baltic Crusade. 1994.
Video
1. Danilevsky I.G. Historical reconstruction between text and reality (lecture)
2. Hour of Truth - Golden Horde - Russian Choice (Igor Danilevsky and Vladimir Rudakov) 1st broadcast.
3. Hour of Truth - Horde yoke - Versions (Igor Danilevsky and Vladimir Rudakov)
4. Hour of Truth - Frontiers of Alexander Nevsky. (Pyotr Stefanovich and Yuri Artamonov)
5. Ice battle. Historian Igor Danilevsky about the events of 1242, about Eisenstein's film and the relationship between Pskov and Novgorod.
Gorsky Anton Anatolievich- Doctor of Historical Sciences. Leading researcher at the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Works at the Institute's Center for the History of Ancient Rus'. Author of several monographs, incl. just released "Moscow and the Horde" (M.: "Nauka", 2000).
Alexander Nevskiy. Left side of the triptych
"For the Russian Land". Artist Yu.P. Pantyukhin, 2003
Alexander Nevskiy- one of those names that are known to everyone in our Fatherland. Prince, covered military glory, who was honored with a literary story about his deeds shortly after his death, canonized by the church; a man whose name continued to inspire generations many centuries later: in 1725, the Order of St. Alexander Nevsky was established, and in 1942, the Soviet Order of Alexander Nevsky (the only Soviet order named after a figure from the era of the Russian Middle Ages). For most Russians, his name is associated with the image created in the film by S. Eisenstein "Alexander Nevsky" by N. Cherkasov.
Alexander was born in 1221 in Pereyaslavl-Zalessky. His father, Prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, was the third son of one of the most powerful Russian princes of the late 12th - early 13th centuries. Vsevolod the Big Nest, son of Yuri Dolgoruky, grandson of Vladimir Monomakh. Vsevolod (who died in 1212) owned North-Eastern Russia (Vladimir-Suzdal land). Yaroslav (born in 1190) received from his father the Principality of Pereyaslav, which was part of Vladimir-Suzdal. Yaroslav's first wife was Konchak's granddaughter (the daughter of his son, Yuri Konchakovich). Around 1213, Yaroslav married a second time (his first wife died or the marriage was terminated for some reason - unknown) - to Rostislav-Feodosia, the daughter of the Novgorod (later Galician) prince Mstislav Mstislavich (in the literature often referred to as "Remote" on the basis of incorrectly understood definition of the prince in the message about his death as "successful", i.e. lucky). In 1216, Yaroslav and his older brother Yuri fought an unsuccessful war against Mstislav, were defeated, and Mstislav took his daughter from Yaroslav. But then the marriage of Yaroslav and Mstislav was resumed (the statement often found in the literature about the marriage of Yaroslav after 1216 with a third marriage to the Ryazan princess is erroneous) and at the beginning of 1220 their first-born Fedor was born, and in May 1221 - Alexander.
In 1230, Yaroslav Vsevolodich, after a difficult struggle with the Chernigov prince Mikhail Vsevolodich (the grandson of Svyatoslav of Kyiv "The Tale of Igor's Campaign"), established himself to reign in Novgorod the Great. He himself preferred to live in his father's Pereyaslavl, and left princes Fedor and Alexander in Novgorod. In 1233, Alexander remained the eldest of the Yaroslavichs - 13-year-old Fyodor died unexpectedly on the eve of his wedding. “And who will not grant this: the wedding is built, the honey is boiled, the bride is brought, the princes are called; and there will be a place of weeping and lamenting for our sins in fun,” the Novgorod chronicler wrote on this occasion.
In 1236, Yaroslav Vsevolodich left Novgorod to reign in Kyiv (which continued to be considered the nominal capital of all Rus'). Alexander became an independent Novgorod prince. It was in Novgorod that he was in the winter of 1237-1238, at a time when North-Eastern Rus' suffered a catastrophe: the hordes of the Mongol Empire, led by the grandson of its founder Genghis Khan Batu (Batu), ravaged the Vladimir-Suzdal principality. 14 cities were taken, including the capital - Vladimir. In a battle with one of the Tatar (in Europe, including Rus', the Mongol conquerors were called "Tatars") detachments on the river. The city was killed by the Grand Duke of Vladimir Yuri Vsevolodich, the elder brother of Yaroslav.
After the Mongol troops returned to the Volga steppes in the spring of 1238, Yaroslav Vsevolodich came from Kyiv to the devastated Vladimir and occupied the main princely table of North-Eastern Rus'. After that, in 1239, he took vigorous action to strengthen his influence in neighboring lands. Yaroslav defeated the Lithuanian troops that captured Smolensk, and planted an allied prince here; made a successful campaign in South Rus'. In line with this policy, there was also an agreement on the marriage of the eldest son Yaroslav with the daughter of the ruler of a large Western Russian center - Polotsk. In 1239, the wedding of Alexander and the daughter of the Polotsk prince Bryachislav took place. And in the summer of the next, in 1240, an event occurred that brought Alexander the first military glory.
In the first half of the XIII century. Swedish feudal lords launched an offensive on the lands of the Finnish tribes and took possession of southwestern Finland. Attempts to move further to the East inevitably had to lead to a collision with Novgorod, which belonged to the mouth of the Neva and the coast of Lake Ladoga. And in 1240, for the first time since 1164, the Swedish army entered the Neva from the Gulf of Finland. He was led, perhaps, by Jarl (the second most important title in Sweden after the king) Ulf Fasi (the reliability of information from later sources that Birger, later the actual ruler of Sweden, commanded the Swedish forces, is doubtful). It is unlikely that the goal of the Swedes was a campaign against Novgorod itself; most likely, their task was to fortify at the mouth of the Neva in order to cut off the Novgorod land access to the sea and make it impossible to resist the Swedes in the struggle for eastern Finland. The moment for the attack was well chosen: the military forces of the princes of North-Eastern Rus', who often came to the aid of the Novgorodians during foreign wars, were weakened as a result of heavy losses incurred during Batu's campaign of 1237-1238.
What experience of participation in military campaigns was by this time 19-year-old Alexander, is unknown. It is possible that he took part in his father's campaign of 1234 against the German crusader knights who settled in the first third of the 13th century. on the lands of the Baltic tribes - the ancestors of the Estonians and Latvians, a campaign that ended in a successful battle for the Russians on the river. Emajõgi in Southeast Estonia. Perhaps Alexander also participated in his father's actions against the Lithuanians in 1239. But, in any case, for the first time he had to act independently, make decisions himself and take charge of military operations.
Having received news of the appearance of the Swedish army, prince of novgorod could take a wait-and-see attitude, send a request for military assistance to his father in Vladimir, try to gather a militia from the inhabitants of the Novgorod land. But Alexander made a different decision: only with his squad and a small detachment of Novgorodians immediately attack the enemy. “God is not in power, but in truth,” said, according to the testimony of the author of the Life of Alexander, the prince, setting off on a campaign.
July 15, 1240, Sunday, Russian army suddenly attacked the numerically superior Swedes, encamped near the confluence of the Izhora River into the Neva. The enemy, taken by surprise, suffered heavy losses. The second most important Swedish military leader (called the “voivode” in the Russian chronicle) and many noble warriors died. According to the Life of Alexander, the prince himself met in battle with a representative of the enemy army and wounded him with a spear in the face. The battle ceased, apparently, after dark, and the Swedes were able to bury the dead. Under the cover of night, the remnants of the enemy troops boarded the ships and sailed away.
At the end of the same 1240, German crusader knights began aggression against the Novgorod land. During the first third of the XIII century. Knights of the Order of the Swordsmen captured the lands of the Baltic tribes - Estonians, Livs and Latgalians. The possessions of the Order came into close contact with the borders of Rus' (along the river Narva and Lake Peipus). Since the end of the 1910s, direct clashes began. After the defeats suffered by the crusaders from Yaroslav Vsevolodich in 1234 and, especially, from the Lithuanians at Siauliai in 1236 (where almost all the sword-bearing knights died - 49 people), the Order of the Sword-bearers merged with the one settled in East Prussia Teutonic Order (1237). The part of the united Order, which received reinforcements from Prussia and Germany, located on the territory of modern Estonia and Latvia, became known as the Livonian Order. Not satisfied with the conquest of the Baltic tribes, the crusaders tried to transfer the expansion to the Russian lands. As with the invasion of the Eastern Baltic, behind the back of the Order stood the papal throne in Rome. The conquest of the peoples of the Baltic states was consecrated by the idea of converting them to Christianity, the war with Russia was justified by the fact that its inhabitants were, from a Catholic point of view, "schismatics" - adherents of the Eastern, Orthodox version of Christianity. At the end of 1240, the Germans captured Izborsk, a city on the western border of the Novgorod land. Then they defeated the army of the large semi-independent center of Pskov, and, thanks to the subsequent collusion with part of the Pskov boyars, they occupied the city. In the north-west of the Novgorod land, the Germans settled in the churchyard of Koporye (to the east of the Narova River near the Gulf of Finland). All West Side Novgorod possessions was ruined by German detachments.
The situation was complicated by the fact that at the height of the German offensive, in the winter of 1240-1241. Prince Alexander quarreled with the Novgorod boyars and went to his father in Pereyaslavl together with his "court" (team). The political system of Novgorod had certain specific features that were different from the system of other Russian lands. Here, the local boyars represented a significant force, which invited princes from different lands to the Novgorod table at their discretion. Often the princes, who did not get along with the local nobility, were forced to leave Novgorod. This also happened to Alexander (the sources do not report the causes of the conflict).
Meanwhile, German detachments began to appear already 30 miles from the city, and the Novgorodians sent an embassy to Yaroslav Vsevolodich asking for help. Yaroslav sent the second oldest of his sons, Andrei, to them. Soon, apparently, it turned out that he could not properly organize a rebuff, and a new embassy was sent to Yaroslav, headed by the Novgorod archbishop with a request to send Alexander to reign in Novgorod again. And "vda Yaroslav his son Alexander again."
Alexander Nevsky in the Horde. Fresco in the Alexander Nevsky Church
School Council of the Holy Governing Synod in St. Petersburg
Returning to Novgorod, Yaroslavich actively set to work. He sent the first blow (1241) to Koporye, the stronghold of the invaders. The fortress built here by the enemy was taken. Some of the captured Germans Alexander brought to Novgorod, some he released; at the same time, traitors from the Finnish-speaking tribes of Vodi and Chud who lived in the Koporye region, who had gone over to the side of the enemy, he ordered to be hanged. At the beginning of the next, in 1242, the prince with his retinue, an army of Novgorodians and a detachment led by his brother Andrei, sent by his father to help from Suzdal, moved to the lands of the Order. At the same time, he blocked the paths connecting the German possessions with Pskov, and then occupied the city with a sudden blow. The Germans who were in Pskov were captured and sent to Novgorod. Having crossed the border of the Order's possessions, Alexander sent forward a reconnaissance detachment led by the brother of the Novgorod posadnik (the highest official of Novgorod from among the local boyars). This detachment ran into the order army. In the ensuing battle, the leader of the detachment, Domash Tverdislavich, died, some of the soldiers died or were captured, others fled to Alexander. After that, the prince retreated to the ice of Lake Peipus (the natural border between the Novgorod and Order possessions) and took up a position near the eastern shore.
On April 5, 1242, on Saturday, the order army attacked the Russians. Having formed a wedge (in Russian sources of that time this formation is called a "pig"), the Germans and the Chud (Ests) managed to break through defensive line, made up of lightly armed soldiers, but were attacked from the flanks by cavalry detachments (obviously, by the squads of Alexander and Andrei) and suffered a complete defeat. Alexander's warriors pursued the fleeing enemy seven miles across the ice to the western shore of the lake.
According to the Novgorod chronicle, in the battle "pade Chudi beschisla" (countless), and there were 400 Germans; in addition, another 50 Germans were captured and brought to Novgorod. The Livonian source - "Rhymed Chronicle" - calls other loss figures: 20 knights killed and 6 captured. This discrepancy, however, is most likely not due to the overestimation of enemy losses in the first case and the underestimation of "ours" in the second. Actually the knights of the Order were the best equipped and trained part German troops, but numerically very insignificant: according to the same Chronicle, during the campaign against Pskov in 1268, out of every hundred soldiers, only one was a knight of the Order. In addition to the knights, their military servants took part in the battle, the soldiers of the bishop of Derpt, probably detachments of German colonial townspeople. A Russian source gives an approximate total of German casualties; in Livonian, however, we are talking only about order knights. According to researchers, in 1242 there were only about a hundred knights in Livonia, while a significant part of them fought with the Baltic tribe of Curonians. Thus, the loss of 26 people killed and captured, apparently, was about half of the number of knights who participated in the Battle of the Ice, and about a quarter of the total number of knights of the Livonian Order.
In the same year, the Germans sent an embassy to Novgorod with a request for peace: the Order renounced all claims to Russian lands and asked for an exchange of prisoners. The peace treaty was signed.
While the war with the Order was going on in the North of Rus', tragic events were unfolding in the South. At the end of 1240, Batu's army invaded South Rus', captured Pereyaslavl, Chernigov, Kyiv, Galich, Vladimir-Volynsky, and many other cities. Having devastated the southern Russian lands, Batu moved to Central Europe. Hungary and Poland were devastated. Mongolian troops reached the Czech Republic and the shores of the Adriatic. Only at the end of 1242 did Batu return to the Volga region. Here the western ulus of the Mongol Empire was formed - the so-called. Golden Horde. As conquerors, the Mongols began to impose their sovereignty on the Russian princes. The first to be summoned to Batu's headquarters in 1243 was Alexander's father, the Grand Duke of Vladimir Yaroslav Vsevolodich, the strongest of the Russian princes at that time, who did not fight the Tatars (during their campaign against North-Eastern Rus', he was in Kiev, and during the campaign to South Rus' - in Vladimir). Batu recognized Yaroslav as the "oldest" of the Russian princes, confirming his rights to Vladimir and Kyiv - ancient capital Rus'. But the Golden Horde was still part of a huge empire that stretched from the Carpathians to the Pacific Ocean. And Yaroslav was forced in 1246 to go to Mongolia, to the capital of the great khan - Karakorum - for approval.
Alexander, meanwhile, continued to reign in Novgorod. In 1245, Novgorod land was raided by Lithuanians who reached Torzhok and Bezhichi. The prince chased them and defeated them in several battles - at Toropets, Zhizhitsy and Usvyat (within the Smolensk and Vitebsk principalities); many Lithuanian "princes" were killed.
On September 30, 1246, Yaroslav Vsevolodich, Alexander's father, died in distant Mongolia. He was poisoned by the mother of the great Mongol Khan Guyuk Turakina, hostile to Batu, whose protege in the eyes of the Karakoram court was Yaroslav. After that, Turakina sent an ambassador to Alexander with a demand to come to Karakorum. But Alexander refused.
In 1247, Svyatoslav Vsevolodich, the younger brother of Yaroslav, became the Grand Duke of Vladimir (in accordance with the ancient Russian tradition of inheriting princely power, according to which brothers were given preference over sons). Alexander, according to the redistribution of tables, got Tver in North-Eastern Rus' (at the same time, he retained the Novgorod reign). But at the end of that year, the prince, together with his brother Andrei, went to Batu. Obviously, the Yaroslavichi appealed to the act of the khan’s grant to their father, which gave the sons priority rights over their uncles to the great reign of Vladimir (later, only the descendants of Yaroslav Vsevolodich claimed it). From Batu, both went to Karakorum, from where they returned to Rus' only at the end of 1249.
While Alexander was in the steppes, two messages were sent to him by Pope Innocent IV. The idea of contacts with Alexander Yaroslavich arose among the papal curia in connection with two circumstances. First, his father met in Karakorum with the Pope's ambassador, Plano Carpini, and agreed, according to the latter, to accept the patronage of the Roman Church. Secondly, from Plano Carpini, the pope learned of Alexander's refusal to submit to the great khansha. In his letter to the prince dated January 22, 1248, the pope insisted that he follow the example of his father and asked, in the event of a Tatar offensive, to notify about him "the brothers of the Teutonic Order, who are in Livonia, so that as soon as this (the news) through these brothers reaches to our knowledge, we could immediately think about how, with the help of God, these Tatars could offer courageous resistance.
The papal bull, apparently, managed to be delivered to Alexander while he was at Batu's headquarters in the lower reaches of the Volga. The prince of Novgorod gave an answer, the text of which has not reached us, but, judging by the content of the next message of the pope (dated September 15, 1248), this answer was evasive or even mostly positive regarding the acceptance of the patronage of the Roman church. Apparently, being in an uncertain position at the court of Batu, the prince wanted to retain the possibility of choice, depending on the results of his trip. In the second message, Innocent IV gave a positive response to Alexander's proposal to build a Catholic cathedral in Pskov and asked to receive his ambassador, the Archbishop of Prussia. But the bull did not have time to reach the addressee - he was already on his way to Karakorum.
The new ruler Ogul-Gamish (Guyuk's widow) recognized (in 1249) Alexander as the "oldest" among the Russian princes: he received Kyiv. But at the same time, Andrei got Vladimir. Thus, the legacy of Yaroslav Vsevolodich was divided into two parts. Alexander chose not to go to distant Kyiv, which had suffered greatly from the Tatar defeat in 1240, and continued to reign in Novgorod. Meanwhile, ambassadors from the pope came to him for a final answer to the proposal to convert to Catholicism. The prince answered with a decisive refusal.
Andrei Yaroslavich, having settled in Vladimir, entered into an alliance with the strongest prince of Southern Rus', Daniil Romanovich Galitsky, marrying his daughter, and tried to conduct (like his father-in-law at that time) a policy independent of the Golden Horde. Such an opportunity was given to him, apparently, by the granting of the reign of Vladimir by the Karakorum court, hostile to Batu. But in 1251, Batu's friend and henchman Munke became the great khan. This untied the hands of the Golden Horde Khan, and the following year he organized military actions against Andrei and Daniel. Batu sent the army of Kurimsa to the Prince of Galicia, which did not achieve success, and to Andrei-Nevryuy, who devastated the environs of Pereyaslavl. The Prince of Vladimir fled, finding refuge in Sweden (later he returned to Rus' and reigned in Suzdal). In the same year, even before the campaign of Nevruy, Alexander went to Batu, received a label for the great reign of Vladimir, and upon his return (already after the expulsion of Andrei) sat in Vladimir.
From 1252 until his death in 1263, Alexander Yaroslavich was the Grand Duke of Vladimir. Having settled here, he took steps to secure his rights to Novgorod. Previously, the Novgorod boyars could invite princes from various Russian lands - Vladimir-Suzdal, Smolensk, Chernigov. Since the time of Alexander, a new order has been established: Novgorod recognized as its prince the one who occupied the grand prince's table in Vladimir. Thus, having become the Grand Duke of Vladimir, Alexander retained the reign of Novgorod. There he left his eldest son Vasily, but not as an independent prince, but as his governor.
The Novgorod boyars did not immediately accept the new order. In 1255, supporters of an independent Novgorod princedom expelled Vasily Alexandrovich from the city and invited Alexander's younger brother Yaroslav (in 1252, Andrei's former ally, who fled to Pskov and reigned there until 1255). Alexander moved to Novgorod by war, but did not storm the city, but preferred the path of negotiations. At first, he demanded that his opponents be handed over from among the Novgorod nobility (Yaroslav fled the city when Alexander approached). Novgorodians agreed to recognize Alexander as their prince, but on the condition that they forgive the leaders of the rebellion. Finally, the prince softened the demands, limiting them to the removal of an objectionable posadnik; this was done, Alexander entered the city, and peace was restored.
In the next year, 1256, the Swedes tried to build a city on the eastern, Russian bank of the river. Narova. Alexander was then in Vladimir, and the Novgorodians sent to him for help. Hearing about the collection of Russian troops, the Swedes abandoned their idea and sailed away "over the sea." The prince, having arrived in Novgorod, went on a campaign, and at first he did not tell the Novgorodians who went with him what his goal was. It turned out that he planned to strike at southeastern Finland captured by the Swedes in 1250. The campaign turned out to be generally successful: the strongholds of the Swedes in the land of the Finnish tribe Em were destroyed. But for a long time it was not possible to eliminate the power of Sweden over this part of Finland - after the departure of the Russian troops, the Swedish administration restored its rule.
In 1257, the Mongol Empire conducted a population census in North-Eastern Rus' to streamline the system of taxation. Alexander Yaroslavich, who then made a trip to the Horde, was forced to agree to a census, maintaining his line on peaceful relations with the Tatars and recognition of the supreme suzerainty of the ruler of the Golden Horde and the great Mongol Khan. From the Suzdal land, the Tatar "numerals" went to Novgorod. The prince accompanied them with a military detachment. In the city, at the news of the Tatar demands for the payment of tribute, a rebellion began, supported by Vasily Alexandrovich, who was still governor there. The Novgorodians did not give "tithes and tamgas" to the Tatar ambassadors, limiting themselves to gifts to the "Caesar" (Great Khan). Alexander, with his detachment, dealt with the rebels: Vasily was expelled from Pskov (where he fled when his father approached) and sent to Suzdal land, and those who incited him to disobedience "cut off their noses, and vyimash eyes to others." In 1259, the Novgorodians, fearing a Tatar invasion, nevertheless agreed to the Horde census. But when the Tatar ambassadors, accompanied by Alexander, began to collect tribute, a rebellion rose again in Novgorod. After a long confrontation, the Novgorodians nevertheless lost. Following the Tatars, Alexander also left the city, leaving his second son Dmitry as governor.
In 1262, in several cities of North-Eastern Rus' - Rostov, Vladimir, Suzdal, Yaroslavl - an uprising broke out, as a result of which the tribute collectors sent by the great khan were killed or expelled. There was no punitive campaign from the Golden Horde: its Khan Berke at that time sought independence from the Great Khan's throne, and the expulsion of the Great Khan's officials from Rus' was in his interests. But in the same year, Berke started a war against the Mongol ruler of Iran, Hulagu, and began to demand that Russian troops be sent to help him. Alexander went to the Horde to "pray the people from that misfortune". Before leaving, he organized a large campaign against the Livonian Order.
After the Battle of the Ice in 1242, the crusaders did not disturb the Russian lands for 11 years. But in 1253 they violated the peace treaty and approached Pskov, but were repulsed by the Pskovites and the Novgorodians who came to the rescue. In subsequent years, the knights tried to increase the pressure on Lithuania, but failed: in 1260, near Lake Durbe, the army of the emerging Lithuanian state, led by its ruler Mindovg, inflicted a crushing defeat on the combined forces of the Teutonic and Livonian orders (only 150 knights died). The defeat of the crusaders caused a series of uprisings of the Baltic peoples conquered by them. Under these conditions, Alexander entered into an alliance with Mindovg, and the two winners of the Order began to prepare a joint attack on Livonia from two sides: Russian troops were to move on Yuriev (formerly an ancient Russian city set by Yaroslav the Wise in the land of the Estonians; captured by the crusaders in 1234 and named Derpt; now Tartu), and Lithuanian - to Venden (now Cesis).
In the autumn of 1262, Russian troops set out on a campaign. They were commanded by the son of Alexander Yaroslavich Dmitry and brother Yaroslav (who had reconciled by that time with Alexander and reigned in Tver). Together with the Russian forces, the army of the Lithuanian prince Tovtivil, who reigned at that time in Polotsk, went. Yuriev was taken by storm. But a coordinated campaign did not work out: the Lithuanian troops set out earlier and had already retreated from Vendel when the Russians approached Yuryev. Having learned about this after the capture of the city, the Russian troops returned to their land. Nevertheless, the campaign once again demonstrated the strength of the two opponents of the Order - Northern Rus' and Lithuania.
Alexander arrived in the Horde for almost a year. His mission, apparently, was a success: there is no information about the participation of Russian troops in the wars of the Golden Horde against Hulagu. On the way back to Rus' in the autumn of 1263, the 42-year-old Grand Duke fell ill and died on November 14, 1263 in Gorodets on the Volga, having taken monastic vows before his death. On November 23, Alexander's body was buried in the monastery of the Nativity of the Virgin in Vladimir. In his funeral speech, Metropolitan of All Rus' Kirill said: "My child, understand that the sun of the land of Suzdal has already set!"
In the literature, one can come across the assumption that Alexander, like his father, was poisoned by the Tatars. However, this version of his death is not found in the sources. In principle, there is nothing surprising in the fact that a long stay in unusual climatic conditions could affect the health of an already elderly person by the standards of that time. In addition, Alexander, apparently, did not differ in iron health: under 1251, the chronicle mentions a serious illness that almost brought him to the grave at the age of thirty.
After the death of Alexander, his younger brother Yaroslav became the Grand Duke of Vladimir. The sons of Alexander received: Dmitry - Pereyaslavl, Andrey - Gorodets. The younger, Daniil (born in 1261), after some time became the first Moscow prince, and from him came the dynasty of Moscow grand dukes and tsars.
If the official (secular and ecclesiastical) assessment of the personality of Alexander Nevsky has always been panegyric, then in historical science his activities were interpreted ambiguously. And this ambiguity naturally follows from the apparent contradiction in the image of Alexander. Indeed: on the one hand, this is undoubtedly an outstanding commander who won all the battles in which he participated, combined decisiveness with prudence, a man of great personal courage; on the other hand, this is a prince who was forced to recognize the supreme power of a foreign ruler, who did not try to organize resistance to the Mongols, undoubtedly the most dangerous enemy of Rus' of that era, moreover, he helped them in establishing a system for the exploitation of Russian lands.
One of the extreme points of view on the activities of Alexander, formulated in the 20s of the last century by the Russian émigré historian G.V. Vernadsky, and recently mostly repeated by L.N. East orientation and West orientation. Having entered into an alliance with the Horde, he prevented the absorption of Northern Rus' by Catholic Europe and, thereby, saved Russian Orthodoxy - the basis of identity. According to another point of view, defended by the English historian J. Fennell and supported by the Russian researcher I.N. Danilevsky, it was Alexander's "collaborationism" in relation to the Mongols, his betrayal of the brothers Andrei and Yaroslav in 1252 that caused the establishment of the yoke of the Golden Horde in Rus'.
So was Alexander really made a historical choice and can one and the same person be both a hero and a collaborator-traitor?
Given the mentality of the era and the characteristics of Alexander's personal biography, both of these points of view look far-fetched. The suzerainty of the Horde immediately acquired a certain semblance of legitimacy in the worldview of the Russian people; its ruler was called in Rus' more high title than any of the Russian princes - the title "tsar". The dependence of the Russian lands on the Horde in its main features (including the collection of tribute) began to take shape as early as the 40s of the 13th century. (at a time when Alexander reigned in Novgorod and did not directly influence Russian-Tatar relations); in the 1950s there was only a streamlining of the system of economic exploitation. After the death of his father in 1246, when Alexander became the strongest prince in Northern Russia, he really faced a choice: to maintain peaceful relations with the Horde, recognizing the supreme suzerainty of the khans over Russia (already recognized by this time by all significant princes of both Northern and Southern Russia) and resist the Order, or start resisting the Tatars by entering into an alliance with the Order and the religious head of Catholic Europe standing behind it - the pope (the prospect of a war on two fronts to the prince, who spent most of his life in Novgorod, near the Horde border, should have seemed unacceptable, and quite fair). Alexander hesitated until returning from a trip to Karakoram and firmly chose the first option only in 1250. What was the reason for the decision of the prince?
Of course, one should take into account the general wary attitude towards Catholicism and the personal experience of Alexander, who in 1241-1242, at the age of twenty, had to repel an attack on Novgorod land German crusaders supported by Rome. But these factors also acted in 1248, however, then the prince's response to the pope's message was different. Consequently, something that appeared later tipped the scales against the pope's proposal. It can be assumed that four factors had an impact:
1) During his two-year trip across the steppes (1247-1249), Alexander was able, on the one hand, to be convinced of the military power of the Mongol Empire, and on the other hand, to understand that the Mongol-Tatars do not claim to directly seize Russian lands, being content with the recognition vassalage and tribute, and also differ in religious tolerance and are not going to encroach on the Orthodox faith. This should have favorably distinguished them in the eyes of the prince from the crusaders, whose actions were characterized by the direct seizure of territory and the forcible conversion of the population to Catholicism.
2) After Alexander returned to Rus' at the end of 1249, information should have reached him that the rapprochement with Rome of the strongest prince of Southern Rus', Daniil Romanovich Galitsky, turned out to be useless for the defense against the Tatars: the anti-Tatar crusade promised by the pope did not take place.
3) In 1249, the de facto ruler of Sweden, Jarl Birger, began the final conquest of the land of Emi (Central Finland), and this was done with the blessing of the papal legate. From ancient times, the land of Emi was included in the sphere of influence of Novgorod, and Alexander had reason to regard what had happened as an act unfriendly to him on the part of the curia.
4) The mention in the bull of September 15, 1248 of the possibility of establishing a Catholic episcopal see in Pskov should inevitably have caused negative emotions in Alexander, because. earlier, a bishopric was established in Yuryev, captured by the Germans, and therefore the proposal to establish one in Pskov was associated with the annexationist aspirations of the Order, recalling the more than a year stay of Pskov in 1240-1242. in the hands of the crusaders. Thus, the decision of the prince to stop contacts with Innocent IV was associated with the realization of the futility of rapprochement with Rome to oppose the Horde and with obvious manifestations of selfish motives in the policy of the pope.
But what happened in 1252? According to the information of the early chronicles and the life of Alexander, this year the Novgorod prince went to the Horde. After that, Batu sent an army under the command of Nevryuy to Andrei Yaroslavich; Andrei fled from Vladimir, first to Pereyaslavl, where his ally, the younger brother of Alexander and Andrei, Yaroslav Yaroslavich, reigned. The Tatars, who approached Pereyaslavl, killed Yaroslav's wife, captured his children "and the people were helpless"; Andrei and Yaroslav managed to escape. After Nevruy left, Alexander arrived from the Horde and settled in Vladimir.
In historiography, the following interpretation of these events has become widespread: Alexander went to the Horde on his own initiative with a complaint against his brother, and Nevruy's campaign was a consequence of this complaint. At the same time, authors who had a positive attitude towards Alexander always tried to speak about what happened with restraint, not to focus on these facts, while J. Fennell interpreted the events of 1252 without any constraint: "Alexander betrayed his brothers" . Indeed, since Nevruy’s campaign was caused by Alexander’s complaint, then there is no escape (unless, of course, we strive for objectivity) from the recognition that it was Alexander who was responsible for the ruin of the land and the death of people, incl. his daughter-in-law; however, no reference to higher political considerations can serve as a serious justification. If the given interpretation of the events of 1252 is correct, Alexander Yaroslavich appears as an unprincipled person, ready to do anything to increase his power. But is it true?
Alexander's complaint against his brother is not mentioned in any medieval source. There is a message about it only in the "History of the Russian" by V.N. Tatishchev, it was from there that it passed into the works of later researchers. According to Tatishchev, "Alexander complained about his brother, Grand Duke Andrei, as if he had solicited the khan, taking a great reign under him, as if he were the oldest, and he caught his father's city, and he did not pay the khan for exits and tamgas in full" . In this case, the uncritical judgment that Tatishchev is quoting "apparently an early source that was not included in the annals" is invalid. The use of sources that have not come down to us in the History of Russia is probable, but refers to other periods (primarily the 12th century). At the same time, there are many additions in Tatishchev's work, which are research reconstructions, attempts to restore what the source "did not finish": unlike later historiography, where the text of the source is separated from the judgments of the researcher, they are not delimited in Russian History , which often gives rise to the illusion of mentioning unknown facts where there is a guess (often plausible) of the scientist. This is the case under consideration. Tatishchev's article of 1252, on the whole, literally repeats one of the sources he had - the Nikon Chronicle. The exception is the one above. It is a completely logical reconstruction: since Nevruy's campaign took place after Alexander's arrival in the Horde, and after the campaign he took the table that belonged to Andrei, it means that the campaign was caused by Alexander's complaint against his brother; analogies of such a development of events are found in the activities of the princes of North-Eastern Rus' of a later time. Thus, we are not talking about the source's message, but about the researcher's guess, uncritically perceived by subsequent historiography, and the question is whether the sources provide a basis for such an interpretation of events.
Andrei Yaroslavich, apparently, really pursued a policy independent of Batu, however, in his actions he relied on such a weighty support as a label for the reign of Vladimir, received in 1249 in Karakorum from Khansha Ogul-Gamish, hostile to Batu. But in 1251, Batu managed to place his henchman Munke on the Karakoram throne, and the next year he organized two campaigns at the same time - Nevryuy against Andrey Yaroslavich and Kuremsy against Daniil Romanovich. Thus, the campaign of Nevruy was clearly a planned action as part of actions against the princes who did not obey Batu, and not a reaction to Alexander's complaint. But, if we consider the latter a myth, then for what purpose did Alexander go to the Horde?
In the Laurentian Chronicle (the oldest containing a story about the events of 1252), the facts are presented in the following sequence: first it is said that "Ide Oleksandr, Prince of Novgorod and Yaroslavich, to the Tatars and let him go and with great honor, giving him the eldership in all his brothers", then it tells about the Tatar campaign against Andrei, after which it tells about the arrival of Alexander from the Horde to Vladimir. Since he returned to Rus', undoubtedly after the "Nevruev rati", the words "let go and with honor", etc. should be attributed to the same time. Before telling about the Tatar campaign, the chronicler says: "Prince Yaroslavich Andrya thought of running away with his boyars rather than serving as a tsar." We are clearly talking about a decision that was not made at the time of Nevruy's attack (then the question was not "serve or flee", but "fight or flee"), but earlier. Most likely, Andrei's "thought" with the boyars took place after the Vladimir prince received a demand to come to the Horde. Batu, having finished with internal Mongol affairs, was going to reconsider the decision on the distribution of the main tables in Rus', adopted in 1249 by the former, hostile to him, the Karakoram court, and summoned both Alexander and Andrei to him. The first obeyed the Khan's demand. Andrey, after consulting with his boyars, decided not to go (perhaps he did not count on a successful outcome of the trip because of the favor shown to him in 1249 by the government of the now overthrown and murdered great khansha). After that, Batu decided to send a military expedition against Andrei, as well as against another prince who did not obey him - Daniil of Galitsky, and give Alexander a label for the great reign of Vladimir. It should be noted that the campaign of Nevruy was a much more "local" enterprise than the campaigns against the princes who did not obey Sarai in the early 80s. 13th century and in 1293 ("Dyudenev's army"): only the environs of Pereyaslavl and, possibly, Vladimir were devastated. It is possible that such "limitation" was the result of Alexander's diplomatic efforts.
In general, it can be stated that in the actions of Alexander Yaroslavich there is no reason to look for some kind of conscious fateful choice. He was a man of his era, acted in accordance with the worldview of that time and personal experience. Alexander was, in modern terms, a "pragmatist": he chose the path that seemed to him more profitable for strengthening his land and for himself personally. When it was a decisive battle, he fought; when an agreement with one of the enemies of Rus' seemed most useful, he went to an agreement. As a result, during the period of the great reign of Alexander (1252-1263), there were no Tatar raids on Suzdal land and only two attempts to attack Rus' from the West (Germans in 1253 and Swedes in 1256), quickly suppressed. Alexander achieved recognition by Novgorod of the suzerainty of the Grand Duke of Vladimir (which was one of the factors due to which it was North-Eastern Rus' that later turned into the core of the new, Russian state). His preference for the Vladimir table over Kiev was a decisive event in the process of moving the nominal capital of Rus' from Kiev to Vladimir (because it turned out that it was Vladimir who was chosen as the capital by the prince, recognized as the "oldest" in Rus'). But these long-term consequences of Alexander Nevsky's policy were not the result of his changing the objective course of events. On the contrary, Alexander acted in accordance with the objective circumstances of his era, acted prudently and energetically.
Notes
Kuchkin V.A. On the date of birth of Alexander Nevsky // Questions of history. 1986. No. 2. The date usually given is incorrect.
Novgorod First Chronicle of the Senior and Junior Editions. M. - L. 1950 (hereinafter - NPL). pp. 54-57.
See: Kuchkmn V.A. About the date of birth of Alexander Nevsky; he is. To the biography of Alexander Nevsky // The most ancient states on the territory of the USSR. 1985. M., 1986.
NPL. pp. 69-72.
NPL. pp. 74-77; Complete collection of Russian chronicles (hereinafter - PSRL). T. 1. Stb. 460-467.
PSRL. T. 1. Stb. 469; T. 2. Stb. 782-783; Gorsky A.A. Russian lands in the XIII-XIV centuries: ways of political development. M., 1996. S. 25.
NPL. S. 77.
See: Shaskolsky I.P. Struggle of Rus' against crusader aggression on the shores of the Baltic in the XII-XIII centuries. L., 1978. S. 171-178.
See: Kuchkin V.A. Alexander Nevsky - statesman and commander of medieval Rus' // Alexander Nevsky and the history of Russia. Novgorod, 1996. S. 13-14; the same in: Domestic history. 1996. No. 5. P. 24. Authors seeking to present the Battle of the Neva as an insignificant clash (J. and descendants (XII-XIV centuries), M., 2001, pp. 183-184) do not take into account this goal of the Swedes; meanwhile, earlier the Swedes did not attempt to build fortifications on the Neva, and the next one would be made only sixty years later, in 1300.
NPL. pp. 72-73.
Begunov Yu.K. Monument of Russian literature of the XIII century. "Word about the destruction of the Russian land". M. - L., 1965. S. 188.
