There are quite a few theories regarding the formation of the Old Russian state. Briefly, the main ones are:

The northern territory of the settlement of the Slavs was obliged to pay tribute to the Varangians, the southern - to the Khazars. In 859 the Slavs liberated themselves from the oppression of the Varangians. But due to the fact that they could not decide who would manage them, the Slavs began civil strife. To resolve the situation, they invited the Varangians to rule over them. As the Tale of Bygone Years says, the Slavs turned to the Varangians with a request: “Our land is great and plentiful, but there is no dress (order) in it. Yes, go and rule over us.” Three brothers came to reign on Russian soil: Rurik, Sineus and Truvor. Rurik settled in Novgorod, and the rest in other parts of the Russian land.

It was in 862, which is considered the year of foundation of the Old Russian state.

Exist Norman theory the emergence of Russia, according to which the main role in the formation of the state was played not by the Slavs, but by the Varangians. The inconsistency of this theory is proved by the following fact: until 862, the Slavs developed relations that led them to the formation of a state.

1. The Slavs had a squad that protected them. The presence of an army is one of the signs of a state.

2. Slavic tribes united in superunions, which also speaks of their ability to independently create a state.

3. The economy of the Slavs was quite developed for those times. They traded among themselves and with other states, they had a division of labor (peasants, artisans, warriors).

So it cannot be said that the formation of Russia is the work of foreigners, this is the work of the whole people. Yet this theory still exists in the minds of Europeans. From this theory, foreigners conclude that the Russians are an initially backward people. But, as scientists have already proven, this is not so: the Russians are capable of creating a state, and the fact that they called on the Varangians to rule them speaks only of the origin of the Russian princes.

Prerequisites for the formation of the Old Russian state began the collapse of tribal ties and the development of a new mode of production. The Old Russian state took shape in the process of development of feudal relations, the emergence of class contradictions and coercion.

Among the Slavs, the dominant layer was gradually formed, the basis of which was the military Nobility of the Kiev princes - the squad. Already in the 9th century, strengthening the positions of their princes, the combatants firmly took leading positions in society.

It was in the 9th century that two ethno-political associations were formed in Eastern Europe, which eventually became the basis of the state. It was formed as a result of the association of glades with the center in Kyiv.

Slavs, Krivichi and Finnish-speaking tribes united in the area of ​​​​Lake Ilmen (the center is in the city of Novgorod). In the middle of the 9th century, Rurik (862-879), a native of Scandinavia, began to rule this association. Therefore, the year of formation of the Old Russian state is considered to be 862.

The presence of the Scandinavians (Varangians) on the territory of Russia is confirmed by archaeological excavations and records in the chronicles. In the 18th century, German scientists G.F. Miller and G.Z. Bayer proved the Scandinavian theory of the formation of the Old Russian state (Rus).

M.V. Lomonosov, denying the Norman (Varangian) origin of statehood, connected the word "Rus" with the Sarmatians-Roksolans, the Ros River, flowing in the south.

Lomonosov, relying on The Tale of the Vladimir Princes, argued that Rurik, being a native of Prussia, belonged to the Slavs, who were the Prussians. It was this “southern” anti-Norman theory of the formation of the Old Russian state that was supported and developed in the 19th and 20th centuries by historians.

The first mentions of Russia are attested in the "Bavarian Chronograph" and refer to the period 811-821. In it, the Russians are mentioned as a people within the Khazars, inhabiting Eastern Europe. In the 9th century, Russia was perceived as an ethno-political formation on the territory of the glades and northerners.

Rurik, who took over the administration of Novgorod, sent his squad led by Askold and Dir to rule Kiev. Rurik's successor, the Varangian prince Oleg (879-912), who took possession of Smolensk and Lyubech, subjugated all the Krivichi to his power, in 882 he fraudulently lured Askold and Dir out of Kyiv and killed him. Having captured Kyiv, he managed to unite the two most important centers by the power of his power. Eastern Slavs- Kyiv and Novgorod. Oleg subjugated the Drevlyans, Northerners and Radimichi.

In 907, Oleg, having gathered a huge army of Slavs and Finns, undertook a campaign against Tsargrad (Constantinople), the capital of the Byzantine Empire. The Russian squad devastated the surroundings, and forced the Greeks to ask Oleg for peace and pay a huge tribute. The result of this campaign was very beneficial for Russia peace treaties with Byzantium, concluded in 907 and 911.

Oleg died in 912 and was succeeded by Igor (912-945), the son of Rurik. In 941, he committed against Byzantium, which violated the previous agreement. Igor's army plundered the shores of Asia Minor, but was defeated in a naval battle. Then, in 945, in alliance with the Pechenegs, he undertook a new campaign against Constantinople and forced the Greeks to conclude a peace treaty again. In 945, while trying to collect a second tribute from the Drevlyans, Igor was killed.

Igor's widow Princess Olga (945-957) ruled for the infancy of her son Svyatoslav. She brutally avenged the murder of her husband by devastating the lands of the Drevlyans. Olga streamlined the size and places of tribute collection. In 955 she visited Constantinople and was baptized into Orthodoxy.

Svyatoslav (957-972) - the bravest and most influential of the princes, who subjugated the Vyatichi to his power. In 965, he inflicted a series of heavy defeats on the Khazars. Svyatoslav defeated the North Caucasian tribes, as well as the Volga Bulgarians, and plundered their capital Bulgar. The Byzantine government sought an alliance with him to fight external enemies.

Kyiv and Novgorod became the center of formation of the Old Russian state, East Slavic tribes, northern and southern, united around them. In the 9th century, both of these groups united into a single Old Russian state, which went down in history as Russia.

The content of the first stage was determined by a number of characteristic features. Under Prince Oleg, the following important state tasks were solved: the lands of a number of East Slavic tribes - the Drevlyans, Severyans, Radimichi, Tivertsy, Ulichi - were annexed; the payment of tribute "polyudya" was introduced, which, in addition to developed agriculture, crafts, trade, constituted one of the economic foundations of the state. It was at the expense of tribute and military booty that the state administration bodies, the squad (permanent professional army), the immediate environment of the prince and his own “court” were maintained. It is characteristic that Prince Oleg (in fact, the regent for the young son of Rurik - the legitimate heir Igor) and his squad, which consisted mainly of the Ilmen Slavs, behaved like conquerors in the south. This could not but cause a sharply negative attitude towards the newcomers among the indigenous inhabitants of this territory, the Dnieper Slavs.

Oleg's successor, Prince Igor, had to suppress the separatist aspirations of a number of tribal unions for many years. Princess Olga sought to strengthen the power of the Grand Duchess and the young national statehood with the help of socio-economic innovations. She streamlined the amount of tribute levied, determined the places of its collection (graveyards), for the first time carried out some reforms in the administrative management system (contracts were concluded with a number of local tribal elites on the delimitation of spheres of influence). However, it was precisely under her that a negative tendency for the strengthening of the state to seize communal lands was outlined. It was during this period that Western European chronicles began to call Russia "Gardarika" - a country of cities, which, by European standards, were more than a hundred. From this position, the European character of the state is obvious. In addition, the number of castle towns as centers of feudal land tenure increased. Under Olga's son, Grand Duke Svyatoslav, the state foundations, the country's defense capability were strengthened, and the management system was improved. However, glory to him and Russia brought numerous military victories in the Balkans, in the fight against Byzantium, the defeat of the hated enemy - the Khazar Khaganate.

At the second stage, under the princes Vladimir and Yaroslav, Russia reached its peak in its development. During the thirty-five years of the reign of Vladimir, who became a prince as a result of a military-political conflict, Ancient Russia turned into a powerful empire (a conditional term). Under him, the process of territorial expansion continued. The state included the lands of the Vyatichi, Croats, Yotvingians, Tmutarakan. Cherven cities. Under him, border fortress cities - Belgorod and Pereslavl - were created. Under Grand Duke Yaroslav, the power of the state reached its peak. Its international position has been especially strengthened. It was under him that the economic power of the state increased significantly. Agriculture has reached a high level of development. Along with the slash and shift systems of land use, a two-field system (a combination of a sown field and fallow) was widely introduced. A little later, a three-field appeared (alternation of fields: winter, spring, fallow). Arable land was actively expanded at the expense of forest areas. The range of sown crops has increased. Cultivated gardens and highly productive kitchen gardens appeared in monastic and princely households. During this period, in the countries of Western Europe, the level of agriculture was generally similar to the ancient Slavic. There also developed a shifting system, two-field and three-field, and in the northern regions of Europe (in Scandinavia, the British Isles, in northern Germany) slash-and-burn agriculture was preserved. However, here, despite some spread of the plow, the hoe remained the main agricultural tool. The development of crafts also strengthened the economy. Its urban variety has reached a particularly high professional level. In cities, there were up to 50 handicraft specialties, moreover, 9 of them were directly related to metal processing. In terms of technical and artistic level, Russian craft was not lower, and often significantly higher than the crafts of European countries. Russian steel blades, chain mail, gold and silver items, bone carving, enamel were admired both in the West and in the East. International trade has become widespread. Russian merchants, Russian goods were known in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. The main export commodities included: timber, agricultural products, weapons, silver and niello, jewelry, enamel, etc.

The main trend of the third period of the development of ancient Russian statehood was an attempt to prevent the impending collapse, both in the economic and socio-political and military fields, the desire to stabilize the situation within the state, to eliminate separatist tendencies. These attempts were sufficiently carried out by Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh. The axiom, known since ancient times, says: a strong state power must rely on a strong army. The armed forces of Novgorod-Kievan Rus are known from the annals under the names squad, army, army, force, army, regiment. It must be emphasized that the early feudal nature of the state, the remnants of tribal relations, left a special imprint on the nature of the armed forces. Moreover, the mutual influence of state bodies and the armed forces was visible, which structurally included squads, militia, mercenaries. The druzhina military organization formed the basis of the army. Being a permanent core of the armed forces of Russia, the squad, in addition, took part in the government. The Grand Duke consulted with her about war and peace, about organizing campaigns, about collecting tribute from the population subject to him, about court, and other state affairs. The combatants helped the prince to manage his house, household, on his behalf they created court and reprisals, collected trade and judicial duties, traded in princely goods, and conducted diplomatic negotiations with other countries.

The grand ducal squad was divided into two categories: the senior squad; junior team. Senior squad - noble, wealthy feudal lords, local princes, boyars, often close relatives of the Grand Duke, who had land, servants, their own military detachments. They are the closest advisers to the prince, associates in public administration, executors of the most important assignments. In relation to the Grand Duke, they carried vassal, mainly military service. For example, in 923, Prince Igor gave the voivode Sveneld the right to collect tribute from the Drevlyans “... by a black kun with smoke ...”. The younger squad - ordinary soldiers (children, youths, grids) were often recruited from free, willing people and made up the main striking force of the army. In peacetime, they were the servants of the prince, served his palace household, carried out individual assignments, and during the war - soldiers or militia commanders. It seems important to state that during the time of the first Kievan princes, the majority of combatants were not connected by land relations - they “fed from tribute”. They, as a rule, lived at the court of the prince, and were kept at his expense. They received a “table”, clothes, weapons, chain mail, a horse. In addition, they were entitled to a share of the spoils of war. With the deepening of feudal relations, more and more purely combatants "sat down to the ground" and turned into landowners-proprietors, relatively independent of the Grand Duke. At the same time, they received land in the form of a beneficiation (a variant of Western Europe) - lifelong possession subject to service. Later, another form arose - flax, hereditary possession. The princely and boyar squads were small in number. They performed police functions in the principality, ensuring the established order. The prince for combatants was not so much a master as the first among equals. The warriors received a salary of 200 hryvnias per year, which was a large amount (a war horse cost 2-3 hryvnias).

However, the main element of the armed forces was the militia. It was collected during large campaigns or to repel large-scale attacks by an external enemy, usually steppe tribes. It included both rural and urban people. Militia warriors went on a campaign with their weapons (depending on material capabilities). They served in the infantry and cavalry. Cities and volosts participated in supplying the militia with weapons, food, and clothing. The militia often remained the only force capable of stopping the enemy. For example, in 1068 the Polovtsy defeated the grand ducal squad on the Alta River and broke through to the capital. The people took arms from power by force and interrogated the nomads from Kyiv. A certain part of the armed forces were mercenaries. Among them are the Varangians, Hungarians, Pechenegs, Polovtsy, Czechs. In the XI century. on the southern borders of Russia, significant masses of nomads who left the Polovtsy were settled: Torks, Pechenegs, Berendeys. Their common name is "black hoods". She carried the border service in a large area between the rivers Dnieper and Ros and actively participated in military campaigns. Thus, the nature, structure, in general, the organization of the armed forces of the ancient Russian state did not actually differ from similar structures in Western European countries, and often even surpassed them.

The most tangible successes in the international arena were achieved by Novgorod-Kievan Rus during the time of Vladimir I and, especially, Yaroslav the Wise. One of the indicators of recognition as equals by European states was dynastic marriages that connected the Kyiv grand ducal house with many royal courts in Europe. Under Yaroslav the Wise, Russian princesses became French, Hungarian, Norwegian, Danish queens, and the sons of the Grand Duke Izyaslav, Svyatoslav, Vsevolod were married to princesses from German, Polish lands and Byzantium. European fame was enjoyed by Prince Vladimir Monomakh, who was first the Prince of Pereyaslavl, and then the Great Prince of Kiev. He was the grandson of Yaroslav the Wise and a Swedish princess, the son of a Byzantine princess, the husband of an English princess, the brother-in-law of the German emperor, the nephew of the Hungarian and Danish queens, and the stepson of a Polovtsian princess. This fact, as well as possible, more clearly testifies to the closest ties between Russia and other states, to its great contribution and improvement of European civilization.

During the period under review, foreign policy was closely connected with the formation and development of the socio-economic and military-political unity of Russia. The country was united by all kinds of economic and political obligations of those lands of the East Slavic confederation that constituted its territorial unity. This was a very important period, since the state borders established at that time and the unions formed at that time existed for a long time. Russian princes, actively participating in international life, encouraged the study of foreign languages. Already at the court of Yaroslav the Wise, a significant role was assigned to people, "too much saturated with the sweetness of the book." Vsevolod Yaroslavich, according to Monomakh, “sitting at home, knowing five languages”; Monomakh himself considered it important to pay attention to foreign merchants "... in that there is honor from other lands." However, at that time, not all state borders were established and legally fixed, since not all peoples in their development reached state forms. This, of course, made it difficult to conduct a full-fledged foreign policy. Another feature was the dependence of many neighboring peoples on Ancient Russia. Moreover, its territory and population included over 20 non-Slavic tribes and tribal unions. Their relationship had a significant impact on foreign policy in general. This is also due to the fact that the lands of the Baltic peoples - Izhors, Vodi, Estonians, Livs, Lats separated Russia from the Prussian-Polish Pomerania and Germany; the lands of the Finns, Karelians and Lapps - from Norway and Sweden; Cheremis, Mordvins, Burtases - from the Volga Bulgaria; Turks and Khazars - from the state of Mavarannahr, Byzantium, Hungary; jars and slants - from the countries of Transcaucasia.

The foreign policy of Ancient Russia was built on the basis of trade and economic relations with most countries. They were especially close with the Byzantine Empire. They started during the reign of Askold and Dir. Byzantium, “sharing the world”, paid tribute to the Russians. It was at that time that the prerequisites for future treaties were laid, the prospects and nature of future relationships were determined, up to the 13th century. In 907 Prince Oleg, after a successful military campaign against Constantinople, signed one of the first international treaties. According to it, Russia received from Byzantium a one-time contribution of up to 12 hryvnias for a “key”, annual tributes - “ways” for Russian cities, benefits for Russian merchants in Constantinople. The Russian princes, judging by the texts of the treaties, sought to conduct an honest policy in relations with their neighbors, avoiding unnecessary bloodshed. When the use of force was required, here too they showed nobility. Suffice it to recall the famous warning of Prince Svyatoslav - "I'm coming at you!"

One of the largest and long-term events of the early Middle Ages for Russia was the adoption of Christianity as the state religion. This problem requires more detailed consideration.

Scientists have proved that the formation of intertribal ethnic communities was usually accompanied by serious changes not only in the political life of people, but also in spiritual life. A significant event in the early history of most European peoples was their introduction to the world of Christian values, Christian outlook on life. Composed of various North German (Scandinavian), Slavic and Finnish elements, the Old Russian (East Slavic) community at the end of the 1st millennium AD. began to gradually turn into a nationality, united not only politically, but also religiously. The slow spread of Christianity among the Varangian and Slavic warriors began, as far as can be judged from the rather scarce evidence, in the 9th century. Initially, few warriors who participated in raids on Byzantine possessions and in trade with Greek Christians were baptized (as already mentioned, the professions of a warrior and a merchant at that time usually coincided).

The change of faith was not too surprising for wandering combatants who had broken away from their native tribe and spent their lives among strangers. Tribal, pagan beliefs were, as a rule, based on vague insights about the impact on human existence of some obscure, unknown forces. Ideas about these forces often correlated with the realities of tribal life, with the characteristics of a particular area, with the specific occupations of its population. Therefore, any serious changes in the way of life of a tribe or some isolated part of it called into question certain elements of beliefs, gave rise to a religious crisis (for example, the tribes worshiping the spirits of the mountains could not maintain their ideas about the supernatural, supersensible world after moving to a flat area ).

The destruction of the habitual way of life during the period of constant migrations, in the 1st millennium AD. e., created the prerequisites for the assimilation of more universal beliefs; the complication of social life gradually prepared people for the perception of developed religious views. It is not surprising that the most active and mobile part of society, the warriors, demonstrated the greatest susceptibility to new religions that went beyond traditional paganism. As far as we can judge, the milieu was distinguished by sufficient religious tolerance, or, better, indifference to matters of faith. So, the Khazar rulers, who professed Judaism, accepted into their service both Muslims, and Christians, and pagans. There were also Christians among the Scandinavian warriors who traded and robbed across the expanses of Eastern Europe. Evidence of the baptism of the Varangian prince Bravalin at the end of the 8th century has been preserved. 78 This prince, who besieged and captured the Greek city of Sugdeya (in Slavic - Sourozh, now - Sudak), located in the Crimea, led a detachment of warriors, whom Byzantine authors ranked among the “people of the people”. There are no sufficient grounds to see in this “people” the immediate and direct ancestors of those Eastern Slavs, who, after a couple of centuries, began to be designated by the name “Rus”. The message that the Varangian Bravalin became a Christian is interesting to others: it shows that not only barbarians who served the Byzantine emperor and other Christian sovereigns, but also some seekers of military fortune, who acted at their own peril and risk, accepted baptism.

The affiliation of a part of the Varangian-Slavic warriors to the Christian Church for a long time did not have a serious impact on the spiritual and political life of the inhabitants of the East European Plain. Even if we admit the fact of the baptism of the Kievan rulers Askold and Dir, who went to Constantinople, probably around 860, which raises some doubts, we still cannot see in this fact anything more than evidence of a personal (still non-state) choice of faith. Nevertheless, periodic contacts, contacts between the most active and militant part of the East Slavic society with the Christian world, of course, contributed to the gradual acquaintance of this entire society with the new religion. The initiation of severe pagan warriors to Christianity could hardly be strong enough, and was by no means always associated with cardinal changes in the worldview of the newly baptized. Such changes required a thoughtful rethinking of one's own spiritual experience, which is far from accessible to everyone. In many cases, the urge to baptism was purely pagan: the “foreign god” turned out to be stronger than the usual, tribal one, as evidenced by the military successes of the foreigners who worshiped this deity. Polytheism, characteristic of paganism, was overcome with difficulty, and Christianity was considered as one of many religions - along with various tribal cults.

Turning to Christian values ​​meant overcoming such utilitarianism, but this overcoming, of course, could not be accomplished overnight. Little evidence has come down to us about the preaching of Christian missionaries, addressed not to princes, but to ordinary soldiers and farmers. Based on indirect data, it can be assumed that the creator of Slavic writing, St. Cyril, in the middle of the 9th century. visited the land of some East Slavic tribe subordinate to the Khazar Khaganate, and managed to convert about two hundred families to Christianity. Less successful was the mission of Bishop Adalbert, sent to the Eastern Slavs at the direction of the German Emperor Otto I (about 959, during the reign of Princess Olga). Adalbert barely managed to escape, and the pagan Slavs killed several of his companions. The message should not be seen as evidence of the irreconcilable attitude of the Slavs to a foreign faith. In the tenth century, there were probably not so many ardent zealots of paganism; traditional rites enjoyed a certain popularity, but mass fanaticism was not observed. In the cities on the way from the Varangians to the Greeks, foreign merchants, including Christians, were frequent guests. Among the warriors of the Kiev princes, as already mentioned, there were also those who were baptized. The treaty concluded by Prince Igor with Byzantium (944) was signed by both pagan warriors and “baptized Rus”, i.e. Christians who occupied a high position in Kiev society. At that time, in the middle of the 10th century, in Kyiv there was the Church of Elijah the Prophet (whom the pagan and semi-pagan consciousness of the Russians for a long time correlated with the Slavic deity of heavenly fire - Perun). The temple of the same name also existed in Constantinople, and the parishioners there were mainly old Russian merchant warriors who came to Byzantium. In the second half of the X century. there were Christian churches in Novgorod, in other cities on the way from the Varangians to the Greeks.

Igor's widow Olga, who ruled the state after the death of her husband, was baptized. Historians often consider Olga's conversion a tactical move in a complex diplomatic game with Byzantium. This is not a completely fair judgment. Of course, the transition of the head of any state (and especially a monarchical one) to one or another religion always has a certain political significance, but the motives for conversion can also be far from politics, related to the spiritual life of a person. One should not see in every act of a person, including a statesman or ruler, only calculation. Both Olga and her grandson Vladimir, under whom Christianity was destined to become the official religion in Russia, were guided not only (and, most likely, not so much) by political considerations. Another thing is that the consequences of the baptism of Russian princes went far beyond the limits of their individual religious experiences. We do not know exactly when and where Olga was baptized. The Russian chronicle connects this event with the visit of the Kievan princess to Constantinople (955 or 957), where Olga had some kind of negotiations with Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus (913-959). However, in the very detailed notes of the emperor who received the Russian ruler, there is not even a mention of the baptism of the northern guest, which makes the domestic source suspect of an accidental or deliberate distortion of facts. Most likely, Olga was baptized even before visiting Constantinople (she was accompanied to the capital of Byzantium by a priest, probably the princess' confessor). One way or another, Olga became a Christian ruler, but her subjects for the most part remained faithful to pagan idols. The reign of Olga and her son Svyatoslav (very far from Christianity, but not striving to spread paganism dear to his heart) was a period of relatively peaceful coexistence of two religious systems. Among the townspeople and inhabitants of the princely courts there was a certain (apparently considerable) number of Christians (Varangians, Slavs, Greeks); in general, the urban population, often only by tradition and without much zeal, participated in pagan rites, was ready to accept the new faith. The degree of commitment to paganism of rural residents is more difficult to determine. Apparently, in some East Slavic (Slavic-Finnish) lands, tribal deities occupied a significant place in the religious life of people.

In the tenth century there was a very slow Christianization of Russia. This process almost did not affect the farmers and hunters who lived outside the cities. Christianity gradually acquired the status of a religion tolerated in the state, but not directly encouraged (even during the reign of Olga, the confession of the faith of Christ did not give serious practical advantages at court or in military service). The spread of Christianity in the court and squad environment (the court and the squad at that time coincided to a certain extent) gradually created the prerequisites for the official recognition of the new religion and for the mass baptism of the Eastern Slavs. These prerequisites were destined to be realized in the practical measures of state power under Prince Vladimir. Prince Svyatoslav, who cared more about his military glory than about state affairs or, moreover, about matters of faith, made several long-distance campaigns (to the east and southeast, against the Turkic-speaking Volga Bulgarians and the weakened Khazar Khaganate, as well as to the south and south -west, to the Byzantine possessions in the Balkans). Svyatoslav tried to create - by force of arms - a power on the lands of the Danubian Slavs (Bulgarians) and founded a new capital there - Pereyaslavets. The territory, which since the time of Oleg was subject to the Russian princes, Svyatoslav transferred to the management of his young sons Yaropolk (he got the throne of Kyiv) and Oleg, (who became the Drevlyansk prince). Svyatoslav sent another son to far Novgorod, Vladimir, who in the eyes of his contemporaries was not quite equal to Yaropolk and Oleg (obviously, because Vladimir's mother, Maluta, was not of Varangian, but of Slavic origin, or because she occupied a low position as a housekeeper and was considered not the wife, but the concubine of the Grand Duke). Vladimir, still a child, was accompanied by his uncle and mentor Dobrynya.

After the death of Svyatoslav (972), the advisers and warriors of his elder sons pushed the young princes into an internecine war. The reasons for this feud are not entirely clear; Governor Sveneld, who essentially led the actions of Yaropolk of Kiev, initiated a campaign against the Drevlyans. The campaign ended with the victory of the Kievans, young Oleg died in the turmoil that formed during the hasty retreat of his troops (the soldiers were in a hurry to take cover behind the walls of the city of Ovruch, and many of them fell from the bridge into the ditch; such a fate befell the 15-year-old prince). Vladimir and Dobrynya, having heard about the events in the Drevlyane land, went to Scandinavia, from where they soon returned with a mercenary army. At the head of this army, replenished by the inhabitants of Novgorod and other northern cities and villages, Vladimir moved south to Kiev. The pretext for the campaign was the actions of Yaropolk, which led to fratricide. On the way, Vladimir's soldiers conquered the Polotsk land (at that time it was actually an independent possession of Prince Rogvolod), and in 978 or 979 they entered Kyiv. Yaropolk, who came to the victorious brother, was killed. The strife ended with the victory of Vladimir. If Yaropolk, who in childhood was influenced by his Christian grandmother Princess Olga, was distinguished by religious tolerance and, according to some historians, even sympathized with supporters of the “Greek religion”, then Vladimir at the time of the conquest of Kyiv was a convinced pagan. After the murder of his brother (the chronicle, however, whitewashes Vladimir and shifts the blame to Sveneld, who betrayed Yaropolk), the new prince ordered a pagan sanctuary (temple) to be built on one of the city hills, where in 980 statues of tribal gods were installed: Perun, Khors, Dazhdbog, Stribog, Simargl and Mokosh.

As already mentioned, at the end of the tenth century. Kyiv was quite a Christianized city. Perhaps the attempt to revive traditional paganism, supporting it with the authority of state power, was connected with the political confrontation between the Kiev “best people” and princely advisers who came from Novgorod. Paganism seemed to be on the rise. Human sacrifices were made to idols, and the prince and a significant number of townspeople accepted these bloody rituals with obvious approval, which, apparently, were almost forgotten in the previous decades (at least in Kyiv). However, the artificial revival of the religion of the ancestors turned out to be futile. Vladimir himself felt this very soon. A few years after the reign in Kyiv, Vladimir abandoned his former commitment to paganism, was baptized and began to convert his subjects to Christianity. The religious reform, which drastically changed the lives of many people, was, of course, to some extent prepared by the previous development of the Russian lands and brought to life by political causes. However, the assertion that is sometimes encountered that Vladimir was guided solely by the understanding of the state benefit of Christianity is devoid of plausibility. Obviously, without a deep internal turning point, without a serious rethinking of his own experience, without a sincere conversion to Christianity, Vladimir would not have been able to act so consistently and decisively, prompting (sometimes forcing) the inhabitants of a vast pagan power to baptize.

Religious pagan ideas were reflected in the well-known chronicle tradition about the “choice of faith” by Prince Vladimir. This tradition itself should be recognized as a legend, but a legend that is sufficiently characteristic precisely for the stage of destruction of tribal beliefs. Vladimir allegedly sent confidants to different countries, called upon to learn more about the Christian, Jewish and Muslim religions (according to another version, he called representatives of these religions to him). The “choice of faith” was carried out, according to the chronicle evidence, purely rationally, on the basis of a careful comparison of the pros and cons of various religious systems - just as the prince chose the time and direction of the next military raid. A rational, even utilitarian attitude towards God (or rather, towards the Gods) was inherent precisely in the pagans, who considered it possible, for example, to outwit a deity, buy him off with gifts and sacrifices (such religious thinking was characteristic of the pagan Slavs, and for the ancient Greeks and Romans).

Turning to Christian values ​​meant overcoming such utilitarianism, but this overcoming, of course, could not be accomplished overnight. We do not know exactly when and how the inveterate pagan, who spent a lot of time in noisy drinking parties at the banquet table and in the chambers of his many wives and slave concubines, came to believe in Christ. With a high probability, it can be assumed that this conversion was the result of repentance for committed atrocities, fatigue from a wild life and a feeling of spiritual emptiness that the pagan religion could not fill, which had already lost its former naturalness and attractiveness in the perception of a person who had overcome tribal narrowness and limitations. Having become a Christian, Vladimir, who had an undoubted state mind and active nature, came to the idea of ​​spreading the new faith in his possessions. This decision was also influenced by the desire of the Kiev prince to strengthen the foreign policy position of Russia. In any relations with Christian states, the pagan power inevitably turned out to be an unequal partner, which Vladimir clearly did not want to put up with (conversion to Christianity probably somewhat moderated the prince's lust for power, but aggravated his inherent sense of responsibility for the state, for its authority and strength) .

External circumstances in the 980s. favored the strengthening of Russia. The turmoil in Byzantium, where the rebellious troops under the leadership of Vardas Focas opposed the legitimate dynasty, put Emperor Basil II and his brother Constantine in an almost desperate situation. They had to turn to Vladimir for help, despite the fact that quite recently Russia, in alliance with the Bulgarians, fought against Byzantium. Vladimir agreed to send an army to help Vasily II, demanding in exchange the consent of the imperial family to his marriage to Princess Anna. Vasily was forced to agree, setting the condition for the baptism of the groom. Vladimir readily accepted this condition, informing his future brother-in-law that he had long been attracted to the "Greek faith." The Kievan prince was, of course, very flattered to be related to the powerful imperial house. Vladimir, of course, understood the state significance of this marriage. However, it would be an oversimplification to consider the baptism of Vladimir only as an external act performed in the name of dynastic union. If the Russian ruler had been guided only by such considerations, he would hardly have started the troublesome business of baptizing a pagan country, to which no one forced him. (Note that many of the obvious benefits for posterity associated with inclusion in the sphere of Christian civilization were hardly clear to Vladimir; the danger associated with a sharp break in the age-old way of life, with the rejection of the usual features of social and family life, for example, polygamy , was quite real.). In any case, Vladimir fulfilled his obligations and helped Vasily II retain the throne. However, the Byzantine emperor was in no hurry to give his sister in marriage to a northern barbarian. Vladimir decided to force the empire to fulfill its obligations and captured the Greek city of Khersones (Korsun) in the Crimea. After that, the marriage of Vladimir and Princess Anna took place in Korsun; many noble Russian soldiers, imitating their prince, converted to Christianity. Upon the return of the victorious army to Kyiv, Vladimir began to baptize the inhabitants of the capital, and then his other subjects.

The people of Kiev, among whom there were quite a few Christians, accepted the transition to the “Greek faith”, if not with enthusiasm, then without obvious resistance (according to Metropolitan Hilarion, “if someone did not love, but commanded to be baptized”). Vladimir considered Christianity precisely as the state religion. Refusal to be baptized under such conditions was tantamount to disloyalty, for which the people of Kiev had no serious grounds. The inhabitants of the southern and western cities of Russia reacted just as calmly to baptism, often communicating with non-Christians and living in a multilingual, multi-tribal environment. Religious innovations were met with much greater resistance in the north and east. Novgorodians rebelled against Bishop Joachim (991), who was sent to the city, who ridiculed pagan beliefs. To conquer the Novgorodians, a military expedition of the people of Kiev, led by Dobrynya and Putyata, was required. The inhabitants of Murom refused to let Vladimir's son, Prince Gleb, into the city and declared their desire to preserve the religion of their ancestors. Similar conflicts arose in other cities of the Novgorod and Rostov lands.

As many historians believe, one of the reasons for the hostile attitude towards Christianity in large cities remote from Kyiv was the adherence of the population to traditional rites. Apparently, it was in these cities, especially in Rostov and Novgorod, that essential elements of a religious pagan organization were formed (regular and stable rituals, separate groups of priests - sorcerers, magicians). In the southern cities and in the countryside, pagan beliefs existed more as an unformed superstition than as a developed religion. (It is no coincidence that the attempt to establish regular sacrifices in the 980s was perceived by the people of Kiev as an innovation. Prior to that, the systematic worship of idols was poorly known to the Dnieper Slavs. It is likely that idolatry, widespread in the north, seemed to the people of Kiev a foreign religion, only partly similar to the local beliefs).

Another reason for the resistance to Christianity by the Novgorodians or Rostovites was their wary attitude towards the orders coming from Kyiv. The Christian religion was seen as a threat to the political autonomy of the northern and eastern lands, whose subordination to the will of the Kiev prince was based on tradition, and was by no means unlimited. Vladimir, who broke the tradition, although he grew up in Novgorod, but then succumbed to alien Greek influences, was in the eyes of the townspeople of the North and East who were forcibly converted to Christianity, an apostate who trampled on his original liberties. In rural areas, resistance to Christianity was not so active; farmers and hunters, who worshiped the spirits of the hearth, forests, fields, rivers, most often combined their previous ideas about the supernatural world with elements of the Christian worldview. The dual faith that existed in Slavic villages for decades and even centuries was only gradually overcome by the efforts of many generations of priests. It is clear that under Vladimir the Baptist the number of Christian clergy in Russia was small, and the prince-reformer was involuntarily forced to confine himself to the Christianization of cities.

It should be noted that the elements of pagan consciousness generally have great stability, they are preserved, for example, in the form of various superstitions. It is significant that many of Vladimir’s orders, designed to establish a new faith, were imbued with a pagan spirit (thus, the defeated idols became objects of desecration: on the orders of the prince, they were beaten with sticks, dragged through the mud, and generally treated in the same way as the pagans used to treat the idols of the defeated enemy ).

One of the urgent tasks of Vladimir after the formal (and in many cases, as already mentioned, forced) baptism of his subjects was their enlightenment in the Christian spirit. This task was carried out by foreign priests, mainly immigrants from Bulgaria, whose inhabitants back in the 9th century. adopted Christianity. It is important to note that the Bulgarian (Ohrid) metropolis had autocephaly (a certain independence, independence from the Patriarch of Constantinople, in particular the right to elect the head of the Church). This circumstance played a big role in the development of the Russian Church during the first decades of its state existence: not trusting the Byzantine emperor, who tried to deceive the prince of Kiev in the matter of matchmaking (see above), Vladimir preferred to subordinate the Russian Church to the Bulgarian, rather than the Greek hierarchs. This order was preserved until 1037 and was also convenient because in Bulgaria they used liturgical books in Slavonic (Old Slavonic, Church Slavonic) language, close to the spoken language of Russians (translations were made in the middle of the 9th century by Saints Cyril and Methodius).

Vladimir, who sincerely believed and just as sincerely strove to realize the Christian ideal in his contemporary East Slavic society, often subordinated his practical actions in the state sphere to this ideal. It is known that at first the prince of Kyiv refused to apply criminal penalties, forgiving the robbers. The same direct application of the gospel truths to social reality was regular meals in the princely court, where anyone hungry could come. A peculiar form of social security for the needy was the distribution of food to the poor, organized by the prince. Such charitable activity (probably extended only to the capital city) was natural for the newly converted sovereign, who took his Christian duties seriously. Of course, the relationship between the Grand Duke and his subjects, especially those who lived outside the capital city, was not reduced to the idyll of forgiveness and unselfishness. The fundamental impracticability of the Christian ahistorical ideal within history soon became clear to both Vladimir and the most zealous Orthodox neophytes (converts) from his entourage.

Vladimir's time cannot be considered a period of complete harmony between power and society. The reign of the holy Equal-to-the-Apostles prince was not a “golden age”. The historical significance of that time consisted in something else - in introducing the Slavic-Finnish world to the values ​​of Christianity, in creating conditions for the full cooperation of the tribes of the East European plain with other Christian tribes and nationalities. Russia was recognized as a Christian state, which determined a qualitatively different, higher level of relations with European countries and peoples. The Russian Church, which from the very beginning developed in cooperation with the state, has become a force that unites the inhabitants of different lands into a cultural and political community. (Close state-church ties more than once became a significant factor in social development, sometimes beneficial, in other situations destabilizing, dangerous for both the state and the Church.). The transfer to Russian soil of the traditions of monastic life gave the originality of the Slavic colonization of the northern and eastern outskirts of the Kievan state. Missionary activity in the lands inhabited by Finnish-speaking and Turkic tribes not only drew these tribes into the orbit of Christian civilization, but also somewhat softened the inevitably painful processes of the formation of a multinational state (this state developed on the basis of not a national, but a religious idea, was a state not so much Russian, how many Orthodox). Initiation to the thousand-year-old Christian tradition posed new cultural and spiritual tasks for Russian society and at the same time indicated the means for their solution. (First of all, it is necessary to mention the tasks of mastering the centuries-old heritage of the Greco-Roman civilization and the development of original forms of literature, art, and religious life.) Borrowing became the basis for cooperation, and from the gradually mastered achievements of Byzantium, stone architecture, iconography and fresco paintings, previously unknown to the Eastern Slavs, grew up , hagiographic literature and annals, schools and correspondence of books.

The baptism of Russia, understood not as a short-term, outwardly spectacular action, not as a mass rite, many of whose participants were not too eager to join the Christian faith, but as a process of gradual Christianization of the East Slavic and neighboring tribes - the baptism of Russia created new forms of the inner life of these converging ethnic groups with each other and new forms of their interaction with the outside world. The main reason for the introduction of Christianity in its Byzantine version, Orthodoxy, was the need to form a state ideology, spiritually unite the diverse peoples of Russia, and strengthen international relations on a more solid basis. The old pagan religion was a product of tribal relations and has already played its positive role. Under the new conditions, it did not fully ensure the process of statehood formation. In order to strengthen and strengthen its position, the new feudal government needed a new, common religion for all. Paganism, however, objectively, due to its inherent polytheism, the multiplicity of tribal cults, was unable, despite all attempts, to unite Russia spiritually, to elevate and strengthen the authority of the grand duke's power. For the ruling elite, this was a very important moment, since the tendencies of separatism were still quite strong in the lands that became part of the Old Russian state.

The process of adopting a new religion was long and controversial. It was accompanied by both violence on the part of the authorities and confrontation on the part of the population. It began with the choice of faith, the reform of Prince Vladimir in the framework of the creation of a single pagan pantheon, the "temple of Perun" in Kyiv. The main thing was the baptism of the prince's entourage, and then the whole people according to the Orthodox order. Prince Vladimir (baptized Vasily) made this decision in connection with the spread of Orthodoxy in Russian society (back in 957, Princess Olga and her entourage were baptized in Constantinople). In addition, a large and authoritative Christian community already existed in Kyiv. Baptism was most actively carried out in 988-998. During this period, a large number of churches were built (for example, in Kyiv, the famous Church of the Tithes). However, unlike the urban population, the peasants did not accept the new faith for a long time. Especially serious was the resistance in the northern regions of the country. In 991, an uprising took place in Novgorod, where many rich Christians, a bishop, clergymen, relatives and the family of the mayor of Novgorod Dobrynia, the uncle of the Grand Duke of Kiev Vladimir, were killed.

Still, the preservation of many elements of paganism remained a feature of Russian Orthodoxy, for example, the celebration of Shrovetide, the custom of plentiful refreshments at commemorations, etc. Objectively, the introduction of Christianity contributed to the strengthening of the political unity of the ancient Russian lands; final elimination, tribal isolation; further rapprochement with European states, strengthened the position of Russia in the international arena. Orthodoxy had a significant cultural impact on society: writing, book publishing, education in general became more widespread, schools, libraries appeared, and systematic chronicle writing began. These are the main prerequisites, causes and directions of the formation of the Old Russian statehood in the period from the 7th to the middle of the 12th centuries.

The topic of Novgorod-Kievan Rus as a state is in the sphere of lively, sometimes, unfortunately, politicized discussions and even polemics. Thus, Ukrainian scientists A. Motsya, V. Rychka 79 , analyzing in their articles some aspects of the development of the civilization of Ancient Russia, expressing rather original judgments, however, in the end, try to adapt the notorious concept of M.S. Hrushevsky 80 . Moreover, defending the concept of “Kiev-centrism”, A. Motsya refers to the authority of B.A. Rybakov, a specialist who “cannot be attributed to the camp of “Ukrainian bourgeois nationalists” (until recently Hrushevsky was also included in this camp”) 81 . Against this background, the appearance of exceptionally bold historical versions (let us emphasize: precisely versions) deserves attention. Thus, the Ukrainian historian A. Tolochko tries to prove that the state called “Kievan Rus” (and even “Ancient Rus”) never existed 82 . The scientist writes that our distant ancestors would have been incredibly surprised to hear the name of their country as “Kievan Rus”. After all, they called it "Russian land", "Rus", and themselves, its population, the collective "Rus" or each separately - "Rusyn". Kievan Rus is a term for the origin of books and scholars and originates not from sources, but from the pages of historical works of the first half of the 19th century - it was then that history, freed from the embrace of belles-lettres, turned into an academic science. The concept of "Kievan Rus" arose in Russian science as an element of more general ideas about the historical fate of Russia, as a necessary link in the periodization of its existence. “The instrumental status of the term is practically forgotten, and it (the term) imperceptibly turned into something more, independent, gradually controlling our ideas” 83, concludes A. Tolochko.

Paying tribute to the originality of the scientist's view, however, we will not go into discussion, remembering that the author himself classifies his concept only as a historical version. At the same time, we agree with the idea of ​​the Ukrainian scientist that historical science has finally got the opportunity to explore Russia - whether Kievan, whether Ancient - for its own sake, without looking for the sources of future stories in it, without making it a pretext and material for "metahistory" and "big schemes". One can finally try to understand this era as it was, “to ask her questions and not be afraid that, being in our property, she will give a crafty, pleasant answer prompted by her own owner…” 84 .

In modern domestic historiography, the concept of Ancient Russia, which came out from the pen of Academician B.A. Rybakov, is seriously criticized. For a long time he was an indisputable authority in Soviet historiography, artificially removed from the field of scientific criticism. No words, Academician BN Rybakov made a huge contribution to the development of Soviet historical science. His works on the history of the civilization of Ancient Russia 85 are of great scientific value. However, today it is impossible in the national historical science to maintain such an approach, when the authority of the title is often placed above scientific arguments. It seems that B.A. Rybakov’s criticism for his attempts to create a field of polemical tension in the Norman theory can be recognized as fair. Moreover, there is a clear politicization here. The venerable Soviet academician claims that it was the Scandinavians who brought this “often senseless cruelty” to Russia 86 . In his opinion, “Oleg is present in the Russian chronicle not so much as a historical figure, but as a literary hero, whose image is from the reminiscences and Varangian sagas about him” 87 . A.P.Novoseltsev in this connection notes that “it smacks of chauvinism” here. It turns out that Kiy, about whom the chronicler had a rather vague idea, is a real person, and Oleg, from whom the first diplomatic documents in Russian have come down to us, about whom the chronicler did not judge from the sagas, but knew accurate data about conflicts with the Khazars and. etc. - the face is almost invented!

It is difficult to assume that B.A. Rybakov did not know that the campaigns against Byzantium and the countries of the East were carried out by the Slavs, both before Oleg and under his successors. Moreover, various sources quite naturally describe such campaigns as military trade, enterprises typical of that time, when pogroms and robbery were a common occurrence for both Scandinavians and Slavs. After all, they were at that stage of historical development, about which F. Engels rightly wrote that constant wars and predatory raids and robberies were its characteristic feature 88 . And, I think, one can fully agree with the opponent of B.A. Rybakov - A.P. Novoseltsev, that if only the Scandinavians are depicted as robbers who seduced other peoples onto the path of wars and robberies, then this means “departing from historical truth in favor of primitive patriotism which is akin to ordinary chauvinism” 89 . Untenable, in the light of the current level of accumulation of historical knowledge, are the attempts of Academician B.A. Rybakov to deny that the East Slavic state was born not only in Kyiv, but also in Novgorod.

It should be emphasized that in modern Russian historiography, some free, one-sided interpretations by Soviet scientists of sources on the history of the civilization of Ancient Russia are also subjected to reasoned scientific criticism 90 . Such criticism is constructive. Historical science does not stand still. And it is not surprising that many concepts that were unique for their time are outdated today. Here are some examples:

the venerable Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky believed that there was no craft in Russia;

Another meter of Russian historiography P.N.Milyukov believed that in ancient times the population of Russia was completely illiterate. And then birch-bark writings were found in Novgorod...;

how much we were told that in ancient times there were two cultures - for the rich and the poor. However, recent studies 91 show that the aesthetic world of the ancient Novgorodian was unified, regardless of their property status.

However, constructive scientific criticism should not be replaced by criticism, where instead of scientific arguments there are superficial judgments that are sometimes born in the race for scientific sensation. Especially here it is necessary to carefully approach historical journalism. It, for all its significance in stimulating serious scientific research, sometimes, unfortunately, is involved in the lack of competence of the authors, and even in shameless politicking.

We will go into the discussion (different points of view, approaches are outlined above). However, let's pass on our judgments with the following remark of a fundamental nature: it will be Novgorod-Kievan Rus, and not Kievan Rus, as is customary in some modern publications 92 .

Observing the course of the historical development of Europe, which remains the standard when comparing socio-historical processes, it is easy to see that the socio-political and economic development of society in antiquity seemed to slow down in movement from the southwest to the northeast, from the Mediterranean Sea - the cradle of ancient civilizations, to Baltic and further to the Arctic Ocean. Russia - the outskirts of the European world, for quite a long time retained the features of an early feudal monarchy with significant elements of the tribal system that preceded it. Although to represent it until the XIII century. a country where tribal democracy dominated, a kind of confederation of regional “city-states”, in the light of the current level of accumulation of historical knowledge on the problem, is incorrect.

In ancient Russia, the state was the supreme owner of the land, natural resources, which were no less valuable than cultivated land. Suffice it to recall Prince Svyatoslav Igorevich, who planned to move the capital to the Danube, and Pereslavets, and mentioned among the goods flowing there, "... from Russia chalk, wax, furs ...".

The long-term state ownership of land was due to the slow development of feudal landownership. This is especially evident in the example of the church. In the early Middle Ages in all Christian countries, including Russia, the church was one of the largest landowners. However, in our country the largest princely awards, but at least until the middle of the XII century. inclusive, they were not land, and part of the state revenues from a certain territory, known as "tithe", and duties in favor of the church from the local population. From the time of the first Rurikovichs, the boyars and combatants received a part of the tribute from the prince, in the collection of which they themselves took part, and often, on behalf of the prince, they themselves organized the named collection. Campaigns for collecting tribute - "polyudye" along with military expeditions occupied most of the time of the prince and his administration 93 . There were conflicts with local tribes due to a sharp increase in tribute. For example, the textbook conflict between Prince Igor and the Drevlyane leaders. This conflict was provoked by the prince's warriors, that is, the "collective feudal lord", whose interests the prince was forced to reckon with.

To govern a state, especially such a vast one, power had to be in constant motion. Even at times quite stable, at the turn of the XI-XII centuries. Vladimir Monomakh recalled that he made 83 large campaigns in his life, “... and I don’t remember other smaller ones ...”. Something similar can be observed in the history of Western Europe in the era of Charlemagne. The centralized nature of the collection and distribution of tribute, combined with the weak development of commodity-money relations, when the supreme power acted as the main “distributor of goods”, contributed to the fact that in Russia, under the first Rurik dynasty, the feudal aristocracy did not seek to isolate itself from the ruler in the localities, as this happened in the western Europe. It was concentrated in the cities at the princely court, that is, the predominantly collective form of feudal property dominated. the very beginning of feudal fragmentation was predominantly patrimonial (tribal, hereditary) in nature.

The abolition of "polyudya" and the introduction of a new system of tribute collection, as a rule, are associated with the names of Igor and his wife, Princess Olga, with their peculiar European orientation. Under Princess Olga, in the second half of the tenth century. (at least in part of the territory of the state) near Pskov and the land conquered after the uprising of the Drevlyans, a stable amount of tribute was determined and "graveyards" were organized - centers for its collection. At the same time, the service system was being folded, as in most European countries. Its content provides the key to understanding the peculiarities of the socio-economic and political development of Novgorod-Kievan Rus and its future successors: the Grand Duchies of Moscow and Lithuania. In the ancient period, similar systems can also be traced in the history of Poland and the Czech Republic, which testified to similar development paths of the Slavic peoples, who were in similar geographical conditions.

The existence of a collective form of feudal property made it necessary to form certain social groups and categories of the population that served the collective owner. People belonging to these categories were exempted from all or part of the tribute and other duties imposed on the rest of the population. By its nature, in principle similar to European states, the service organization was divided into two large branches: the crafts of natural resources and various crafts directly related to the service of princes, boyars and combatants, as well as to export. The wide range of the latter is clearly evidenced by the latest finds of archaeologists in Volhynia, where during the excavations of the settlement, large baking ovens were discovered, obviously working to provide for the squad located in the castle-detinets.

The long period of the existence of a collective feudal lord and collective feudal ownership of land naturally implied an equally long preservation of a large number of free people at the base of the feudal ladder, primarily free communal peasants. The process of feudalization of land ownership is traced weakly according to written sources, but this does not mean the absence of a process as such. Actual material, which serves as the main source for studying the forms of land tenure for the ancient era, is almost completely absent, in particular, this concerns a private act. The reasons for this situation are both in the poor preservation of the most ancient Russian written monuments in general, and in the long existence of the practice of concluding property agreements verbally in the presence of authoritative witnesses. It is known, for example, that even in the XII century. the princess, that is, a person not even fully private, Efrosinya Polotskaya, as her life testifies, acquired land for the monastery she founded without a written transaction.

Along with the free population, just as in Europe at that time, in ancient Russian society, although in much smaller numbers, there were slaves (serfs). In the most ancient period, these were mostly captives captured in military campaigns, non-payers of polyudya could also account for a certain percentage. Later, debt bondage also spread. The labor of slaves was used in the princely and boyar households, they were "planted" on the ground, included in the service categories of the population, for example, artisan slaves. Of these, the administration in feudal farms, and military detachments could also be formed. It is known that the term "nobleman", as well as the social category denoted by it, are closely related to the concepts of "court", "maid".

On the ground, along with the princely administration, which is typical for Russia, there were elements of local self-government of cities and communities - elected elders, the people's militia - "thousand", the memory of which was preserved in the rank of thousand (once its leader). However, the popular assembly “Veche” as the highest form of government became a relic already in the 11th century. All cases of its mention in the annals over this and subsequent centuries are associated with exceptional situations when, as a result of a military threat, natural disasters or prolonged famine, the administration was unable to control the situation. The only exceptions to this rule are Novgorod with its “suburb” Pskov and, to a certain extent, Polotsk, where the early stage of state formation under the rule of the Varangian Rogvold was similar to the one near Ilmen. Here, the veche retained its power and strength for centuries and eventually became one of the integral attributes of the feudal republic.

The level of development of the political system of Novgorod-Kievan Rus is evidenced by the presence of legal regulation of life. By the time of the Grand Duke of Kiev Yaroslav the Wise, the beginning of the creation of a complex legal monument - "Russian Truth" is attributed. It relied on the norms of customary law and on previous legislation. For that time, the most important sign of the strength of a document was a legal precedent and a reference to antiquity. Yaroslav owns the first 17 articles of Russkaya Pravda, in which blood feud was limited to the circle of closest relatives, which indicated the existence of the norms of the primitive system at that time. Laws sorted out disputes between free people and, above all, among the prince's combatants. Novgorod men received the same rights as Kiev men. Later, the content of Russkaya Pravda was significantly supplemented by other norms.

Another feature that characterizes the European character of ancient Russian statehood was the adoption of Christianity. In addition to the above on this issue, let us focus on the fact that as a result of the adoption of Christianity, a unique historical and cultural phenomenon was formed that had no analogues in the Slavic world. The country, at that time close in the socio-political and economic structure of the Czech Republic and Poland (which adopted Catholicism and entered the circle of civilization and culture of Latin Europe), culturally approached the South Slavic peoples of the Balkan Peninsula, who were in the sphere of influence of Byzantium and developed according to the Byzantine model . This circumstance largely determined the features of the development of the country and its culture for a long time. Christianity, borrowed from the Greeks, and at the same time, not completely dissociated from the West, ultimately turned out to be neither Byzantine nor Western, but Russian. This Russification of the Christian faith and the Church began early and proceeded in two directions. The first direction is the struggle for their national church at the top. The Greek metropolitans met in Russia with a tendency towards originality. The first Russian saints were exalted for political reasons, not related to faith, contrary to the opinion of the Greek metropolitan. The second stream came from the people. The new faith could not supplant what was part of the people themselves. Along with the Christian faith, which was not strong enough among the people, the cults of the old gods were alive. It was not dual faith that took shape, but a new syncretic faith as a result of the Russification of Christianity. Christianity was assimilated by the Russians in a peculiar way, like everything that came from outside.

How did the choice of Christianity influence Russian history and culture? In the period X - XIII centuries. there was a complex psychological demolition of pagan beliefs and the formation of Christian ideas. The process of changing spiritual and moral priorities is always difficult. In Russia, it did not take place without violence. The life-loving optimism of paganism was replaced by faith, which required restrictions, strict adherence to moral standards. The adoption of Christianity meant a change in the whole structure of life. Now the church became the center of public life. She preached a new ideology, instilled new value orientations, brought up a new person. Christianity made a person the bearer of a new morality based on the culture of conscience, arising from the evangelical commandments. Christianity created a broad basis for the unification of ancient Russian society, the formation of a single people on the basis of common spiritual and moral principles. The border between Rus and Slav has disappeared. All were united by a common spiritual foundation. Society has been humanised. Russia was included in the European Christendom. Since that time, she considers herself a part of this world, trying to play a prominent role in it, always comparing herself with it. Among the numerous economic, social, cultural consequences of Russia's entry into the family of Christian peoples was the awareness by Russian culture of the place of the Eastern Slavs in the world historical process, the value of knowledge about the past of Russia, preserved in oral folk art.

Christianity has influenced all aspects of life in Russia. The adoption of a new religion helped to establish, let's repeat it once again, political, trade, cultural ties with the countries of the Christian world. It contributed to the formation of urban culture, in a predominantly agricultural country, by the nature of life. But it is necessary to take into account the specific “Sloboda” character of Russian cities, where the bulk of the population continued to engage in agricultural production, to a small extent supplemented by handicrafts, and the urban culture proper was concentrated in a narrow circle of secular and ecclesiastical aristocracy. This can explain the superficial, formally figurative level of Christianization of the Russian philistines, their ignorance of elementary religious beliefs, their naive interpretation of the foundations of the dogma, which so surprised the Europeans who visited the country in the Middle Ages and later. The government's reliance on religion as a social and normative institution that regulates social life has formed a special type of Russian mass Orthodoxy - formal, ignorant, often synthesized with pagan mysticism.

The church contributed to the creation of magnificent architecture and art in Russia, the first annals appeared, schools where people from various segments of the population studied. The fact that Christianity was adopted in the Eastern version also had other consequences, which manifested themselves in a historical perspective. In Orthodoxy, the idea of ​​progress was less expressed than in Western Christianity. In the times of Novgorod-Kievan Rus, this still did not matter much. But as the pace of development of Europe accelerated, the orientation of Orthodoxy towards a different understanding of the goals of life had a significant effect. The European-type attitude towards transformative activity was strong in the early stages of history, but it was transformed by Orthodoxy.

Russian Orthodoxy oriented a person towards spiritual transformations, stimulated the desire for self-improvement, approaching Christian ideals. This contributed to the development of such a phenomenon as spirituality. At the same time, Orthodoxy did not provide incentives for social and social progress, for the transformation of the real life of the individual. Orientation towards Byzantium also meant a rejection of the Latin, Greco-Roman heritage. M.Grek warned against translating the works of Western thinkers into Russian. He believed that this could be detrimental to true Christianity. Hellenistic literature, which had nothing to do with Christianity at all, was subjected to special blasphemy. But Russia was not completely cut off from the ancient heritage. The influence of Hellenism, secondary, was felt through Byzantine culture. The colonies in the Black Sea region left their mark, and there was great interest in ancient philosophy.

In this regard, it seems fundamental to emphasize the following circumstance: for a long time, until the 19th century, Christianity will remain the dominant culture. It will determine the style, manners, way of thinking and feeling. There was a peculiar relationship between church and state. The state took over the tasks of the Church. The church became an instrument for the centralization of the state, created the ideological foundations of autocracy. The organizational features of the church contributed to the cultural isolation of the country. Traditionalism intensified in Russia. There was no reformation - an alternative to Orthodoxy. Since the period of the Muscovite kingdom, the cultural lag behind Western Europe has been growing.

Thus, the content and nature of the process of formation and development of ancient Russian statehood clearly testifies to the commonality of many features of the initial period of statehood among the Eastern Slavs with similar processes that took place in Europe. During the genesis of the initial stage of statehood, the Eastern Slavs formed a system of factors that influenced both the historical fate of many peoples of our country and the peoples of neighboring European and Eastern countries. The characteristic features and characteristics of ancient Russian statehood directly testify in general to the European type of civilization. The foregoing, however, does not give grounds for not taking into account the following circumstance: Russian civilization (including the civilization of ancient Russia) constantly experienced in its development the factor of the Eurasian area of ​​​​its existence.

Period XIII - XVI centuries. in the history of Europe was characterized by an active process of formation of a civilization of the Western type. The feudal fragmentation is being replaced by a steady trend towards the formation of national European states.

The conclusion of vassal agreements meant the establishment of legal relations between certain social groups - feudal landowners. In the XIII - XIV centuries. in Europe, the so-called “communal revolution” is taking place, during which the population of cities, which has grown sharply as a result of the deepening social division of labor, either buys out the territory of cities from landowners, or begins to build relations with feudal lords on the basis of contracts and taxes. These processes led to an increase in the number of owners who sought to limit the economic and political power of kings over themselves. Under pressure from the barons - direct vassals of the monarchs - the English king John the Landless in 1215 signed the Magna Carta. It limited royal power in the interests of landlords (large landowners), granted some privileges to chivalry, free peasantry and townspeople. In Germany, a system of "Magdeburg law" was formed, which secured the rights and freedoms of citizens, their right to self-government. The class of proprietors, which grew stronger as a result of the influx of townspeople, not only sought to establish legal relations with the royal power, but also created authorities capable of limiting the arbitrariness of the monarchy. For example, estate-representative institutions were formed: the States General in France (1302) and in the Netherlands (1463), the Cortes in Spain (1137), the parliament in England (XIII century), which pursued a policy in the interests of various social groups of owners and protecting them from the arbitrariness of hereditary sole royal power.

The Age of Discovery has accelerated the pace of progress of Western civilization by intensifying the accumulation of capital based on the seizure and robbery of open lands. Eurocentrism, Catholic expansion, the desire to remake the whole world in its own image and resist the onslaught of aggressive Islamic statehood led to a clash between West and East, organization in 1096-1270. crusades against Muslims and the Orthodox world. Their results were the complete loss of European possessions in the Middle East, the conquest of Constantinople by the crusaders and the creation of the Latin Empire (1204 - 1261) on part of the territory of Byzantium. Subsequently, the Byzantine Empire was restored and conquered by the Turks in 1453.

The states of Eastern society continued to exist during this period on the basis of rigid vertical ties in the conditions of the strengthening of the omnipotence of the bureaucracy, which disposed of all social wealth. Attempts by private owners to oppose the state, as a rule, ended with the last large-scale expropriation (confiscation of property). The struggle of the lower classes against the supreme power unfolded in the East mainly under the slogans of universal equalization. The Islamic religion, which has become the spiritual core of most societies of the eastern type of development, has strengthened the rigid organization of states and their offensive foreign policy. In the XIV - XVI centuries. The Ottoman Turkish Empire becomes the most influential power in the world. In the late Middle Ages, nomadic peoples and the states created by them on the principles of allegiance and autocracy continued to play an important role in the life of the East, the most powerful of which was the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan.

In the same period, the final division of the spiritual world of the East into spheres of influence between Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism is completed, proclaiming, along with other priorities, the need for spiritual self-improvement of man.

Analyzing the period of the XII-XV centuries. in the history of Russia, V.O. Klyuchevsky called it “specific years” and wrote that Russian cities and regions represented isolated and closed worlds for almost three centuries, and “brigades, the aristocracy of weapons, with their princes, glided over these worlds, with maintaining communication between them with difficulty” 95 . After 1132, it was not the disintegration of the Old Russian state that took place, but its transformation into a kind of federation of principalities, first headed by the Great Kiev Prince, whose power was constantly weakening. Relations between the princes were regulated by the customary law that existed then and the agreements that were concluded. The onset of feudal fragmentation was due to a number of objective reasons:

natural character of the feudal economy. It gave the possibility of autonomous existence to its individual units. At the same time, the growth of private boyar landownership in conditions of weak economic ties led to the economic independence of the feudal lords (boyars and specific princes) from the Grand Duke. The development of handicrafts turned cities into economic and administrative-political centers of feudal lords independent of Kyiv, and increased their number (the end of the 12th century - 150 cities, the middle of the 13th century - 240). Local markets were formed around the cities, commodity production was born;

the spread of local land tenure, in which the combatants received from their princes and boyars in conditional possession of plots of land - estates (place - official position). The settling of the squad on the ground made the prince lose his mobility, strengthen his own reign, and not move to a more prestigious princely table. At the same time, the landowner was not the owner of the land, unlike the European vassal, and was economically dependent on his master;

the strengthening of the independent military strength of the princes and boyars, the creation of their own feudal militias, consisting of landowners-nobles, to repel an external enemy, conduct internecine wars and suppress social unrest (their number grew as the serfs were enslaved).

The number of independent principalities was not stable due to permanent family divisions and associations (see Table 2).

Plan

Introduction

4.2 Social order

Conclusion

Introduction

"Where did the Russian land come from?"

We usually remember these words of the first Russian chronicler Nestor, who began his chronicle like this: "Behold the Tales of the temporary (past) years, where did the Russian Land come from, who in Kyiv began first to reign, and where did the Russian Land come from ..." This question disturbs the minds of scientists husbands for tens and hundreds of years, many theories have been put forward on this subject, the most famous of which are the so-called "Norman theory", put forward by German scientists G. Bayer, G. Miller and A. Schlozer invited to Russia, declaring the German core of the fundamental Russian history and Russian statehood. As well as "Slavic" or "anti-Norman", put forward by Mikhail Lomonosov as opposed to Miller's. The Slavic theory claims that the Varangians - representatives of the South Baltic, Pomeranian Slavs - large tribal unions that dominated the southern Baltic shores in VIII-IX-X, determined the history of the emergence of the ancient Russian state and had a huge impact on the religion, culture of this region, and on the development of everything Eastern Slavs.

The Norman theory, buried in the 1860s and 1870s by Gedeonov, received new life during the First World War. The German government saw in Normanism a powerful ideological base for a campaign in the East. "Drang nach Osten!" - shouted the German newspapers, resurrecting the seemingly forgotten ideology of Normanism. So, the theory that appeared in Russia in the 18th century about the superiority of the state-forming German element stirred up the minds of German youth and directed their battle for living space in the East ...

Old Russian state East Slavic tribe

In this term paper, I will consider both theories and on the basis of material sources and try to draw a conclusion about the validity or inconsistency of both theories, I will conduct their comparative analysis.

In the process of writing this work, the following tasks were set and solved:

study of the prerequisites for the formation of the Russian state

study of the life of the Slavic tribes in the proto-state period

consideration of evidence about the way of life of the Slavs (political history, culture, places of settlement, etc.);

the study of the Norman and Slavic theory of the emergence of the ancient Russian state;

summarizing the results of the studies and writing the work.

In the process of work, the works of such authors S. Gedeons as B. Rybakov, L. Grot, M. Lomonosov, G. Nosovsky and A. Fomenko and others were studied.

Chapter 1

The birth of the ancient Russian state was a long process. The origin of Slavic society stretched for many centuries.

The starting point for the study of the history of the Slavs, as noted by the largest researcher of Russia, Academician B.A. Rybakov, one should consider the moment of separation of the Slavic language family from the common European array, which dates back to the middle of the 2nd millennium BC. By this time, the ancestors of the Slavs, the so-called "Proto-Slavs", had come a long way in the development of a tribal society.

Tribes settled in new territories, mixed, assimilated. By the middle of the II millennium BC. the process of uniting settled tribes into ethnic communities began. One of these ethnic communities were the Proto-Slavs. At that time, the Proto-Slavic world was at the primitive communal level, had serious historical baggage. The Slavic community of that time was not a single, formed ethnic group, although it had much in common. In the second half of the II millennium BC. the uniformity of the Slavic ethnos begins to collapse. The reason for this was the complex processes that were taking place at that time in Europe. As a result of a series of wars, new ethnic groups were formed from fragments of old ethnic groups, and some disappeared altogether. Our Proto-Slavic ancestors entered one of these new ethnic communities, but without losing the common Proto-Slavic language, as noted by B.A. Rybakov. The Middle Dnieper becomes a key historical region - the core of Russian statehood - Kievan Rus will be laid here.

The Slavs, who lived on the banks of the middle Dnieper, were engaged in agriculture, cultivated mainly wheat, barley, rye, oats, millet, peas, buckwheat, exported grain to the Roman Empire, thereby stimulating the development of agriculture as the main branch of the economy. The position of the Eastern Slavs in the world at that time was closely connected with the Roman Empire, which at that time determined the course of history throughout Europe. She crossed Europe diagonally - from Scotland to the Don. Rome acted as a catalyst for the development of hundreds of barbarian tribes, including the Slavs. Trade, craft, military affairs, mercenary - all these factors contributed to the stratification within the barbarian tribes and the Slavs were no exception. All these factors were expressed in a number of large-scale offensive operations, united in tribal alliances. The wars of those times left a strong mark in the course of the further historical development of the ancient Russian tribes. The defeat of the Roman provinces in the Black Sea region by the Hunnic hordes undermined the most important source of income for the Slavic tribes - the trade in bread. The result was some equalization of the Middle Dnieper Slavs with the less developed northerners. Despite the fact that the Slavs were defeated, it did not work out to include the Middle Dnieper region in the system of dominion of the Huns.

In the history of the ancient Russian people, the events that took place in the 6th century BC played an important role. In his historical work "The Tale of Bygone Years" ( further PVL, approx. auth.)chronicler Nestor attaches great importance to these events. In the VI century. there is a mass migration of Slavs to the Balkan Peninsula. The Slavs reach ancient Sparta and the Mediterranean islands. Calling this people "Slavs", one should understand the ethnonym of this word. Academician B.A. Rybakov claims that in the VI-VII centuries. the ethnonym "Slavs" refers to all the Venedian and Andean tribes. That is, all those communities that in the I-VI centuries. merged with the ancient Balts and lived in the neighborhood - Dregovichi, Krivichi, Polovtsy, used the Dnieper and its tributaries. The main rivers - Pripyat, Dnieper, Berezina, Desna - flowed to the heights, later called Kiev. In the further history of the Slavs, they played a big role.

Chapter 2. Stages of development of the state

2.1 East Slavic tribes before the formation of the Kievan state

In the VII-VIII centuries. Eastern Slavs, settled vast territories in Eastern Europe, gradually mastered the dense forests covering the center of modern Russia. Since the new territories were mostly sparsely populated, the Slavs did not have to come into conflict with the natives. The Slavs, who had a high level of agricultural culture acquired in the fertile south, were gladly welcomed by the indigenous people. Living side by side with the Balts and Ugrofins, the Slavs gradually assimilate them. Historical sources indicate that in the VII-VIII centuries. in Slavic society, the process of decomposition of the tribal system begins. The initial chronicle tells us about large East Slavic tribal groups - glades who settled on the banks of the Dnieper near Kyiv, their neighbors - the Drevlyans, with a capital in Iskorosten, Slovenes, or Ilmen Slavs who lived near Lake Ilmen (future Novgorodians), Dregovichi, who lived between Pripyat and Western Dvina, Krivichi, whose main city was Smolensk, Polovtsy, who settled on the banks of the Polota River with the capital in Polotsk, northerners - the northern neighbors of the glades, Radimichi in the Sozh river basin, Vyatichi in the Oka basin, etc.

Toponyms of Slavic associations are mainly associated not with origin, but rather with the area of ​​​​settlement. So, for example, the meadow lived in the fields, the Drevlyans lived in the forests, the northerners lived in the north, etc. This is clear evidence that at that time for the Slavs, territorial ties stood above tribal ones.

But we are not talking about tribes, but about larger tribal associations - unions, original proto-states, rather fragile, but which are a prerequisite for the emergence of a full-fledged state. One of the important reasons for the creation of such unions was the ongoing hostility with the nomads - the Khazars, Pechenegs, etc. Each of these unions had its own "principality", which Byzantine historians mention, but they were not yet full-fledged principalities, in the feudal sense of the word, but were rather something like a transitional system from tribal to feudal system, where the reign was ruled by tribal leaders, called "princes", who belonged to the then-nascent tribal nobility, distinguished from the rest of society by their property status. The basis of the Slavic society was the patriarchal family community.

The consolidation of the Slavs took place in different ways. By the middle of the 1st millennium, Volhynians, Drevlyans, Ulichs and Tivertsy, lived in a territorial community, consisting of large and small families. Plowed agriculture became the main branch of the economy, private property arose, the power of the leaders began to be inherited, based on property and social status, as a result, the union of tribes develops into larger and larger unions.

In the northern lands - the area of ​​\u200b\u200bresidence of northerners, Krivichi, Polyans and Slovenes, at that time the patriarchal-clan system was still indestructible, there was still no mention of social stratification of society, the basis of society was a large patriarchal community. Slash-and-burn agriculture flourished, but it was not the main branch of management.

In the middle of the 1st millennium, the differences between the two Slavic groups gradually disappear, their rapprochement begins, individual families and clans from the Middle Dnieper region flee to the North, fleeing the endless raids of nomads. At the same time, the "forest" tribes move south in search of fertile land. Moving to other territories, both Slavic groups carry their foundations, customs and their way of life, assimilating with each other, they become a more monolithic ethnic and social community. The final unification of the North and South is completed during the formation of the Old Russian state.

Uniting, the Slavs also included foreign tribal groups (Lithuanians, Finns, etc.). Thus, spreading from the main center of the Middle Dnieper, the circle of Slavic tribes increased all the time and covered an ever larger territory.

2.2 Decomposition of the primitive communal system and the emergence of feudal relations in ancient Russia

The economic basis of the Slavic tribes was agriculture, so the decomposition of the primitive communal system is also primarily associated with agriculture.

At the initial stage of the decomposition of the primitive communal system, the Slavs still live in large communities, "hillforts". Agriculture has not yet become the main branch of the economy. Cattle breeding, hunting, fishing, beekeeping are of great importance, agriculture remains slash-and-burn, craft and exchange are poorly expressed.

As a result of further agricultural work, primitive tools of labor appear - a plow, an iron coulter, livestock is used as a draft force, labor productivity thereby increased, agriculture passes from slash to arable, thereby becoming the main branch of the economy.

The more perfect agricultural technology becomes, the more affordable it becomes for each small family to run an independent household. The tribal community becomes a relic of the past, the need for it disappears and the patriarchal family breaks up, it is replaced by a territorial neighborhood community. An increase in productivity leads to the appearance of surpluses, private, family property, private plots of arable land appear.

The appearance of surpluses provokes the development of exchange, trade and crafts, and there is a division of labor. There is a process of social stratification, a rich stratum stands out, while other families, on the contrary, go bankrupt and fall into the service of their more successful compatriots. Thus, through the exploitation of poor neighbors, military industry and trade, the rich stratum enhances its importance, economic and social significance.

There is a redistribution and seizure of land by princes, military leaders and combatants, tribute is levied from the occupied territories, and peasants are enslaved for debts.

Tribal nobility and wealthy community members create the ruling class. The stratification of society was facilitated by constant wars, as a result of which the seizure of booty and slaves took place, the dependence of the communal peasants on the princes-military leaders, who provided them with protection from external threats, increased. Voluntary tribute is replaced by a mandatory tax. In addition to their own tribe, the princes also tax the danbyu and neighboring captured tribes.

Over time, tribal unions begin to emerge. Arab sources report that in the VIII century. there are three large Slavic associations - Kuyaba, Slavia and Artania, which have signs of statehood. The forerunner of the emergence of statehood, in addition to internal socio-economic processes, was also the need to protect against external enemies, wage wars, organize and maintain trade relations, overcome contradictions as a result of the increasing stratification of society.

The power of the leaders of tribal unions is growing, and an apparatus of political power is emerging. Thus, by the end of the 1st millennium, the socio-economic system of the Eastern Slavs is characterized by the final decomposition of the tribal system, the emergence of class division, the reorganization of tribal forms of power into the bodies of the economically dominant class, and statehood arises.

2.3 The unification of the East Slavic tribes into a single Old Russian state

The beginning of the 9th century was marked by the unification of the ancient Russian tribes into a single state with its capital in Kyiv. The emergence of this state was facilitated by the promotion of crafts, the development of tillage techniques, the establishment of trade relations with neighbors, the difficult political situation with Byzantium, the constant raids of the Polovtsian nomads, the Khazars and other tribes who constantly attacked the Eastern Slavs. All these conditions required the emergence of an armed squad, the reorganization of foreign trade.

But there is no doubt that the main prerequisite for unification was the position of the Kiev prince, who had at his disposal rich lands, many slaves, dependent peasants, a combat-ready squad capable of protecting the feudal lords in the face of increasing class contradictions. The Kiev principality, unlike other ancient Russian lands, experienced the transformation of tribal apparatuses into institutions of state power much earlier. The Kyiv prince, taking polyudye from his lands, kept numerous servants, palace servants, a squad, and governors. The institutes of power introduced by the Kievan prince played the role of central administration and assisted petty princelings.

At the same time, in addition to Kyiv, Novgorod became the center of Russian statehood; the process of unification of the northern Slavic tribes was going on around it ( Slavia).

The process of creating the Old Russian state was completed by consolidation in the second half of the 9th century. southern and northern Slavic tribes into a single state with its capital in Kyiv. This event is closely connected with the name of Oleg, in 882. After the campaign of squads under his leadership from Novgorod to Kyiv on the way "from the Varangians to the Greeks", the centers of Russian statehood were united.

After that, the rest of the East Slavic tribes swore allegiance to the Kiev prince. Consolidation takes place during the reign of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich. In 981, the region of the Cherven cities of Przemysl, that is, the East Slavic lands, up to San, joins the Kiev estate. In 992, the lands of the Croats located on both slopes of the Carpathians became part of the Old Russian state. In 989, Russian warriors laid the foundation for Black Russia, going to the Yatvags and the Russian population living up to the Prussian borders. In 981, Vyatichi joined Kiev, although they retained signs of their former independence for a long time. Thus, by the end of the X century. the process of unification of the Eastern Slavs into a single state was completed.

The resulting Old Russian state occupied a rather large territory and became one of the strongest European states. Kyiv had diplomatic, trade and other international relations with many Western countries. The Russian army victoriously marched through the lands of Byzantium, Khazaria, and Bulgaria. Having united, the Slavs ensured the development of their economy and culture, developed a system of feudal land tenure, contributed to the strengthening of feudal landowning power, the oppression of the feudal lords.

Chapter 3

"What dirty tricks such a beast admitted to them will roam in Russian antiquities."

Since the 17th century, researchers of Russian history have been divided into two camps - adherents of the Norman theory and anti-Normanists (Slavs). The founders of the Norman theory were invited German scientists - Johann Gottfried Bayer, a Koenigsberg linguist, Gerard Friedrich Miller, invited by Peter I to work in St. Petersburg in 1724. Based on the text of the PVL, they claimed that their name was "Rus" together with statehood - Normans - Swedes. This theory served as the basis for the political, state claims of the German world in relation to the Slavic lands. Foreign scientists, who, by the way, did not even know the Russian language, exposed the Slavs as primitive barbarians, who only with the arrival of the Germans threw off their tails, climbed down from the birches and learned to speak. This theory was humiliating for the Russians, and the entire St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences was not only outraged, but indignant! Such prominent Russian scientists as Tatishchev, Derzhavin, Sumarokov, Shishkov, as well as other Russian historians of that time, vehemently objected to this falsification.

The Norman theory is based on the fact that the process of the origin of the Old Russian state is described in the oldest Russian chronicle - "The Tale of Bygone Years". Based on this theory, the chronicle makes it clear that in the 9th century. Slavs lived in conditions of statelessness. The southern and northern Slavic tribes, after the expulsion of the Varangians, were mired in civil strife, could not agree among themselves and turned to the Norman rulers to establish order. The Varangian princes came to Russia and in 862 sat on the thrones: Rurik - occupied Novgorod, Truvor - Izborsk, Sineus - Beloozero. This moment is considered the starting point for the formation of the Russian state.

Anti-Normanists raise a number of objections to the consistency of the Norman theory.

Firstly, there is no direct indication in the PVL that Russian statehood began after the calling of the Varangians. On the contrary, she argues that the Eastern Slavs had statehood long before the Varangians. Secondly, the genesis of any state is a laborious historical process, and one or several even the most prominent personalities cannot arrange it. With regards to the facts mentioned in the annals of the calling of the Varangian princes by the Slavs with their squads, they were invited as military specialists. In addition, many authors doubt the Norman origin of Rurik, Sineus and Truvor, reasonably suggesting that they could also be representatives of the northern Slavic tribes. This is supported by the almost complete absence of traces of the Varangian culture in the history of Russia.

A.V. Seregin, in refutation of the Norman theory, cites signs of statehood among our ancestors before the calling of the Varangians in 862 AD.

Firstly, we know from ancient Arabic sources that already by the 6th c. AD there were three proto-state formations among the Eastern Slavs - this is Slavia (in the area of ​​\u200b\u200bLake Ilmen, with a center in Novgorod), Kuyaba (around Kyiv) and Artania (Tmutarakan - Crimea and Kuban)

Secondly, in itself the calling of the Varangians to reign in 862 AD, after their expulsion, testifies to the presence of sovereignty and a political principle in ancient Russian society. So, M.F. Vladimirsky-Budanov in his book concluded that "the Varangian princes found a ready state system everywhere."

Thirdly, long before the arrival of the Varangians, the Eastern Slavs had a territorial division, which follows from the Tale of Bygone Years, which notes: "They called themselves by their names from the places where they sat down. Settled in the forests - the Drevlyans, along the river Cloths - Polotsk. According to the Bug - Buzhan. " The Varangians did not establish a new territorial division of the state.

Fourth, there are no traces of Norman law in Russian history. And the formation of the state is inseparably connected with the emergence of law. And if the Varangians had a more developed state than the Slavs, and it was they who created statehood in Russia, then the sources of Old Russian law, of course, should have been based on Varangian law. Neither Russkaya Pravda nor the Treaties with Byzantium contain any traces of Swedish terminology or even words borrowed from the Swedish language.

Fifthly, ancient sources testify that as early as the 1st c. AD Slavs paid their leaders a special tax-rug, which amounted to one hundredth of the property of each family. And the word "polyudye", which meant the collection of tribute, was borrowed by the Varangians precisely from the Russian language, from which it follows that the collection of tax, as a sign of statehood, appeared among the Slavs much earlier.

Thus, the first Russian states arose as a result of the internal socio-economic development of the Eastern Slavs, and not under the influence of external circumstances, and certainly not as a result of the calling of the Varangians. It is not possible to establish the time of the appearance of the first Russian principalities. But the formation of the Old Russian state, which is also commonly called Kievan Rus, is associated with the moment of the unification of the East Slavic lands into one state. Most authors attribute this event to the end of the 9th century AD, when in 882 the Novgorod prince Oleg captured Kyiv and united the two most important groups of Russian lands; then he managed to annex the rest of the Russian lands, creating a huge state. In addition to the Slavs, the Old Russian state also included some neighboring Finnish and Baltic tribes. But it was based on the ancient Russian nationality, which is the beginning of the three Slavic peoples - Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians.

The most ardent opponent of the treacherous Norman theory was the great Russian scientist - Lomonosov. He argued in his writings that Slavic history is several thousand years deeper and that it must be considered together with the history of all European peoples. Outraged by Miller's dissertation, Lomonosov was forced to start writing ancient Russian history based on primary sources.In correspondence with Shuvalov, he mentioned his works "Description of impostors and streltsy riots", "On the state of Russia during the reign of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich", "Abbreviated description of the affairs of the sovereign" (Peter the Great), "Notes on the labors of the monarch".

However neither these works, nor the numerous documents that Lomonosov intended to publish in the form of notes, nor preparatory materials, nor the manuscript of parts 2 and 3 of volume 1"Ancient Russian History" has not come down to us. They were confiscated and disappeared without a trace.

4. Characteristics of the ancient Russian state

4.1 The political system of the state is feudal

The form of government of the Old Russian state was the early feudal monarchy. The Grand Duke was the eldest (suzerain) in relation to the local princes. He owned the largest and most powerful principality. Relations with other princes were built on the basis of agreements - letters of the cross.

The Grand Duke's throne was inherited. First to the eldest in the family, then to the eldest son. Gradually, relatives of the Grand Duke became local princes.

Initially, the functions of the princes were to organize a squad, a military militia, collect taxes, and foreign trade. Gradually, activities in the field of administration, legislative and judicial functions acquired greater importance. The prince was the highest court.

In his activities, the Grand Duke relied on the advice of large feudal lords - the boyars and the clergy. Feudal congresses were sometimes convened to resolve important issues (the adoption of laws, etc.).

At first, the central administration had a numerical system, which was based on the organization of a military militia. The military structural units corresponded to certain military districts, which were under the control of the thousand, sot and ten. Over time, correspondence to the numerical designation is lost. A thousand became not an armed number of people, but a territorial concept. The Thousands were, first of all, the leaders of the military forces of the district, but at the same time they concentrated power, judicial and political functions in their hands.

Later, a palace-patrimonial system of government was formed. The state apparatus, as it were, coincided with the apparatus of managing a domain, a fiefdom. The main ranks in charge of the prince's household and state affairs were palace servants. The most important of them were the butler (dvorsky), who managed the princely court, the voivode, who led the armed forces, and the equerry, who provided the princely army with horses. In the subordination of these higher princely ranks were various servants - tiuns.

Local authorities were posadniks (governors) in cities and volostels in rural areas. They were representatives of the prince in the city or volost: they collected tribute, duties, judged, established and levied fines. They kept a part of the collected from the population for themselves - instead of a salary for the service, the so-called "feed". The size of the "feed" was determined in letters. Assistants of posadniks and volostels - tiuns, virniks and others - also received "feed". This control system was called the feeding system.

State administration was based on a system of taxes. Initially, the tax was only in the form of polyudia, when the princes, usually once a year, traveled around the subject lands and collected income directly from their subjects. Later, graveyards were established, i.e. special collection points. Then there was a system of various taxes, as well as trade, judicial and other duties. Taxes were usually collected in furs, which were a specific monetary unit.

One of the most important elements of the political system of ancient Russian society was the church, closely connected with the state. Of great importance was the introduction of Christianity in the 10th century, which preached the divine origin of the power of the monarch, the obedience of the people to the rulers. At the head of the Orthodox Church was the Metropolitan, who was appointed initially from Byzantium, and then by the Grand Dukes. In some Russian lands the church was headed by a bishop.

The territorial structure of the Old Russian state was initially based on a kind of federal principles. A.N. Chertkov in his article proposes to introduce the term "Old Russian Prafederation". At the heart of the Old Russian Prafederation was the testament of Yaroslav the Wise, who established the principles of dividing Russia into destinies. Yaroslav's testament established the basis for the succession of princely thrones and the territorial structure of the state; proclaimed Russia as a single fiefdom of the Rurik family; determined the relationship between the center and the regions on the basis of the seniority of the Kiev prince, the significant independence of the specific princes; gave an ideological basis for the unity of state power and territory (we are all grandchildren of the same grandfather). The federal nature of the Old Russian state was also reflected in public agreements, which were concluded not only between the city (local prince) and the Grand Duke, but also between individual local princes. In the Old Russian state, such a democratic institution as the veche was preserved. The competence of the veche originally included all issues of public administration: legislation, courts, disputes, etc. Gradually, the range of issues narrowed. Later veche remained only in individual cities. His most significant influence was in Novgorod. Present in the Old Russian state and the body of local peasant self-government - the territorial community - verv. Its functions included: the distribution of land plots, the taxation and distribution of taxes, the resolution of litigation, the execution of punishments. Thus, the Old Russian state was an early feudal monarchy with federal principles in the territorial structure.

4.2 Social order

By the time of the formation of the Old Russian state, feudal ownership of land was established among the Eastern Slavs, and classes were formed - feudal landowners and feudal-dependent peasants.

The largest feudal lords were princes: Kievan and local (tribal). The land holdings of the princes grew through the seizure of communal lands, as well as through the seizure of the lands of other tribes as a result of wars.

The boyars were also big feudal lords - the feudal aristocracy, which grew rich due to the exploitation of the peasants and predatory wars. In addition, the class of feudal lords also included warriors of princes who received land from the prince. Such land ownership was called a patrimony, a permanent possession that could be inherited.

After the adoption in the X century. Christianity appeared collective feudal lords - monasteries and churches. Their lands mainly grew at the expense of tithes and other incomes (judicial, etc.).

The lowest layer of the feudal lords were servants, princely and boyar, service people. They received land for service and for the duration of service.

All groups of feudal lords were in a relationship of suzerainty-vassalage. The Grand Duke was the supreme suzerain, his vassals were the local princes - the overlords of their boyars and servicemen. Vassals carried out military service.

The main right of the feudal lords was the right to land and exploitation of the peasants, which was expressed primarily in the fact that they received feudal taxes from the peasants.

Gradually, the feudal lords received from their overlords-princes the so-called immunities, were exempted from paying tribute in favor of the prince and acquired the right to have a squad, judge the population dependent on them, collect various taxes, etc. Ie. political power became an attribute of large feudal property. The law also established the privileges of the ruling class: increased punishment for the murder of a feudal lord or causing property damage to him, broader rights to transfer property by inheritance, etc.

With the growth of feudal property, the number of dependent population increased through economic enslavement, when the ruined community members were forced to become dependent on the feudal lord on various conditions (purchasing, patronage, hiring, etc.), as well as non-economic coercion. As a result, there were almost no free peasants-communes, and the main peasant population fell under one form or another of feudal dependence.

The main group of the peasantry were smerds, who lived in communities-vervs. They had their own house, farm, a plot of land in use. The dependence of the smerds on the feudal lords was expressed in the fact that they were obliged to serve feudal duties (pay tribute, taxes). In the absence of sons and unmarried daughters, all their property after death passed to the master. Smerdy were subject to the court of the prince, his vassals, the church. But these are not yet serfs, since they were not attached to the land and the personality of the feudal lord.

Another category of dependent population consisted of purchases - smerds, forced to go into bondage to the master. Having borrowed money or property (kupa) from the feudal lord, they were obliged to work for the owner. Moreover, the purchase cannot work out the kupa and practically remains with the master for life if he does not pay the debt. In the event of an escape, the purchase turned into a serf.

There were other categories of the feudal-dependent population: outcasts - people who left the community; forgiveness - those who fell under the patronage of the church, monasteries or secular feudal lords and are obliged to work in their households for this.

Slaves also existed in the Old Russian state - servants, serfs. They were practically powerless and equated to cattle. The sources of servitude were: captivity, birth from a slave, self-sale into slavery, marriage with a slave, entry into the service “without a row” (i.e. without any reservations), bankruptcy, escape from a purchase, committing serious crimes (arson of a threshing floor, horse stealing).

However, slavery in the Kievan state was not the basis of production, but was predominantly domestic. Subsequently, serfs became the first serfs.

Large and numerous cities existed in the Old Russian state. Merchants, who were a privileged category of people, stood out among the urban population. Skillful artisans also lived in the cities, building magnificent temples and palaces for the nobility, making weapons, jewelry, etc.

The urban population was freer than dependent peasants. In cities, from time to time, people's assemblies - veche - were convened. But the class differentiation was very significant.

The Russian state has always been polyethnic (multinational). The Slavs mixed with the Finnish tribes, and this process was peaceful. All peoples were equal. There was no advantage for the Slavs, including in the sources of Old Russian law.

Thus, the social system of the Old Russian state was a pronounced class division of society, characteristic of the early feudal monarchy. Feudal landownership was based on the dependent position of smerds and purchases. Slavery was used mainly for domestic purposes and did not form the basis of production. At the same time, there was no division along national lines.

Conclusion

In the IX-XII centuries, Kievan Rus was one of the largest medieval European powers, which played an important role in the fate of the peoples and states not only of the West, but also of the East and even the distant North. Just as a caterpillar turns into a butterfly, so the young Russian state, from a small handful of the Dnieper Slavs, turned into a huge power, uniting under its wing all the East Slavic tribes, the tribes of the Balts and the Finno-Ugrians. The spirit of that time can be conveyed by the words of the Russian poet S. Yesenin: "Oh Russia, flap your wings, put up a different support!". And she waved, and waved so much that half the world learned about the young Slavic state - Western rulers dreamed of intermarrying with the Kiev princes, the Greeks were a constant trading partner of Russia, Russian merchants walked along the Caspian Sea, reached Baghdad and Balkh. Streams of the Varangians incessantly adjoined the rapidly developing neighbor, joining princely squads and joining overseas expeditions. And in Gardarik, as the Varangians called it, newcomers found a new home, assimilating with the local population.

From the main historical work of those times that has come down to us - "The Tale of Bygone Years", we learn that the Slavs had extensive knowledge in the geography of the then world, from the coast of Britain in the west to the Chinese lands in the east, he mentions "Island" (Indonesia), located at the end of the earth, talks about the Indian Brahmins.

The population of Kievan Rus quickly merged into the pan-European current, joining the Byzantine and Western European culture, creating their own literary, architectural and artistic works of art. With the adoption of Christianity by Russia, the young state joins the book culture. Although there was writing in Russia even before baptism, however, the greatest development of literature begins after 988.

Could it be that our ancestors, being illiterate savages, as the adherents of the Norman theory expose them, could build such a strong state? Would they be able to declare themselves to half the world? Can it be that yesterday's barbarians, who threw off their tails and climbed down from the birches, were able to build the largest state in the world, withstanding the attacks of Europeans from the West and countless hordes from the east? and about Byzantine sources and about Arabic information indicating that long before Rurik came to Russia, the Slavs had their own princes, who managed perfectly well without the "German core".

However, let us leave the Norman theory, choking in its death throes, rushing about with unsubstantiated loud statements, and take a sober look at things. The formation of statehood among the ancient Slavs was a natural result of the collapse of the tribal community, the emergence of a class society, the reorganization of tribal authorities into the bodies of the economically dominant class. It completed the process of creating the ancient Russian state of the East Slavic tribes into a single state, which firmly occupied its niche among other strong states of medieval Europe.

List of used literature

1.Belkovets L.P., Belkovets V.V. History of the state and law of Russia. Lecture course. - Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk book publishing house, 2010. - 216 p.

2.Vladimirsky-Budanov M.F. Review of the history of Russian law. - Rostov-on-Don: Phoenix, 2007. - 524 p.

.Isaev I.A. History of State and Law of Russia: Textbook. - M.: Jurist, 2004. - 797 p.

.History of the domestic state and law: Textbook / Ed. Yu.P. Titov. - M.: OOO "TK Velbi", 2011. - 544 p.

.Mavrodin V.V. Formation of the Old Russian state. - L.: Izd-vo LGOLU, 2005. - 432 p.

.The Tale of Bygone Years // Tale of Ancient Russia. - M.: Baluev, 2012. - 400 p.

.Chertkov A.N. Territorial structure of the Old Russian state: the search for a legal basis // History of State and Law. - 2010. - N 21. - P.34 -

.Rybakov B.A. Kievan Rus and Russian principalities. M.: Nauka, 2009. P.12

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

2. Political parties in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century: genesis, classification, programs, tactics.

1) The state of the Eastern Slavs was formed as a result of socio-economic, political and cultural factors. The development of arable farming led to the appearance of a surplus product, which created conditions for the separation of the princely retinue elite from the community (there was a separation of military administrative labor from productive labor). Due to the fact that a separate large family could already provide for its existence, the tribal community began to transform into an agricultural (neighboring) community. This created conditions for property and social stratification.

Intertribal struggle led to the formation of tribal alliances led by the most powerful tribe and its leader. Over time, the power of the prince turned into hereditary and less and less dependent on the will of veche assemblies.

The Khazars and the Normans sought to take control of the trade routes linking the West with the East and the South, which accelerated the formation of princely-druzhina groups that were drawn into foreign trade. They collected craft products from their fellow tribesmen and, exchanging them for prestigious consumption products and silver from foreign merchants, selling them captured foreigners, the local nobility more and more subjugated the tribal structures, enriched themselves and isolated themselves from ordinary community members.

At the first stage of the formation of the Old Russian state (7th-middle of the 9th century), intertribal unions and their centers were formed. In the ninth century appears polyudie - a detour of the prince with a squad of subordinate territories to collect tribute.

At the second stage (2nd half of the 9th - middle of the 10th century), the process of folding the state accelerated, largely due to the active intervention of external forces - the Khazars and the Normans (Varangians). A kind of federation of tribal principalities was formed, headed by the Grand Duke of Kiev.

The third, stage of the folding of the state begins with Reforms of Princess Olga. She established in the middle of the X century. a fixed rate of tribute, and to collect it arranges "graveyards".

The third stage (911-1054) - the flowering of the early feudal monarchy, due to the rise of productive forces, the successful struggle against the Pechenegs, Byzantium, the Varangians and the development of feudal relations.

The fourth stage (1054-1093) - the reign of Vladimir Monomakh, his son Mstislav the Great - became the beginning of the collapse of the state. At the same time, the productive forces are growing. The boyars were then a progressive element of the ruling class

The fifth stage (1093-1132) is characterized by a new strengthening of the feudal monarchy, since. the princes, in connection with the onslaught of the Polovtsy, sought to unite Kievan Rus, which they eventually succeeded, but after the victory over the Polovtsy, the need for a single state disappeared.

Thus, the state of the Eastern Slavs was formed as a result of a complex interaction of internal and external factors. One of the features of the Old Russian state was that from the very beginning it was multinational in its composition. The formation of the state was of great historical importance for the Eastern Slavs. It created favorable conditions for the development of agriculture, crafts, foreign trade, and influenced the formation of the social structure. Thanks to the formation of the state, ancient Russian culture is being formed, a single ideological system of society is being formed. .

Late XIX - early XX century. - the period of formation of political parties in Russia. All the parties that arose in that period can be divided into three groups: radical (socialist orientation), liberal and conservative (monarchist). A separate group can be distinguished parties that arose in the national regions of the empire, expressing the desire of the peoples of these regions for national revival or self-determination.
The largest revolutionary party in Russia was the Party of Socialist Revolutionaries (SRs). She was the successor of the populist organizations "Land and Freedom" and "Narodnaya Volya". The party was formed in 1901, which was officially announced in 1902. V. M. Chernov was the leader of the party. The party staked on the peasantry as the bearer of the socialist (communal) idea, as well as on the entire working people, including workers and the intelligentsia in this concept. Like the Narodniks, the Socialist-Revolutionaries recognized individual terror as an effective means of political struggle. The militant organization of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party, which was successively headed by G. Gershuni, E. Azef, B. Savinkov, carried out high-profile political assassinations of high-ranking tsarist officials, among whom were the Minister of the Interior Plehve, the Governor of Moscow, Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, and others.
Out of the Marxist circles and unions that existed in the 1980s and 1990s, the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party arose in 1898. Its creation was announced in 1898 at the founding congress, which was held illegally in Minsk. In 1903, at the II Congress of this party, where its charter and program were adopted, the party split into two currents: the radical Bolshevik and the more moderate Menshevik. V. I. Ulyanov (Lenin) became the leader of the Bolsheviks, Yu. O. Martov became the leader of the Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks were supporters of the proletarian revolution on a worldwide scale and the establishment of the "dictatorship of the proletariat." The Mensheviks believed that the conditions for a socialist revolution were not yet ripe in Russia. They advocated the preservation of parliamentarism, democracy and political freedoms.
From 1903 to 1917, the party consisted of these competing groupings, which either converged or diverged. Lenin believed that the final split occurred in 1912 at the Prague Party Conference. However, a single program, charter and name of the party were preserved until 1917. Only in 1917, after the adoption of Lenin's "April Theses", two truly independent parties arose: the Bolsheviks - the RSDLP (b) and the Mensheviks (RSDLP). During the First World War, the Mensheviks included defencists, internationalists and mezhrayontsy.
After the publication of the Manifesto on October 17, 1905, the process of creating liberal and monarchist parties intensified.
One of the largest political parties in Russia was the party of constitutional democrats (cadets); the official name is the "Party of People's Freedom", existed from October 1905 to November 1917. The Cadets represented the left wing in Russian liberalism. They traced their lineage to the zemstvo liberal movement and the Union of Liberation, created in 1903. Professor P. N. Milyukov was the leader of the party. The political goal of the party was the establishment of a constitutional monarchy in Russia and the introduction of basic democratic freedoms. Deputies from the Cadet Party played an important role in the activities of the State Duma of all four convocations, its representatives were included in all four compositions of the Provisional Government.
The right wing of Russian liberalism was represented by the Union of October 17th. He was the spokesman for the interests of big businessmen, liberal-minded landowners and part of the officials. This party considered its main task to be assistance to the government if it follows the path of reforms. Just like the Cadets, the Octobrists considered the ideal form of government for Russia to be a constitutional monarchy. The leader of the party is the big industrialist AI Guchkov.
The largest conservative-protective, nationalist party in Russia was the Union of the Russian People. Its organizations began to emerge in October 1905. The charter was approved in 1906, in which the most important task was to attract the general public to protect the autocracy and fight the revolutionary movement. The most important program slogans were: autocracy, Orthodoxy and nationality. Party leader - A. I. Dubrovin. In 1908, one of the leaders of the party, V. M. Purishkevich, created another organization of the right-monarchist wing called the Union of Michael the Archangel.
In total, by 1906 there were about 50 parties in the country. The parties were divided into all-Russian, regional and national, differing in political directions. The multiplicity of Russian parties was explained by the diversity of the social and national structure of Russian society.

The main stages in the formation of the Old Russian state

In the process of formation of the Old Russian state, three main stages can be distinguished:

Stage I (VIII-mid-IX centuries). going on maturation of the prerequisites for statehood in the East Slavic tribes. Internal factors played a decisive role in this process:

ethnic community,

A certain similarity of economic interests,

Proximity of the area

The need for protection from external enemies (neighboring tribes and states),

The need to expand the territory through military campaigns.

Starting from the VI century. among the Eastern Slavs, power is isolated and strengthened tribal aristocracy, primarily military leaders, relying directly on real armed force - squad. This type of social organization is called "military democracy".

Against this background, there are tribal unions and their centers are highlighted. By the 8th century the Eastern Slavs had certain state forms. Historical sources testify to the existence of unions of East Slavic tribes:

- Valinana (among the Volhynians in the upper reaches of the Bug River),

- Kuyavia (identified with Kiev),

- Slavia (associated with Novgorod),

· - Artania (location unknown, possibly in the area of ​​the modern city of Ryazan).

Appears polyudya system(collection of tribute from community members in favor of the leader-prince, so far voluntarily, perceived as compensation for military expenses and administrative activities).

Stage II (II half of the IX-mid-X centuries). The process of folding the state accelerated largely due to the active intervention of external forces - the Khazars and the Normans (Varangians), who forced the Slavic and Finno-Ugric tribes to pay tribute.

But one can speak about the real principles of ancient Russian statehood first of all when prince's power came to be seen as special state power(second half of the 9th-first half of the 10th centuries). Its character can be judged, first of all, by the organization of the collection of tribute and people, by an active foreign policy, especially in relation to Byzantium.

Vocation Rurik Novgorodians (862) and unification by his successor Oleg (879-912) Northern and Southern Russia under the rule of Kyiv in the 9th century. allowed to concentrate the power of the Kiev princes over the territory from Ladoga to the lower reaches of the Dnieper.

There was a kind of federation of tribal principalities, headed by Prince of Kiev. His power was manifested in tribute collection from all the tribes included in this association.

Oleg, relying on the power of the Slavic-Norman squad and "wars" (armed free community members), commits successful campaigns against Byzantium in 907 and 911. As a result, they signed beneficial agreements for Russia, providing her with the right to duty-free trade on the territory of the empire and a number of other privileges.

Igor(912-945)

and also defended its borders from the formidable nomads who appeared - Pechenegs.

In 944-945. he committed two trips to Byzantium, which violated its agreements with Russia, but, having suffered defeat, was forced to conclude a less favorable agreement with the empire.

In an agreement with Byzantium in 945, the term itself is found "Russian land". In the same year, during the polyudya, he was killed by the Drevlyans for demanding tribute in excess of the usual.

Stage III (II half of the X-beginning of the XI centuries). It begins with the reforms of the princess Olga (945-964). Having avenged the Drevlyans for the death of her husband, in order to prevent what happened to Igor in the future, she established a fixed rate of tribute collection (“lessons”), and to collect it set special places ("graveyards"), where the boyar with a small retinue "sat" (i.e. watched the collection of tribute).

"Polyudye" turned into "reason».

Graveyards become the backbone of local princely power.

Politics of Olga's son, Prince Svyatoslav (964-972) was aimed mainly at fight against an external enemy. The defeat of Khazaria and campaigns on the Danube required a lot of effort, money and time. In connection with this, the prince-warrior (that was the name of Svyatoslav both among the people and in the annals) practically did not deal with issues of the internal structure of the state.

New steps in the development of the Russian state is associated with the activities of the illegitimate son of Svyatoslav - Vladimir I (980-1015), who came to power as a result of a cruel, bloody struggle with his brothers for the throne of Kyiv.

1. He expanded the territory of Kiev states, adding to it the southwestern (Galicia, Volyn) and western (Polotsk, Turov) Slavic lands.

In addition, feeling the danger to the strength of his power, associated with the inferiority of his origin (the son of the slave Malusha - the housekeeper of Princess Olga), Vladimir sought strengthen princely power basically -

Introduction monotheistic religion (monotheism) .

Introduction institute of governors

It first does this by creating pantheon of 5 gods headed by Perun, which was especially revered by warriors. But this reform did not take root, and he went for radical changes - he introduced monotheism, accepting himself and forcing all of Russia to accept Christianity.

The introduction of Christianity not only created the basis for the spiritual unity of the Russian people, but also strengthened the supreme power in the state ("one god in heaven, one prince on earth"), increased the international prestige of Kievan Rus, which ceased to be a barbarian country. In addition, Christian morality called for humility, which justified the feudal exploitation of ordinary community members by the prince, his entourage, and the landowning boyars, who were the backbone of princely power.

The next decisive step, completing the creation of the state, was the replacement of the tribal princes by Vladimir governors (they were 12 sons of Vladimir and approximate boyars), appointed by the Kiev prince. Governors should have

defend the new faith

and to strengthen the power of the prince in the field, being the "eye of the sovereign."

The strengthening of power gave Vladimir the opportunity to organize the population of the country for creating powerful defensive lines on the southern borders state and resettle part of the population here from more northern territories (Krivichi, Slovenes, Chudi, Vyatichi). This made it possible to successful fight with raids Pechenegs . As a result, the prince, as epics testify, began to be perceived in the popular mind not just as a warrior-defender, but as the head of state, organizing the protection of his borders.

The final step in the formation of Russian statehood was made by the son of Vladimir I, Yaroslav the Wise (1019-1054), which marked the beginning of Russian written legislation. He created the first part of the first written code of laws - "Russian Truth" ("The Truth of Yaroslav"). It was written back in 1015, when he was his governor in Novgorod, and was intended for Novgorodians. Having entered the throne of Kyiv in 1019, Yaroslav extended it to the territory of the entire state. Subsequently, for a century and a half, Yaroslav's Truth was supplemented by his sons ("The Truth of the Yaroslavichs"), Vladimir Monomakh ("Charter of Vladimir Monomakh") and subsequent rulers of the Russian state and existed as a legislative basis until the adoption of the first Sudebnik in 1497.

The emergence of a written code of laws in the early ninth century. became necessary because disintegration of the tribal community many ordinary people lost their status and suffered insults, not being able to turn to tribal groups. The only protection for community members and ordinary citizens was the prince and his squad. This further increased the power of the prince.

Russkaya Pravda, as a developing monument, gives an idea of ​​the increasingly complex social structure, categories of free and dependent population, i.e. actually objects and subjects of state administration.

Being predominantly a procedural collection, Russkaya Pravda spoke little about judicial organization (the prince and judges are mentioned as court bodies, and the princely court as a court place). The fact is that many disputes were resolved out of court, by the forces of the interested parties themselves.

The significance of Russkaya Pravda lies in the fact that it influenced the development of local legislation and, in the future, national legislation.

In addition, it carried the idea of ​​the responsibility of the authorities in court cases, primarily before God, and the self-serving court in the interests of the authorities itself was qualified as wrong.

In general, the first written legislative code of Russia is important evidence of the maturity of the state.

Thus, by the beginning of the XI century. Kievan Rus had the main features of the formed statehood:

A single territory covering the place of residence of all Eastern Slavs;