Russian lands in the 12th and early 13th centuries. Russian principalities and lands in the XII

Already in the middle of the 12th century. the power of the Kiev princes began to have real significance only within the boundaries of the Kiev principality itself, which included lands along the banks of the tributaries of the Dnieper - Teterev, Irpen and semi-autonomous Porosye, populated by the Black Hoods, vassals from Kiev. The attempt of Yaropolk, who became the prince of Kyiv after the death of Mstislav I, to autocratically dispose of the “fatherland” of other princes was decisively stopped.
Despite the loss of Kiev's all-Russian significance, the struggle for its possession continued until the Mongol invasion. There was no order in the inheritance of the Kyiv throne, and it passed from hand to hand depending on the balance of power of the fighting princely groups and, to a large extent, on the attitude towards them on the part of the powerful Kiev boyars and the “Black Klobuks”. In the conditions of the all-Russian struggle for Kyiv, the local boyars sought to end the strife and to political stabilization in their principality. The invitation by the boyars in 1113 of Vladimir Monomakh to Kyiv (bypassing the then accepted order of succession) was a precedent that was later used by the boyars to justify their “right” to choose a strong and pleasing prince and to conclude a “row” with him that protected them territorially. corporate interests. The boyars who violated this series of princes were eliminated by going over to the side of his rivals or through a conspiracy (as, perhaps, Yuri Dolgoruky was poisoned, overthrown, and then killed in 1147 during a popular uprising, Igor Olgovich Chernigovsky, unpopular among the people of Kiev). As more and more princes were drawn into the struggle for Kiev, the Kyiv boyars resorted to a kind of system of princely duumvirate, inviting representatives from two of several rival princely groups to Kiev as co-rulers, which for some time achieved the relative political balance much needed by the Kyiv land.
As Kiev loses its all-Russian significance, individual rulers of the strongest principalities, who have become “great” in their lands, begin to be satisfied by the installation of their proteges in Kyiv - “henchmen”.
Princely strife over Kyiv turned the Kyiv land into an arena of frequent military operations, during which cities and villages were ruined, and the population was taken prisoner. Kyiv itself was subjected to brutal pogroms, both from the princes who entered it as victors and those who left it as defeated and returned to their “fatherland.” All this predetermined the development that emerged from the beginning of the 13th century. the gradual decline of the Kyiv land, the flow of its population to the northern and northwestern regions of the country, which suffered less from princely strife and were virtually inaccessible to the Polovtsians. Periods of temporary strengthening of Kiev during the reign of such outstanding political figures and organizers of the fight against the Polovtsians as Svyatoslav Vsevolodich of Chernigov (1180-1194) and Roman Mstislavich of Volyn (1202 - 1205) alternated with the reign of colorless, kaleidoscopically successive princes. Daniil Romanovich Galitsky, into whose hands Kyiv passed shortly before Batu’s capture of it, had already limited himself to appointing his mayor from the boyars.

Vladimir-Suzdal Principality

Until the middle of the 11th century. The Rostov-Suzdal land was governed by mayors sent from Kyiv. Its real “princeship” began after it went to the younger “Yaroslavich” - Vsevolod of Pereyaslavl - and was assigned to his descendants as their ancestral “volost” in the XII-XIII centuries. The Rostov-Suzdal land experienced an economic and political upsurge, which put it among the strongest principalities in Rus'. The fertile lands of the Suzdal “Opolye”, vast forests cut through by a dense network of rivers and lakes along which ancient and important trade routes to the south and east ran, the presence of iron ores accessible for mining - all this favored the development of agriculture, cattle breeding, rural and forestry industries , crafts and trade. In accelerating the economic development and political rise of this forest region, the rapid growth of its population at the expense of the inhabitants of the southern Russian lands, subjected to Polovtsian raids, was of great importance. In the 11th-12th centuries, a large princely and boyar (and then ecclesiastical) state was formed and strengthened here. land ownership, which absorbed communal lands and involved peasants in personal feudal dependence In the 12th - 13th centuries, almost all the main cities of this land arose (Vladimir, Pereyaslavl-Zalesskii, Dmitrov, Starodub, Gorodets, Galich, Kostroma, Tver, Nizhny Novgorod, etc.) , built by the Suzdal princes on the borders and inside the principality as strongholds and administrative points and equipped with trade and craft settlements, the population of which was actively involved in political life. In 1147, the chronicle first mentioned Moscow, a small border town built by Yuri Dolgoruky on the site of the estate of the boyar Kuchka, which he had confiscated.
In the early 30s of the 12th century, during the reign of Monomakh’s son Yuri Vladimirovich Dolgoruky (1125-1157), the Rostov-Suzdal land gained independence. The military-political activity of Yuri, who intervened in all the princely strife, stretched out his “long hands” to cities and lands far from his principality, made him one of the central figures in the political life of Rus' in the second third of the 11th century. The struggle with Novgorod and the war with Volga Bulgaria, begun by Yuri and continued by his successors, marked the beginning of the expansion of the borders of the principality towards the Podvina region and the Volga-Kama lands. Ryazan and Murom, which had previously been “pulling” towards Chernigov, fell under the influence of the Suzdal princes.
The last ten years of Dolgoruky’s life were spent in a grueling and alien to the interests of his principality struggle with the southern Russian princes for Kyiv, the reign of which, in the eyes of Yuri and the princes of his generation, was combined with “eldership” in Rus'. But already the son of Dolgoruky, Andrei Bogolyubsky, having captured Kiev in 1169 and brutally robbed it, handed it over to the management of one of his vassal princes, “helpers”, which indicated a change on the part of the most far-sighted princes in their attitude towards Kyiv, which had lost its significance all-Russian political center.
The reign of Andrei Yuryevich Bogolyubsky (1157 - 1174) was marked by the beginning of the struggle of the Suzdal princes for the political hegemony of their principality over the rest of the Russian lands. The ambitious attempts of Bogolyubsky, who claimed the title of Grand Duke of all Rus', to completely subjugate Novgorod and force other princes to recognize his supremacy in Rus' failed. However, it was precisely these attempts that reflected the tendency to restore the state-political unity of the country based on the subordination of appanage princes to the autocratic ruler of one of the strongest principalities in Rus'.
The reign of Andrei Bogolyubsky is associated with the revival of the traditions of the power politics of Vladimir Monomakh. Relying on the support of the townspeople and noble warriors, Andrei dealt harshly with the rebellious boyars, expelled them from the principality, and confiscated their estates. To be even more independent from the boyars, he moved the capital of the principality from a relatively new city - Vladimir-on-Klyazma, which had a significant trade and craft settlement. It was not possible to completely suppress the boyar opposition to the “autocratic” prince, as Andrei was called by his contemporaries. In June 1174 he was killed by conspiratorial boyars.
The two-year strife, unleashed after the murder of Bogolyubsky by the boyars, ended with the reign of his brother Vsevolod Yuryevich the Big Nest (1176-1212), who, relying on the townspeople and the squads of feudal lords, dealt harshly with the rebellious nobility and became the sovereign ruler in his land. During his reign, the Vladimir-Suzdal land reached its greatest prosperity and power, playing a decisive role in the political life of Rus' at the end of the 12th - beginning of the 13th centuries. Extending his influence to other Russian lands, Vsevolod skillfully combined the force of arms (as, for example, in relation to the Ryazan princes) with skillful politics (in relations with the southern Russian princes and Novgorod). The name and power of Vsevolod were well known far beyond the borders of Rus'. The author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” proudly wrote about him as the most powerful prince in Rus', whose numerous regiments could sprinkle the Volga with oars, and with their helmets draw water from the Don, from whose very name “all countries trembled” and with rumors about which “the world was full of the whole earth."
After the death of Vsevolod, an intensive process of feudal fragmentation began in the Vladimir-Suzdal land. The quarrels of Vsevolod's numerous sons over the grand-ducal table and the distribution of principalities led to a gradual weakening of the grand-ducal power and its political influence on other Russian lands. Nevertheless, until the invasion of the Mongols, the Vladimir-Suzdal land remained the strongest and most influential principality in Rus', maintaining political unity under the leadership of the Vladimir Grand Duke. When planning a campaign of conquest against Rus', the Mongol-Tatars linked the result of the surprise and power of their first strike with the success of the entire campaign as a whole. And it is no coincidence that North-Eastern Rus' was chosen as the target of the first strike.

Chernigov and Smolensk principalities

These two large Dnieper principalities had much in common in their economics and political system with other South Russian principalities, which were ancient centers of culture for the Eastern Slavs. Here already in the 9th -11th centuries. Large princely and boyar land ownership developed, cities grew rapidly, becoming centers of handicraft production, serving not only the nearby rural districts, but also having developed external connections. The Smolensk Principality had extensive trade relations, especially with the West, where the upper reaches of the Volga, Dnieper and Western Dvina converged - the most important trade routes of Eastern Europe.
The separation of Chernigov land into an independent principality occurred in the second half of the 11th century. in connection with its transfer (together with the Murom-Ryazan land) to the son of Yaroslav the Wise Svyatoslav, to whose descendants it was assigned. Back at the end of the 11th century. The ancient ties between Chernigov and Tmutarakan, which was cut off by the Polovtsians from the rest of the Russian lands and fell under the sovereignty of Byzantium, were interrupted. At the end of the 40s of the 11th century. The Chernigov principality was divided into two principalities: Chernigov and Novgorod-Seversky. At the same time, the Murom-Ryazan land became isolated, falling under the influence of the Vladimir-Suzdal princes. The Smolensk land separated from Kyiv at the end of the 20s of the 12th century, when it went to the son of Mstislav I Rostislav. Under him and his descendants (“Rostislavichs”), the Smolensk principality expanded territorially and strengthened.
The central, connecting position of the Chernigov and Smolensk principalities among other Russian lands involved their princes in all the political events that took place in Rus' in the 12th-13th centuries, and above all in the struggle for their neighboring Kyiv. The Chernigov and Seversk princes showed particular political activity, indispensable participants (and often initiators) of all princely strife, unscrupulous in the means of fighting their opponents and more often than other princes resorted to an alliance with the Polovtsians, with whom they devastated the lands of their rivals. It is no coincidence that the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” called the founder of the dynasty of Chernigov princes Oleg Svyatoslavich “Gorislavich,” who was the first to “forge sedition with the sword” and “sow” the Russian land with strife.
The grand ducal power in the Chernigov and Smolensk lands was unable to overcome the forces of feudal decentralization (the zemstvo nobility and the rulers of small principalities), and as a result, these lands at the end of the 12th - first half of the 13th century. were fragmented into many small principalities, which only nominally recognized the sovereignty of the great princes.

Polotsk-Minsk land

The Polotsk-Minsk land showed early trends towards separation from Kyiv. Despite the unfavorable soil conditions for agriculture, the socio-economic development of the Polotsk land occurred at a high pace due to its favorable location at the crossroads of the most important trade routes along the Western Dvina, Neman and Berezina. Lively trade relations with the West and the Baltic neighboring tribes (Livs, Lats, Curonians, etc.), which were under the sovereignty of the Polotsk princes, contributed to the growth of cities with a significant and influential trade and craft stratum. A large feudal economy with developed agricultural industries, the products of which were exported abroad, also developed here early.
At the beginning of the 11th century. The Polotsk land went to the brother of Yaroslav the Wise, Izyaslav, whose descendants, relying on the support of the local nobility and townspeople, fought for the independence of their “fatherland” from Kyiv for more than a hundred years with varying success. The Polotsk land reached its greatest power in the second half of the 11th century. during the reign of Vseslav Bryachislavich (1044-1103), but in the 12th century. an intensive process of feudal fragmentation began in it. In the first half of the 13th century. it was already a conglomerate of small principalities that only nominally recognized the power of the Grand Duke of Polotsk. These principalities, weakened by internal strife, faced a difficult struggle (in alliance with neighboring and dependent Baltic tribes) with the German crusaders who invaded the Eastern Baltic. From the middle of the 12th century. The Polotsk land became the target of an offensive by the Lithuanian feudal lords.

Galicia-Volyn land

The Galician-Volyn land extended from the Carpathians and the Dniester-Danube Black Sea region in the south and southwest to the lands of the Lithuanian Yatvingian tribe and the Polotsk land in the north. In the west it bordered with Hungary and Poland, and in the east with the Kyiv land and the Polovtsian steppe. The Galicia-Volyn land was one of the most ancient centers of the arable farming culture of the Eastern Slavs. Fertile soils, mild climate, numerous rivers and forests, interspersed with steppe spaces, created favorable conditions for the development of agriculture, cattle breeding and various crafts, and at the same time the early development of feudal relations, large feudal princely and boyar land ownership. Craft production reached a high level, the separation of which from agriculture contributed to the growth of cities, which were more numerous here than in other Russian lands. The largest of them were Vladimir-Volynsky, Przemysl, Terebovl, Galich, Berestye, Kholm, Drogichin, etc. A significant part of the inhabitants of these cities were artisans and merchants. The second trade route from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea (Vistula-Western Bug-Dniester) and overland trade routes from Rus' to the countries of South-Eastern and Central Europe passed through the Galicia-Volyn land. The dependence of the Dniester-Danube lower land on Galich made it possible to control the European shipping trade route along the Danube with the East.
Galician land until the middle of the 12th century. was divided into several small principalities, which in 1141 were united by the Przemysl prince Vladimir Volodarevich, who moved his capital to Galich. The Principality of Galicia reached its greatest prosperity and power under his son Yaroslav Osmomysl (1153-1187) - a major statesman of that time, who highly raised the international prestige of his principality and successfully defended in his policy all-Russian interests in relations with Byzantium and the European states neighboring Russia. . The author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” dedicated the most pathetic lines to the military power and international authority of Yaroslav Osmomysl. After the death of Osmomysl, the Principality of Galicia became the arena of a long struggle between the princes and the oligarchic aspirations of the local boyars. Boyar land ownership in the Galician land was ahead of the princely land in its development and significantly exceeded the latter in size. The Galician “great boyars”, who owned huge estates with their own fortified castle cities and had numerous military servants-vassals, in the fight against the princes they disliked, resorted to conspiracies and rebellions, and entered into an alliance with the Hungarian and Polish feudal lords.
The Volyn land separated from Kyiv in the middle of the 12th century, securing itself as a ancestral “fatherland” for the descendants of the Kyiv Grand Duke Izyaslav Mstislavich. Unlike the neighboring Galician land, a large princely domain was formed early in Volyn. Boyar land ownership grew mainly due to princely grants to serving boyars, whose support allowed the Volyn princes to begin an active struggle to expand their “fatherland.” In 1199, the Volyn prince Roman Mstislavich managed to unite the Galician and Volyn lands for the first time, and with his occupation in 1203, Kyiv brought all of Southern and Southwestern Rus' under his rule - a territory equal to the large European states of that time. The reign of Roman Mstislavich was marked by the strengthening of the all-Russian and international position of the Galicia-Volyn region
lands, successes in the fight against the Polovtsians, the fight against the rebellious boyars, the rise of Western Russian cities, crafts and trade. Thus, the conditions were prepared for the flourishing of Southwestern Rus' during the reign of his son Daniil Romanovich.
The death of Roman Mstislavich in Poland in 1205 led to the temporary loss of the achieved political unity of Southwestern Rus' and to the weakening of princely power in it. All groups of the Galician boyars united in the struggle against the princely power, unleashing a devastating feudal war that lasted over 30 years.
The boyars entered into an agreement with the Hungarian and
Polish feudal lords who managed to take possession of the Galician land and part of Volyn. During these same years, an unprecedented case in Rus' occurred in the reign of boyar Vodrdislav Kormilich in Galich. The national liberation struggle against the Hungarian and Polish invaders, which ended in their defeat and expulsion, served as the basis for the restoration and strengthening of the positions of princely power. Relying on the support of cities, the service boyars and the nobility, Daniil Romanovich established himself in Volyn, and then, having occupied Galich in 1238, and Kyiv in 1240, he again united all of South-Western Rus' and the Kyiv land.

Novgorod feudal republic

A special political system, different from princely monarchies, developed in the 12th century. in Novgorod land, one of the most developed Russian lands. The ancient core of the Novgorod-Pskov land consisted of the lands between Ilmen and Lake Peipus and along the banks of the Volkhov, Lovat, Velikaya, Mologa and Msta rivers, which were divided territorially and geographically into “pyatina”, and
in administrative terms - “hundreds” and “cemeteries”. The Novgorod “suburbs” (Pskov, Ladoga, Staraya Russa, Velikiye Luki, Bezhichi, Yuryev, Torzhok) served as important trading posts on trade routes and military strongholds on the borders of the land. The largest suburb, which occupied a special, autonomous position in the system of the Novgorod Republic (the “younger brother” of Novgorod), was Pskov, distinguished by its developed crafts and its own trade with the Baltic states, German cities and even with Novgorod itself. In the second half of the 13th century. Pskov actually became an independent feudal republic.
From the 11th century active Novgorod colonization of Karelia, the Podvina region, the Onega region and the vast northern Pomerania began, which became Novgorod colonies. Following the peasant colonization (from the Novgorod and Rostov-Suzdal lands) and the Novgorod trade and fishing people, the Novgorod feudal lords also moved there. In the XII - XIII centuries. there already were the largest patrimonial estates of the Novgorod nobility, who jealously did not allow feudal lords from other principalities to enter these areas and create princely land ownership there.
In the 12th century. Novgorod was one of the largest and most developed cities in Rus'. The rise of Novgorod was facilitated by its exceptionally advantageous location at the beginning of trade routes important for Eastern Europe, connecting the Baltic Sea with the Black and Caspian Seas. This predetermined a significant share of intermediary trade in Novgorod’s trade relations with other Russian lands, with Volga Bulgaria, the Caspian and Black Sea regions, the Baltic states, Scandinavia and North German cities. Trade in Novgorod was based on crafts and various trades developed in the Novgorod land. Novgorod artisans, distinguished by their wide specialization and professional skills, worked mainly to order, but some of their products came to the city market, and through merchant buyers to foreign markets. Craftsmen and merchants had their own territorial (“Ulichansky”) and professional associations (“hundreds”, “brotherhood”), which played a significant role in the political life of Novgorod. The most influential, uniting the top of the Novgorod merchants, was the association of merchants-women (“Ivanskoye Sto”), who were mainly engaged in foreign trade. The Novgorod boyars also actively participated in foreign trade, virtually monopolizing the most profitable fur trade, which they received from their possessions in the Podvina and Pomerania and from the trade and fishing expeditions they specially equipped to the Pechersk and Ugra lands.
Despite the predominance of the trade and craft population in Novgorod, the basis of the economy of the Novgorod land was agriculture and related crafts. Due to unfavorable natural conditions, grain farming was unproductive and bread constituted a significant part of Novgorod imports. Grain reserves in the estates were created at the expense of food rent collected from smerds and were used by feudal lords for speculation in frequent lean years of famine, to entangle the working people in usurious bondage. In a number of areas, peasants, in addition to ordinary rural crafts, were engaged in the extraction of iron ore and salt.
In the Novgorod land, large boyar and then church land ownership arose early and became dominant. The specificity of the position of the princes in Novgorod, sent from Kyiv as prince-deputies, which excluded the possibility of Novgorod turning into a principality, did not contribute to the formation of a large princely domain, thereby weakening the position of the princely authorities in the fight against the oligarchic aspirations of the local boyars. Already the end! V. the Novgorod nobility largely predetermined the candidacies of the princes sent from Kyiv. Thus, in 1102, the boyars refused to accept the son of the Kyiv Grand Duke Svyatopolk into Novgorod, declaring with a threat to the latter: “if your son had two heads, then they ate him.”
In 1136, the rebels of Novgorod, supported by the Pskovians and Ladoga residents, expelled Prince Vsevolod Mstislavich, accusing him of “neglecting” the interests of Novgorod. In the Novgorod land, freed from the rule of Kyiv, a unique political system was established, in which republican governing bodies stood next to and above the princely power. However, the Novgorod feudal lords needed the prince and his squad to fight the anti-feudal protests of the masses and to protect Novgorod from external danger. In the first time after the uprising of 1136, the scope of the rights and activities of the princely power did not change, but they acquired a service-executive character, were subject to regulation and were placed under the control of the mayor (primarily in the field of court, which the prince began to administer together with the mayor). As the political system in Novgorod acquired an increasingly pronounced boyar-oligarchic character, the rights and sphere of activity of the princely power were steadily reduced.
The lowest level of organization and management in Novgorod was the unification of neighbors - “ulichans” with elected elders at their head. Five urban “ends” formed self-governing territorial-administrative and political units, which also had special Konchan lands in collective feudal ownership. At the ends, their own veche gathered and elected Konchan elders.
The highest authority, representing all ends, was considered the city veche meeting of free citizens, owners of city yards and estates. The bulk of the urban plebs, who lived on the lands and estates of feudal lords as tenants or enslaved and feudal-dependent people, were not authorized to participate in the passing of veche sentences, but thanks to the publicity of the veche, which gathered on Sophia Square or Yaroslav's Courtyard, they could follow the progress of veche debates and with its violent reaction often exerted a certain amount of pressure on the eternalists. The veche considered the most important issues of domestic and foreign policy, invited the prince and entered into a series with him, elected the mayor, who was in charge of administration and court and controlled the activities of the prince, and the thousand, who headed the militia and the court for trade matters, which was of particular importance in Novgorod.
Throughout the history of the Novgorod Republic, the positions of posadnik, Konchan elders and tysyatsky were occupied only by representatives of 30 - 40 boyar families - the elite of the Novgorod nobility (“300 golden belts”).
In order to further strengthen the independence of Novgorod from Kyiv and transform the Novgorod bishopric from an ally of the princely power into one of the instruments of its political domination, the Novgorod nobility managed to achieve the election (since 1156) of the Novgorod bishop, who, as the head of the powerful church feudal hierarchy, became soon one of the first dignitaries of the republic.
The veche system in Novgorod and Pskov was a kind of Feudal “democracy”, one of the forms of the feudal state, in which the democratic principles of representation and election of officials at the veche created the illusion of “democracy”, the participation of “the whole of Novgovgorod in governance, but where in reality all the power was concentrated in the hands of the boyars and the privileged elite of the merchant class. Taking into account the political activity of the urban plebs, the boyars skillfully used the democratic traditions of Konchan self-government as a symbol of Novgorod freedom, which covered their political dominance and provided them with the support of the urban plebs in the fight against the princely power.
Political history of Novgorod in the XII - XIII centuries. was distinguished by the complex interweaving of the struggle for independence with anti-feudal protests of the masses and the struggle for power between boyar groups (representing the boyar families of the Sofia and Trade sides of the city, its ends and streets). The boyars often used anti-feudal protests of the urban poor to eliminate their rivals from power, dulling the anti-feudal nature of these protests to the point of reprisals against individual boyars or officials. The largest anti-feudal movement was the uprising in 1207 against the mayor Dmitry Miroshkinich and his relatives, who burdened the urban people and peasants with arbitrary exactions and usurious bondage. The rebels destroyed the city estates and villages of the Miroshkinichs, and seized their debt bonds. The boyars, hostile to the Miroshkinichs, took advantage of the uprising to remove them from power.
Novgorod had to wage a stubborn struggle for its independence with neighboring princes who sought to subjugate the rich “free” city. The Novgorod boyars skillfully used the rivalry between the princes to choose strong allies among them. At the same time, rival boyar groups drew the rulers of neighboring principalities into their struggle. The most difficult thing for Novgorod was the struggle with the Suzdal princes, who enjoyed the support of an influential group of Novgorod boyars and merchants connected by trade interests with North-Eastern Russia. An important weapon of political pressure on Novgorod in the hands of the Suzdal princes was the cessation of the supply of grain from North-Eastern Rus'. The positions of the Suzdal princes in Novgorod were significantly strengthened when their military assistance to the Novgorodians and Pskovians became decisive in repelling the aggression of the German Crusaders and Swedish feudal lords who sought to seize the western and northern Novgorod territories.

Work plan.

I.Introduction.

II.Russian lands and principalities inXII-XIIIcenturies.

Causes and essence of state fragmentation. Socio-political and cultural characteristics of Russian lands during the period of fragmentation.

§ 1. The feudal fragmentation of Rus' is a natural stage in the development of Russian society and the state.

§ 2. Economic and socio-political reasons for the fragmentation of Russian lands.

§ 3. The Vladimir-Suzdal principality as one of the types of feudal state formations in Rus' in the 12th-13th centuries.

§ 4 Features of the geographical location, natural and climatic conditions of the Vladimir-Suzdal land.

§ 5. Features of the socio-political and cultural development of the Vladimir-Suzdal principality.

The Mongol-Tatar invasion of Rus' and its consequences. Rus' and the Golden Horde.

§ 1. The originality of the historical development and way of life of the nomadic peoples of Central Asia.

§ 2. Batya’s invasion and the formation of the Golden Horde.

§ 3. The Mongol-Tatar yoke and its influence on ancient Russian history.

The struggle of Rus' against the aggression of the German and Swedish conquerors. Alexander Nevskiy.

§ 1. Expansion to the East of Western European countries and religious and political organizations at the beginning of the 13th century.

§ 2. Historical significance of the military victories of Prince Alexander Nevsky (Battle of the Neva, Battle of the Ice).

III. Conclusion

I. INTRODUCTION

The XII-XIII centuries, which will be discussed in this test work, are barely visible in the fog of the past. In order to understand and understand the events of this most difficult era in the history of medieval Rus', it is necessary to get acquainted with the monuments of ancient Russian literature, study fragments of medieval chronicles and chronicles, and read the works of historians relating to this period. It is historical documents that help us see in history not a simple set of dry facts, but a complex science, the achievements of which play an important role in the further development of society, and allow us to better understand the most important events of Russian history.

Consider the reasons that determined feudal fragmentation - the political and economic decentralization of the state, the creation on the territory of Ancient Rus' of practically independent, independent state entities on the territory of Ancient Russia; to understand why the Tatar-Mongol yoke on Russian soil became possible, and how the dominance of the conquerors was manifested for more than two centuries in the field of economic, political and cultural life, and what consequences it had for the future historical development of Rus' - this is the main task of this work.

The 13th century, rich in tragic events, still excites and attracts the attention of historians and writers. After all, this century is called the “dark period” of Russian history.

However, its beginning was bright and calm. The huge country, larger in size than any European state, was full of young creative force. The proud and strong people who inhabited it did not yet know the oppressive weight of the foreign yoke, did not know the humiliating inhumanity of serfdom.

The world in their eyes was simple and whole. They did not yet know the destructive power of gunpowder. Distance was measured by the swing of arms or the flight of an arrow, and time by the change of winter and summer. The rhythm of their life was leisurely and measured.

At the beginning of the 12th century, axes were knocking all over Rus', new cities and villages were growing. Rus' was a country of craftsmen. Here they knew how to weave the finest lace and build skyward cathedrals, forge reliable, sharp swords and paint the heavenly beauty of angels.

Rus' was a crossroads of peoples. In the squares of Russian cities one could meet Germans and Hungarians, Poles and Czechs, Italians and Greeks, Polovtsians and Swedes... Many were surprised at how quickly the “Russians” assimilated the achievements of neighboring peoples, applied them to their needs, and enriched their own ancient and unique culture.

At the beginning of the 13th century, Rus' was one of the most prominent states in Europe. The power and wealth of the Russian princes were known throughout Europe.

But suddenly a thunderstorm approached the Russian land - a hitherto unknown terrible enemy. The Mongol-Tatar yoke fell heavily on the shoulders of the Russian people. The exploitation of the conquered peoples by the Mongol khans was ruthless and comprehensive. Simultaneously with the invasion from the East, Rus' was faced with another terrible disaster - the expansion of the Livonian Order, its attempt to impose Catholicism on the Russian people. In this difficult historical era, the heroism and love of freedom of our people manifested themselves with particular force, people rose to the occasion, whose names were forever preserved in the memory of posterity.

II. RUSSIAN LANDS AND PRINCIPALITIES INXII-XIIIBB.

1. CAUSES AND ESSENCE OF STATE Fragmentation. SOCIO-POLITICAL AND CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF RUSSIAN LANDS

PERIOD OF FRAGRANCE.

§ 1. FEUDAL Fragmentation of Rus' – A LEGAL STAGE

DEVELOPMENT OF RUSSIAN SOCIETY AND STATE

Since the 30s of the 12th century, the process of feudal fragmentation began in Rus'. Feudal fragmentation is an inevitable stage in the evolution of feudal society, the basis of which is the natural economy with its isolation and isolation.

The system of natural economy that had developed by this time contributed to the isolation from each other of all individual economic units (family, community, inheritance, land, principality), each of which became self-sufficient, consuming all the product it produced. There was practically no exchange of goods in this situation.

Within the framework of a single Russian state, over the course of three centuries, independent economic regions emerged, new cities grew, large patrimonial farms and the estates of many monasteries and churches arose and developed. Feudal clans grew and united - the boyars with their vassals, the rich elite of the cities, church hierarchs. The nobility arose, the basis of whose life was service to the overlord in exchange for a land grant for the duration of this service. The huge Kievan Rus with its superficial political cohesion, necessary, first of all, for defense against an external enemy, for organizing long-distance campaigns of conquest, now no longer met the needs of large cities with their branched feudal hierarchy, developed trade and craft layers, and the needs of patrimonial lands.

The need to unite all forces against the Polovtsian danger and the powerful will of the great princes - Vladimir Monomakh and his son Mstislav - temporarily slowed down the inevitable process of fragmentation of Kievan Rus, but then it resumed with renewed vigor. “The whole Russian land was in disarray,” as the chronicle says.

From the point of view of general historical development, the political fragmentation of Rus' is a natural stage on the path to the future centralization of the country, future economic and political takeoff on a new civilizational basis.

Europe also did not escape the collapse of early medieval states, fragmentation and local wars. Then the process of formation of national states of a secular type, which still exist today, developed here. Ancient Rus', having gone through a period of collapse, could have come to a similar result. However, the Mongol-Tatar invasion disrupted this natural development of political life in Rus' and threw it back.

§ 2. ECONOMIC AND SOCIO-POLITICAL REASONS

Fragmentation of the Russian lands

We can highlight the economic and socio-political reasons for feudal fragmentation in Rus':

1.Economic reasons:

the growth and development of feudal boyar land ownership, expansion of estates by seizing the lands of community members, purchasing land, etc. All this led to increased economic power and independence of the boyars and, ultimately, to an aggravation of contradictions between the boyars and the Grand Duke of Kyiv. The boyars were interested in such princely power that could provide them with military and legal protection, in particular in connection with the growing resistance of the townspeople, the smerds, to contribute to the seizure of their lands and increased exploitation.

the dominance of subsistence farming and the lack of economic ties contributed to the creation of relatively small boyar worlds and the separatism of local boyar unions.

in the 12th century, trade routes began to bypass Kyiv, “the path from the Varangians to the Greeks,” which once united the Slavic tribes around itself, gradually lost its former significance, because European merchants, as well as Novgorodians, were increasingly attracted to Germany, Italy, and the Middle East.

2. Socio-political reasons :

strengthening the power of individual princes;

weakening of the influence of the Grand Duke of Kyiv;

princely strife; they were based on the Yaroslav appanage system itself, which could no longer satisfy the expanded Rurik family. There was no clear, precise order either in the distribution of inheritances or in their inheritance. After the death of the Grand Duke of Kyiv, the “table”, according to existing law, went not to his son, but to the eldest prince in the family. At the same time, the principle of seniority came into conflict with the principle of “fatherland”: when the prince-brothers moved from one “table” to another, some of them did not want to change their homes, while others rushed to the Kyiv “table” over the heads of their older brothers. Thus, the continued order of inheritance of “tables” created the preconditions for internecine conflicts. In the middle of the 12th century, civil strife reached unprecedented severity, and the number of participants increased many times as a result of the fragmentation of the princely possessions. At that time in Rus' there were 15 principalities and separate lands. In the next century, on the eve of Batu’s invasion, it was already 50.

the growth and strengthening of cities as new political and cultural centers can also be considered the reason for the further fragmentation of Rus', although some historians, on the contrary, regard the development of cities as a consequence of this process.

the fight against nomads also weakened the Principality of Kiev and slowed down its progress; in Novgorod and Suzdal it was much calmer.

To summarize the above, it should be noted that feudal fragmentation in Rus' in the 12th-13th centuries was a natural phenomenon associated with the peculiarities of the formation of the feudal system. Despite the progressiveness of this process, feudal fragmentation had a significant negative aspect: constant strife between the princes depleted the strength of the Russian lands, weakening them in the face of external danger, in particular the approaching Mongol-Tatar invasion.

§ 3. VLADIMIRO-SUZDAL PRINCIPALITY AS ONE OF THE TYPES

FEUDAL STATE FORMATIONS IN Rus'.

In the middle of the 12th century, the once united Kiev state broke up into a number of independent lands and principalities. This collapse occurred under the influence of the feudal mode of production. The external defense of the Russian land was especially weakened. The princes of individual principalities pursued their own separate policies, considering primarily the interests of the local feudal nobility and entered into endless internecine wars. This led to the loss of centralized control and to a severe weakening of the state as a whole.

Further processes of feudalization that continued in the Russian lands, the specifics of local conditions, the peculiarities of the geographical location, and socio-economic development determined different types of political power in the Russian lands and determined three main political centers: in the southwest - the Galician-Volyn principality; in the northeast - the Vladimir-Suzdal principality and Novgorod land in the northwest. These three feudal formations differed in the degree of influence of princely power and the role of the feudal aristocracy, as well as the degree of development of one of the forms of feudal land ownership (patrimony and estate), the influence of external factors on internal political life, and played a major role in the history of Rus' in the 12th-13th centuries.

A feudal veche republic was established in Novgorod the Great. A conflict type of government has developed in the Galicia-Volyn lands. The political system of North-Eastern Rus' gravitated towards the princely monarchy.

Gradually, the center of economic and political life moved northeast to the Upper Volga basin. Here the strong Vladimir-Suzdal principality was formed - later the dominant territory of North-Eastern Rus', it became the center of the unification of Russian lands. During the period of feudal fragmentation (after the 30s of the 12th century), it acted as a competitor to Kyiv.

§ 4. FEATURES OF GEOGRAPHICAL POSITION, NATURAL

CLIMATIC CONDITIONS OF THE VLADIMIRO-SUZDAL LAND.

For many centuries, North-Eastern Rus' was a wild outskirts. Fertile soils, rich forests, many rivers and lakes created favorable conditions for the development of agriculture, cattle breeding and crafts. Trade routes to the south, east and west passed here, which led to the development of trade. It was also important that the northeastern lands were well protected by forests and rivers from the raids of nomads. The forest thickets of this land were so vast that in the 13th century, two princely armies going out to battle got lost and did not find each other. It was the land of the rebellious Vyatichi tribe.

Under the dominance of a subsistence economy, each principality had the opportunity to separate from the center and exist as an independent land or principality. By the middle of the 12th century. on the basis of Kievan Rus, 15 independent principalities were formed, and by the beginning of the 13th century. - 50 principalities. Feudal fragmentation became a new form of organization of Russian statehood in the conditions of the development of the feudal mode of production, which became a natural stage in the development of Ancient Rus'. Titles of the Grand Duke in the 12th century. They named not only the Kyiv princes, but also other princes. The fragmentation process led to the fact that the principalities were divided into smaller fiefs. As a result of this process, the following became independent principalities: Kiev, Chernigov, Murom, etc. Each of the lands was ruled by its own dynasty - one of the branches of the Rurikovichs. The largest principalities were: Galicia-Volyn, Vladimir-Suzdal and Novgorod Boyar Republic. The Vladimir-Suzdal principality emerged at the beginning of the 12th century as a large feudal-boyar agriculture. There were many cities on its territory: Dmitrov, Zvenigorod, Rostov, Suzdal - the territory was protected from enemies by forests and rivers. Profitable trade routes contributed to the separation from the Kyiv state. This principality strengthened under Prince Yuri Dolgoruky, Andrei the Bogolyubenny, and under Vsedom the Big Nest. In the southwest of Rus', the Galician-Volyn principality played an important role. There were fertile lands, rich cities, and significant reserves of rock salt. Princes Yaroslav I and Roman Mstislavovich successfully fought against the Polish feudal lords, the Polovtsians. The largest political center was the Novgorod Boyar Republic. The highest body of the republic was the veche, where the mayor and bishop were elected. The basis of the government's economy was agriculture. Russian lands in the 12th-13th centuries. were independent, had various forms of government, and the economic basis was agriculture.

In the spring of 1223, hordes of nomads under the command of Genghis Khan reached the Dnieper. These were the Mongol-Tatars. Their society was at the stage of decline of military democracy during the transition to the early feudal monarchy. The nomadic army was distinguished by strict military discipline. For example, for the escape of one warrior from the battlefield, his entire ten were executed; for the escape of a dozen, a hundred died.

The Mongol-Tatars came to the Dnieper to attack the Polovtsians, whose khan, Kotyan, turned to his son-in-law, the Galician prince Mstislav Romanovich, for help.

The Russians, therefore, first met in battle with the invaders on the river. Kalka May 31, 1223 The first clash showed:

1) the futility of attempts by Russian troops to help the allies;
2) lack of a single organization;
3) weakness of command.

All together made further battle with the invaders pointless for the Russians.

In the winter of 1237, the Mongol-Tatars under the command of Batu entered the territory of North-Eastern Rus'. Their first victim was the Russian city of Kazan, then the invaders plundered Kolomna.

In February 1238, the capital of North-Eastern Rus', Vladimir, fell.

The nomads conquered Chernigov, and the capital Kyiv also fell. The capture of Russian cities was accompanied by inhuman cruelty; residents were killed, regardless of gender and age.

The war did not affect the Orthodox Church.

The conquerors did not interfere in the religious area of the conquered countries. They did not take tribute from the monasteries. The Mongol-Tatars also sought to attract church leaders to their side.

The Mongol-Tatar yoke was established in Rus': 1) Rus' fell under the rule of the Horde protectorate.

The Golden Horde is the ulus of Jochi, a powerful state created by the Mongol khans. Its capital was Sarai-Batu, located not far from modern Astrakhan; 2) the khan handed over the label for the great reign of Vladimir and controlled the situation throughout the territory. The label was a desired goal for the Russian princes and the cause of feudal strife; 3) the conquerors in every possible way encouraged feudal fragmentation, pitting Rurik’s descendants against each other; 4) the main form of dependence on the Horde was the collection of tribute, the “Horde exit”. Khan's officials (baskaks) dealt with it in Rus'. Tribute was collected from the household. The actions of the Baskaks were characterized by extreme cruelty. They captured people and censused the entire population of North-Eastern Rus' in 1257-1259. The “Great Baskak” had a residence in Vladimir, where at that time the political center of the country practically moved.

The main reasons for the defeat of Rus' and the establishment of the Horde yoke were:

1) the feudal fragmentation that existed at that time, since each principality found itself alone with the forces of the conquerors. Thus, the Russian princes were defeated one by one by their enemies;
2) the Mongol-Tatars used advanced military equipment (stone throwers, battering machines, gunpowder);
3) numerical superiority of the enemy.

The results of the conquest: cities and villages were burned, skilled artisans were taken into slavery, fields fell into disrepair, and Rus''s foreign economic relations were disrupted for many years. The Mongol-Tatar conquest completed the history of Ancient Rus' in 1240.

The Mongol-Tatar conquest played the role of a catalyst during the division of territory and spheres of influence. This specific feature also distinguished the struggle between the Moscow and Tver principalities in a later period. As a result of this, the exploitation of the dependent population on the ground has increased.

As a result of studying this chapter, the student should:

know

features of development and foundations] gys facts of the political and social history of the Russian lands of the 12th–13th centuries: Kiev, Chernigov, Pereyaslav, Rostov-Suzdal, Ryazan, Polotsk, Minsk, Turov, Smolensk, Galician and Volyn, Novgorod;
places of memory of Russian history associated with the period under study;

be able to

explain the reasons for the separation of various political centers, princely dynasties, and the struggle of individual lands with each other;
critically analyze the concepts of historiography about the essence of the period of the 12th–13th centuries. in the history of Russian lands (the concept of “feudalism”, “feudal fragmentation”, etc.);
plot on a contour map the political centers of individual lands and the approximate territories of their power and influence;
draw up a chronological table for the period under study;

own

methods of searching for information in library and electronic resources for the period being studied and the issues being studied;
ideas about the features of the Middle Ages as a historical era in relation to the history of Russia.

Key terms and concepts: feudalism, appanage principality, the great reign of Vladimir, veche, prince, treaty (row), invitation of princes, Kiev land, Chernigov land, Pereyaslavl land, Rostov-Suzdal land, Ryazan land, Polotsk land, Minsk land, Turov land, Smolensk land , Galician and Volyn lands, Novgorod lands.

Key names: Vladimir Monomakh, Yuri Dolgoruky, Yaroslav Osmomysl, Roman Mstislavich Galitsky, Oleg Svyatoslavich Chernigovsky, Andrey Yuryevich Bogolyubsky, Vsevolod Yuryevich Big Nest, Vseslav Bryachislavich Polotsky, Daniil Romanovich Galitsky, Rostislav Mstislavich Smolensky.

Russian lands in the 12th–13th centuries: general characteristics

Period XII - first half of the XV century. in historiography it is called the era of fragmentation. Its beginning is usually associated with the death of the son of Vladimir Monomakh - Mstislava(1132), after which, as the chronicle puts it, “the whole Russian land was enraged.”

The preconditions for the allocation of separate territories were laid in 1097 by the decisions of the Lyubech Congress, at which the division of the possessions of the entire Rurik family was proclaimed between three dynasties - Izyaslavich, Svyatoslavich, Vsevolodovich. However, at the beginning of the 12th century. Vladimir Monomakh, with his iron will, managed to subjugate most of the princes. But the system could not stand on the power of one, albeit a very strong leader, and after his death the process of sovereignization of individual lands became irreversible.

As A. A. Gorsky showed, in the 12th century. in Rus' on the basis of the territorial units of a single early feudal state - volosts – 13 formations emerged, which began to be called lands(for example, Kiev land, Chernigov land, etc.). From the middle of the 12th century. the term “volost” began to denote primarily not a large principality (“land”) as a whole, but a part of its territory under the authority of one or another prince. Term Earth meant sovereign state(in historiography land often call principalities).

"The Polotsk principality was the earliest to stand apart dynastically: at the end of the 10th century, the Polotsk volost was transferred by the Kiev prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich to his son Izyaslav and assigned to his descendants. At the end of the 11th century, Peremyshl and Tersbovl volosts, later united into the Galician land (during the reign of Vladimir Volodarevich, 1124–1153).With the reign of Vladimir Monomakh Yuri (Dolgoruky)'s son in Rostov at the beginning of the 12th century, the separation of the Rostov-Suzdal land began, where his descendants began to reign The final separation of the Chernigov land can be dated back to 1127. In this year, the possessions of the descendants of Svyatoslav Yaroslavich, assigned to him by the Lyubetsk Congress of Princes in 1097, were divided into the Chernigov principality, which went to the sons of Davyd and Oleg Svyatoslavich (from 1167, after the termination of the Davydovich branch , only the Olgovichs reigned there), and Murom, where their uncle Yaroslav Svyatoslavich began to rule. Later, the Murom reign was divided into two - Murom and Ryazan under the control of different branches of Yaroslav's descendants: the descendants of Svyatoslav Yaroslavich reigned in the Murom land, his brother Rostislav - in the Ryazan land. The Smolensk land was assigned to the descendants of Rostislav Mstislavich, the grandson of Vladimir Monomakh, who lived in Smolensk in the 20s. XII century The descendants of another grandson of Monomakh, Izyaslav Mstislavich, began to rule in the Volyn principality. In the second half of the 12th century. The Turovo-Pinsk principality is assigned to the descendants of Prince Svyatonolk Izyaslavich."

Several dynasties existed simultaneously in Rus' - Monomakhovichi, Olgovichi, Rostislavichy etc. Nine lands were ruled by certain branches of the Rurik princely family: tables within the land were distributed among representatives of the branch. In the XII - early XIII centuries. four lands (Kiev, Novgorod, Galician and Chernigov) had not yet been assigned to any specific subdynasty. The result of the struggle of princes for disputed thrones and territories was the further fragmentation of lands. Among the princely dynasties, according to the calculations of A. A. Gorsky, in the 13th century. the leaders were the Rostislavichs (their representatives in the 13th century owned all-Russian tables for about 50 years), the Yuryevichs (30 years), the Olgovichis (16.5 years), and the Izyaslavichs (13 years).

The main reason for the collapse of the country is the development of feudal relations. It can highlight political, social, and economic factors.

In the XII–XIII centuries. The final formation of feudal relations in Rus' took place. The princes and boyars turned their estates into hereditary possessions and in every possible way resisted Kyiv's attempts to take them away. Each appanage principality was a fief whose owner wanted to dispose of his property himself, regardless of the central government. It was also easier for his subjects to turn to their “local” master for help and protection than to the distant Kyiv prince. The power of the latter turned out to be of no use to anyone.

At this time, a special social group formed around the appanage princes - nobles. They constituted the princely yard and were entirely dependent on their master: all they possessed was land received for the duration of their service. If they left for another ruler, they lost their possessions. Therefore, the richer the prince was, the more powerful an army from the nobles he could recruit for himself and with it resist any attempts by the central government to limit his personal interests.

In the 12th century. The role of cities with veche governance, urban communities, which overthrew the power of princes and invited them to rule at their own discretion on the terms of a “row” (agreement), increases. This became possible thanks to the development of urban crafts and trade, which reached such a level that the townspeople could themselves maintain a powerful militia and, therefore, needed less protection from the prince and his squad. A kind of separatism of cities arose, often based on their trade interests.

Along with centrifugal and separatist tendencies, centripetal tendencies are also developing: stronger lands are trying to subjugate weaker ones. As a result, in the XIII–XIV centuries. a significant part of Russian lands falls under the influence of neighboring states (the Horde, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Poland, Hungary) and even in some cases becomes part of them.

The development paths of different territories of Rus' begin to diverge. The centers of future regions are being formed: Southwestern and Southern Rus'(later – Little Russia, modern Ukraine), Northwestern Rus'(hereinafter – Belaya Rus, modern Belarus), Northeastern Rus'(it will become the core of the Moscow state). North-West Rus'(Novgorod and Pskov lands) longer than others retained the original vector of development, laid down in the Old Russian period, but in the 15th–16th centuries. was subordinated to Moscow.

Rus' in the 13th century experienced a period of princely civil strife. While there was a struggle for power and land between the princes within the country, a significant threat was looming from Asia - the Tatar-Mongol tribes led by Genghis Khan.

Fight against the Mongol conquerors

The main events of the 13th century in Rus' centered around the fight against the Mongol-Tatar invasion. At first it did not affect Rus', but the princes agreed to come to the aid of the Polovtsian princes. Further events are presented in chronological order in the table:

Rice. 1. Khan Batu.

In fact, this is where the list of important events ends - the end of the 13th century did not bring any changes, Rus' continued to be under the rule of the Horde, who encouraged princely civil strife.

Fight against the Swedes and Germans

Almost simultaneously with the invasion from Asia, the expansion of the West into Russian lands began. So, in 1240, the crusading knights, who settled in the Baltic states, began to threaten the Pskov and Novgorod lands. The common idea - the spread of the ideas of Catholicism - was supposed to be supported by the united Swedish-German forces, but the Swedes attacked Rus' first.

On July 15, 1240, the Battle of the Neva took place. The Swedish fleet entered the mouth of the Neva, but at their request, the son of the Vladimir prince Yaroslav Vsevolodovich Alexander came to the aid of the Novgorodians. He set out with an army and chose a strategy of surprise and speed of attack, since his army was inferior in number to the Swedish one. Thanks to the swiftness of the blow, a victory was won, for which young Alexander was given the nickname Nevsky.

TOP 5 articleswho are reading along with this

Rice. 2. Alexander Nevsky.

But this was not the end of Rus'’s struggle with the conquerors. this time the German knights, who had gained strength, came out against Pskov and Novgorod. Alexander Nevsky again came to their aid.

In 1242, on April 5, Russian warriors and crusaders converged on the ice of Lake Peipus. Alexander's army acted coherently and again won. Many knights simply fell through the ice under the weight of their uniforms. Subsequently, this battle will be called the Battle of the Ice.

From 1251 to 1263, the reign of Alexander Nevsky lasted.

Culture of Rus' 13th century

The culture of Ancient Rus' of the 13th century was based on the culture of East Slavic tribes. Many of its monuments were lost due to the Mongol-Tatar invasion. Some examples of architecture have been preserved - churches and cathedrals, as well as church paintings - icons - and literary monuments. At this time, parables began to be written, such a genre as hagiography appeared, and the most famous work of this period is “Prayer” by Daniil Zatochnik.

Rice. 3. Church of the 13th century.

The culture of Rus' of this period was influenced by nomadic peoples and countries of Western Europe. as well as Byzantium, which is associated with the adoption of Christianity. It had special features, such as a slow pace of development, the predominance of a religious worldview and reverence for the past.

The main political centers, such as Vladimir, Suzdal, Galich, Novgorod, were at the same time cultural centers. Due to the invasion of the Mongols and their constant destructive raids, many secrets of crafts, in particular, jewelry making, were lost. The population also decreased greatly.

What have we learned?

How did Rus' live in the 13th century and who were its main military opponents - the Tatar-Mongols and the crusading knights who wanted to introduce Catholicism. We also found out who ruled Rus' in the 13th century and which ruler saved the Pskov and Novgorod principalities from the Teutonic knights. We looked at how military events influenced the course of history, as well as the culture of Rus'. They established which cities were cultural centers and what trends prevailed in architecture, literature and painting. We examined in general terms the state of culture during this period and its main features.