1. At the end of the 9th century. there was a process of formation of a single Old Russian state. It consisted of two stages:

- Calling to reign in 862 by the inhabitants of Novgorod, the Varangians, led by Rurik and his squad, establishing the power of the Ruriks over Novgorod;

- the forcible unification by the Varangian-Novgorod squad of the East Slavic tribes settled along the Dnieper into a single state - Kievan Rus.

At the first stage, according to the common legend:

• the ancient Russian tribes, despite the beginnings of statehood, lived separately;
• enmity was common both within the tribe and between the tribes;
• in 862, the inhabitants of Novgorod turned to the Varangians (Swedes) with a request to take power in the city and restore order;
• at the request of the Novgorodians, three brothers arrived in the city from Scandinavia - Rurik, Truvor and Sineus, along with their squad;

Rurik became the prince of Novgorod and is considered the founder of the princely dynasty of Rurikovich, who ruled Russia for more than 700 years (until 1598).

Having established themselves in power in Novgorod and mixed with the local population, the Rurikoviches and the Novgorod-Varangian squad began to unite under their rule the neighboring East Slavic tribes:

• after the death of Rurik in 879, the young son of Rurik Igor (Ingvar) was proclaimed the new prince, and the military leader Prince Oleg became the actual ruler;
• Prince Oleg at the end of the 9th century. made trips to neighboring tribes and subordinated them to his will;
• in 882 Kyiv was captured by Prince Oleg, the local Polyansky princes Askold and Dir were killed;
• The capital of the new state was moved to Kyiv, which was called "Kievan Rus".

The unification of Kyiv and Novgorod in 882 under the rule of one prince (Oleg) is considered the beginning of the formation of the Old Russian state.

2. In connection with the formation of Kievan Rus, there are two common theories:

• Norman, according to which the Varangians (Normans) brought the state to the Slavic tribes;
• Old Slavic, denying the role of the Varangians and arguing that the state was before their arrival, but the information in history has not been preserved, it is also hypothesized that Rurik was a Slav, not a Varangian.

Exact archival evidence of this or that theory has not been preserved. Both points of view have their supporters and opponents. There are two theories of the origin of the term "Rus":

• "southern theory", according to which the name comes from the Ros River near Kiev;
• "northern theory", according to which the name "Rus" was brought by the Vikings. A number of Scandinavian tribes, especially their elite - military leaders, managers, called themselves "Rus". In the Scandinavian countries there are many cities, rivers, names derived from the root "Rus" (Rosenborg, Rus, Russa, etc.). Accordingly, Kievan Rus, according to this theory, is translated as the state of the Varangians ("Rus") with its center in Kiev.

Also controversial is the question of the existence of a single ancient Russian people and the centralized nature of the state of Kievan Rus. Most sources, especially foreign ones (Italian, Arabic), prove that even under the rule of the Rurikids, Kievan Rus, until its collapse, remained a union of various Slavic tribes. Boyar-aristocratic Kyiv, culturally close to Byzantium and nomads, was very different from the commercial democratic republic of Novgorod, which gravitated towards the northern European cities of the Hanseatic Trade Union, and the way of life of the Tivertsy living at the mouth of the Danube was very different from the life of Ryazan and Vladimir-Suzdal land.

Despite this, in the 900s. (X century) there is a process of spreading the power of the Rurikoviches and strengthening the Old Russian state created by them. It is associated with the names of the first ancient Russian princes:

• Oleg;
• Igor Rurikovich;
• Olga;
• Svyatoslav Igorevich.

3. In 907, the squad of Kievan Rus, led by Prince Oleg, made the first major overseas conquest campaign and captured the capital of Byzantium, Constantinople (Tsargrad). After that, Byzantium, one of the largest empires of that time, paid tribute to Kievan Rus.

4. In 912, Prince Oleg died (according to legend, from the bite of a snake hiding in the skull of Oleg's horse).

Rurik's son Igor became his heir. Under Igor, the tribes were finally united around Kyiv and forced to pay tribute. In 945, during the collection of tribute, Prince Igor was killed by the Drevlyans, who, with this step, protested against the increase in the amount of tribute.

Princess Olga, Igor's wife, who ruled in 945-964, continued his policy. Olga began her reign by campaigning against the Drevlyans, burned down many Drevlyan settlements, suppressed their protests, and avenged her husband's death. Olga was the first of the princes who converted to Christianity. The process of Christianization of the ancient Russian elite began, while the majority of the population remained pagans.

5. The son of Igor and Olga, Svyatoslav, spent most of his time on campaigns of conquest, in which he showed great strength and courage. Svyatoslav always declared war in advance ("I'm going to attack you"), fought with the Pechenegs and the Byzantines. In 969 - 971 years. Svyatoslav fought on the territory of Bulgaria and settled at the mouth of the Danube. In 972, while returning from a campaign in Kyiv, Svyatoslav was killed by the Pechenegs.

6. By the end of the X century. the process of formation of the Old Russian state, which lasted about 100 years (from Rurik to Vladimir Svyatoslavovich), was basically completed. We can highlight its main results:

• under the rule of Kyiv (Kievan Rus), all the main ancient Russian tribes were united, which paid tribute to Kiev;
• at the head of the state was the prince, who was no longer only a military leader, but also a political leader; the prince and the squad (army) defended Russia from external threats (mainly nomads), suppressed internal civil strife;
• from the wealthy combatants of the prince, the formation of an independent political and economic elite began - the boyars;
• the Christianization of the old Russian elite began;
• Russia began to seek recognition from other countries, primarily Byzantium.

Old Russian state (Kievan Rus)- a state that existed in the East Slavic lands from the end of the 9th century to the second third (according to another point of view, until the middle) of the 12th century. and uniting a significant part of the East Slavic lands (and at the end of the 10th - beginning of the 11th centuries - almost all of them).

The capital is Kyiv. Self-names - Russia, Russian land; It is called the Old Russian state (or Kievan Rus) in historical science.

Form of government

The Grand Duke of Russia was at the head of the state; until the middle of the 11th century. he was called the title “kagan” borrowed from the Khazars (in historical science, the head of the Old Russian state is called the Grand Duke of Kiev). For the period from 960s. until 1054, the coat of arms of the Grand Duke of Russia (Kagan) is known. Under Svyatoslav Igorevich (964 - 972) and Svyatopolk the Accursed (1015 - 1016 and 1018 - 1019) it was a bident, under Vladimir Svyatoslavich (978 - 1015) and Yaroslav the Wise (1016 - 1018 and 1019 - 1054) .) - a trident.

Socio-economic structure

In Soviet historiography, the Old Russian state was considered early feudal - i.e. one whose character was determined by the formation of feudal relations at that time. According to the scientists of the Leningrad school I.Ya. Froyanov, the feudal system in the Old Russian state was by no means a backbone.

State apparatus and legislation

Legislation of the Old Russian state at the end of the 9th - 10th centuries. was oral ("Law Russian"). During the XI - early XII centuries. a set of written laws is being formed - Russian Pravda (formed by such legislative monuments as Yaroslav's Pravda, Pokonvirny, Lesson to bridgemen, Yaroslavichi's Pravda and Vladimir Monomakh's Charter).

The functions of the state apparatus at the end of the 9th - the end of the 10th century. performed by the warriors of the Grand Duke (Kagan); from the end of the tenth century such officials as virniki, mytniki, swordsmen are known.

Stages of formation

The Old Russian state was formed around 882 as a result of the unification by the Novgorod prince Oleg the Prophetic states, conventionally referred to in science as Novgorod and Kiev. Four major periods can be distinguished in the history of the Old Russian state.

1) Around 882 - early 990s. The state is federal in nature; the territories of the East Slavic tribal unions included in it enjoy wide autonomy and are generally poorly connected with the center. Therefore, the Old Russian state of this period is often characterized as a "union of unions of tribes." After the death in 972 of Svyatoslav Igorevich, the state generally breaks up into three independent "volosts" (Kiev, Novgorod and Drevlyansk, reunited by Yaropolk Svyatoslavich only around 977).

2) Early 990s - 1054 As a result of the liquidation by Vladimir Svyatoslavich of most of the tribal principalities and the replacement of tribal princes by deputies (sons) of the Grand Duke of Russia (Kagan), the state acquires the features of a unitary state. However, as a result of the strife between Yaroslav the Wise and his brother Mstislav Vladimirovich (Fierce), in 1026 it again splits - into two halves (with a border between them along the Dnieper), - and only after the death in 1036 Mstislav Yaroslav restores the unity of the state .

3) 1054 - 1113 According to the will of Yaroslav the Wise, the state again takes on the features of a federation. It is considered the common property of the princely family of Rurikovich, each of which has the right to reign in a particular area (“volost”), but must obey the eldest in the family - the Grand Duke of Russia. However, as a result of the beginning in the XI century. rapid growth of cities (potential regional centers) and the decline in the importance of the Dnieper trade route (now and then blocked by the Polovtsy), the role of Kyiv as a single center that controls the Dnieper route begins to decline, and the federation tends to turn into a confederation (i.e., to the collapse of a single states).

4) 1113 - 1132 Vladimir Monomakh (1113 - 1125) and his eldest son Mstislav the Great (1125 - 1132) manage to stop the disintegration of the Old Russian state and again give it the features of a federation (rather than a confederation).

The collapse of the Old Russian state

Since the objective reasons for the growth of centrifugal tendencies (and, in addition to those listed above, were the weak controllability of a huge state with the then means of communication and communication), neither Vladimir Monomakh nor Mstislav the Great could eliminate, after the death of the latter in 1132, these tendencies triumphed again . City "volosts" one after another began to come out of subordination to the Russian Grand Duke. The last of them did so in the 1150s. (why the time of the final collapse of the Old Russian state is sometimes attributed to the middle of the 12th century), but usually the turn of the first and second thirds of the 12th century is considered the end of the existence of the Old Russian state.

Over the past two years, discussions about the antiquity of Ukrainian statehood compared to Russian have become an important part of Ukrainian political discourse. The famous statement of Petro Poroshenko: “When Peter I cut down windows to Europe for Russia, Ukraine of the times of Mazepa already went to Europe through the door” is not the best example of an alternative history: the president can no longer keep up with what his compatriots write on social networks and the Internet -forums. The most common myth was brilliantly formulated by a reader of one of the Ukrainian news media: “In ancient Kievan Rus, a language was spoken that was much closer to the modern Ukrainian language than to Russian. In this regard, perhaps it would be more correct to call it Old Ukrainian, and not Old Russian ... Kievan Rus' counts more than a millennium, and Moscow - a few centuries. Half a millennium of slavery and incessant whiplash have created this nation, the living heir to the barbarian horde.”

Many Maidan supporters believe that Ukrainians are real Slavs, and Russians are glorified Finno-Ugric peoples. Moreover, both in Ukraine and in Russia: Ukrainian-speaking Russians do not get tired of quoting Alexei Tolstoy: “There are two Russ. The first Kievskaya has its roots in world, and at least in European culture. The ideas of goodness, honor, freedom, justice were understood by this Russia in the same way as the entire Western world understood it. And there is also a second Russia - Moscow. This is Russia of the Taiga, Mongolian, wild, bestial. This Russia has made bloody despotism and wild bitterness its national ideal. This Muscovite Russia, from ancient times, was, is, and will be a complete denial of everything European and a fierce enemy of Europe. And the fact that Tolstoy obviously opposes two different periods of Russian history to each other does not bother them: well, obviously the Soviet classic wrote about present-day Ukraine and Russia, isn’t it clear?

Who is closer to the ancestors of mammals - a dog or a horse? Who was the first to climb down from the tree - a man or a chimpanzee? Who is closer to the first organism that arose in the primordial soup of the ancient Earth - Russians or Ukrainians? From a historical point of view, such questions are absurd. Let's see why.

Where did Rurik sit?

There are two main theories regarding the origin of statehood among the Eastern Slavs. According to the Norman theory, based on Russian chronicles, the state of the ancestors of Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians arose thanks to the Varangians - the Normans, whose princes the Slavs themselves invited to reign in Russia. According to a more patriotic version, which was considered the only correct one in Soviet textbooks, the Eastern Slavs created the state themselves, and the calling of the Varangians is nothing more than an invention. Now historians admit that a compromise between these two points of view is quite possible - political formations arose even among the Slavs themselves, and there is nothing surprising in the fact that the Normans later became their princes: the situation was considered the norm for medieval Europe when power in the kingdoms belonged to aliens dynasties that were ethnically different from the main mass of subjects. England, for example, for most of the 11th century, tried to fight off the same Viking Varangians - as a result, the Anglo-Saxon kings did not succeed in defending the independence of the island.

According to the Tale of Bygone Years, the Varangians established statehood not at all in Kyiv, but in Novgorod: “And three brothers with their clans were elected, and they took all of Russia with them, and they came, and the eldest, Rurik, sat down in Novgorod, and the other, Sineus , - on Beloozero, and the third, Truvor, - in Izborsk. And from those Varangians the Russian land was nicknamed. In the middle of the 9th century, Kyiv was not part of the Old Russian state, the largest cities of which were Novgorod, Beloozero, Rostov, Murom, etc. Varangian commanders captured Kyiv at least twice: first, Rurik’s warriors Askold and Dir subjugated him on the way to Constantinople, and in 882 the Kiev rulers were killed by Rurik’s relative, Prince Oleg. It was Oleg who made Kyiv - an important point on the way from the Varangians to the Greeks - his capital. Oleg's great-grandson was Prince Vladimir, with whom most modern people associate the heyday of Kievan Rus. If the Norman theory is correct, then the question of who found the state earlier - Russians or Ukrainians, is absurd: both of them "received it as a gift" from the conquerors, and the Varangians made Novgorod happy before Kyiv.

By the way, where did the term Kievan Rus come from? It is not in the annals: it first appears among historians of the 19th century as a narrow designation of the Kiev principality. As a designation of the historical period in the formation of East Slavic statehood, this term takes root in the Stalin years - in particular, thanks to the work of the same name by academician Boris Grekov - the monograph "Kievan Rus" published in 1939. The adoption of this term did not happen without ideological reasons - in the 1930s, official propaganda in every way supported the idea of ​​​​the unity of the East Slavic peoples. If the Norman theory is erroneous and statehood arose independently among the Slavs, this means that it crystallized around several centers, the largest of which were Novgorod and Kyiv, and not just Kyiv. And since the beginning of the 12th century, Kyiv has been gradually losing its role as the political center of Russia - in 1169, the pogrom of the city, organized by the troops of the Vladimir prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, opens an era when the “mother of Russian cities” is fearlessly smashed by Russian princes fighting among themselves.

The capture of Kyiv in 1169. Miniature from the Radziwill Chronicle, Library of the Academy of Sciences

But still, which of the nations has more right to be called Russian? Ukrainian publicists (if you do not take completely science fiction writers from history) admit that the name "Ukraine" is later, and the ancestors of Ukrainians called themselves Russians. Historians are still arguing about where the terms “Rus”, “Russian” came from. "Normanists" most often consider the word "Rus" to be the ethnonym of the Varangians themselves - that's what the peoples from whom they collected tribute called them. Finns and Estonians still call the word Ruotsi (Rootsi) exactly the Swedes, and this name could have arisen from the distorted Scandinavian drots - “squad”. “The Russian land was nicknamed from those Varangians,” wrote the legendary chronicler Nestor. Soviet historians - and again not without ideological considerations - were mainly of the opinion that the word is of purely Slavic origin and is almost connected with the designation of hair color "blond": fair-haired Slavs, as it were, opposed themselves to the peoples of the steppe. There are also more exotic versions - for example, Iranian, according to which this name, meaning "bright", was given to the Slavs by the northern Iranians who once neighbored them. But be that as it may, the name takes root precisely as a designation for the ancestors of all the current East Slavic peoples - both Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians. Subsequently, when the "Russians" are divided between several states (Kyiv itself from the second half of the 14th century is part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and then the Commonwealth), this name is preserved as an ethnonym - Lithuanian Rus and Muscovite Rus appear. We owe to the perspicacious and active princes of Moscow that the East Slavic peoples were again politically connected - that the term did not disappear, did not get lost in the roar of ethnic construction that was going on in other states, but gave the name to the power, which over time will turn into the largest in the world .

Language or language?

The Ukrainian language serves as an important argument in kitchen disputes about the antiquity of peoples. Militant Ukrainians, trying to prove that Ukrainians are real Slavs, and Russians are only Slavicized Mordvins, will certainly point out that grammatically, and sometimes even lexically, the modern Ukrainian language is closer to Old Russian than Russian. For example, in modern Ukrainian the vocative case has been preserved, but in Russian it has disappeared - wipe yourself off, Muscovites, who have lost the forms “older” and “friendly” commanded by their ancestors.

Perhaps, in this sense, Ukrainian is indeed closer to Old Russian than Russian. But does this have anything to do with the question of the antiquity and originality of peoples? Here's a good example: modern Moldavian is more like Latin than French, and some of its forms are closer to Latin than even modern forms of Italian. Moldovans - real Romans? Of course not: Moldavian-Romanian, which was a folk Latin learned by the locals of these places from the Roman legionnaires, remained close to the original simply because there were no such rapid migrations of peoples who quickly barbarized the original Latin. On the outskirts of Europe, Latin was mothballed and preserved better than in the center of European events.

The language and the anthropological type of people who speak it are not directly related: the people can assimilate by assimilating a completely new language for themselves. Some modern historians even express the opinion that the real Greeks, descendants of the Hellenes, were wiped out by the plague of Justinian, which raged in the Balkans in the 6th century, and the current Greeks are the descendants of the Slavs, who eventually settled the peninsula and adopted the language and some elements of culture from the few surviving natives . The modern descendants of the New World natives who switched to English and Spanish, of course, did not become English and Spanish.

Moreover, the Old Russian language was not unified either - Academician Zaliznyak, for example, distinguishes at least two dialect zones on the territory of the Old Russian state - one type of dialects was characteristic of the future Ukraine, the other - for the center and east of the European part of Russia. Both the language of Muscovite Rus and the language that would later be called Ukrainian developed with the passage of time. At the same time, Russian was waiting for the fate of all the languages ​​​​of large peoples living in a strong state - starting from the 17th century, it needs more and more borrowings, as Russia begins to turn into a European state. Thanks to the reforms of Peter the Great, Dutch naval vocabulary, German designations of state posts and military ranks, and Polish everyday terms settled in the Russian language.

Reforms of Peter I. Engraving from a painting by N.N. Karazin

If archpriest Avvakum writes in the beautiful, living Russian language of the seventeenth century, then less than a century later, under Peter the Great, the translators of Molière's comedies will find themselves in difficulty: what is the Russian literary language? How should you write on it? And they will write like this, interfering with the forms of the Church Slavonic language with Polish words: “There are dates so great money for your fair faces. Tell me something little you have done to these gentlemen, whom I have shown you and whom I will wait for those who come out of my yard with such great shame. And only Pushkin will be able to finally break the inclination of the literary Russian language towards the inanimate, artificial.

The Ukrainian language as a language without a state in the 17th-19th centuries remained far from all these philological battles. But it would be naive to present it as a pristine language, not clouded by borrowings - it's just that its turn came later, already in the 20th century. In the 19th century, the Ukrainian language did not have time to develop a developed literary tradition - for example, the famous transcription of the Aeneid, made by Kotlyarevsky, is also printed with “yats”, although “yat” in Russian denotes the sound “e”, but here they designate the sound “and” . The "Little Russian language" is considered something secondary in relation to Russian, he was forced to play by the rules already established in Russian. And the question of what should be the rules of the Ukrainian language itself and its vocabulary, for the first time becomes a political issue only after the February Revolution. Where do they speak and write in the correct Ukrainian? In Kyiv? Or maybe in Galicia, whose inhabitants blame the people of Kiev for "surzhik"? But hetman Skoropadsky, who can hardly be accused of disliking Ukrainian statehood, writes in his memoirs that Galician nationalism, the claim of Galicians to be exemplary Ukrainians speaking the only possible “real Ukrainian”, was deliberately nurtured and promoted by the authorities of Austria-Hungary, to plant the seeds of discord between Ukrainians and Russians. This constructed “mova” with a mass of borrowed words cannot claim the right to be considered a real Ukrainian language: “After all, the Galicians live on leftovers from the German and Polish table. Already one of their languages ​​clearly reflects this, where five words - 4 of Polish or German origin.

According to Skoropadsky, it was important for the Galicians “to present not a real picture of the Ukraine that really exists, that is, it has a sharp line between Galician Ukraine and ours. In fact, these are two different countries. The whole culture, religion, worldview of the inhabitants are different. The Galicians, on the other hand, want to present a picture of a united Ukraine, which is extremely hostile to the idea of ​​Russia, and in this Ukraine the Galicians themselves would play the most important role. The hetman warned his country against narrow-minded nationalism and believed that the future of Ukrainian culture was in commonwealth with Russian culture: “Indeed, the cultural class of Ukrainians is very small. This is the misfortune of the Ukrainian people. There are many people who passionately love Ukraine and wish it cultural development, but these people of Russian culture themselves, and they, taking care of Ukrainian culture, will not change Russian culture in the least. This narrow Ukrainianism is exclusively a product brought to us from Galicia, whose culture there is no sense for us to completely transplant: there are no prerequisites for success and it’s just a crime, since there, in fact, there is no culture there.”

Unfortunately, these undeniably fair words were not heard. It is regrettable that the Ukrainian language - expressive, lively, beautiful - has become a bargaining chip in political battles. Like ours - yes, complex, but at the same time glorious - a common history.

Until now, historians put forward various theories about the emergence of Kievan Rus as a state. For a long time, the official version has been taken as the basis, according to which the year 862 is called the date of birth. But after all, the state does not appear “from scratch”! It is impossible to imagine that before this date there were only savages in the territory where the Slavs lived, who could not create their own state without help from “outsiders”. After all, as you know, history moves along an evolutionary path. For the emergence of the state must be certain prerequisites. Let's try to understand the history of Kievan Rus. How was this state created? Why has it fallen into disrepair?

The emergence of Kievan Rus

At the moment, domestic historians adhere to 2 main versions of the emergence of Kievan Rus.

1. Norman. It relies on one weighty historical document, namely the Tale of Bygone Years. According to this theory, the ancient tribes called on the Varangians (Rurik, Sineus and Truvor) to create and manage their state. Thus, they could not create their own state formation on their own. They needed outside help.
2. Russian (anti-Norman). For the first time, the rudiments of the theory were formulated by the famous Russian scientist Mikhail Lomonosov. He argued that the entire history of the ancient Russian state was written by foreigners. Lomonosov was sure that there was no logic in this story, the important question of the nationality of the Varangians was not revealed.

Unfortunately, until the end of the 9th century, there are no mentions of the Slavs in the annals. It is suspicious that Rurik "came to rule the Russian state" when it already had its own traditions, customs, its own language, cities and ships. That is, Russia did not arise from scratch. Old Russian cities were very well developed (including from a military point of view).

According to generally accepted sources, the year 862 is considered the date of foundation of the ancient Russian state. It was then that Rurik began to rule in Novgorod. In 864, his associates Askold and Dir seized the princely power in Kyiv. Eighteen years later, in 882, Oleg, who is usually called the Prophet, captured Kyiv and became the Grand Duke. He managed to unite the scattered Slavic lands, and it was during his reign that a campaign against Byzantium was made. More and more new territories and cities joined the grand ducal lands. During the reign of Oleg, there were no major clashes between Novgorod and Kiev. This was largely due to blood ties and kinship.

The formation and flourishing of Kievan Rus

Kievan Rus was a powerful and developed state. Its capital was a fortified outpost located on the banks of the Dnieper. Taking power in Kyiv meant becoming the head of vast territories. It was Kyiv that was compared with the “mother of Russian cities” (although Novgorod, from where Askold and Dir arrived in Kyiv, was quite worthy of such a title). The city retained the status of the capital of the ancient Russian lands until the period of the Tatar-Mongol invasion.

• Among the key events of the heyday of Kievan Rus can be called Baptism in 988, when the country abandoned idolatry in favor of Christianity.
• The reign of Prince Yaroslav the Wise led to the fact that at the beginning of the 11th century the first Russian code of laws appeared under the name "Russian Truth".
• The Kyiv prince intermarried with many famous ruling European dynasties. Also, under Yaroslav the Wise, the raids of the Pechenegs forever turned, which brought Kievan Rus a lot of trouble and suffering.
• Also from the end of the X century on the territory of Kievan Rus began its own coin production. Silver and gold coins appeared.

The period of civil strife and the collapse of Kievan Rus

Unfortunately, an understandable and uniform system of succession to the throne was not developed in Kievan Rus. Various grand-princely lands for military and other merits were distributed among combatants.

Only after the end of the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, such a principle of inheritance was established, which involved the transfer of power over Kiev to the eldest in the family. All other lands were divided among members of the Rurik dynasty in accordance with the principle of seniority (but this could not remove all the contradictions and problems). After the death of the ruler, there were dozens of heirs claiming the "throne" (starting from brothers, sons, and ending with nephews). Despite certain rules of inheritance, the supreme power was often established by force: through bloody clashes and wars. Only a few independently abandoned the control of Kievan Rus.

Applicants for the title of the Grand Duke of Kiev did not shy away from the most terrible deeds. Literature and history describe a terrible example with Svyatopolk the Accursed. He went to fratricide only in order to gain power over Kiev.

Many historians come to the conclusion that it was internecine wars that became the factor that led to the collapse of Kievan Rus. The situation was also complicated by the fact that the Tatar-Mongols began to actively attack in the 13th century. "Small rulers with big ambitions" could unite against the enemy, but no. The princes dealt with internal problems "in their own area", did not compromise and desperately defended their own interests to the detriment of others. As a result, Russia became completely dependent on the Golden Horde for a couple of centuries, and the rulers were forced to pay tribute to the Tatar-Mongols.

The prerequisites for the coming collapse of Kievan Rus were formed under Vladimir the Great, who decided to give each of his 12 sons his own city. The beginning of the collapse of Kievan Rus is called 1132, when Mstislav the Great died. Then immediately 2 powerful centers refused to recognize the grand ducal power in Kyiv (Polotsk and Novgorod).

In the XII century. there was a rivalry of 4 main lands: Volyn, Suzdal, Chernigov and Smolensk. As a result of internecine clashes, Kyiv was periodically looted and churches burned. In 1240 the city was burned by the Tatar-Mongols. The influence gradually weakened, in 1299 the residence of the metropolitan was transferred to Vladimir. To manage the Russian lands, it was no longer necessary to occupy Kyiv

Kievan Rus or Old Russian state- a medieval state in Eastern Europe, which arose in the 9th century as a result of the unification of the East Slavic tribes under the rule of the princes of the Rurik dynasty.

In the period of its highest prosperity, it occupied the territory from the Taman Peninsula in the south, the Dniester and the upper reaches of the Vistula in the west to the upper reaches of the Northern Dvina in the north.

By the middle of the XII century, it entered a state of fragmentation and actually broke up into a dozen and a half separate principalities, ruled by different branches of the Rurikovich. Political ties were maintained between the principalities, Kyiv continued to formally remain the main table of Russia, and the Kiev principality was considered as the collective possession of all the Rurikids. The end of Kievan Rus is considered the Mongol invasion (1237-1240), after which the Russian lands ceased to form a single political entity, and Kyiv fell into decay for a long time and finally lost its nominal capital functions.

In chronicle sources, the state is called "Rus" or "Russian land", in Byzantine sources - "Rosia".

Term

The definition of "Old Russian" is not connected with the division of antiquity and the Middle Ages generally accepted in historiography in Europe in the middle of the 1st millennium AD. e. In relation to Russia, it is usually used to refer to the so-called. "pre-Mongolian" period of the IX - the middle of the XIII centuries, in order to distinguish this era from the following periods of Russian history.

The term "Kievan Rus" arose at the end of the 18th century. In modern historiography, it is used both to refer to a single state that existed until the middle of the 12th century, and for a wider period of the middle of the 12th - the middle of the 13th centuries, when Kyiv remained the center of the country and Russia was ruled by a single princely family on the principles of "collective suzerainty".

Pre-revolutionary historians, starting with N. M. Karamzin, adhered to the idea of ​​transferring the political center of Russia in 1169 from Kyiv to Vladimir, dating back to the works of Moscow scribes, or to Vladimir and Galich. However, in modern historiography, these points of view are not popular, as they are not confirmed in the sources.

The problem of the emergence of statehood

There are two main hypotheses for the formation of the Old Russian state. According to the Norman theory, based on the Tale of Bygone Years of the XII century and numerous Western European and Byzantine sources, statehood was introduced to Russia from outside by the Varangians - the brothers Rurik, Sineus and Truvor in 862. The founders of the Norman theory are German historians Bayer, Miller, Schlozer, who worked at the Russian Academy of Sciences. The point of view about the external origin of the Russian monarchy was generally held by Nikolai Karamzin, who followed the versions of The Tale of Bygone Years.

The anti-Norman theory is based on the concept of the impossibility of introducing statehood from outside, on the idea of ​​the emergence of the state as a stage in the internal development of society. Mikhail Lomonosov was considered the founder of this theory in Russian historiography. In addition, there are different points of view on the origin of the Varangians themselves. Scientists classified as Normanists considered them Scandinavians (usually Swedes), some anti-Normanists, starting with Lomonosov, suggest their origin from the West Slavic lands. There are also intermediate versions of localization - in Finland, Prussia, another part of the Baltic States. The problem of the ethnicity of the Varangians is independent of the question of the emergence of statehood.

In modern science, the point of view prevails, according to which the rigid opposition of "Normanism" and "anti-Normanism" is largely politicized. The prerequisites for the original statehood among the Eastern Slavs were not seriously denied either by Miller, or Schlözer, or Karamzin, and the external (Scandinavian or other) origin of the ruling dynasty is a fairly common phenomenon in the Middle Ages, which in no way proves the inability of the people to create a state or, more specifically, the institution of a monarchy. Questions about whether Rurik was a real historical person, what is the origin of the chronicle Varangians, whether the ethnonym (and then the name of the state) is associated with them Russia, continue to be debatable in modern Russian historical science. Western historians generally follow the concept of Normanism.

Story

Education of Kievan Rus

Kievan Rus arose on the trade route "from the Varangians to the Greeks" on the lands of the East Slavic tribes - the Ilmen Slovenes, Krivichi, Polyans, then embracing the Drevlyans, Dregovichi, Polochans, Radimichi, Severyans, Vyatichi.

According to the chronicle legend, the founders of Kyiv are the rulers of the Polyan tribe - the brothers Kyi, Shchek and Khoriv. According to archaeological excavations conducted in Kyiv in the 19th-20th centuries, already in the middle of the 1st millennium AD. e. there was a settlement on the site of Kyiv. Arab writers of the 10th century (al-Istarkhi, Ibn Khordadbeh, Ibn-Khaukal) later speak of Kuyab as a large city. Ibn Haukal wrote: “The king lives in a city called Kuyaba, which is larger than Bolgar ... Russ constantly trade with Khazar and Rum (Byzantium)”

The first information about the state of the Rus dates back to the first third of the 9th century: in 839, the ambassadors of the kagan of the Ros people are mentioned, who first arrived in Constantinople, and from there to the court of the Frankish emperor Louis the Pious. Since that time, the ethnonym "Rus" has also become famous. The term "Kievan Rus" appears for the first time in historical studies of the 18th-19th centuries.

In 860 (The Tale of Bygone Years erroneously refers it to 866) Russia makes the first campaign against Constantinople. Greek sources associate it with the so-called first baptism of Russia, after which a diocese may have arisen in Russia, and the ruling elite (possibly led by Askold) adopted Christianity.

In 862, according to the Tale of Bygone Years, the Slavic and Finno-Ugric tribes called for the reign of the Varangians.

“In the year 6370 (862). They expelled the Varangians across the sea, and did not give them tribute, and began to rule themselves, and there was no truth among them, and clan stood against clan, and they had strife, and began to fight with each other. And they said to themselves: "Let's look for a prince who would rule over us and judge by right." And they went across the sea to the Varangians, to Russia. Those Varangians were called Rus, as others are called Swedes, and others are Normans and Angles, and still others are Gotlanders, and so are these. The Russians said Chud, Slovenes, Krivichi and all: “Our land is great and plentiful, but there is no order in it. Come reign and rule over us." And three brothers with their clans were elected, and they took all of Russia with them, and they came, and the eldest, Rurik, sat in Novgorod, and the other, Sineus, on Beloozero, and the third, Truvor, in Izborsk. And from those Varangians the Russian land was nicknamed. Novgorodians are those people from the Varangian family, and before they were Slovenes.

In 862 (the date is approximate, like the entire early chronology of the Chronicle), the Varangians, Rurik’s combatants Askold and Dir, sailing to Constantinople, seeking to establish full control over the most important trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks”, establish their power over Kiev.

Rurik died in 879 in Novgorod. The reign was transferred to Oleg, the regent under the young son of Rurik Igor.

The reign of Oleg the Prophet

In 882, according to chronicle chronology, Prince Oleg, a relative of Rurik, set off on a campaign from Novgorod to the south. On the way, they captured Smolensk and Lyubech, established their power there and put their people on the reign. Further, Oleg, with the Novgorod army and a mercenary Varangian squad, under the guise of merchants, captured Kyiv, killed Askold and Dir, who ruled there, and declared Kyiv the capital of his state (“And Oleg, the prince, sat down in Kyiv, and Oleg said: “May this be the mother of Russian cities “.”); the dominant religion was paganism, although Kyiv also had a Christian minority.

Oleg conquered the Drevlyans, Northerners and Radimichis, the last two unions before that paid tribute to the Khazars.

As a result of the victorious campaign against Byzantium, the first written agreements were concluded in 907 and 911, which provided for preferential terms of trade for Russian merchants (trade duties were canceled, repairs of ships were provided, accommodation for the night), the solution of legal and military issues. The tribes of Radimichi, Severyans, Drevlyans, Krivichi were taxed. According to the chronicle version, Oleg, who bore the title of Grand Duke, ruled for more than 30 years. Rurik's own son Igor took the throne after the death of Oleg around 912 and ruled until 945.

Igor Rurikovich

Igor made two military campaigns against Byzantium. The first, in 941, ended unsuccessfully. It was also preceded by an unsuccessful military campaign against Khazaria, during which Russia, acting at the request of Byzantium, attacked the Khazar city of Samkerts on the Taman Peninsula, but was defeated by the Khazar commander Pesach, and then turned its weapons against Byzantium. The second campaign against Byzantium took place in 944. It ended with an agreement that confirmed many of the provisions of the previous agreements of 907 and 911, but abolished duty-free trade. In 943 or 944, a campaign was made against Berdaa. In 945, Igor was killed while collecting tribute from the Drevlyans. After Igor's death, due to the infancy of his son Svyatoslav, real power was in the hands of Igor's widow, Princess Olga. She became the first ruler of the Old Russian state who officially adopted Christianity of the Byzantine rite (according to the most reasoned version, in 957, although other dates are also proposed). However, around 959 Olga invited the German bishop Adalbert and priests of the Latin rite to Russia (after the failure of their mission, they were forced to leave Kyiv).

Svyatoslav Igorevich

Around 962, the matured Svyatoslav took power into his own hands. His first action was the subjugation of the Vyatichi (964), who were the last of all East Slavic tribes to pay tribute to the Khazars. In 965, Svyatoslav made a campaign against the Khazar Khaganate, taking by storm its main cities: Sarkel, Semender and the capital Itil. On the site of the city of Sarkel, he built the Belaya Vezha fortress. Svyatoslav also carried out two trips to Bulgaria, where he intended to create his own state with its capital in the Danube region. He was killed in battle with the Pechenegs while returning to Kyiv from an unsuccessful campaign in 972.

After the death of Svyatoslav, civil strife broke out for the right to the throne (972-978 or 980). The eldest son Yaropolk became the great prince of Kiev, Oleg received the Drevlyansk lands, Vladimir - Novgorod. In 977, Yaropolk defeated Oleg's squad, Oleg died. Vladimir fled "over the sea", but returned after 2 years with the Varangian squad. During the civil strife, Svyatoslav's son Vladimir Svyatoslavich (r. 980-1015) defended his rights to the throne. Under him, the formation of the state territory of Ancient Russia was completed, the Cherven cities and Carpathian Rus were annexed.

Characteristics of the state in the IX-X centuries.

Kievan Rus united vast territories inhabited by East Slavic, Finno-Ugric and Baltic tribes under its rule. In the annals, the state was called Rus; the word "Russian" in combination with other words was found in various spellings: both with one "s" and with a double one; both with "b" and without it. In a narrow sense, "Rus" meant the territory of Kiev (with the exception of the Drevlyansk and Dregovichi lands), Chernigov-Seversk (with the exception of the Radimich and Vyatichi lands) and Pereyaslav lands; it is in this sense that the term "Rus" was used, for example, in Novgorod sources until the 13th century.

The head of state bore the title of Grand Duke, Prince of Russia. Unofficially, other prestigious titles could sometimes be attached to it, including the Turkic kagan and the Byzantine king. Princely power was hereditary. In addition to the princes, the grand ducal boyars and "husbands" participated in the administration of the territories. These were combatants appointed by the prince. The boyars commanded special squads, territorial garrisons (for example, Pretich commanded the Chernigov squad), which, if necessary, united into a single army. Under the prince, one of the boyar governors also stood out, who often performed the functions of real government, such governors under the juvenile princes were Oleg under Igor, Sveneld under Olga, Svyatoslav and Yaropolk, Dobrynya under Vladimir. At the local level, princely power dealt with tribal self-government in the form of a veche and "city elders".

Druzhina

Druzhina in the period of IX-X centuries. was hired. A significant part of it was the newcomers Varangians. It was also replenished by people from the Baltic lands and local tribes. The size of the annual payment of a mercenary is estimated by historians in different ways. Wages were paid in silver, gold and furs. Usually a warrior received about 8-9 Kiev hryvnias (more than 200 silver dirhams) per year, but by the beginning of the 11th century, the pay for an ordinary soldier was 1 northern hryvnia, which is much less. Helmsmen on ships, elders and townspeople received more (10 hryvnias). In addition, the squad was fed at the expense of the prince. Initially, this was expressed in the form of dining, and then turned into one of the forms of taxes in kind, "feeding", the maintenance of the squad by the tax-paying population during polyudya. Among the squads subordinate to the Grand Duke, his personal “small”, or junior, squad, which included 400 soldiers, stands out. The Old Russian army also included a tribal militia, which could reach several thousand in each tribe. The total number of the Old Russian army reached from 30 to 80 thousand people.

Taxes (tribute)

The form of taxes in Ancient Russia was tribute, which was paid by subject tribes. Most often, the unit of taxation was "smoke", that is, a house, or a family hearth. The size of the tax has traditionally been one skin from the smoke. In some cases, from the Vyatichi tribe, a coin was taken from a ral (plough). The form of tribute collection was polyudye, when the prince with his retinue traveled around his subjects from November to April. Russia was divided into several taxable districts, polyudye in the Kiev district passed through the lands of the Drevlyans, Dregovichi, Krivichi, Radimichi and Northerners. A special district was Novgorod, paying about 3,000 hryvnias. According to a late Hungarian legend, the maximum amount of tribute in the 10th century was 10,000 marks (30,000 or more hryvnias). The collection of tribute was carried out by squads of several hundred soldiers. The dominant ethno-class group of the population, which was called "Rus" paid the prince a tenth of their annual income.

In 946, after the suppression of the uprising of the Drevlyans, Princess Olga carried out a tax reform, streamlining the collection of tribute. She established "lessons", that is, the amount of tribute, and created "graveyards", fortresses on the path of polyudia, in which princely administrators lived and where tribute was brought. This form of tribute collection and the tribute itself was called "cart". When paying the tax, subjects received clay seals with a princely sign, which insured them from re-collection. The reform contributed to the centralization of grand ducal power and the weakening of the power of tribal princes.

Right

In the 10th century, customary law operated in Russia, which is called the “Russian Law” in the sources. Its norms are reflected in the treaties of Russia and Byzantium, in the Scandinavian sagas and in Yaroslav's Pravda. They concerned the relationship between equal people, Russia, one of the institutions was "vira" - a fine for murder. Laws guaranteed property relations, including ownership of slaves (“servants”).

The principle of inheritance of power in the IX-X centuries is unknown. The heirs were often underage (Igor Rurikovich, Svyatoslav Igorevich). In the XI century, princely power in Russia was transferred along the "ladder", that is, not necessarily the son, but the eldest in the family (the uncle had an advantage over the nephews). At the turn of the XI-XII centuries, two principles clashed, and a struggle broke out between the direct heirs and the side lines.

monetary system

In the X century, a more or less unified monetary system developed, focused on the Byzantine liter and the Arab dirham. The main monetary units were the hryvnia (monetary and weight unit of ancient Russia), kuna, nogata and rezana. They had a silver and fur expression.

State type

Historians assess the nature of the state of this period in different ways: “barbarian state”, “military democracy”, “druzhina period”, “Norman period”, “military-commercial state”, “folding of the early feudal monarchy”.

Baptism of Russia and its heyday

Under Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich in 988, Christianity became the official religion of Russia. Having become the prince of Kiev, Vladimir faced the increased Pecheneg threat. To protect against nomads, he builds a line of fortresses on the border. It was during the time of Vladimir that the action of many Russian epics telling about the exploits of heroes takes place.

Crafts and trade. Monuments of writing (“The Tale of Bygone Years”, the Novgorod Codex, the Ostromir Gospel, Lives) and architecture (the Church of the Tithes, St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv and the cathedrals of the same name in Novgorod and Polotsk) were created. The high level of literacy of the inhabitants of Russia is evidenced by numerous birch bark letters that have come down to our time). Russia traded with the southern and western Slavs, Scandinavia, Byzantium, Western Europe, the peoples of the Caucasus and Central Asia.

After the death of Vladimir in Russia, a new civil strife takes place. Svyatopolk the Accursed in 1015 kills his brothers Boris (according to another version, Boris was killed by Yaroslav's Scandinavian mercenaries), Gleb and Svyatoslav. Boris and Gleb in 1071 were canonized as saints. Svyatopolk himself is defeated by Yaroslav and dies in exile.

The reign of Yaroslav the Wise (1019 - 1054) was at times the highest flowering of the state. Public relations were regulated by the collection of laws "Russian Truth" and princely charters. Yaroslav the Wise pursued an active foreign policy. He intermarried with many ruling dynasties of Europe, which testified to the wide international recognition of Russia in the European Christian world. Intensive stone construction is unfolding. In 1036, Yaroslav defeats the Pechenegs near Kiev and their raids on Russia stop.

Changes in public administration at the end of the 10th - beginning of the 12th centuries.

During the baptism of Russia in all its lands, the power of the sons of Vladimir I and the power of Orthodox bishops, who were subordinate to the Kiev Metropolitan, were established. Now all the princes who acted as vassals of the Kiev Grand Duke were only from the Rurik family. The Scandinavian sagas mention fief possessions of the Vikings, but they were located on the outskirts of Russia and on the newly annexed lands, so at the time of writing The Tale of Bygone Years, they already seemed like a relic. The Rurik princes waged a fierce struggle with the remaining tribal princes (Vladimir Monomakh mentions the Vyatichi prince Khodota and his son). This contributed to the centralization of power.

The power of the Grand Duke reached its highest level under Vladimir, Yaroslav the Wise, and later under Vladimir Monomakh. Attempts to strengthen it, but less successfully, were also made by Izyaslav Yaroslavich. The position of the dynasty was strengthened by numerous international dynastic marriages: Anna Yaroslavna and the French king, Vsevolod Yaroslavich and the Byzantine princess, etc.

From the time of Vladimir or, according to some reports, Yaropolk Svyatoslavich, instead of a monetary salary, the prince began to distribute land to combatants. If initially these were cities for feeding, then in the 11th century the combatants received villages. Together with the villages, which became estates, the boyar title was also granted. The boyars began to make up the senior squad, which by type was a feudal militia. The younger squad (“youths”, “children”, “gridi”), who was with the prince, lived off feeding from the princely villages and the war. To protect the southern borders, a policy of resettlement of the "best men" of the northern tribes to the south was carried out, and agreements were also concluded with allied nomads, "black hoods" (torks, berendeys and pechenegs). The services of the hired Varangian squad were basically abandoned during the reign of Yaroslav the Wise.

After Yaroslav the Wise, the "ladder" principle of land inheritance in the Rurik dynasty was finally established. The eldest in the family (not by age, but by line of kinship), received Kyiv and became the Grand Duke, all other lands were divided among members of the family and distributed according to seniority. Power passed from brother to brother, from uncle to nephew. The second place in the hierarchy of tables was occupied by Chernihiv. At the death of one of the members of the family, all the younger in relation to him Rurik moved to the lands corresponding to their seniority. When new members of the clan appeared, they were assigned a lot - a city with land (volost). In 1097, the principle of mandatory allocation of inheritance to the princes was enshrined.

Over time, the church (“monastic estates”) began to possess a significant part of the land. Since 996, the population has paid tithes to the church. The number of dioceses, starting from 4, grew. The chair of the metropolitan, appointed by the patriarch of Constantinople, began to be located in Kyiv, and under Yaroslav the Wise, the metropolitan was first elected from among the Russian priests, in 1051 he became close to Vladimir and his son Hilarion. The monasteries and their elected heads, abbots, began to have great influence. The Kiev-Pechersk Monastery becomes the center of Orthodoxy.

The boyars and the retinue formed special councils under the prince. The prince also consulted with the metropolitan, bishops and abbots, who made up the church council. With the complication of the princely hierarchy, by the end of the 11th century, princely congresses (“snems”) began to gather. There were vechas in the cities, on which the boyars often relied to support their own political demands (the uprisings in Kyiv in 1068 and 1113).

In the 11th - early 12th centuries, the first written code of laws was formed - "Russian Pravda", which was consistently replenished with articles "Pravda Yaroslav" (c. 1015-1016), "Pravda Yaroslavichi" (c. 1072) and "Charter of Vladimir Vsevolodovich" (c. 1113). Russkaya Pravda reflected the growing differentiation of the population (now the size of the virus depended on the social status of the murdered), regulated the position of such categories of the population as servants, serfs, smerds, purchases and ryadovichi.

"Pravda Yaroslava" equalized the rights of "Rusyns" and "Slovenes". This, along with Christianization and other factors, contributed to the formation of a new ethnic community, which was aware of its unity and historical origin.
Since the end of the 10th century, Russia has known its own coin production - silver and gold coins of Vladimir I, Svyatopolk, Yaroslav the Wise and other princes.

Decay

The Principality of Polotsk separated from Kyiv for the first time at the beginning of the 11th century. Having concentrated all the other Russian lands under his rule only 21 years after the death of his father, Yaroslav the Wise, dying in 1054, divided them among his five surviving sons. After the death of the two younger of them, all the lands were concentrated in the hands of the three elders: Izyaslav of Kiev, Svyatoslav of Chernigov and Vsevolod Pereyaslavsky (“the triumvirate of Yaroslavichi”). After the death of Svyatoslav in 1076, the Kiev princes attempted to deprive his sons of the Chernigov inheritance, and they resorted to the help of the Polovtsy, whose raids began as early as 1061 (immediately after the defeat of the Torques by the Russian princes in the steppes), although for the first time the Polovtsy were used in strife by Vladimir Monomakh (against Vseslav Polotsky). In this struggle, Izyaslav of Kyiv (1078) and the son of Vladimir Monomakh Izyaslav (1096) died. At the Lubech Congress (1097), called to stop civil strife and unite the princes to protect themselves from the Polovtsy, the principle was proclaimed: "Let everyone keep his fatherland." Thus, while maintaining the right of the ladder, in the event of the death of one of the princes, the movement of heirs was limited to their patrimony. This made it possible to stop the strife and join forces to fight the Polovtsy, which was moved deep into the steppes. However, this also opened the way to political fragmentation, as a separate dynasty was established in each land, and the Grand Duke of Kyiv became the first among equals, losing the role of overlord.

In the second quarter of the 12th century, Kievan Rus actually broke up into independent principalities. The modern historiographic tradition considers the chronological beginning of the period of fragmentation to be 1132, when, after the death of Mstislav the Great, the son of Vladimir Monomakh, Polotsk (1132) and Novgorod (1136) ceased to recognize the power of the Kiev prince, and the title itself became an object of struggle between various dynastic and territorial associations of the Rurikovichs. The chronicler under 1134, in connection with the split among the Monomakhoviches, wrote down "the whole Russian land was torn apart."

In 1169, the grandson of Vladimir Monomakh, Andrey Bogolyubsky, having captured Kyiv, for the first time in the practice of inter-princely strife, did not reign in it, but gave it to inheritance. From that moment on, Kyiv began to gradually lose the political, and then the cultural attributes of the all-Russian center. The political center under Andrei Bogolyubsky and Vsevolod the Big Nest moved to Vladimir, whose prince also began to bear the title of great.

Kyiv, unlike other principalities, did not become the property of any one dynasty, but served as a constant bone of contention for all strong princes. In 1203, it was again plundered by the Smolensk prince Rurik Rostislavich, who fought against the Galician-Volyn prince Roman Mstislavich. In the battle on the Kalka River (1223), in which almost all South Russian princes took part, the first clash of Russia with the Mongols took place. The weakening of the southern Russian principalities increased the onslaught from the Hungarian and Lithuanian feudal lords, but at the same time contributed to the strengthening of the influence of the Vladimir princes in Chernigov (1226), Novgorod (1231), Kyiv (in 1236 Yaroslav Vsevolodovich occupied Kyiv for two years, while his older brother Yuri remained reign in Vladimir) and Smolensk (1236-1239). During the Mongol invasion of Russia, which began in 1237, in December 1240, Kyiv was turned into ruins. It was received by Vladimir princes Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, recognized by the Mongols as the oldest in Russia, and later by his son Alexander Nevsky. However, they did not move to Kyiv, remaining in their ancestral Vladimir. In 1299, the Metropolitan of Kyiv moved his residence there. In some church and literary sources, for example, in the statements of the Patriarch of Constantinople and Vytautas at the end of the 14th century, Kyiv continued to be considered the capital at a later time, but by that time it was already a provincial city of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The title of "great princes of all Russia" from the beginning of the 14th century began to be worn by the princes of Vladimir.

The nature of the statehood of Russian lands

At the beginning of the XIII century, on the eve of the Mongol invasion in Russia, there were about 15 relatively territorially stable principalities (in turn divided into destinies), three of which: Kiev, Novgorod and Galicia were objects of the all-Russian struggle, and the rest were controlled by their own branches of the Rurikovich. The most powerful princely dynasties were Chernigov Olgovichi, Smolensk Rostislavichi, Volyn Izyaslavichi and Suzdal Yurievichi. After the invasion, almost all Russian lands entered a new round of fragmentation, and in the XIV century the number of great and specific principalities reached approximately 250.

The only all-Russian political body remained the congress of princes, which mainly decided the issues of the struggle against the Polovtsy. The Church also maintained its relative unity (excluding the emergence of local cults of saints and the veneration of the cult of local relics) headed by the metropolitan and fought various kinds of regional "heresies" by convening councils. However, the position of the church was weakened by the strengthening of tribal pagan beliefs in the XII-XIII centuries. Religious authority and "zabozhny" (repression) were weakened. The candidacy of the archbishop of Veliky Novgorod was proposed by the Novgorod veche, there are also known cases of the expulsion of the lord (archbishop) ..

During the period of fragmentation of Kievan Rus, political power passed from the hands of the prince and the younger squad to the intensified boyars. If earlier the boyars had business, political and economic relations with the whole family of Rurikoviches headed by the Grand Duke, now they have with individual families of specific princes.

In the Principality of Kiev, the boyars, in order to reduce the intensity of the struggle between the princely dynasties, in a number of cases supported the duumvirate (coordination) of the princes and even resorted to the physical elimination of the alien princes (Yuri Dolgoruky was poisoned). The Kiev boyars sympathized with the authorities of the senior branch of the descendants of Mstislav the Great, but external pressure was too strong for the position of the local nobility to become decisive in the choice of princes. In the Novgorod land, which, like Kyiv, did not become the patrimony of the specific princely branch of the Rurik family, retaining its all-Russian significance, and during the anti-princely uprising, a republican system was established - from now on, the prince was invited and expelled by the veche. In the Vladimir-Suzdal land, the princely power was traditionally strong and sometimes even prone to despotism. There is a known case when the boyars (Kuchkovichi) and the younger squad physically eliminated the prince of the “autocratic” Andrei Bogolyubsky. In the southern Russian lands, city vechas played a huge role in the political struggle, there were also vechas in the Vladimir-Suzdal land (there are references to them up to the 14th century). In the Galician land, there was a unique case of the election of a prince from among the boyars.

The main type of troops was the feudal militia, the senior squad received personal inheritable land rights. For the defense of the city, urban district and settlements, the city militia was used. In Veliky Novgorod, the princely squad was actually hired in relation to the republican authorities, the lord had a special regiment, the townspeople made up a “thousand” (militia led by a thousand), there was also a boyar militia formed from the inhabitants of the “pyatins” (five dependent on the Novgorod boyar families of regions of the Novgorod land). The army of a separate principality did not exceed the size of 8,000 people. The total number of squads and city militia by 1237, according to historians, was about 100 thousand people.

During the period of fragmentation, several monetary systems developed: there are Novgorod, Kiev and "Chernihiv" hryvnias. These were silver bars of various sizes and weights. The northern (Novgorod) hryvnia was oriented towards the northern mark, and the southern - towards the Byzantine liter. Kuna had a silver and fur expression, the former related to the latter as one to four. Old skins, fastened with a princely seal (the so-called "leather money"), were also used as a monetary unit.

The name Rus remained during this period behind the lands in the Middle Dnieper. Residents of different lands usually called themselves after the capital cities of specific principalities: Novgorodians, Suzdalians, Kuryans, etc. Up to the 13th century, according to archeology, tribal differences in material culture persisted, and the spoken Old Russian language was also not unified, preserving the regional- tribal dialects.

Trade

The most important trade routes of Ancient Russia were:

• the path “from the Varangians to the Greeks”, starting from the Varangian Sea, along Lake Nevo, along the Volkhov and Dnieper rivers, leading to the Black Sea, Balkan Bulgaria and Byzantium (the same way, entering from the Black Sea to the Danube, one could get to Great Moravia) ;
• the Volga trade route (“the path from the Varangians to the Persians”), which went from the city of Ladoga to the Caspian Sea and further to Khorezm and Central Asia, Persia and Transcaucasia;
• a land route that began in Prague and through Kyiv went to the Volga and further to Asia.