In the 16th century. The Moscow state occupied about 2.9 million square meters. m. By the 16th century. peasants were no longer subject to taxes (the tax was placed on the land), and, having become more independent, people could move to other territories.
Monasteries played a vital role in the process of settlement and development of new territories by the people. Although the economy retains its subsistence character, in some areas arable farming and productive livestock breeding are developing.
There is an active development of fishing and crafts, iron production centers. Sparsely populated cities still remain the trading centers, but the number of trading villages is increasing.
During his reign, it developed in many Russian cities. For this purpose, as well as the Pushkar business, the prince hired foreign workers.
And there were consequences for Rus':
- the destruction of cities and villages, peasants fleeing to new lands;
- the country's economy froze, and the plague epidemic and extremely terrible harvests aggravated the situation - an economic crisis ensued;
- Almost all the land in the central regions was abandoned. The surviving peasants left the land.
A strong desire to find a way out of the crisis prompted the government to decide to introduce “reservation years” (from 1581 to 1582), during which people were not allowed to leave their lands. The feudal lords tried to lease land to the peasants, but this did not bring much success. In the 90s 16th century a rise in agriculture was planned, but it was extremely vulnerable. The lands were owned mainly by secular and ecclesiastical feudal lords, whose possessions were subject to various benefits secured by grand ducal charters.
In the 16th century. Important changes took place in the structure of feudal property: the share of manorial land ownership grew significantly, the development of the manorial system led to a decrease in the number of black-growing peasants in the center of the country. In Rus', two territorially separated forms of feudal land ownership naturally arose:
- the previously strengthened local-patrimonial (secular and church feudal lords) in the central regions;
- communal peasantry in sparsely populated areas, periodically controlled by the state and, as a result, falling into the sphere of wide demand.
This was a distinctive feature of the development of the Russian economy in the Middle Ages.
The general direction of the country's socio-economic development in the 16th century. there was a strengthening of the feudal-serf system. The economic basis of serfdom was feudal ownership of land.
According to their social status, peasants were divided into three groups:
- proprietary - belonged to secular and church feudal lords;
- palace - belonged to the palace department of the Moscow princes, and then the tsars;
- Chernososhnye (state) - lived in territories that did not belong to one or another owner, but were obliged to perform public works in favor of the state.
In the 16th century. Trade with centers in Moscow and other cities increased. Bread was delivered to the northern lands, and from there salt, fish and furs. For internal trade, feudal lords who had privileges, as well as the Grand Duke himself, were of great importance. The sphere of commodity education included products of the commercial economy and handicrafts. Foreign trade was actively gaining momentum. Novgorod and Smolensk were the link of trade relations with the West. In 1553, a trade route to England was opened through the White Sea. Products of Russian crafts and timber were exported, and weapons, metals, and cloth were imported. Chinese fabrics, porcelain, and jewelry were imported from the East to Russia, and furs and wax were exported.
The growth of the country's commodity turnover in the 16th century. led to the development of monetary relations and the accumulation of capital. But due to the dominance of feudal-serfdom and the cruel fiscal policy of the state, capital or enrichment of the treasury was directed to lending money at interest and drawing the population into heavy debt dependence.
During the expansion of trade, a rich merchant stratum was formed from different social strata. Merchant associations with privileges were created in Moscow. Legally, they were equalized with feudal landowners.
In the 16th century. The largest merchants were the Stroganovs; they were Pomeranian peasants who became the founders of a powerful commercial and industrial house in the 15th century, operating until 1917.
The creation of a centralized state had an impact on the development of the economy and social system of Russia. The cessation of feudal strife contributed to the development of productive forces. The development of new territories by Russian peasants continued: colonization flows moved to the Urals, beyond the Oka, and the population of Pomerania increased.
The extensive slash-and-burn farming system retained its leading role in many regions of the country. At the same time, two-field and, in some places, three-field crop rotations appeared.
Important changes occurred in the structure of feudal land ownership. The nature of land ownership of princes changed. Having become subjects of the sovereign of all Rus', they largely retained their former domain lands, which were increasingly closer to ordinary feudal estates.
Under Ivan III, land distributions were widely carried out to service people at the expense of the possessions of Novgorod patrimonial lands and other annexed lands.
Such feudal lords, resettled to new places and “settled” there, began to be called landowners, and their possessions - estates. Initially, estates were not much different from votchinas: they were practically inherited, and votchinniki were also obliged to serve. The main thing was that the estates were prohibited from being sold or given away. Soon, landowners began to distribute the lands of black-sown peasants; in the first third of the 16th century, there were already estates in almost all districts of the country, and in many of them mass local distributions were carried out. Service people - landowners were the main social support of the emerging autocracy.
The creation of a centralized state served as one of the prerequisites for the enslavement of the peasantry. There has long been a rule according to which a peasant could leave his owner only for two weeks a year. Now this has become a national norm. The Code of Law of 1497 established a single deadline for the transition of peasants: a week before the autumn Saint George’s Day (November 26) and a week after. This was the first nationwide restriction of peasant freedom, but not yet the enslavement of the peasants.
Among the feudal duties of peasants, quitrent in kind dominated, although in some places monetary taxes were also collected. The corvee industry was still poorly developed, and the feudal lord's own plowing was worked mainly by slaves.
Crafts continued to develop, the main centers of which were cities. Craft specialization grew; in large cities there were often settlements inhabited by artisans of the same specialty (pottery, blacksmithing, armor making in Moscow, etc.). Weapons manufacturing has reached a high level. At the end of the 15th century, the Cannon Yard was created in Moscow, where artillery pieces were manufactured. The development of the craft of masons made it possible to carry out work on an unprecedented scale in Moscow on the construction of new Kremlin walls.
In the second half of the XV - first third of the XVI centuries. Economic ties between different regions of the country continued to develop. This was facilitated by the creation of a centralized state. But it would be wrong to exaggerate these connections. The share of the urban population was too insignificant for the development of lively trade. Subsistence farming retained its undivided dominant position.
The speed with which the political unification of the Russian lands took place led to the fact that the old, associated with specific times, turned out to be tenacious and intricately intertwined with the new, national. Along with the sovereign of all Rus', “sovereigns” of lower rank, former princes, retained a share of their power locally.
Some princes from the relatives of the Grand Duke (usually his brothers) even had their own appanages and issued letters of grant.
But the political system of the Russian state at the turn of the 15th-16th centuries. developed towards greater centralization. The Grand Dukes Ivan III and Vasily III increasingly showed themselves as autocrats. Even the appearance of the sovereign during ceremonies was supposed to show his difference from his subjects. In his hands he held a scepter and an orb, on his head was a grand-ducal crown, “Monomakh’s cap” - a skullcap forged from gold, trimmed with fur and crowned with a cross. It was assumed that it was presented to Ivan Kalita by Uzbek Khan. The official Moscow legend “The Tale of the Princes of Vladimir” said that this was supposedly a Byzantine crown that passed to Vladimir Monomakh from his grandfather, the Byzantine emperor1 Constantine Monomakh, as a sign of royal dignity.
In 1472, the widowed Ivan III married the niece of the last emperor of Byzantium, Sophia (Zoe) Palaeologus, after which the grand ducal coat of arms of the flock was the Byzantine double-headed eagle. At the same time, the idea of Moscow as the third Rome was spreading.
The advisory body under the Grand Duke was the Boyar Duma. Until the middle of the 15th century, only people from the old Moscow boyar families sat in it, but with the formation of a centralized state, the boyars included princes of previously independent principalities. Formally, they were “favored” as boyars, but in fact, the transition to the boyar rank was a sign of their transformation from vassals into subjects of the Grand Duke, that is, it reduced their social status. Due to the fact that the Duma was small, the sovereign could make his advisers only those aristocrats on whose loyalty he could firmly count.
The management system of a centralized state at the beginning of the 16th century had not yet taken shape and was quite archaic; many remnants of feudal fragmentation still remained. In 1497, the Code of Laws was adopted
The first set of laws of a centralized state. Although the Sudebnik was used in practice, it was not widely used and, probably after the death of Ivan III (1505), was almost forgotten: only one copy of this document has reached us.
In the 15th century, as a result of a long process of development, the Great Russian people with their own language emerged. On the territory of North-Eastern Rus', due to the influx of people migrating there from other regions under the threat of external danger, there was a mixture of features of various dialects: “Akanya”, typical of the South-Eastern Russian lands, and “Okanya”, characteristic of the North-Western regions. The Rostov-Suzdal dialect acquired leading importance in the emerging Russian language. Subsequently, dialect diversity began to increase on the expanding1 territory of the Russian state due to the annexation of new lands.
The process of formation of the Great Russian nationality found a vivid expression in the rise of Russian culture, which, developing on the basis of the cultural traditions of ancient Rus', acquired a number of specific features at that time.
Thus, as a result of complex historical processes, by the beginning of the 16th century, a Russian centralized state had emerged. The circumstances in which it was formed left an imprint on the entire subsequent history of Russia.
Liberation from the Mongol-Tatar yoke brought new opportunities for the Russian people to develop trade and politics. Strengthening the production sector in the Moscow State became the most important prerequisite for the formation of the all-Russian market. The tough policies of Ivan the Terrible introduced significant contradictions into Russian society, which were later expressed in mass urban protests. Disputes in the sphere of religion manifested themselves in the confrontation between non-possessors and Josephites - the main reason for the discussions was the attitude towards church property. Despite all the internal problems, Russia's international authority increased significantly.
- - By the end of the 16th century, the number of cities in the Moscow state reached two hundred. Some of them grew out of craft centers located at large monasteries. The old cities were overgrown with towns and settlements, in which artisans of various specialties worked.
- - The state territory is engulfed in peasant uprisings, the cause of which was feudal tyranny. Against the backdrop of social instability in the middle of the 16th century, freethinkers and heretics showed themselves, however, they were not yet able to seriously change anything in society.
- - The middle of the 16th century was a time of palace coups and struggles for power among nobles and boyar groups. The latter played into the hands of the carried out judicial reform, lobbying the interests of the feudal class. However, everything was to change in 1547, after Ivan IV came to power.
- - Crimea and Kazan turned out to be the most problematic territories for the Russian state at the turn of the 15th-16th centuries. Long military campaigns, lasting with varying success on both sides, lead to acceptable results. The role of the state in the international political arena is increasing every year.
- - Moscow is turning into the third Rome - and thus the basic principle of Russian autocracy is formulated. The teaching of non-possessors is rejected, however, this did not prevent Maxim the Greek, who was twice condemned and imprisoned in a monastery, from becoming a famous publicist of his time.
- - At the beginning of the 16th century, the supreme rulers seriously thought about creating a clear hierarchy of ranks and titles. This is necessary for conducting foreign and domestic policy. The struggle for the throne is between two main competitors - Dmitry (grandson of Ivan III) and Vasily III.
- - Work on the Code of Law began on the orders of Ivan III. This set of laws provided for different punishments for criminal offenses for different classes. He also secured the right of peasants to move from one landowner to another, but allowed this to be done once a year - on St. George’s Day.
- - In the process of centralization, appanage principalities were gradually replaced by appanages, and local authorities ceded their power to the institution of clerks. The prince's power was constantly strengthened, although he still needed support from the large aristocracy, represented by the boyar duma.
- - In Moscow markets, goods were sold not only from nearby villages, but also from distant cities: Ustyug, Perm and Yaroslavl. Receiving raw materials, Moscow artisans made finished products from them. Products from Moscow reached such distant countries as Bukhara and Iran.
- - In the Moscow state of the 16th century, there were 186 craft specializations. The most efficient handicraft industries, concentrated in cities (Novgorod, Moscow, Vologda), displaced from the market the home-grown products of patrimonial artisans dependent on the feudal lords.
- - Russian peasants in the 15th–16th centuries developed new lands in the Volga region and the Urals. They became increasingly dependent on the feudal lords, to whom they had to pay quitrents and rent in kind. The largest feudal lord was the church - it owned a third of all agricultural land.
Socio-economic and political development of Rus'
Socio-economic
In the 9th–12th centuries. The economy of the Old Russian state is characterized as the period of early feudalism. This period is associated with the beginning of the emergence of the very basis of the relationship between the state, feudal lords and agriculture. The most basic issues affecting the entire population are being resolved, such as production, tax collection procedures, and military service. After all, the core of the “Russian land” is agriculture, which occupies the main place in the economy of Kievan Rus. It was based on arable farming. If compared with the primitive communal system, then at this time farming technology was significantly improved. Cultivation of the land in the southern part, where tracts of land rich in black soil predominated, was carried out with a plow (or rawl); in the north, a plow was used. Agriculture played a primary role in the life of Ancient Rus', therefore the sown fields were called life, and the main grain for each area was called zhit (from the verb “to live”).
By the 9th-10th centuries. A fallow system appeared and began to be used, in which the arable land was abandoned for some time. Two-field and three-field with spring and winter crops have become famous.
Old traditions of land cultivation have also been preserved in forested areas (slashing or burning). Peasant farms had horses, cows, pigs, sheep, goats and poultry
Socio-political
The first legal document was adopted by Yaroslav the Wise in the 11th century and was called “Russian Truth”.
The main objective of this document is to protect people from unrest and regulate public relations. The “Russian Truth” spelled out various types of crimes and punishments for them.
In addition, the document divided society into several social categories. In particular, there were free community members and dependent ones. Dependents were considered not full citizens, had no freedoms and could not serve in the army. They were divided into smerds (common people), serfs (servants) and temporarily dependents.
Free community members were divided into smerds and people. They had rights and served in the army.
Features of the political system of Ancient Rus'
In the 10th-12th centuries, the head of the state (which united several principalities) was a prince. The council of boyars and warriors were subordinate to him, with the help of whom he administered the state.
The state was a union of city-states, since life outside the cities was poorly developed. City-states were ruled by princely mayors.
Rural lands were ruled by boyars and patrimonial lands, to whom these lands belonged.
The prince's squad was divided into old and young. The ancient one included boyars and older men. The squad was engaged in collecting tribute, carrying out trials and managing locally. The junior squad included young people and less noble people. The prince also had a personal squad.
Legislative, executive, military and judicial powers were in the hands of the prince. With the development of the state, these branches of government began to separate into separate institutions.
Also in Ancient Rus' there were the beginnings of democracy, which were expressed in the holding of popular assemblies - veche.
The final formation of the political system in Rus' was completed by the end of the 12th century.
Due to the long period during which the state under the general name Ancient Rus' existed, as well as due to the colossal size and fragmentation of this state, it is simply impossible to accurately establish the socio-economic and political type of its development.
Each version is supported by numerous evidence. However, most historians have already agreed that Ancient Rus' did not have a clearly defined form of socio-economic development. Thus, at the moment we can conclude that Ancient Rus' had the features of a feudal structure, a primitive communal system and slavery.
According to the surviving ancient chronicles, the stratification of society began from the time of the existence of Kievan Rus, where the head was a prince, who was helped by boyars and warriors, as well as the governors of the Grand Duke, who ruled in smaller territories.
As for the development of feudal relations in Ancient Rus', most researchers here agree that a similar form did not reach its development earlier than the 11th century. It was then that terms such as “people” and “smerds” began to appear in many chronicles. Later it becomes clear that the “people” or “lyudins” were free peasants who worked on their own plots of land.
The change in the situation with freedom was influenced by the emergence of the so-called “fiefdoms”, i.e. hereditary fiefs, who began to receive at their full disposal not only the lands, but also the peasants who worked on them. Another important role in defining the system is played by the concept of “smerda”, a clear interpretation of which is not given in the chronicles. However, the vast majority of researchers believe that this was the name given to peasants dependent on the feudal lords.
Another category of dependent peasants were purchases and ryadovichi, who had a completely different socio-economic degree of dependence on the upper classes, different from other groups.
Scientists also identify a group of free urban population, which was called “city people”. The lowest class were slaves and servants, who were actually in slavish dependence on their masters.
The servants initially consisted only of prisoners of war and their descendants, so this category was oppressed to the highest degree. The concept of slaves appeared with the development of feudal relations, when many fellow tribesmen began to fall into servile dependence on their masters.
If we talk exclusively about the basis of economic development, then here, to the greatest extent, subsistence farming, trade and craft played a role.
Socio-economic and political development of Rus'
The latter was given a big impetus by the development of cities, thanks to which the population quickly mastered various professions. The development of trade in Ancient Rus' was also not unexpected, because the state was located on the world-famous trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.” Subsistence products, handicrafts and slaves were most exported from Rus'. Feudal lords very often sold their servants to other countries.
The domestic economy, however, did not develop significantly and was based on subsistence farming.
There were practically no trade relations between numerous cities within the country, because the population independently provided itself with all necessary products.
Thus, from all of the above we can conclude that the socio-economic development of Ancient Rus' was a combination of several forms of external and internal structure, which manifested themselves to varying degrees at different times of the existence of the state.
Date of publication: 2015-10-09; Read: 163 | Page copyright infringement
studopedia.org - Studopedia.Org - 2014-2018 (0.001 s)…
Features of the socio-economic development of Ancient Rus'.
1) Different approaches to the topic of the nature of ancient Russian literature. Before the revolution, it was believed that Russians were wandering cattle breeders.
2) Marxist-Lenists believed that there was a slave-owning society.
3) Grekov introduced the concept of the feudal type.
The princes appropriated part of the surplus product in the form of tribute (more than they spent)
SOCIAL ORDER.
2.1. The nature of the social system. The question of the nature of the social system in Ancient Rus' remains one of the most controversial and confusing in Russian science.
Some historians believe that slave relations developed there (V.I. Goremykina), others define this society as transitional and pre-class, in which several socio-economic structures existed, but the communal one predominated (I.
Ya. Froyanov).
Most agree that within the framework of Ancient Rus' there was a process of the emergence of an early feudal society, which was still significantly different from mature feudalism.
2.2. The main features of the mature feudal system:
- monopoly ownership of land by feudal lords;
- the presence of a peasant farm in which the producer owned tools, livestock and used part of the land transferred to him by the feudal lord;
- for its use he bore duties - quitrent, corvee or cash rent;
- personal dependence of the peasant on the feudal lord;
- dominance of subsistence farming.
Historians have tried to discover the origin of these features and, first of all, feudal ownership of land, in the depths of ancient Russian society.
Features of the social system of Ancient Rus'.
2.3.1. Community and free community members. The main population of Ancient Rus' were free community members - people (in the singular - “lyudin”, hence “common people”). In Ancient Rus' and in the XI century. The agricultural community - the rope - formed the economic and social basis of society.
She was responsible for public order on her territory to the state (for a corpse found on her territory, she had to pay or find and extradite the killer), paid a fine for her members, and owned land, which she periodically distributed among families.
(The word “rope” itself is most often associated with a rope, which may have been used to mark out individual areas.) For possession, i.e.
That is, the disposal and use of the land, as well as for protection from nomadic raids, the community members paid tribute to the prince, who was gradually perceived by them as the supreme owner of all the land.
The practice of tributary relations is based on the concept of “state feudalism” put forward by L.V. Cherepnin, which interprets tribute as the embryo of feudal rent going to the “collective feudal lord” - the state. I. Ya. Froyanov sees in it a “military indemnity” collected by the prince from the conquered tribes.
Prince and squad. The main sources of income for the prince and his squad, in addition to tribute, continued to be military booty. But already at the end of the 10th century. Princely villages appeared, the economy of which was of a fishing and horse breeding nature (the extracted furs were sold along with the export part of the tribute in the markets of Constantinople, and horses were needed for military purposes).
With the growth of the Rurik family and the increase in the number of warriors, tribute-polyudya begins to be scarce.
The princes began to send their governor-boyars to “feed”, transferring to them the right to collect polyud in any village or locality. In some cases, in the form of a kind of reward for the service of the prince.
villages were assigned to the feeder, passed on by inheritance and turned into a fiefdom.
Rare monastic and boyar estates, surrounded by a sea of free communities, appeared no earlier than the 12th century. Therefore, if we can talk about the early feudal character of ancient Russian society, then only with a large degree of convention, as a trend - a direction of development that is gradually making its way, but not as about the real situation of that time.
The following factors contributed to the emergence of early feudal relations:
- increase in the number of princely squads;
- reduction of traditional sources of its existence (tribute, virs, war booty);
— increasing the value of arable land;
- the emergence of the opportunity to provide the land with labor in connection with the decomposition of the community and the increase in the number of various kinds of social outcasts;
- a change in the stereotypes of consciousness and behavior of the warriors, who, on the one hand, increasingly strived not for military glory and service to the prince, but for wealth, and on the other hand, immovable property (silver, cattle, slaves, etc.) began to be considered the main value. , and the ground.
Dependent population. Dependent people worked in princely villages and boyar estates. At first, the labor of the largest group of dependent population prevailed there - slaves (slaves or servants), replenished by captives and dispossessed fellow tribesmen forced to sell their freedom.
Socio-economic development of the Old Russian state - Kievan Rus
Other sources of servitude were marriage to a slave, as well as service as a tiun without a special contract in this regard.
However, slavery for debt was prohibited. The owner had complete control over the life of the slave, and for his murder he suffered only church punishment. The range of use of their labor was very wide - from arable land (role slaves) to managing the estate (tiuns, firemen).
At the beginning of the 12th century.
a new group of dependent people appeared - purchases. Most often these were bankrupt community members who went into bondage for receiving some kind of loan - “kupas”. While working off the debt, the purchaser could work on his master’s land, but at the same time he maintained his farm.
The law protected the purchaser from the owner’s possible desire to turn him into a “whitewashed” (i.e., complete) slave. Thus, in terms of its social status, procurement was more like a feudal dependent peasant than other groups.
"Russian Truth" more than once mentions such a group of people as smerds, dependent on the prince. Most likely, these are people who worked in the princely villages.
Some historians see in them the entire agricultural population of the country - community members. (The term peasants appears only in the 14th century).
However, for the murder of a smerd there was a fine of 5 hryvnia, as for a serf, and for a free community member - a “liudin” - 40 hryvnia.
The various forms and degrees of dependence that exist in ancient Russian society, the significant predominance of free people in it testifies to its complex transitional nature.
Economy in Ancient Rus'.
ACTIVITIES OF THE EASTERN SLAVS.
3.1. Agriculture. The Eastern Slavs, exploring the vast forest and forest-steppe spaces of Eastern Europe, brought with them an agricultural culture. Swidden (slash-and-burn) agriculture was widespread. On lands freed from forest as a result of cutting and burning, agricultural crops were grown for 2–3 years, using the natural fertility of the soil, enhanced by ash from burnt trees. After the land was exhausted, the site was abandoned and a new one was developed, which required the efforts of the entire community.
In the steppe regions, shifting agriculture was used, similar to cutting, but associated with the burning of field grasses rather than trees.
From the 8th century In the southern regions, field arable farming based on the use of draft animals and wooden plows, which survived until the beginning of the 20th century, became widespread.
Other activities. Along with cattle breeding, the Slavs also engaged in their usual trades: hunting, fishing, beekeeping. Crafts are developing, which, however, have not yet separated from agriculture.
Of particular importance for the fate of the Eastern Slavs will be foreign trade, which developed both on the Baltic-Volga route, along which Arab silver arrived in Europe, and on the route “from the Varangians to the Greeks,” connecting the Byzantine world through the Dnieper with the Baltic region.
Development of agriculture. First of all, one should take into account the changes that occurred in the economy of the Eastern Slavs in the 7th–9th centuries. Thus, the already noted development of agriculture, especially arable farming in the steppe and forest-steppe region of the Middle Dnieper, led to the appearance of excess product, which created conditions for the separation of the princely-retinue group from the community (there was a separation of military-administrative labor from productive labor).
1.1.2. In the North of Eastern Europe, where, due to harsh climatic conditions, agriculture could not become widespread, fisheries continued to play a major role, and the emergence of a surplus product was the result of the development of exchange and foreign trade.
In the area where arable farming spread, the evolution of the clan community began, which, thanks to the fact that now an individual large family could ensure its existence, began to transform into an agricultural or neighboring (territorial) community. Such a community, as before, mainly consisted of relatives, but unlike the clan community, the arable land, divided into plots, and the products of labor were here in the use of individual small families who owned tools and livestock.
This created some conditions for property differentiation, but social stratification did not occur in the community itself - the productivity of agricultural labor remained too low. Archaeological excavations of East Slavic settlements of that period discovered almost identical semi-dugout family dwellings with the same set of objects and tools.
In addition, on the vast forest territory of the East Slavic world, clearing was preserved, and because of its labor intensity, it required the efforts of the entire clan collective.
Thus, unevenness emerged in the development of individual tribal unions.
Related information:
Search on the site:
Page 1 of 2Next ⇒
On the territory of our country in the 6th-10th centuries. Eastern Slavs lived: Vyatichi, Polyane and others. By the 10th century, the Eastern Slavs developed a clan society.
Its formation ends with the formation of the Old Russian state. According to the Tale of Bygone Years, in 862 Rurik established himself in Novgorod. After his death, Oleg seized power in 879, and in 882, with the help of deception, he captured Kyiv, which became the center of the united state. Old Russian state of the early feudal monarchy. The head of the state was the Grand Duke, and his sons, brothers and warriors carried out the court and collected tribute.
Socio-economic development of ancient Rus'
In the 9th–12th centuries. The economy of the Old Russian state is characterized as the period of early feudalism. This period is associated with the beginning of the emergence of the very basis of the relationship between the state, feudal lords and agriculture.
The most basic issues affecting the entire population are being resolved, such as production, tax collection procedures, and military service. After all, the core of the “Russian land” is agriculture, which occupies the main place in the economy of Kievan Rus. It was based on arable farming. If compared with the primitive communal system, then at this time farming technology was significantly improved.
Cultivation of the land in the southern part, where tracts of land rich in black soil predominated, was carried out with a plow (or rawl); in the north, a plow was used. Agriculture played a primary role in the life of Ancient Rus', therefore the sown fields were called life, and the main grain for each area was called zhit (from the verb “to live”).
By the 9th-10th centuries. A fallow system appeared and began to be used, in which the arable land was abandoned for some time.
Two-field and three-field with spring and winter crops have become famous.
A characteristic feature was also how developed the commercial economy was, because almost everything necessary for life was produced.
Crafts developed, the center of which, of course, became cities, but certain industries also developed in villages. The leading role was occupied by ferrous metallurgy for the simple reason that Ancient Rus' was rich in swamp ores from which iron was extracted. All kinds of processing of iron were carried out, making numerous things from it for the household, military affairs and everyday life, and various technological techniques were used: forging, welding, cementing, turning, inlaying with non-ferrous metals.
Old Russian state: economic and political development. Social structure of Ancient Rus'
However, along with metallurgy, there was a big push in the development of woodworking, pottery, and leather crafts.
Thus, metallurgy and agriculture become a strong support and the main article of the economy of Kievan Rus.
Social and political development of ancient Rus'
(features of the social and political system of Russia)
The entire community was divided according to their relationship to the prince into 3 groups: 1) who personally served the prince; 2) for free people - they did not serve personally, but paid tribute in peace - as a community; 3) served private individuals.
The estates have not yet been formed. Basically there were free, semi-free and slaves (slaves). Slavery did not spread. Basic the mass of the rural population, dependent. from the prince, was called “smerds”. There were merchants and artisans. Among the vigilantes stand out. max. close associates - boyars who received land, cat. could be passed on by inheritance. Later, nobles also appear - they receive land only for the duration of their service.
Lands of ancient Rus' 11-13th centuries. (Novgorod; Vladimir-Suzdal; Pledsko-Volyn lands)
Mongol-Tatar invasion
In the spring of 1223 Hordes of nomads under the command of Genghis Khan reached the Dnieper.
These were the Mongol-Tatars. Their society was at the stage of decline of military democracy during the transition to the early feudal monarchy. The nomadic army was distinguished by strict military discipline. For example, for the escape of one warrior from the battlefield, his entire ten were executed; for the escape of a dozen, a hundred died.
The Mongol-Tatars came to the Dnieper to attack the Polovtsians, whose khan, Kotyan, turned to his son-in-law, the Galician prince Mstislav Romanovich, for help.
The Russians thus first met the invaders in battle on R.
1) the futility of attempts by Russian troops to help the allies;
2) lack of a single organization;
3) weakness of command.
All together made further battle with the invaders pointless for the Russians.
Winter 1237 The Mongol-Tatars under the command of Batu entered the territory of North-Eastern Rus'.
Their first victim was the Russian city of Kazan, then the invaders plundered Kolomna.
IN February 1238 The capital of North-Eastern Rus', Vladimir, fell.
The nomads conquered Chernigov, and the capital Kyiv also fell. The capture of Russian cities was accompanied by inhuman cruelty; residents were killed, regardless of gender and age.
The war did not affect the Orthodox Church.
The conquerors did not interfere in the religious area of the conquered countries.
They did not take tribute from the monasteries. The Mongol-Tatars also sought to attract church leaders to their side.
The Mongol-Tatar yoke was established in Rus': 1) Rus' fell under the rule of the Horde protectorate.
Golden Horde- Juchi ulus, a powerful state created by the Mongol khans.
Its capital was Sarai-Batu, located not far from modern Astrakhan; 2) the khan presented label for the great reign Vladimirskoe and controlled the situation throughout the entire territory.
The label was a desired goal for the Russian princes and the cause of feudal strife; 3) the conquerors in every possible way encouraged feudal fragmentation, pitting Rurik’s descendants against each other; 4) main form of addiction came from the Horde collection of tribute, “Horde exit”. Khan's officials (baskaks) dealt with it in Rus'.
Tribute was collected from the household. The actions of the Baskaks were characterized by extreme cruelty. They captured people and censused the entire population of North-Eastern Rus' in 1257–1259. The “Great Baskak” had a residence in Vladimir, where the political center of the country practically moved at that time.
The main reasons for the defeat of Rus' and the establishment of the Horde yoke were:
1) the feudal fragmentation that existed at that time, since each principality found itself alone with the forces of the conquerors.
Thus, the Russian princes were defeated one by one by their enemies;
2) the Mongol-Tatars used advanced military equipment (stone throwers, battering machines, gunpowder);
3) numerical superiority of the enemy.
Results of the conquest: cities and villages were burned, skilled artisans were taken into slavery, fields fell into disrepair, and Rus''s foreign economic relations were disrupted for many years.
The Mongol-Tatar conquest completed the history of Ancient Rus' in 1240.
The Mongol-Tatar conquest played the role of a catalyst during the division of territory and spheres of influence.
This specific feature also distinguished the struggle between the Moscow and Tver principalities in a later period. As a result of this, the exploitation of the dependent population on the ground has increased.
Domination of the Golden Horde 13-14th centuries.
forms of subordination of Russian Rus', the fight against the Mongol-Tatars
Formation of the Moscow invasion, gathering of lands around Moscow 13-15th centuries.
Foreign policy
Formation of the ancient Russian state (9-10 centuries)
On the territory of our country in the 6th-10th centuries.
Eastern Slavs lived: Vyatichi, Polyane and others. By the 10th century, the Eastern Slavs developed a clan society. Its formation ends with the formation of the Old Russian state. According to the Tale of Bygone Years, in 862 Rurik established himself in Novgorod.
After his death, Oleg seized power in 879, and in 882, with the help of deception, he captured Kyiv, which became the center of the united state. Old Russian state of the early feudal monarchy. The head of the state was the Grand Duke, and his sons, brothers and warriors carried out the court and collected tribute.
The main task of the country was to protect the border from raids by nomads. In 991, Prince Oleg signed the first international treaty with Byzantium. The Old Russian state strengthened significantly under princes Igor and Svyatoslav, but the true dawn of Kievan Rus occurred under Prince Vladimir I. Under him, all the lands of the Eastern Slavs were united into Kievan Rus. In 988, Vladimir adopted Christianity as a new state religion.
The adoption of Christianity strengthened the state power and territorial unity of Kievan Rus. Having rejected primitive paganism, Rus' became equal to other Christian countries
Socio-economic development of ancient Rus'
The economy of the Old Russian state is characterized as the period of early feudalism. This period is associated with the beginning of the emergence of the very basis of the relationship between the state, feudal lords and agriculture. The most basic issues affecting the entire population are being resolved, such as production, tax collection procedures, and military service.
After all, the core of the “Russian land” is agriculture, which occupies the main place in the economy of Kievan Rus. It was based on arable farming.
If compared with the primitive communal system, then at this time farming technology was significantly improved. Cultivation of the land in the southern part, where tracts of land rich in black soil predominated, was carried out with a plow (or rawl); in the north, a plow was used. Agriculture played a primary role in the life of Ancient Rus', therefore the sown fields were called life, and the main grain for each area was called zhit (from the verb “to live”).
A fallow system appeared and began to be used, in which the arable land was abandoned for some time. Two-field and three-field with spring and winter crops have become famous.
Old traditions of land cultivation have also been preserved in forested areas (slashing or burning). Peasant farms had horses, cows, pigs, sheep, goats and poultry.
A characteristic feature was also how developed the commercial economy was, because almost everything necessary for life was produced.
Crafts developed, the center of which, of course, became cities, but certain industries also developed in villages. The leading role was occupied by ferrous metallurgy for the simple reason that Ancient Rus' was rich in swamp ores from which iron was extracted. All kinds of processing of iron were carried out, making numerous things from it for the household, military affairs and everyday life, and various technological techniques were used: forging, welding, cementing, turning, inlaying with non-ferrous metals.
However, along with metallurgy, there was a big push in the development of woodworking, pottery, and leather crafts.
Thus, metallurgy and agriculture become a strong support and the main article of the economy of Kievan Rus.
The state united around Moscow represented a qualitatively new stage in the development of statehood. Huge in territory, six times larger than the former Grand Duchy of Moscow, the Russian state had a much more complex structure of the ruling class and its ruling institutions. State functions have become more complex in both internal and external affairs. If in the feudal principalities of the previous period the palace and the state administration itself were poorly differentiated, now functional government bodies appeared, separate from the palace economy. A multi-level layer of service people was formed.
In international relations, it was no longer separate lands and principalities, but a centralizing state that opposed other peoples and states, which, in the conditions of a class antagonistic society with its inherent constant international conflicts, significantly increased the stability of peoples in the struggle for independence, which in turn was the primary condition for social -economic and cultural progress.
Grand Duke's power
The government of Ivan III tried to elevate the grand-ducal power over the feudal nobility. With special oaths, the boyars were forced to swear allegiance to the Grand Duke of Moscow. The latter began to impose “disgraces” on the boyars, removing them from his court and thereby from the highest levels of government service, confiscating their estates, limiting or expanding the immune privileges of landowners. Marriage for a second marriage to the niece of the last Byzantine emperor Sophia Paleologus, the introduction of a new magnificent ceremony at the Moscow court, the state coat of arms - a double-headed eagle, special signs of grand-ducal dignity - “barm” (mantles) and the so-called “Monomakh’s cap”, allegedly received by Vladimir Monomakh from Byzantium , not to mention the complete restructuring of the Kremlin - all this was supposed to outwardly emphasize the increased strength of the Moscow sovereigns. However, the actual degree of state centralization depended not so much on the subjective aspirations of the grand ducal power, but on the real balance of socio-political forces, and this latter was determined by the level and direction of socio-economic development.
Traces of former autonomy
Since the unification process in Russia took place in the conditions of progressive feudal social relations with their inherent natural type of economy and the development of cities and commodity-money relations weakened by the Mongol-Tatar invasion and yoke, traces of feudal fragmentation remained for a long time in the political system of feudal Rus' united around Moscow. The spiritual and secular feudal lords had enormous wealth - lands, industries, and sometimes small towns.
A large feudal organization was the church with its own system of court and administration. The head of the church - the metropolitan - had his own “court”, boyars, army, service people, supported by a conditional feudal holding. The organization of local churches, subordinate to the metropolitan and governed by archbishops and bishops, was similar. Only for the most serious criminal offenses was the trial of church people carried out by secular authorities, while the church had the right to trial in family and some other cases over the entire population.
The possessions of large secular feudal lords enjoyed immunity privileges, thanks to which the feudal lords had more or less broad judicial and administrative rights in relation to the population under their control, and often to their troops, which consisted of service people - nobles. After the death of Ivan III, the appanages in the Moscow Principality were restored again, which was also one of the important traces of the former autonomy.
Feudal nobility in the new state
There was an intense struggle between groups of nobility for a place in the newly emerging hierarchy of feudal rulers of the united Russian state. The old Moscow nobility, which served the Grand Duke of Moscow for generations, was joined by the princely-boyar nobility before independent principalities and appanages in them. The new hierarchy system took the form of “localism” - the order of appointment to positions in accordance with the nobility of origin, which was determined both by the proximity of one or another family to the Grand Duke, and by the length of service. The highest place in the hierarchy was occupied by the descendants of the “Rurikovichs” and immigrants from Lithuania - the “Gediminovichs”.
The political system of the Russian state became autocracy with the Boyar Duma. and the boyar aristocracy. This is how V.I. Lenin defined this system in relation to the 17th century. 1, when the importance of the boyar aristocracy began to decrease compared to previous times - especially since this characteristic can be attributed to the end of the 15th-16th centuries.
Boyar Duma
Under the Grand Duke, a permanent council of nobility was formed - the Boyar Duma. Its members were appointed by the Grand Duke on the basis of parochial rules. The initial number of boyars was small (about 20 people). The “Duma ranks” included the boyars. Subsequently, the ranks of boyars were received not only by the sons of boyars and princes, but in the 17th century. in everyday life, all gentlemen in general began to be called boyars; later the word “boyar” turned into the word “master”. The second oldest Duma rank was the okolnichy, then the Duma nobles, and later the Duma clerks appeared - representatives of the growing government administration. The Boyar Duma met daily in the presence of the Grand Duke and resolved issues of domestic and foreign policy, as well as local affairs. The formula for the decision was the words: “the Grand Duke indicated, and the boyars sentenced.” Soon the grand ducal government began to allocate a narrow circle of direct advisers - the so-called “close Duma”.
Subsequently, the circle of estates involved in resolving state issues expanded to include the nobility and the elite of the merchant class. This happened in the middle of the 16th century. and was embodied in the practice of Zemsky Sobors, the embryo of which researchers believe were the meetings of Ivan III with representatives of different layers of feudal lords on the eve of the campaign against Novgorod in 1471.
Church cathedrals
The highest spiritual authorities also influenced the resolution of state issues. Although the Grand Duke appointed metropolitans and bishops at his own discretion (the church councils convened on his initiative only confirmed the choice of the Grand Duke), in practice church leaders did not always act only as advisers and assistants to the Grand Duke - sometimes they opposed his measures if the latter contradicted their interests. Church councils discussed many issues that were put forward by the grand ducal government, which needed the support of the church.
Orders
With the increase in the functions of public administration, the need arose to create special institutions that would manage military, foreign, land, financial, judicial and other affairs. In the ancient bodies of palace administration - the Grand Palace and the Treasury - special departmental “tables” began to be formed, controlled by clerks. Later they developed into orders, when a certain group of issues began to be entrusted (“ordered”) to some boyar, around whom a permanent staff of clerks and clerks was formed. The first mention of orders dates back to 1512, but it is possible that they arose somewhat earlier.
The order system was a typical manifestation of the feudal organization of government. It was based on the ancient principles of the inseparability of judicial and administrative powers. To provide orders, they were often given control of individual cities and counties, where they collected taxes and duties for their benefit. The orders were functional and territorial, palace and national. The formation of new orders occurred largely spontaneously, under the influence of newly emerging needs. The boundaries of the activities of orders were often very contradictory.
For example: financial affairs were divided between the orders of the Grand Palace, the Grand Parish and others. The robber order was engaged in the pursuit of “dashing people”. There were territorial orders - “cheti”.
With the annexation of new territories, the Kazan, Siberian and other orders arose, which were in charge of all affairs in a certain territory. In the orders, a layer of professional officials was gradually formed from humble service people - experts in their field, who over time began to influence the resolution of state issues.
Local government
To govern in districts - former independent lands and principalities or their appanages - boyar-governors were appointed for a certain period of time. To help them, “volostels” were sent to the volosts, and “bailiffs” and “closers” were sent to perform judicial functions. Counties were divided into camps, camps into volosts, and sometimes vice versa. In some cases, there was a division into lands - thirds and quarters. There was no single principle of administrative-territorial structure. For the performance of their judicial and administrative functions, governors and volostels collected “fodder” from the subject and subject population for their benefit, just as in ancient Rus', according to the “Russian Pravda,” there was a “pokon virny.” This form of management and its provision in practice easily led to lack of control and arbitrariness on the part of the feeding boyars; in fact, something like feudal autonomy of individual lands arose again, with the difference that they were headed not by a local prince, but by a Moscow governor. The governors also controlled the local military forces.
Law code 1497
In order to centralize and unify the procedure for judicial and administrative activities throughout the entire state, the Code of Law of Ivan III was compiled in 1497. Uniform standards of criminal liability and procedures for conducting investigations and trials were established. The class essence of the Sudebnik is visible very clearly - with all its content it is aimed at protecting the interests of feudal landowners, their lives and property, their power over the dependent population, as well as the feudal state. Article 57 of the Sudebnik established as a national law the rule according to which peasants could leave their owners only once a year - a week before St. George’s Day, autumn (November 26), and during the week after it, with obligatory
payment of “elderly” - payment for living on the land of the feudal lord, and in reality compensation to the landowner for the loss of workers. At the same time, in the interests of preserving the contingent of taxpayers for the state, the Code of Law limited the sources of servitude (slaves did not bear taxes). A person who entered the service of a feudal lord in a city, most often a city artisan, was not supposed to become a serf. By leaving the city dweller personal freedom, the grand ducal government thereby preserved him for itself as an object of exploitation, a tax collector.
1 See: V.I. Lenin. Full collection cit., vol. 17, p. 346.
B.A. Rybakov - “History of the USSR from ancient times to the end of the 18th century.” - M., “Higher School”, 1975.
