The first reason for the feudal fragmentation was the growth of boyar estates, the number of dependent smerds in them. XII - early XIII centuries were characterized by the further development of boyar land tenure in various principalities of Russia. The boyars expanded their possession by seizing the lands of free smerds-communes, enslaved them, and bought land. In an effort to get a larger surplus product, they increased the natural quitrent and labor work, which the dependent smerds performed. The increase due to this received by the boyars of the surplus product made them economically powerful and independent. In various lands of Russia, economically powerful boyar corporations began to take shape, striving to become sovereign masters on the lands where their estates were located. They wanted to judge their peasants themselves, to receive fines from them, vira. Many boyars enjoyed feudal immunity (the right of non-interference in the affairs of the patrimony), "Russkaya Pravda" determined the rights of the boyars. However, the Grand Duke (and such is the nature of princely power) strove to keep in his hands all the power. He intervened in the affairs of the boyar estates, strove to retain the right of trial over the peasants and to receive from them males in all lands of Rus.

The Grand Duke, being considered the supreme owner of all the lands of Rus, and their supreme ruler, continued to regard all the princes and boyars as his servants, and therefore forced them to participate in the numerous campaigns he organized. These campaigns often did not coincide with the interests of the boyars, tore them away from their estates. The boyars began to feel weary about serving the Grand Duke, they tried to evade it, which led to numerous conflicts. The contradictions between the local boyars and the great Kiev prince led to the strengthening of the former's striving for political independence. The boyars were also pushed to this by the need for their own, close princely power, which could quickly implement the norms of "Russian Truth", since the power of the grand prince's virniks, voivods, vigilantes could not provide quick real help to the boyars of the lands remote from Kiev. The strong power of the local prince was also necessary for the boyars in connection with the growing resistance of the townspeople, smerds, the seizure of their lands, enslavement, and an increase in extortions. The consequence of this was the growth of clashes between smerds and townspeople with the boyars.

The need for princely power on the ground, the creation of a state apparatus forced the local boyars to invite the prince and his retinue to their lands. But when inviting the prince, the boyars were inclined to see in him only a police and military force that did not interfere in boyar affairs. This invitation was also beneficial for the princes and retinue. The prince received a permanent reign, his land fiefdom, ceased to rush from one princely table to another. The squad was also pleased, which was also tired of following from table to table with the prince. Princes and vigilantes had the opportunity to receive a stable rent-tax. At the same time, the prince, having settled in a particular land, as a rule, was not satisfied with the role assigned to him by the boyars, but sought to concentrate in his hands all the power, limiting the rights and privileges of the boyars. This inevitably led to a struggle between the prince and the boyars.

Growth and strengthening of cities as new political and cultural centers

During the period of feudal fragmentation, the number of cities in the Russian lands reached 224. Their economic and political role as centers of a particular land increased. It was on the cities that the local boyars and the prince relied on in the struggle against the great Kiev prince. The growing role of the boyars and local princes led to the revitalization of city veche meetings. Veche, a peculiar form of feudal democracy, was a political organ. In fact, it was in the hands of the boyars, which excluded real decisive participation in the management of ordinary townspeople. The boyars, controlling the veche, tried to use the political activity of the townspeople in their own interests. Very often the veche was used as an instrument of pressure not only on the great, but also on the local prince, forcing him to act in the interests of the local nobility. Thus, cities, as local political and economic centers, gravitating towards their lands, were the stronghold of the decentralizing aspirations of local princes and nobility.

The first strife.

After the death of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich in 1015, a long war began between his numerous sons, who ruled separate parts of Russia. The instigator of the strife was Svyatopolk the Damned, who killed his brothers Boris and Gleb. In internecine wars, the princes-brothers brought to Russia either the Pechenegs, or the Poles, or the mercenary detachments of the Varangians. In the end, the winner was Yaroslav the Wise, who divided Russia (along the Dnieper) with his brother Mstislav Tmutarakansky from 1024 to 1036, and then, after the death of Mstislav, became an "autocrat".

After the death of Yaroslav the Wise in 1054, a significant number of sons, relatives and cousins ​​of the Grand Duke turned out to be in Russia.

Each of them had this or that "fatherland", their own domain, and each, to the best of his ability, sought to increase the domain or exchange it for a richer one. This created a tense situation in all the princely centers and in Kiev itself. Researchers sometimes call the time after the death of Yaroslav the time of feudal fragmentation, but this cannot be recognized as correct, since real feudal fragmentation occurs when separate lands crystallize, large cities grow, heading these lands, when each sovereign principality consolidates its own princely dynasty. All this appeared in Russia only after 1132, and in the second half of the 11th century. everything was changeable, fragile and unstable. The princely strife ruined the people and the squad, shattered the Russian state, but did not introduce any new political form.

In the last quarter of the XI century. in difficult conditions of internal crisis and the constant threat of external danger from the Polovtsian khans, the princely strife acquired the character of a national disaster. The object of contention was the grand throne: Svyatoslav Yaroslavich expelled his elder brother Izyaslav from Kiev, "laying the foundation for the expulsion of the brothers."

The strife became especially terrible after the son of Svyatoslav Oleg entered into an alliance with the Polovtsians and repeatedly led the Polovtsian hordes to Russia for a selfish decision between the princes' wars.

Oleg's enemy was the young Vladimir Vsevolodovich Monomakh, who reigned in the border Pereyaslavl. Monomakh managed to convene a princely congress in Lyubech in 1097, the task of which was to secure the "fatherland" for the princes, to condemn the instigator of strife Oleg and, if possible, eliminate future strife in order to resist the Polovtsy with united forces.

However, the princes were powerless to establish order not only in the entire Russian land, but even within their princely circle of relatives and cousins ​​and nephews. Immediately after the congress, a new strife broke out in Lyubech, which lasted for several years. The only force that, under those conditions, could really stop the spinning of princes and princely quarrels, was the boyars - the main body of the young and progressive then feudal class. Boyar program at the end of the XI and the beginning of the XII century. consisted in limiting princely tyranny and outrages of princely officials, in the elimination of strife and in the general defense of Russia from the Polovtsy. Coinciding in these points with the aspirations of the townspeople, this program reflected the interests of the whole people and was undoubtedly progressive.

In 1093, after the death of Vsevolod Yaroslavich, the Kievites invited the insignificant Turov prince Svyatopolk to the throne, but they miscalculated significantly, since he turned out to be a bad commander and a greedy ruler.

Svyatopolk died in 1113; his death was the signal for a widespread uprising in Kiev. The people fell upon the courts of the princely rulers and usurers. The Kiev boyars, bypassing the princely seniority, chose the Grand Duke Vladimir Monomakh, who reigned successfully until his death in 1125. After him, the unity of Rus was still held under his son Mstislav (1125-1132), and then, in the words of the chronicler, " Russian land "into separate independent reigns.

The essence

The loss of the state unity of Russia weakened and divided its forces in the face of the growing threat of foreign aggression and, above all, of the steppe nomads. All this predetermined the gradual decline of the Kiev land from the 13th century. For some time, under the Monamakh and Mstislav, Kiev rose again. These princes were able to rebuff the Polovtsian nomads.

Russia split into 14 principalities, and a republican form of government was established in Novgorod. In each principality, the princes, together with the boyars, "thought about the land system and military service." The princes declared war, made peace and various alliances. The Grand Duke was the first (senior) among equal princes. The princely congresses have survived, where questions of all-Russian politics were discussed. The princes were bound by a system of vassal relations. It should be noted that for all the progressiveness of feudal fragmentation, it had one significant negative aspect. Constant, then subsided, then flared up with renewed vigor, strife between the princes depleted the strength of the Russian lands, weakened their defenses in the face of external danger. The disintegration of Rus, however, did not lead to the disintegration of the Old Russian nationality, a historically formed linguistic, territorial, economic and cultural community. In the Russian lands, a single concept of Rus, the Russian land continued to exist. "Oh, Russian land, you are already over the hill!" - proclaimed the author of “The Lay of Igor's Regiment.” During the period of feudal fragmentation, three centers emerged in the Russian lands: the Vladimir-Suzdal, Galicia-Volyn principality and the Novgorod feudal republic.

The power of the prince

Princely power.

The political system of the Russian lands and principalities had local peculiarities due to differences in the level and rates of development of productive forces, feudal land ownership, and the maturity of feudal production relations. In some lands, the princely power, as a result of a stubborn struggle that continued with varying success, was able to subjugate the local nobility and strengthen itself. In the Novgorod land, on the contrary, a feudal republic was established, in which the princely power lost the role of head of state and began to play a subordinate, mainly military-service role.

With the triumph of feudal fragmentation, the general Russian significance of the power of the Kiev Grand Dukes was gradually reduced to a nominal "eldership" among other princes. Linked to each other by a complex system of suzerainty and vassalage (due to the complex hierarchical structure of land ownership), the rulers and the feudal nobility of the principalities, with all their local independence, were forced to recognize the eldership of the strongest of their midst, who united their efforts to resolve issues that could not be decided by the forces of one principality or affected the interests of a number of principalities.

Already from the second half of the XII century, the strongest principalities stand out, the rulers of which become "great", "the oldest" in their lands, representing in them the top of the entire feudal hierarchy, the supreme head, without which the vassals could not do and in relation to which they were at the same time in a state of continuous rebellion.

Political centers.

Until the middle of the 12th century, such a head in the feudal hierarchy on a scale of all of Russia was the Kiev prince. From the second half of the XII century. his role passed to the local grand dukes, who, in the eyes of their contemporaries, as the "oldest" princes, were responsible for the historical fate of Rus (the idea of ​​the ethnic-state unity of which continued to be preserved).

At the end of the XII - beginning of the XIII century. in Russia, three main political centers were identified, each of which had a decisive influence on political life in the neighboring lands and principalities: for North-Eastern and Western (and also to a large extent for North-Western and Southern) Russia - Vladimir-Suzdal principality ; for South and South-West Russia - Galicia-Volyn principality; for North-Western Russia - the Novgorod feudal republic.

In the conditions of feudal fragmentation, the role of all-Russian and land congresses (seims) of princes and vassals sharply increased, at which questions of inter-princes' relations were considered and appropriate agreements were concluded, issues of organizing the struggle against the Polovtsy and other joint events were discussed. But the attempts of the princes by convening such congresses to smooth out the most negative consequences of the loss of the state unity of Russia, to link their local interests with the problems facing them on an all-Russian (or common land) scale ultimately failed because of the incessant strife between them.

Vassals and overlords

Prince and princely administration in Kievan Rus.

The prince in relation to other sovereign princes was an independent sovereign. Within his volost, the prince was the head of the administration, the highest military leader and judge. The princely power was a necessary element in the composition of the state power of all Russian lands. However, the state system of the ancient Russian lands-reigns cannot be called monarchical. The state system of the ancient Russian principalities of the X-XII centuries. represents a kind of "unstable balance" between two elements of state power: monarchical, in the person of the prince, and democratic, in the person of the national assembly or veche senior township towns. The prince's power was not absolute; it was everywhere limited by the power of the veche. But the power of the veche and its interference in affairs manifested itself only in cases of emergency, while the power of the prince was a constantly and daily operating body of government.

The prince was primarily responsible for maintaining external security and protecting the land from attacks by an external enemy. The prince conducted foreign policy, was in charge of relations with other princes and states, entered into alliances and treaties, declared war and concluded peace (however, in those cases when the war required the convocation of the people's militia, the prince had to secure the consent of the veche). The prince was a military organizer and leader; he appointed the chief of the people's militia ("tysyatsky") and during the hostilities commanded both his own squad and the people's militia.

The prince was a legislator, administrator and supreme judge. He had to "the truth of the deed in this world." The prince often entrusted the court to his deputies, "posadniks" and "tiuns," but the people always preferred the prince's personal judgment.

The prince was the head of government and appointed all officials. Regional governors appointed by the prince were called posadniks. Administrative and judicial power was in the hands of the posadniks. Under the prince and under the mayor there were minor officials, partly from free, partly from their slaves, for all kinds of judicial and police enforcement actions - these were "virniks", "metalniks", "children", "youths". The local free population, urban and rural, made up their communities, or worlds, had their elected representatives, elders and "good people" who defended their interests before the princely administration. At the prince's court was the management of an extensive princely economy - "courtyard tiuns".

The prince's income consisted of tribute from the population, fines for crimes and trade duties and income from princely estates.

In their government activities, the princes usually enjoyed the advice and help of their senior warriors, the "prince's husbands." On important occasions, especially before the start of military expeditions, the princes gathered the entire squad for a council. The guards were personally free and connected with the prince only by the bonds of personal agreement and trust. But the thought was not with the boyars and vigilantes compulsory for the prince, as well as did not impose any formal obligations on him. There was also no obligatory composition of the princely council. Sometimes the prince consulted with the entire squad, sometimes only with its upper class "princely men", sometimes with two or three close boyars. Therefore, the “aristocratic element of power” that some historians see in the Russian princely duma was only an advisory and auxiliary body under the prince.

But in this druzhina or boyar duma were also the "elders of the city", that is, the elective military authorities of the city of Kiev, perhaps of other cities, "tysyatskie" and "sotskie". So the very question of the adoption of Christianity was decided by the prince on the advice of the boyars and "elders of the city". These elders, or city elders, are hand in hand with the prince, together with the boyars, in matters of government, as in all court celebrations, forming, as it were, the zemstvo aristocracy alongside the princely service. On the prince's feast on the occasion of the consecration of the church in Vasilev in 996, they were invited together with the boyars and mayors and "elders throughout the city." In the same way, by order of Vladimir, boyars, “greedy”, “sotsky”, “ten's” and all “deliberate men” were supposed to come to his Sunday feasts in Kiev. But constituting the military-government class, the princely squad at the same time remained at the head of the Russian merchant class, from which it separated, taking an active part in overseas trade. This Russian merchant class is about half of the 10th century. it was still far from being Slavic-Russian.

Organization of military forces in Kievan Rus.

The main components of the armed forces of the principalities in the X-XII centuries. there were, firstly, the princely squad, and secondly, the people's militia.

The princely retinue was not numerous; even among the older princes, she made up a detachment of 700-800 people. But they were strong, brave, trained professional warriors. The squad was divided into the younger (lower, “juveniles”), which were called “gridi” or “gridboy” (Scandinavian grid - yard servant), “adolescents”, “children's”, and the older (higher), which were called princely men or boyars. The most ancient collective name of the junior squad “grid” was later replaced by the word “yard” or “servant”. This squad, together with its prince, emerged from among the armed merchants of large cities. In the XI century. it did not yet differ from this merchant class in sharp features, either political or economic. The squadron of the principality was, in fact, a military class.

Initially, the squad was kept and fed in the prince's court and, as an additional reward, received its share from the tribute collected from the population and from the spoils of war after a successful campaign. Subsequently, the warriors, especially their upper stratum, the boyars, began to acquire land and acquire an economy, and then they went to war with their "youths" - servants.

The princely squad was the strongest core and the main core of the army. In the event of the forthcoming large-scale military operations, the people's militia, made up of the free urban population, was called to arms, and in cases of emergency the villagers - "smerds" - were also called up for military service.

Large trading cities were organized in a military fashion, each integral organized regiment was formed, called a thousand, which was subdivided into hundreds and tens (battalions and companies). A thousand (people's militia) was commanded by a city that got out, and then appointed by the prince, a "tysyatsky", hundreds and dozens were also elective "sotsky" and "ten". These elected commanders made up the military administration of the city and the region belonging to it, the military-government foreman, which is called in the chronicles "the elders of the city." The city regiments, more precisely, the armed cities, constantly took part in the campaigns of the prince along with his retinue. But the prince could call on the people's militia only with the consent of the veche.

In addition to the princely squad and the people's militia, auxiliary detachments from foreigners took part in the wars. Initially, these were mainly Varangian squads, which the Russian princes hired for their service, and from the end of the 11th century they were horse detachments of “their own filthy” or “black hoods” (Torks, Berendey, Pechenegs), which Russian princes settled on the southern outskirts of Kiev land.

Veche.

The news of the chronicles about the veche life in Russia is numerous and varied, although we rarely find detailed descriptions of veche meetings. Of course, in all cases when the population of the city acted independently and independently of the prince, we must assume a preliminary meeting or council, that is, a veche.

In the era of tribal life. Before the formation and strengthening of the Grand Duchy of Kiev, individual tribes, glades, Drevlyans, etc., gather, if necessary, at their tribal meetings and consult with their tribal princelings about common affairs. In the X and at the beginning of the XI century. with the strengthening of the central power in the person of the Grand Duke of Kiev (Vladimir the Saint and Yaroslav the Wise), these tribal gatherings lose their political significance, and from the middle of the 11th century they were replaced by an active and influential veche of older regional cities.

However, in exceptional cases (especially in the absence of the prince), the urban population shows its activity and initiative in the early period of the Kiev state. For example, in 997 we see a veche in Belgorod besieged by the Pechenegs.

After the death of Yaroslav (in 1054), when the Russian land was divided into several principalities, the veche of the main volost cities acts as the bearer of the supreme power in the state. When the prince was strong enough and popular, the veche was inactive and left the prince with government affairs. On the other hand, emergencies, such as a change in the throne or the resolution of issues of war and peace, caused the imperious intervention of the veche, and the voice of the popular assembly in these matters was decisive.

The power of the veche, its composition and competence were not determined by any legal norms. The veche was an open meeting, a nationwide gathering, and all who were free could take part in it. It was only required that the participants did not stand under paternal authority (the fathers of the veche decided for the children) or in any kind of private dependence. In fact, the veche was a meeting of the townspeople of the main city; residents of small towns or “suburbs” had the right to attend the veche, but rarely had the actual opportunity to do so. The decision of the veche meeting of the older city was considered obligatory for the residents of the suburbs and for the entire volost. No law defined or limited the competence of the veche. Veche could discuss and resolve any issue that interested him.

The most important and ordinary subject of the veche meetings' competence was the vocation, or acceptance, of princes and the expulsion of princes who were not pleasing to the people. The calling and change of princes were not only political facts arising from the real balance of forces, but were generally recognized right population. This right was recognized by the princes themselves and their squads.

The second - extremely important - range of issues to be resolved by the veche was questions of war and peace in general, as well as the continuation or cessation of hostilities. For a war by his own means, with the help of his squad and hunters from the people, the prince did not need the consent of the veche, but for the war by means of the volost, when the convocation of the people's militia was required, the consent of the veche was needed.

Kievan Rus IX-XII centuries is, firstly, the cradle of the statehood of three fraternal peoples - Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, and secondly, it is one of the largest powers of medieval Europe, which played a historical role in the destinies of the peoples and states of the West, East and the distant North. Kiev - the capital of Russia - was one of the five largest cities in the world.

From a relatively small union of Slavic tribes of the Middle Dnieper region (the origins of this union go back to the time of Herodotus), Russia has grown to a huge power, uniting all the East Slavic tribes, as well as a number of Lithuanian-Latvian tribes of the Baltic region and numerous Finno-Ugric tribes of northeastern Europe.
The importance and necessity of studying Kievan Rus as the first state formation was already fully realized by our ancestors: Nestor's Tale of Bygone Years, created at the beginning of the 12th century, was copied and reproduced by scribes for over 500 years. And this is a wise instruction for us to study the glorious epic past of our Motherland in all the fullness and variety of historical sources available to us.
The era of Kievan Rus is the era of the greatness of our people, therefore, I consider its history to be one of the most important pages of our past.
In this work, I would like to consider the role of the prince and the veche in the "political" sphere of the life of society in the 9th-12th centuries. Here the main question is how the relationship between the called government principle and the calling tribes, as well as those that were subsequently subordinated, was determined; how the life of these tribes changed due to the influence of the government principle - the squads, and how, in turn, the life of the tribes acted to determine the relationship between the government principle and the rest of the population when establishing an internal order, or order.
Sources and historiography

Sources on the history of Kievan Rus are quite abundant and varied. A good and detailed overview of Rus and the feudal principalities is made in a solid collective work, created under the editorship of V.V. Mavrodin: "Soviet Kievan Rus" (L., 1979), where the authors reasonably understand by Kievan Rus not only the period from IX to the beginning of XII century, but also the initial phase of feudal fragmentation until the beginning of the XIII century, which they substantiated in another, also very useful publication.
Of great interest are the letters of the 12th century that have come down to us, some of which reflect individual transactions between feudal lords, and some give a broad picture of the whole principality. A number of princely and veche affairs are reflected in the birch bark letters of Novgorod the Great. A very important source of birch bark letters turns out to be when compared with chronicles, act material, later scribal books.
For the era of the existence of Kievan Rus in the 9th - 12th centuries, the annals are still the most important historical source. In numerous works of historians and literary critics, both the all-Russian chronicles and the chronicles of different regions are comprehensively considered.
Two works devoted to bibliography and historiography of chronicle writing help to orient oneself in the vast and involuntarily contradictory literature on Russian chronicle writing: these are the works of V.I.Buganov and R.P.Dmitrieva.
If the X century left us only the chronicle of Kiev, then the XI century, when the state chronicle in the capital continued continuously, added the chronicle of Novgorod, which often gave a different, local assessment of events and figures. In the future boyar republic (since 1136), an interest in the life of the city is clearly visible, some of the Kiev princes are negatively assessed. It is possible that the initiator of the first chronicle of “Lord of Novgorod the Great” was the Novgorod mayor Ostomir.
In the 12th century, chronicle writing ceases to be the privilege of only these two cities and appears in every major center. The chronicles continued to be kept in Kiev and Novgorod.
Sources on the history of Kievan Rus are numerous and varied. Studying them and extracting from them data on the economy, social structure, political system and social thought is far from complete.
In this work, I have used several books - the works of famous historians.
For example, the work of IN Danilevsky gives an idea of ​​the current state of domestic and foreign science in the study of the early period of Russian history (up to the 12th century). The book is based on a critical rethinking of the source base used for historical constructions; it also includes a detailed analysis of the potential opportunities and experience accumulated to date in the study of Russian history by different schools of humanitarian knowledge.
Used the work of the prominent Russian historian Solovyov S. M. "History of Russia since ancient times", which is a great scientific work, and the historical and cultural interest in which is not waning.
Also, the sources were the monographs of B.A. Rybakov, who penned fundamental works on the history of our Motherland, the study of the origin of the ancient Slavs, the initial stages of the formation of Russian statehood, Kievan Rus in the 9th-12th centuries, the development of crafts, the culture of the Russian lands and the art of the ancient Slavs.

Prerequisites for the formation of the state

and his education.

The origin of the Eastern Slavs

N

And based on the analysis of archaeological sites, the following is known: in the village. 1st millennium BC NS. the pre-Slavs lived in Hanging. They maintained ethnic contacts with the Balts, Germans, Illyrians, Celts, from the II century. - with the descendants of the Scythians and Sarmatians. Finds on the Kiev hills of treasures of Roman coins and jewelry of the 1st – 3rd centuries. testify to the trade of the Slavs with the Greek colonies. In the III century. the Slavs waged fierce wars with the Goths, and in the IV century. - with the Huns. At the same time, the area of ​​settlement of the Proto-Slavs in the IV century. expanded from the lower Elbe in the west to tributaries and the middle Dnieper in the east. The Slavs constituted a single Indo-European community with the Germans.
From written sources, we know the following: the Proto-Slavs - Wends (as the Proto-Slavs were called in ancient sources of the 1st century) - lived in small villages. The social system is a tribal community. The basis of the economy from the I-III centuries. becomes arable farming, as well as cattle breeding, fishing and hunting. The tools of labor - axes, knives, sickles - were also made of stone. Bronze was used mainly for decoration, and from household equipment only for chisels needed in wooden construction. Herodotus wrote about the northern regions, where the Scythians-plowmen lived near “many huge rivers”, “who sow grain not for their own needs, but for sale”. In the II century. from the colonists, the Slavs borrowed the measure of grain "chetverik". Information about the life and social structure of the Eastern Slavs is contained in the work "Strategicon" by the Byzantine historian Procopius of Caesarea. In the IV century. Proto-Slavic tribes united in tribal unions.
We do not reliably know the origin of the Slavs from either archaeological or written sources. Some researchers believe that the Slavs were the autochthonous population of Eastern Europe; others believe that the Slavs are descended from Herodotov's "Scythian plowmen"; still others believe that the Slavs descended from the Finno-Ugric peoples and the Balts. "The Tale of Bygone Years" reports that the Slavs are from Central Europe. Academician B. A. Rybakov noted: "... judging by the designations of the landscape common to all Slavic peoples, the Pre-Slavs lived in the zone of deciduous forests and forest-steppe, where there were glades, lakes, swamps, but there was no sea; where there were hills, ravines, watersheds, but there were no high mountains. "

Resettlement of ancient Russian peoples

V

III-IV centuries the settlement by the Slavs of the territory of Eastern and Southern Europe begins.
Causes:
1. Slavic tribal unions were involved in the last wave of the Great Nations Migration. In 530, Slavic migration intensified. The first mention of the "grew" people dates back to this time.
2. The emergence of the Slavs in the IV-V centuries. arable farming requiring new land
3. Gradual cooling on the European continent.
The migration took place not from one region, but from different dialectal regions of the Proto-Slavic area. This circumstance, along with the processes of assimilation of the local population, led to the disintegration in the VI-VIII centuries. the Proto-Slavs into three branches of the Slavs: Wends, Antes and Sklavins. The Veneds are the ancestors of the Czechs, Poles, Slovaks, and the Lusatian Serbs - the Western Slavs. Sklavins - the ancestors of Serbs, Slovenes, Croats, Bulgarians, Balkan Muslims - the South Slavs. Anty - the ancestors of Ukrainians, Russians, Belarusians - Eastern Slavs.
The Old Russian nationality was formed on the vast expanses of the East European Plain. The neighbors of the ants in the VI-VII centuries. there were Finno-Ugric, Lithuanian, Turkic (Berendei, Obry, Torki, Khazars, Black hoods, Pechenegs) tribes. Relations with neighbors were uneven. In 558 the Avar kagan Boyan killed the Duleb ambassador Mezhamir and conquered their country. In 602, the Avars again sent an army under the command of Aspikh to the land of the Antes. The history of Eastern Slavs begins from the period when an independent East Slavic language began to stand out from the common Slavic (Proto-Slavic) language. This happened in the 7th – 8th centuries. Tribal differences within the East Slavic community were due to mixing with the peoples of the Finno-Ugric group.
During the settlement (IV-IV centuries), there were changes in the socio-political structure:
1. Formed East Slavic tribal unions (glade, northerners, uchiha, duleby, drevlyans, volynians, buzhany, white croats, dregovichi, krivichi, radimichi, vyatichi, ilmensky slovenes and others), each of 120-150 tribes. According to the "Tale of Bygone Years" in the VIII century. 12-15 tribal unions lived on the territory of Eastern Europe
2. The clan community and the patriarchal family were replaced by a branch
3. The transition from military democracy to early feudal monarchy began.

State formation

D

The jealous Russian state was formed as a result of internal preconditions: the decomposition of the tribal system, common territory, culture, language, history, economic structure. Along with the formation of the state, as a result of the merger of tribal unions, an ancient Russian nationality was formed.
The initiators of the creation of a tribal union on the middle Dnieper in the 5th century. there were glades in the person of Prince Kyi - the legendary founder of Kiev. There is very little reliable information about the history of this proto-state. It is known that the Kiev prince and his retinue referred to themselves as "dews", in contrast to the bulk of the tax-paying population - the glades.
OK. VI century a similar proto-state of Slavia was formed - a tribal union of Ilmenian Slovenes around Novgorod and Ladoga. It was the Ilmenian Slovenes who initiated the formation of a single East Slavic state by uniting Kiev and Novgorod.
It is absolutely not known exactly when the ancient Russian state was formed, tk. this stage of development is legendary. Modern historians believe that the main signs of the existence of statehood in early medieval society are the existence of power alienated from the people, the distribution of the population according to the territorial principle and the pulling together of tribute for the maintenance of power. You can add to this as a prerequisite - the inheritance of power by the prince. In the conditions of Kievan Rus at the end of the 8th - beginning of the 9th century, specific forms of statehood were: the conquest of the territories of tribal principalities by the power of the state center and the spread of the system of collecting tribute, administration and legal proceedings to these lands.
Thus, among the Eastern Slavs, the existence of a collection of tribute and veche can be distinguished. Veche is characterized by the fact that the Slavs have some kind of organization, which must be led, therefore, there is a “chairman”. Collecting tribute is the establishment of the order by which the contract arises: "We protect you - you pay us." Tribute is payment for a failed raid. So, we see that in the VIII century. - early. IX century the structure of the prince - squad - veche is associated with the use of force, but there are no rules (laws) as such. Therefore, we call this period "Military democracy". At this time, society is heterogeneous: a prince stands out - a military leader who ruled over the affairs of the tribe, but at the same time there was a veche - a national assembly, which gathered the tribal militia (at the head of the militia - the voivode). Under the prince there is a squad (its members - "youths" - warriors).
The state of the Eastern Slavs arises as a two-centric one with centers in Kiev and Novgorod. (Oleg in 882 united Novgorod and Kievan Rus. And, although Novgorod was the initiator of the unification, the state of the Eastern Slavs received the name "Kievan Rus", since Kiev was richer and had traditional ties with Byzantium.)
The history of the formation of the state of Kievan Rus covers the period from 862 to 1019, i.e. from the vocation of Rurik to the beginning of the reign of Yaroslav the Wise in Kiev. At this time ruled: Rurik - Oleg - Igor - Olga - Svyatoslav - Vladimir - Svyatopolk. The main subject of their concerns and efforts were: the unification of all the East Slavic (and part of the Finnish) tribes under the rule of the Grand Duke of Kiev; the acquisition of overseas markets for Russian trade and the protection of trade routes that led to these markets; protection of the borders of the Russian land from the attacks of the steppe nomads.
Later we will take a closer look at how these rulers reigned.

The political structure of the Russian lands in the X-XII centuries.

V

The beginning of the IX century. marked the transition from military democracy to an early feudal monarchy. The process of transformation of the tribal nobility into the owners of the land began. The structure of the tribal "executive" power took shape - the prince, the squad (boyars, greedy, youths) and the structure of the "legislative" power - the veche. The class of feudal lords was also formed by separating the most prosperous members from the community, who turned part of the communal arable land into property. The growth of the economic and political power of landowners led to the establishment of various forms of dependence of ordinary communes on the landowners. Against this background, the role of councils of elders and people's militias gradually diminished.
Kievan Rus XI-XII centuries. It was not a single state, nor was it a political federation, for princely congresses were a relatively rare phenomenon, they met only in exceptional cases, and decisions were not legally binding. All members of the Rurik clan considered themselves natural-born sovereign princes and “brothers” among themselves; the eldest in the family, the Grand Duke of Kiev, they usually call their "father", but this is nothing more than an honorary appointment without any real content, especially since the Kiev prince was by no means always really the eldest in the family. In reality, each prince within his "volost" and in inter-princely relations behaved as an independent sovereign and his relations with other princes were determined "either by the army, or by the world," that is, all controversial issues were resolved either by force of arms, or by agreements, treaties with other princes. This contractual beginning in inter-princely relations runs through the entire ancient Russian history and ends only in the Muscovite state.
Kievan Rus did not develop any definite order in the distribution of volosts among the princes, for that next order of princely possession, based on the principle of clan seniority, did not actually enter the political life of Kievan Rus.

A number of other principles and factors that did not depend on seniority played a role in the distribution of princely tables. One of them was the principle of "fatherland", or hereditary possession. Princes often claim the name domain that their father owned and where they were born and raised. Already the Lyubech congress of princes in 1097, in order to get out of difficulties, adopted a resolution: "whoever keeps his fatherland." Quite often the "tables" were distributed according to agreements and contracts between the princes. Sometimes an order or will of a sufficiently strong and authoritative sovereign prince transferred the throne to his son or brother.
Quite often, the population of the older volost cities at the veche decided the issue of inviting some popular prince to reign or expelling a prince unloved by the people, without, of course, paying any attention to the family scores of the princes. Veche sent its ambassadors to the elected candidate for the throne with an invitation.
Finally, very often the stronger, more courageous, enterprising and shameless princes occupied the tables simply by force of arms, having won a victory over the rival prince. This practice of "obtaining" tables has been continuous throughout our ancient history.
Veche and princely power in Kievan Rus
Prince and princely administration in Kievan Rus.
The prince in relation to other sovereign princes was an independent sovereign. Within his volost, the prince was the head of the administration, the highest military leader and judge. The princely power was a necessary element in the composition of the state power of all Russian lands. However, the state system of the ancient Russian lands-reigns cannot be called monarchical. The state system of the ancient Russian principalities of the X-XII centuries. represents a kind of "unstable balance" between two elements of state power: monarchical, in the person of the prince, and democratic, in the person of the national assembly or veche senior township towns. The prince's power was not absolute; it was everywhere limited by the power of the veche. But the power of the veche and its interference in affairs manifested itself only in cases of emergency, while the power of the prince was a constantly and daily operating body of government.
The prince was primarily responsible for maintaining external security and protecting the land from attacks by an external enemy. The prince conducted foreign policy, was in charge of relations with other princes and states, entered into alliances and treaties, declared war and concluded peace (however, in those cases when the war required the convening of a popular militia, the prince had to secure the consent of the veche). The prince was a military organizer and the leader; he appointed the chief of the people's militia ("tysyatsky") and during the hostilities commanded both his own squad and the people's militia.
The prince was a legislator, administrator and supreme judge. He had to "the truth of the deed in this world." The prince often entrusted the court to his deputies, "posadniks" and "tiuns," but the people always preferred the prince's personal judgment.
The prince was the head of government and appointed all officials. Regional governors appointed by the prince were called posadniks. Administrative and judicial power was in the hands of the posadniks. Under the prince and under the mayor there were minor officials, partly from free, partly from their slaves, for all kinds of judicial and police enforcement actions - these were "virniks", "metalniks", "children", "youths". The local free population, urban and rural, made up their communities, or worlds, had their elected representatives, elders and "good people" who defended their interests before the princely administration. At the prince's court was the management of an extensive princely economy - "courtyard tiuns".
The prince's income consisted of tribute from the population, fines for crimes and trade duties and income from princely estates.
In their government activities, the princes usually enjoyed the advice and help of their senior warriors, the "prince's husbands." On important occasions, especially before the start of military expeditions, the princes gathered the entire squad for a council. The guards were personally free and connected with the prince only by the bonds of personal agreement and trust. But the thought was not with the boyars and vigilantes compulsory for the prince, as well as did not impose any formal obligations on him. There was also no obligatory composition of the princely council. Sometimes the prince consulted with the entire squad, sometimes only with its upper class "princely men", sometimes with two or three close boyars. Therefore, the “aristocratic element of power” that some historians see in the Russian princely duma was only an advisory and auxiliary body under the prince.
But in this druzhina or boyar duma were also the "elders of the city", that is, the elective military authorities of the city of Kiev, perhaps of other cities, "tysyatskie" and "sotskie". So the very question of the adoption of Christianity was decided by the prince on the advice of the boyars and "elders of the city". These elders, or city elders, are hand in hand with the prince, together with the boyars, in matters of government, as in all court celebrations, forming, as it were, the zemstvo aristocracy alongside the princely service. On the prince's feast on the occasion of the consecration of the church in Vasilev in 996, they were invited together with the boyars and mayors and "elders throughout the city." In the same way, by order of Vladimir, boyars, “greedy”, “sotsky”, “ten's” and all “deliberate men” were supposed to come to his Sunday feasts in Kiev. But constituting the military-government class, the princely squad at the same time remained at the head of the Russian merchant class, from which it separated, taking an active part in overseas trade. This Russian merchant class is about half of the 10th century. it was still far from being Slavic-Russian.
Organization of military forces in Kievan Rus.
The main components of the armed forces of the principalities in the X-XII centuries. there were, firstly, the princely squad, and secondly, the people's militia.
The princely retinue was not numerous; even among the older princes, she made up a detachment of 700-800 people. But they were strong, brave, trained professional warriors. The squad was divided into the younger (lower, “juveniles”), which were called “gridi” or “gridboy” (Scandinavian grid - yard servant), “adolescents”, “children's”, and the older (higher), which were called princely men or boyars. The most ancient collective name of the junior squad “grid” was later replaced by the word “yard” or “servant”. This squad, together with its prince, emerged from among the armed merchants of large cities. In the XI century. it did not yet differ from this merchant class in sharp features, either political or economic. The squadron of the principality was, in fact, a military class.
Initially, the squad was kept and fed in the prince's court and, as an additional reward, received its share from the tribute collected from the population and from the spoils of war after a successful campaign. Subsequently, the warriors, especially their upper stratum, the boyars, began to acquire land and acquire an economy, and then they went to war with their "youths" - servants.
The princely squad was the strongest core and the main core of the army. In the event of the forthcoming large-scale military operations, the people's militia, made up of the free urban population, was called to arms, and in cases of emergency the villagers - "smerds" - were also called up for military service.
Large trading cities were organized in a military fashion, each integral organized regiment was formed, called a thousand, which was subdivided into hundreds and tens (battalions and companies). A thousand (people's militia) was commanded by a city that got out, and then appointed by the prince, a "tysyatsky", hundreds and dozens were also elective "sotsky" and "ten". These elected commanders made up the military administration of the city and the region belonging to it, the military-government foreman, which is called in the chronicles "the elders of the city." The city regiments, more precisely, the armed cities, constantly took part in the campaigns of the prince along with his retinue. But the prince could call on the people's militia only with the consent of the veche.
In addition to the princely squad and the people's militia, auxiliary detachments from foreigners took part in the wars. Initially, these were mainly Varangian squads, which the Russian princes hired for their service, and from the end of the 11th century they were horse detachments of “their own filthy” or “black hoods” (Torks, Berendey, Pechenegs), which Russian princes settled on the southern outskirts of Kiev land.
Veche.
The news of the chronicles about the veche life in Russia is numerous and varied, although we rarely find detailed descriptions of veche meetings. Of course, in all cases when the population of the city acted independently and independently of the prince, we must assume a preliminary meeting or council, that is, a veche.
In the era of tribal life. Before the formation and strengthening of the Grand Duchy of Kiev, individual tribes, glades, Drevlyans, etc., gather, if necessary, at their tribal meetings and consult with their tribal princelings about common affairs. In the X and at the beginning of the XI century. with the strengthening of the central power in the person of the Grand Duke of Kiev (Vladimir the Saint and Yaroslav the Wise), these tribal gatherings lose their political significance, and from the middle of the 11th century they were replaced by an active and influential veche of older regional cities.
However, in exceptional cases (especially in the absence of the prince), the urban population shows its activity and initiative in the early period of the Kiev state. For example, in 997 we see a veche in Belgorod besieged by the Pechenegs.
After the death of Yaroslav (in 1054), when the Russian land was divided into several principalities, the veche of the main volost cities acts as the bearer of the supreme power in the state. When the prince was strong enough and popular, the veche was inactive and left the prince with government affairs. On the other hand, emergencies, such as a change in the throne or the resolution of issues of war and peace, caused the imperious intervention of the veche, and the voice of the popular assembly in these matters was decisive.
The power of the veche, its composition and competence were not determined by any legal norms. The veche was an open meeting, a nationwide gathering, and all who were free could take part in it. It was only required that the participants did not stand under paternal authority (the fathers of the veche decided for the children) or in any kind of private dependence. In fact, the veche was a meeting of the townspeople of the main city; residents of small towns or “suburbs” had the right to attend the veche, but rarely had the actual opportunity to do so. The decision of the veche meeting of the older city was considered obligatory for the residents of the suburbs and for the entire volost. No law defined or limited the competence of the veche. Veche could discuss and resolve any issue that interested him.
The most important and ordinary subject of the veche meetings' competence was the vocation, or acceptance, of princes and the expulsion of princes who were not pleasing to the people. The calling and change of princes were not only political facts arising from the real balance of forces, but were generally recognized right population. This right was recognized by the princes themselves and their squads.
The second - extremely important - range of issues to be resolved by the veche was questions of war and peace in general, as well as the continuation or cessation of hostilities. For a war by his own means, with the help of his squad and hunters from the people, the prince did not need the consent of the veche, but for the war by means of the volost, when the convocation of the people's militia was required, the consent of the veche was needed.

Development of political freedom and independence of the Great
Novgorod. Veche and the princely power of Novgorod Rus. .

V

X-XI centuries Novgorod was under the rule of the great princes of Kiev, who kept in it their governor (usually one or their own sons) and to whom Novgorod until the time of Yaroslavl I paid tribute on an equal basis with other Russian lands. However, already under Yaroslavl, a significant change took place in Novgorod's relations with the Grand Duke of Kiev. Yaroslav “sat” in Novgorod in 1015, when his father died, Vladimir the Holy and his brother Svyatopolk began to beat their brothers in order to seize power over all Russian lands. Only thanks to the active and energetic support of the Novgorodians, Yaroslav managed to defeat Svyatopolk and capture the Grand Duchy of Kiev.
The division of Rus into several separate principalities weakened the power and influence of the Grand Duke of Kiev, and strife and civil strife in the princely clan gave Novgorod the opportunity to invite to reign from the rival princes, who was his "love".
The right of Novgorod to choose any prince among all the Russian princes was indisputable and generally recognized. In the Novgorod Chronicle we read: "and Novgorod laid out all the princes in freedom: wherever they either, the same prince will get it." In addition to the prince, the Novgorod administration was headed by a mayor, who in the X-XI centuries. was appointed prince, but in the 30s. XII centuries. the important post of the mayor in Novgorod becomes electoral, and the right to change the mayor belongs only to the veche.
The important post of the tysyatskiy (‘thousand’) also becomes electoral, and the Novgorod veche “gives” and “takes away” it at its discretion. Finally, from the second half of the XII century. upon the election of the veche, the high post of head of the Novgorod church, Vladyka Archbishop of Novgorod, was replaced. In 1156, after the death of Archbishop Niphont, “the whole city of people gathered and deigned to himself the bishop to appoint a man by God chosen by Arcadius”; of course, the chosen one of the veche was to receive a "decree" for the episcopal see from the Metropolitan of Kiev and All Russia.
Thus, during the XI-XII century. the entire top Novgorod administration becomes elected, and the veche of the Lord of Veliky Novgorod becomes the sovereign administrator of the fate of the Novgorod state.
State structure and management:

Prince.
The Novgorodians were “free men”, lived and ruled “in all their will,” but they also did not consider it possible to do without the prince. Novgorod needed the prince mainly as the leader of the army. That is why the people of Novgorod valued and respected their warlike princes so much. However, giving the prince the command of the armed forces, the Novgorodians by no means allowed him to independently conduct foreign policy affairs and start a war without the consent of the veche. The Novgorodians demanded an oath from their prince that he would inviolably observe all their rights and freedoms.
When inviting a new prince, Novgorod entered into a formal agreement with him, which precisely determined his rights and obligations. Each newly invited prince undertakes to observe indestructiblely: "For this, Prince, kiss the whole of Novgorod, on which grandfathers and fathers kissed, - keep Novgorod in the old days, at a duty, without offense." All judicial and government activities of the prince must go in agreement with the Novgorod mayor and under his constant supervision: “But the devil of the mayor, the prince, should not judge the court, distribute no volosts, or give letters”; but without the fault of the husband, the parish cannot be deprived. And a number in the Novgorod volost, you, prince, and your judges do not judge (that is, do not change), and do not plot lynching. " The entire local administration should be appointed from the Novgorodians, and not from the princely men: “that the volosts of all Novgorod, the prince, should not be kept by their own men, but by the Novgorodian men; you have a gift from those volosts ”. This "gift" from the volosts, the size of which is precisely determined in contracts, is the reward of the prince for his government activities. A number of decrees ensured against violations of the trade rights and interests of Novgorod. Ensuring freedom of trade between Novgorod and Russian lands, the treaties also required the prince not to interfere with Novgorod trade with the Germans and that he himself did not take a direct part in it.
Novgorod made sure that the prince and his retinue did not enter too closely and deeply into the inner life of Novgorod society and did not become an influential social force in it. The prince with his court was supposed to live outside the city, on the Gorodishche. He and his people were forbidden to take any of the Novgorodians into personal dependence, as well as to acquire land property in the possessions of Veliky Novgorod - “and you, the prince, neither your princess, nor your boyars, nor your nobles, should not hold villages, neither buy nor take it for free throughout the entire Novgorod volost ”.
Thus, “the prince had to stand near Novgorod, serving him. And not at the head of him, they are right, ”says Klyuchevsky, who points to the political contradiction in the system of Novgorod: he needed a prince, but“ at the same time treated him with extreme distrust ”and tried in every possible way to restrict and limit his power.
Veche.
Mister Veliky Novgorod was divided into “ends”, “hundreds” and “streets”, and all these divisions represented self-governing communities, they had their own local councils and elected sotsk, as well as Konchansk and street elders for management and representation. The union of these local communities constituted Veliky Novgorod, and “the combined will of all these allied worlds was expressed in the general veche of the city” (Klyuchevsky). The veche was not convened periodically, at certain times, but only when the need was for it. And the prince, and the mayor, and any group of citizens could convene (or "call") a veche. All free and full-fledged Novgorodians gathered on the veche square, and all had the same right to vote. Sometimes residents of Novgorod suburbs (Pskov and Ladozhians) took part in the veche, but usually the veche consisted of citizens of one older city.
The competence of the Novgorod veche was comprehensive. It adopted laws and regulations (in particular, the Novgorod code of law, or the so-called "letter of judgment" was adopted and approved in 1471 by the Vechem); it invited the prince and concluded a treaty with him, and in case of displeasure with him, expelled him; the veche chose, replaced and judged the mayor and the one of thousands and resolved their disputes with the prince; it chose a candidate for the post of archbishop of Novgorod, sometimes "peacefully" appointed churches and monasteries; the veche donated the state lands of Veliky Novgorod to church institutions or individuals, and also donated some suburbs and lands “for feeding” to the invited princes; it was the highest court for the suburbs and for individuals; was in charge of the court for political and other major crimes, combined with the most severe punishments - deprivation of life or confiscation of property and expulsion; finally, the veche was in charge of the entire area of ​​foreign policy: it made a decree on the gathering of troops on the construction of fortresses on the country's borders and, in general, on measures of state defense; declared war and made peace, and also entered into trade agreements with foreign countries.
The veche had its own office (or veche hut, headed by an "eternal clerk" (secretary). The decrees or sentences of the veche were recorded and sealed with the seals of the Lord of Veliky Novgorod (the so-called "eternal letters"). The letters were written on behalf of all Novgorod, its government and In the salary to the Novgorod charter given to the Solovetsky Monastery, we read: “And with the blessing of the Most Reverend Archbishop of Veliky Novgorod and Vladyka of Pskov, Mr. and boyars, and people, and merchants, and black people, and the whole lord sovereign Veliky Novgorod all five ends, in the veche, in the Yaroslavl court, the abbot ... and all the elders ...
A large Novgorod veche usually gathered on the trading side, on the Yaroslavl yard (or “yard”). The huge crowd of “free men” gathered here, of course, did not always observe order and decency: “At the veche, according to its very composition, there could be neither a correct discussion of the issue, nor a correct vote. The decision was drawn up by eye, better to say by ear, rather by the strength of the cries than by the majority of votes ”(Klyuchevsky). In the event of disagreements at the veche, noisy disputes arose, sometimes fights, and “the party that mastered it was recognized by the majority” (Klyuchevsky). Sometimes two parties would gather at the same time: one on the trade, the other on the Sofia side; some of the participants appeared “in armor” (that is, in arms), and disputes between hostile parties sometimes reached armed clashes on the Volkhov bridge.
Administration and court.
Council of gentlemen. The Novgorod administration was headed by a "sedate mayor" and a "sedate tysyatsky".
The court was divided between different authorities: the lord of Novgorod, the princely governor, the mayor and the tysyak governor; in particular, the tysyatsky, together with the collegium of three elders from living people and two elders from merchants, was supposed to "manage all sorts of affairs" of the merchant class and the "commercial court". In appropriate cases, a joint court of different instances acted. For "gossip", i.e. to review the cases decided in the first instance, there was a board of 10 "speakers", one boyar and one "living" from each end. For executive judicial and administrative-police actions, the higher administration had at its disposal a number of lower agents who bore various names: bailiff, podvoyskie, pozovniki, izvetniki, birichi.
The crowded veche crowd, of course, could not sensibly and thoroughly discuss the details of government events or individual articles of laws and treaties; she could only accept or reject ready-made reports from the top administration. For the preliminary development of the necessary measures and for the preparation of reports in Novgorod, there was a special government council, or a council of gentlemen, it consisted of the power mayor and the thousand, Konchansk elders, the sotsk and old (i.e., former) mayors and the thousand. This council, which included the upper echelons of the Novgorod boyars, had a great influence in the political life of Novgorod and often predetermined the issues to be resolved by the veche - “‘ it was a hidden but very active spring of Novgorod’s administration ”(Klyuchevsky).
In the regional administration of the Novgorod state, we find a duality of principles - centralization and local autonomy. Posadniks were appointed from Novgorod to the suburbs, and the judicial institutions of the older city served as the highest instance for the townspeople. Suburbs and all Novgorod volosts had to pay tribute to the lord of Veliky Novgorod. Disorders and abuses in the field of management caused centrifugal forces in the Novgorod regions, and some of them tried to break away from their center.

Historical destinies of Ancient Russia

The Russian land as an indivisible whole, which was in the general hold of the princes-relatives, from the turn of the XI-XIII centuries. ceases to be proper political reality.
Despite the differences between Kievan and Novgorod Rus, they had some common features. Everywhere we see as the main political institutions three forces: the prince, the squad (boyars), the city veche.
At the same time, these principalities can be conditionally divided into two types: early feudal monarchy and feudal republic. They differed in which of the listed political bodies played a decisive role in them. At the same time, other power structures could continue to exist, although in everyday life they often remained outside the attention of their contemporaries. Only in extreme situations did society "remember" such traditional state institutions.
The Kiev principality is an example of the first type of state. Princes are fighting for the Kiev throne. Possession of them gave the right to be titled the Grand Duke, who formally stood above all other - appanage - princes.
In Kiev (and later in Galich and Volhynia), the princely power was strong, relying on the squad. One of the first mentions of a direct attempt by the Kiev prince's squad to independently decide who would sit at the Kiev table dates back to 1015. Upon learning of the death of Vladimir Svyatoslavich, his combatants offered to become the Kiev prince to his youngest son Boris. And only the unwillingness to break the tradition of obeying the elder in the family (in any case, the chronicler interprets this episode) did not allow the squad to insist on their own. By the way, right after Boris refused to fight for power in Kiev, his father's warriors left him. Another example of this kind can be a meeting with his "husbands" in 1187 of the dying Galician prince Yaroslav Osmomysl on the transfer of power in Galich to his younger son, bypassing the eldest - the legal heir.
.
The southern princes also consulted with their retinues when deciding questions of war and peace. So, in 1093, the princes Svyatopolk, Vladimir and Rostislav before the outbreak of hostilities held a council with their "wise men": "Should we attack the Polovtsians, or is it more profitable to conclude peace with them?" The question of the timing of the action against the Polovtsians during the princely congresses in 1103 and 1111 was also discussed with the squads. At the same time, the voice of the prince turned out to be decisive, but only after he convinced the vigilantes of the correctness of his decision.
At the same time, in critical situations, when the prince for some reason could not fulfill his functions, the city veche took real power into its own hands. This happened in 1068, when the Kiev prince Izyaslav could not resist the Polovtsians and fled from the battlefield. The consequence of this was the veche decision of the people of Kiev to remove the "legitimate" prince and put Vseslav Bryachislavich of Polotsk in his place. Only as a result of the most severe measures did the former prince manage to regain the Kiev throne.
Another example is the situation when the Kiev veche in 1113, contrary to the existing order of succession (Kiev was not his "patrimony" invited to the throne of Vladimir Monomakh. In 1125, the elder Monomashich Mstislav was planted on the Kiev table, and after his death in 1132 the Kievites transferred power to his brother Yaropolk. In 1146, the Kievites summoned Prince Igor Olgovich to the assembly, who, according to the will of his brother Vsevolod, was to enter the Kiev throne. It is characteristic that Igor was afraid to appear at the veche himself, did not dare to ignore the "invitation". As his plenipotentiary representative (while the pretender to the throne himself with his squad was sitting in ambush), he sent Svyatoslav Olgovich to the meeting of the townspeople, who had to listen to the complaints of the inhabitants of Kiev and promise to stop the abuses of the princely people.
The situation in Kiev changed with the coming to power of the Grand Duke Andrey Yuryevich Bogolyubsky (1157-1174). If his father Yuri Vladimirovich Dolgoruky all his life sought the Kiev throne, then Andrei twice left the Kiev suburb, where he was planted by the Grand Duke in the North-East of Russia. There he eventually settled. Having become the Grand Duke, Andrei moved his "table" to the former suburb of Suzdal - Vladimir-on-Klyazma. Moreover, in 1169 the united troops of the Russian lands under the leadership of Andrey attacked Kiev, which tried to get out of his influence, and plundered it. After that, the importance of the southern capital of the Russian land began to decline rapidly. Despite the fact that the second all-Russian campaign against Kiev in 1173 turned out to be a failure, the former capital never recovered from the blow. In 1203 Kiev was again plundered in the joint campaign of Rurik Rostislavich, Olgovichi and Polovtsy. The invasion of Mongol troops in 1240 only completed what the Russian princes had begun. Nevertheless, it was the southern Russian lands that for a long time continued to preserve the traditions of government that had developed in Kievan Rus: the prince's power rested there on the strength of the squad and was controlled by the city veche. Conventionally, this form of government is usually called early feudal monarchy.
Its own type of state power has developed in the North-West of Russia. Here the princely power as an independent political force ceased to exist as a result of the events of 1136 (the so-called Novgorod "revolution"). On May 28, the Novgorodians put under arrest their prince - the protege of the Kiev prince, Vsevolod Mstislavich, and then expelled him from the city. From that time on, the order was finally established to elect the Novgorod prince, like all other state positions of Novgorod the Great, at the veche. It became part of the city's administrative apparatus. Now his functions were limited to military issues. The voivode was involved in the maintenance of law and order in the city, and all power in the periods between veche meetings was concentrated in the hands of the Novgorod mayor and the bishop (from 1165 the archbishop). Difficult issues could be resolved on the so-called mixed court, which included representatives of all power structures of Novgorod.
This type of government can be defined as feudal republic, and the republic "boyar", "aristocratic".
On the one hand, only members of influential (aristocratic) boyar families were elected to the highest government positions (primarily posadniks, who apparently had full power in the intervals between meetings of the veche).
On the other hand, the characteristics of the Novgorod state are associated with the aristocratic composition of the veche - the highest state body of Novgorod. According to V.L. Yanin, from 300 to 500 people gathered at the veche - people from the largest boyar "families" (as we remember, M.Kh. Aleshkovsky believed that the richest Novgorod merchants were also among the vecheniki from the 13th century). There is, however, another point of view, according to which not only all adult residents of Novgorod, regardless of their social status, but, possibly, residents of Novgorod suburbs, including rural ones, took part in the Novgorod veche (I. Ya. Froyanov, V. F. Andreev and others). At the veche, the most important issues of the political life of the republic were decided. Chief among them - the election of officials who performed power functions: mayor, thousand, bishop (archbishop), archimandrite, prince.
Further development of the Russian lands could go along any of the outlined paths, but the invasion in the second third of the 13th century. Mongolian troops significantly changed the political situation in the country. But this is a topic for a special conversation.


Kievan Rus was a whole epoch in the history of the Slavic peoples. She was the only Slavic state that could compete in terms of its development with the leading countries of the world.

As a result of the collapse of the Old Russian state by the second half of the XII century. 13 separate feudal principalities and republics arose on the territory of Kievan Rus: the Novgorod and Pskov lands and the princedoms of Kiev, Pereyaslavskoe, Chernigovskoe, Galicia-Volynskoe, Turovo-Pinskoe, Polotsko-Minsk, Smolenskoe, Vladimir-Suz-Dalskoe, Muromskoe, Ryazarakanskoe. For some time the great princes of Kiev continued to be considered the supreme head of the fragmented Russian land. However, this supremacy was purely nominal. In the system of political formations, the Kiev principality was far from the strongest. The power of the Kiev princes was steadily falling, and Kiev itself turned into an object of struggle between the strongest Russian princes. Andrey Bogolyubsky's campaign to Kiev in 1169 further undermined the significance of this city, and the invasion of the Tatar-Mongols in 1240 turned it into a heap of ruins.

At the head of the Russian lands, into which the ancient Russian state fell apart, were princes. The most powerful of them soon began to appropriate the title of Grand Dukes and claimed to unite other Russian lands under their rule.

In all lands, the princes had to wage a stubborn struggle with the boyars, who did not want to strengthen the princely power. The results of this struggle in different Russian lands were not the same, for the level of development of feudalism in them was not the same, and hence the correspondence of class forces. In Novgorod, for example, the strong Novgorod boyars won a victory, and a feudal aristocratic republic was formed here. Novgorod princes were elected and had very limited rights. Their power was limited mainly by the framework of the military leadership.

In the Vladimir-Suzdal land, on the other hand, the princely power was extremely important. The fact is that northeastern Russia in the Kiev period had a relatively low level of development of feudalism. Therefore, a close-knit group of local feudal lords did not manage to form here, capable of resisting the princely power. The Vladimir-Suzdal princes quickly defeated their opponents, created an extensive princely domain, which had no equal in other Russian lands, distributed lands to their warriors and thus strengthened their supreme, in fact, monarchical power.

In the Galicia-Volyn land, a third type of political system was formed, a characteristic feature of which was that the struggle between princes and boyars here took place with varying success. In this part of Kievan Rus, the princely power settled rather late, when, on the basis of the intensive decomposition of the rural community, a large layer of local feudal lords had already grown up. Relying on their vast estates, the local boyars played an important role in the political life of the Galicia-Volyn land. They often replaced princes at their own discretion, widely attracted Poles and Hungarians to the fight against the prince. Even such strong princes as Roman and his son Daniel could not break the power of the boyars to the end. The political system of the Galicia-Volyn land occupied, as it were, a middle position between the political system of Novgorod and the Vladimir-Suzdal land.

The political system of other Russian lands was little reflected in the sources, but, apparently, one of the described options was repeated to one degree or another in them.

Common to all lands was a hierarchical order of power and subordination. The dominant class was organized into a system of feudal hierarchy, where each member, with the exception of the highest and the lowest, was both a suzerain and a vassal at the same time. True, this order received its completed forms only in the 14th century, but it can also be said in relation to the 12th - 13th centuries. At the top of the feudal hierarchical ladder stood the prince, below - his vassals-boyars. The boyars had their vassals, less powerful feudal owners, the latter, in turn, had people dependent on them. The boyars were free servants of the princes. They could choose their own lord, move from one prince to another, without losing their estates. Princely fees and duties from boyar estates were made at their location.

Being vassals of princes, boyars at the same time acted as sovereign rulers in their estates. They exercised the right of court and administration on the territory of their estates. In addition, the largest patrimonial owners had immunities - privileges granted by the princes that exempted the estates of the owners from princely taxes and duties.

During the period of feudal fragmentation in all Russian Lands, the feudal state apparatus was further strengthened - the number of state (princely) and patrimonial officials increased. Their task was to ensure the power of the feudal lords over the peasants and the urban lower classes; collection from them of rent, taxes, fines, etc. and the suppression of anti-feudal protests of workers.

The interests of the feudal class were guarded by feudal legislation, punitive organs and the armed forces. “Russkaya Pravda”, imbued with the idea of ​​protecting the property and power of the feudal lord, remained the judicial law in all Russian lands. Those who raised their hand against feudal property or the feudal order of the "Tatias" or "robbers" were shackled in iron and thrown into prisons - "camps" and "dungeons" - deep dark pits.

The most powerful political tool in the hands of the feudal lords were the armed forces, the composition and organization of which clearly reflected the socio-political system of the period of feudal fragmentation. The armed forces of the Russian feudal principalities consisted of princely squads, which were now called princely courts, boyar regiments and soldiers, and people's militias.

Only a part of the prince's court carried out permanent military service; it constituted a professional army. The rest of the prince's servants who made up his court lived in their estates and came to the prince when necessary. In case of war, the boyars who served him with their warriors and regiments also rushed to the prince's aid. However, the main armed force of the feudal principalities was not the princely squad and boyar troops, but the people's militias. They were present in every principality, but they were convened only in special, extreme cases.

The armed forces of the period of feudal fragmentation had, therefore, a motley composition and for the most part were irregular, which undoubtedly affected their fighting qualities.

The most common weapons were the spear and the ax; they were armed with the foot soldiers of the militia. A sword served as a weapon for the vigilante. During the siege of cities, vices, slings, and battering rams were used.