The emergence of ancient Russian statehood is brief. Formation of the Old Russian state

Prerequisites: education The ancient Russian state began with the collapse of tribal ties and the development of a new method of production. The Old Russian state took shape in the process of the development of feudal relations, the emergence of class contradictions and coercion.

Among the Slavs a dominant layer was gradually formed, the basis of which was the military nobility of the Kyiv princes - the squad. Already at 9., strengthening the position of their princes, the warriors firmly took leading positions in society.

It was in the 9th century. In Eastern Europe, two ethnopolitical associations were formed, which ultimately became the basis of the state. It was formed as a result of the unification of the glades with the center in Kyiv.

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

Scandinavian presence(Varyags) on the territory of Rus' is confirmed by archaeological excavations and records in chronicles. In the 18th century German scientists G.F. Miller and G.Z. Bayer proved the Scandinavian theory of the formation of the ancient Russian state (Rus).

M.V. Lomonosov, denying the Norman (Varangian) origin of statehood, associated the word “Rus” with the Sarmatians-Roxolans, the Ros River flowing in the south.

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

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

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

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

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

Igor's widow Princess Olga (945-957) ruled due to the early childhood of his son Svyatoslav. She brutally took revenge for the murder of her husband by ravaging the lands of the Drevlyans. Olga organized the sizes and places of collecting tribute. In 955 she visited Constantinople and was baptized into Orthodoxy.

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

The centers of formation of the ancient Russian state were Kyiv and Novgorod, the East Slavic tribes, northern and southern, united around them. In the 9th century both of these groups united into a single ancient Russian state, which went down in history as Rus'.

At the end of the 9th century AD. e. scattered tribes of the Eastern Slavs unite into a powerful union, which will later be called Kievan Rus. The ancient state covered vast territories of central and southern Europe, uniting completely culturally different peoples.

Name

The question of the history of the emergence of Russian statehood has been causing a lot of disagreement among historians and archaeologists for decades. For a very long time, the manuscript “The Tale of Bygone Years,” one of the main documented sources of information about this period, was considered a falsification, and therefore the data on when and how Kievan Rus appeared was questioned. Education single center among the Eastern Slavs presumably dates back to the eleventh century.

The state of the Russians received its familiar name to us only in the twentieth century, when the textbook studies of Soviet scientists were published. They clarified that this concept does not include a separate region of modern Ukraine, but the entire Rurikovich empire, located over a vast territory. The Old Russian state is called conventionally, for a more convenient distinction between the periods before and after the Mongol invasion.

Prerequisites for the emergence of statehood

In the early Middle Ages, throughout almost the entire territory of Europe, there was a tendency to unite disparate tribes and principalities. This was associated with the conquests of some king or knight, as well as with the creation of alliances of wealthy families. The prerequisites for the formation of Kievan Rus were different and had their own specifics.

By the end of IX, several large tribes, such as the Krivichi, Polyans, Drevlyans, Dregovichs, Vyatichi, Northerners, and Radimichi, gradually united into one principality. The main reasons for this process were the following factors:

1. All alliances rallied to confront common enemies - the steppe nomads, who often carried out devastating raids on cities and villages.
2. These tribes were also united by a common geographical location; they all lived near the trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.”
3. The first Kyiv princes known to us - Askold, Dir, and later Oleg, Vladimir and Yaroslav made campaigns of conquest in the North and South-East of Europe in order to establish their rule and impose tribute on the local population.

Thus, the formation of Kievan Rus gradually took place. It is difficult to speak briefly about this period; many events and bloody battles preceded the final consolidation of power in one center, under the leadership of the all-powerful prince. From the very beginning, the Russian state developed as a multi-ethnic state; peoples differed in terms of beliefs, way of life and culture.

"Norman" and "anti-Norman" theory

In historiography, the question of who and how created the state called Kievan Rus has not yet been finally resolved. For many decades, the formation of a single center among the Slavs was associated with the arrival of leaders from outside the lands - the Varangians or Normans, whom the local residents themselves called upon.

The theory has many shortcomings, the main reliable source of its confirmation is the mention of a certain legend of the chroniclers of the “Tale of Bygone Years” about the arrival of princes from the Varangians and their establishment of statehood; any archaeological or historical evidence still does not exist. This interpretation was adhered to by German scientists G. Miller and I. Bayer.

The theory of the formation of Kievan Rus by foreign princes was challenged by M. Lomonosov; he and his followers believed that statehood in this territory arose through the gradual establishment of the power of one center over others, and was not introduced from the outside. Until now, scientists have not come to a consensus, and this issue has long been politicized and used as a lever of pressure on the perception of Russian history.

The first princes

Whatever disagreements there may be regarding the issue of the origin of statehood, official history speaks of the arrival of three brothers to the Slavic lands - Sinius, Truvor and Rurik. The first two soon died, and Rurik became the sole ruler of the then large cities of Ladoga, Izborsk and Beloozero. After his death, his son Igor, due to his early age, was unable to take over control, so Prince Oleg became regent for the heir.

It is with his name that the formation of the eastern state of Kievan Rus is associated; at the end of the ninth century, he made a campaign against the capital city and declared these lands “the cradle of the Russian land.” Oleg proved himself not only as a strong leader and a great conqueror, but also as a good manager. In each city he created a special system of subordination, legal proceedings and rules for collecting taxes.

Several destructive campaigns against Greek lands carried out by Oleg and his predecessor Igor helped strengthen the authority of Rus' as a strong and independent state, and also led to the establishment of wider and more profitable trade with Byzantium.

Prince Vladimir

Igor's son Svyatoslav continued his campaigns of conquest into remote territories, annexed the Crimea and the Taman Peninsula to his possessions, and returned cities previously conquered by the Khazars. However, it was very difficult to manage such economically and culturally different territories from Kyiv. Therefore, Svyatoslav carried out an important administrative reform, placing his sons in charge of all major cities.

The education and development of Kievan Rus was successfully continued by his illegitimate son Vladimir, this man became an outstanding figure national history, it was during his reign that Russian statehood was finally formed, and a new religion was adopted - Christianity. He continued to consolidate all the lands under his control, removing individual rulers and appointing his sons as princes.

The rise of the state

Vladimir is often called the first Russian reformer; during his reign, he created a clear system of administrative division and subordination, and also established a unified rule for collecting taxes. In addition, he reorganized judicial law, now the law was administered on his behalf by governors in each region. During the first period of his reign, Vladimir devoted a lot of effort to fighting the raids of steppe nomads and strengthening the country’s borders.

It was during his reign that Kievan Rus was finally formed. The formation of a new state is impossible without establishing a single religion and worldview among the people, so Vladimir, being a smart strategist, decides to convert to Orthodoxy. Thanks to the rapprochement with the strong and enlightened Byzantium, the state very soon became the cultural center of Europe. Thanks to the Christian faith, the authority of the head of the country is strengthened, schools are opened, monasteries are built and books are published.

Civil wars, collapse

Initially, the system of government in Rus' was formed on the basis of tribal traditions of inheritance - from father to son. Under Vladimir, and then Yaroslav, this custom played a key role in uniting disparate lands; the prince appointed his sons as governors in different cities, thereby maintaining a unified government. But already in the 17th century, the grandchildren of Vladimir Monomakh were mired in internecine wars among themselves.

The centralized state, created with such diligence over the course of two hundred years, soon fell apart into many appanage principalities. The absence of a strong leader and agreement between the children of Mstislav Vladimirovich led to the fact that the once powerful country found itself completely unprotected against the forces of Batu’s crushing hordes.

Way of life

By the time of the Mongol-Tatar invasion, there were about three hundred cities in Rus', although the majority of the population lived in rural areas, where they farmed the land and raised livestock. The formation of the state of the Eastern Slavs of Kievan Rus contributed to the massive construction and strengthening of settlements; part of the taxes went both to the creation of infrastructure and to the construction of powerful defensive systems. To establish Christianity among the population, churches and monasteries were built in every city.

The class division in Kievan Rus developed over a long period of time. One of the first to stand out was a group of leaders; it usually consisted of representatives of a separate family; the social inequality between the leaders and the rest of the population was striking. Gradually, the future feudal nobility is formed from the princely squad. Despite the active slave trade with Byzantium, others eastern countries, there were not many slaves in Ancient Rus'. Among the subordinate people, historians distinguish smerds, who obey the will of the prince, and slaves, who have practically no rights.

Economy

The formation of the monetary system in Ancient Rus' occurred in the first half of the 9th century and was associated with the beginning of active trade with large states of Europe and the East. For a long time, coins minted in the centers of the Caliphate or in Western Europe, to make their own banknotes, the Slavic princes had neither the experience nor the necessary raw materials.

The formation of the state of Kievan Rus became possible largely thanks to the establishment of economic ties with Germany, Byzantium, and Poland. Russian princes always prioritized protecting the interests of merchants abroad. Traditional trade goods in Rus' were furs, honey, wax, flax, silver, jewelry, castles, weapons and much more. The message took place along the famous route “from the Varangians to the Greeks,” when ships ascended the Dnieper River to the Black Sea, as well as along the Volga route through Ladoga to the Caspian Sea.

Meaning

Social and cultural processes that took place during the formation and heyday of Kievan Rus became the basis for the formation of Russian nationality. With the adoption of Christianity, the country forever changed its appearance; in subsequent centuries, Orthodoxy will become a unifying factor for all peoples living in this territory, despite the fact that the pagan customs and rituals of our ancestors still remain in the culture and way of life.

Folklore, for which Kievan Rus was famous, had a huge influence on Russian literature and people’s worldview. The formation of a single center contributed to the emergence of common legends and fairy tales glorifying the great princes and their exploits.

With the adoption of Christianity in Rus', the widespread construction of monumental stone structures began. Some architectural monuments have survived to this day, for example, the Church of the Intercession on the Nerl, which dates back to the 9th century. Of no less historical value are examples of paintings by ancient masters that remained in the form of frescoes and mosaics in Orthodox churches and churches.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 32

Causes:

1. Among the Eastern Slavs, tribal and consanguineous relations are replaced by military, political and territorial ties.
2. Threats from the Pechenegs and Khazars pushed for unification
3. By the middle of the 9th century. they already had organs that were a prototype state institutions(prince, squad, meeting of tribal representatives - future veche)
4. The route “From the Varangians to the Greeks,” which ran from north to south, became the main core of the economic and political life of the East Slavic ethnos.

Anti-Norman and Norman theory
Statehood in Rus' was brought from outside and the Eastern Slavs were unable to create their own state on their own, calling on Rurik. (Norman theory)

Modern researchers recognize this theory as untenable. They pay attention to the following: among the Eastern Slavs by the middle of the 9th century. there were bodies that were the prototype of state institutions (prince, squad, meeting of tribal representatives - the future veche); inviting a foreigner as a ruler is an important indicator of the maturity of the prerequisites for the formation of a state. The tribal union is aware of its common interests and tries to resolve contradictions between individual tribes with the calling of a prince standing above local differences. The Varangian princes, surrounded by a strong and combat-ready squad, led and completed the processes leading to the formation of the state; large tribal super-unions, which included several tribal unions, developed among the Eastern Slavs already in the 8th-9th centuries. - around Novgorod and around Kyiv;

Stages of development:

• 9th-second half of the 10th century Formation of the state, national authorities and administration.

Prince, he has a senior and a junior squad. The Old Russian Kiev state gradually subjugated a number of tribal unions, but the southern streets, Tivertsy, Croats in the Carpathian region, Vyatichi, Radimichi and Krivichi remained independent. The reign of Rurik, Oleg, Igor, Olga, Svyatoslav.

• Calling of Rurik to Novgorod 862.
• Unification of Kyiv and Novgorod by Prince Oleg
• Sea campaign against Byzantium 907
• Svyatoslav's campaigns against the Khazars, Volga Bulgars, against the Pechenegs.

• Late 10th – 11th century Heyday in the development of Old Russian. states.

Time is watered. stability. The structure of a single early feudal state was formed, and the onslaught of the Pechenegs was neutralized.

Gradual involvement of East Slavic tribal principalities in dependence on Kyiv. The Vyatichi fought the longest.

Reign of Svyatoslav, Vladimir, Yaroslav

• Adoption of Orthodoxy as the state religion in 988.
• Victories over the Pechenegs
• Growth of cities
• Creation of a code of laws “Russian truth”
• The rise of trade

First third of the 12th century. Decline of Kievan Rus.

Strife among the princes, the Princely Congress in Lyubech in 1097, at which appanage princes received the right to own their patrimony (land passed on by inheritance), the reign of Vladimir Monomakh, Mstislav, the collapse of Rus' into independent Russian principalities in 1132.

Old Russian state: economic and political development. Social structure of Ancient Rus'

In the Old Russian state, trade was poorly developed. In the Russian economy of that time subsistence farming dominated. Foreign trade began to develop rapidly after the formation of the Russian state. This was due to the fact that the state began to protect trade routes and ensure the safety of Russian merchants. Rus' developed special trade relations with Byzantium. Contributed to this trade route from "Varangians to the Greeks". From Rus' to Byzantium such goods as honey and wax, tar, furs, grain, furs, plyasnitsa as well as products of Russian artisans, gunsmiths and jewelers (goldsmiths). These products were a great success in the Empire. They brought them to Rus' from Byzantium luxury goods, grape wines, silk fabrics, incense, seasonings and expensive, beautiful weapons. Russian crafts and trade were concentrated in cities. Russian chronicles say that in ancient Rus' there were more than 200 cities. The head of state bore the title of Grand Duke, Prince of Kyiv. Princely power was hereditary. The prince was the supreme judge. In addition to the princes, grand-ducal boyars and “men” participated in the administration of the territories. The principle of inheritance of power in the 9th-10th centuries is unknown. In the 11th century, princely power in Rus' was transferred along the “ladder”, that is, not necessarily to the son, but to the eldest in the family. The form of taxes in Ancient Rus' was tribute, which was paid by subject tribes. The form of collecting tribute was polyudye, the prince and his retinue toured his subjects from November to April. Rus' was divided into several tax districts. In 946, after the suppression of the Drevlyan uprising, Princess Olga carried out a tax reform, streamlining the collection of tribute. She set " lessons”, that is, the size of the tribute, and created “cemeteries”, fortresses on the route of Polyudye, in which the princely administrators lived and where the tribute was brought. This form of collecting tribute and the tribute itself was called a “cart.” The reform contributed to the centralization of grand ducal power and the weakening of the power of tribal princes. "Russkaya Pravda" calls the main population of the country free community members - Lyudinov or people (hence: collection of tribute from peasants - community members - polyudye). Second large group population - stinkers. These are not free or semi-free princely tributaries. Smerd had no right to leave his property to indirect heirs. It was handed over to the prince. With the development of feudal relations, this category of population increased at the expense of free community members. The third group of the population are slaves, serfs. "Russian Truth" shows slaves completely without rights. A slave had no right to be a witness in court. The owner was not responsible for his murder. Not only the slave, but also everyone who helped him was punished for escaping. Purchase- this is a bankrupt community member who went into debt bondage for a certain loan (kupa). He worked as a servant or in the fields. Zakup was deprived of personal freedom, but he retained his own farm and could redeem himself by repaying the debt. A small group of the dependent population of Rus' were ryadovichi. Judging by Russkaya Pravda, they were petty administrative agents. Another small group - outcasts, people who have lost their social status: slaves set free, community members expelled from the ropes, etc. A fairly large group of the population of Rus' were artisans. As the social division of labor grew, cities became centers for the development of crafts. The growth of cities and the development of handicrafts are associated with the activities of such a group of the population as merchants. It is necessary to single out such a group of the population of Ancient Rus' as vigilantes (“men”). The warriors lived at the prince's court, participated in military campaigns and collected tribute. The princely squad is an integral part of the administrative apparatus. The squad was heterogeneous. The closest warriors formed a permanent council, the “Duma.” They were called boyars. The prince consulted with them on important state affairs. Senior warriors could also have their own squad. Subsequently, the boyars acted as governors. Junior vigilantes performed the duties of bailiffs, fine collectors, etc. The princely warriors formed the basis of the emerging class of feudal lords. At the local level, the princely government dealt with tribal self-government in the form of the veche and “city elders.”

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 32

Prerequisites and reasons for the emergence of the Old Russian state.

Moment of occurrence Old Russian state cannot be determined with sufficient accuracy. Obviously, there was a gradual development of those political formations that we talked about earlier into the feudal state of the Eastern Slavs - the Old Russian state. In the literature, this event is dated differently by different historians. However, most authors agree that the emergence of the Old Russian state should be attributed to the 9th century.

The question of how this state was formed is not entirely clear. And here we are faced with the so-called Norman theory.

The fact is that we have at our disposal a source that, it would seem, to some extent answers the question about the origin of the Old Russian state. This is the oldest chronicle collection “The Tale of Bygone Years”. The chronicle makes it clear that in the 9th century. our ancestors lived in conditions of statelessness, although this is not directly stated in the Tale. We are only talking about the fact that the southern Slavic tribes paid tribute to the Khazars, and the northern ones to the Varangians, that the northern tribes once drove out the Varangians, but then changed their minds and called the Varangian princes to themselves. This decision was caused by the fact that the Slavs fought among themselves and decided to turn to foreign princes to establish order. It was then that the famous phrase was uttered: “Our land is great and abundant, but there is no decoration in it. May you come and reign over us.” The Varangian princes came to Rus' and in 862 sat on the thrones: Rurik - in Novgorod, Truvor - in Izborsk (not far from Pskov), Sineus - in Beloozero.

This interpretation raises at least two objections. Firstly, the factual material presented in The Tale of Bygone Years does not provide grounds for the conclusion that the Russian state was created by calling the Varangians. On the contrary, like other sources that have come down to us, it says that statehood among the Eastern Slavs existed even before the Varangians. Secondly, modern science cannot agree with such a primitive explanation complex process formation of any state. The state cannot be organized by one person or several even the most outstanding men. The state is a product of complex and long development social structure society. Nevertheless, the chronicle mention in a certain sense was adopted back in the 18th century. This is how the notorious Norman theory of the origin of the Old Russian state was born.

Already at that time, Normanism met with objections from advanced Russian scientists, among whom was M.V. Lomonosov. Since then, all historians studying Ancient Russia have been divided into two camps - Normanists and anti-Normanists.

Modern domestic scientists predominantly reject the Norman theory. They are joined by the largest foreign researchers of Slavic countries. However, a certain part of foreign authors still preach this theory, although not in such a primitive form as was done previously.

The main refutation of the Norman theory is the fairly high level of social and political development of the Eastern Slavs in the 9th century. The Old Russian state was prepared by the centuries-old development of the Eastern Slavs. In terms of their economic and political level, the Slavs were higher than the Varangians, so they could not borrow state experience from the newcomers.

The chronicle story contains, of course, elements of truth. It is possible that the Slavs invited several princes with their squads as military specialists, as was done in later times in Rus' and in Western Europe. It is reliably known that the Russian principalities invited squads not only of the Varangians, but also of their steppe neighbors - the Pechenegs, Karakalpaks, and Torks. However, it was not the Varangian princes who organized the Old Russian state, but the already existing state that gave them the corresponding government posts. However, some authors, starting with M.V. Lomonosov, doubt the Varangian origin of Rurik, Sineus and Truvor, believing that they could also be representatives of some Slavic tribes. In any case, there are practically no traces of Varangian culture in the history of our Motherland. Scientists, for example, have calculated that per 10 thousand square meters. km of Russian territory, only five Scandinavian geographical names can be found, while in England, which the Normans conquered, this number reaches 150.

We do not know exactly when and how exactly the first principalities of the Eastern Slavs arose, preceding the formation of the Old Russian state, but in any case they existed until 862, before the notorious “calling of the Varangians.” In German chronicles, already from 839, Russian princes were called Khakans - tsars.

But the moment of unification of the East Slavic lands into one state is known with certainty. In 882, the Novgorod prince Oleg captured Kyiv and united the two most important groups of Russian lands; then he managed to annex the rest of the Russian lands, creating a huge state for those times.

Russian Orthodox Church tries to link the emergence of statehood in Rus' with the introduction of Christianity.

Of course, the baptism of Rus' had great importance to strengthen the feudal state, fortunately the church sanctified the subordination of Christians to the exploitative state. However, the baptism occurred no less than a century after the formation of the Kievan state, not to mention the earlier East Slavic states.

In addition to the Slavs, the Old Russian state also included some neighboring Finnish and Baltic tribes. This state was thus ethnically heterogeneous from the very beginning. However, it was based on the Old Russian people, which was the cradle of three Slavic peoples - Russians (Great Russians), Ukrainians and Belarusians. It cannot be identified with any of these peoples separately. Even before the revolution, Ukrainian nationalists tried to portray the Old Russian state as Ukrainian.

This idea has been picked up in our time in nationalist circles, trying to quarrel the three fraternal Slavic peoples. Meanwhile, the Old Russian state did not coincide either in territory or in population with modern Ukraine; they only had a common capital - the city of Kyiv. In the 9th and even 12th centuries. It is still impossible to talk about specifically Ukrainian culture, language, etc. All this will appear later, when, due to objective historical processes, the Old Russian people split into three independent branches.

Also, the Old Russian state arises in a heterogeneous society and is a way of regulating relations between different social strata, classes, etc.

• Social division of labor . The sources from which people drew their livelihood became more diverse; Thus, military spoils began to play a major role in the life of the clan. Over time, professional artisans and warriors appeared. Frequent migrations of clans, the emergence and disintegration of inter-clan and inter-tribal unions, the separation from the clan of groups of war booty seekers (squads) - all these processes forced every now and then to deviate from tradition, based on custom; old solutions did not always work in previously unknown conflict situations.
• Economic development . Not only the changed individual and group identity and the established inter-tribal relations, but also economic activity encouraged people to search for more suitable forms of common existence. The importance of the economic factor in the emergence of the state is usually exaggerated in studies by supporters of Marxism and other teachings that consider production (or distribution of what is produced) to be the basis public life. The relationship between the economy and the ideas that guide people is between economic activity and the ways in which power is organized are much more complex than Marxists imagine. Without going into the details of the long-standing dispute between “materialists”, who highlight the economic needs of people, and “idealists”, who consider ideas to be the main factor social development, let us limit ourselves to recognizing the close relationship between the material world and human consciousness. Private property could not arise until a person realized his distance from the clan, but the further development of the self-awareness of the individual was undoubtedly influenced by the practical, material results of the fragmentation of common clan property. Economic factors influenced the formation of the state, but this influence was neither direct nor decisive. The state arose when property differences directly related to the economy were not too significant; The emerging state power initially made almost no claims to serious participation in economic life. The bearers of the new, pre-state and state power (princes, warriors) were distinguished from society not on property, but on professional grounds. At the same time, the often coinciding professions of a warrior and a ruler (standing above the traditional, patriarchal power of clan elders) were almost unanimously recognized as socially useful.
• Society's interest in the emergence of a state . The state arose because the overwhelming majority of members of society were interested in its emergence. It was convenient and beneficial for the community farmer to have the prince and warriors with weapons in their hands protect him and save him from burdensome and dangerous military affairs. From the very beginning, the state solved not only military, but also judicial problems, especially related to inter-tribal disputes. The princes and their warriors were relatively objective mediators in conflicts between representatives of various clans; the elders, who from time immemorial had to take care of the interests of their clan, their community, were not suitable for the role of impartial arbiters. Resolving communal disputes by force of arms was too burdensome for society; As the general utility of power was realized, above private and tribal interests, the conditions were created for the transfer of the most important judicial powers historically.

Hence it turns out that the created Kievan Rus was one of the largest states of the Middle Ages in the 9th-12th centuries. Unlike Eastern and Western countries, its process of statehood formation had its own specific features - spatial and geopolitical. The geopolitical space in which Kievan Rus was located was at the junction different worlds: nomadic and settled, Christian and Muslim, pagan and Jewish. During its formation, Rus' acquired the characteristics of both Eastern and Western state formations, since it occupied a middle position between Europe and Asia and did not have clearly defined natural geographical boundaries within the vast flat space. The need for constant protection from external enemies of a large territory forced peoples to unite with different types development, religion, culture, language, create strong state power.

Feedback

COGNITIVE

Willpower leads to action, and positive actions lead to positive attitudes.

How your target knows what you want before you act. How companies predict habits and manipulate them

Healing Habit

How to get rid of resentment yourself

Conflicting views on the qualities inherent in men

Self Confidence Training

Delicious "Beet Salad with Garlic"

Still life and its visual possibilities

Application, how to take mumiyo? Shilajit for hair, face, fractures, bleeding, etc.

How to learn to take responsibility

Why are boundaries needed in relationships with children?

Reflective elements on children's clothing

How to beat your age? Eight unique ways to help achieve longevity

Classification of obesity by BMI (WHO)

Chapter 3. Covenant of a man with a woman

Axes and planes of the human body - The human body consists of certain topographic parts and areas in which organs, muscles, vessels, nerves, etc. are located.

Chiselling of walls and cutting of jambs - When there are not enough windows and doors on the house, a beautiful high porch is only in the imagination, you have to climb from the street into the house along a ladder.

Second order differential equations (market model with predicted prices) - B simple models In the market, supply and demand are usually considered to depend only on the current price of the product.

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution

higher professional education

"Vladimir State University

Named after Alexander Grigorievich and Nikolai Grigorievich Stoletov"

College innovative technologies and entrepreneurship

Performed:

student gr. Tisp-315

Chvanova O.V.

Checked

assistant Sakharov A.M.:

Vladimir 2016

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3

1. Reasons for the emergence of the Old Russian state………………………3

2. Origin of the ancient Slavs……………………………………………………….6

3. Development of nationality and trade………………………………………………………8

4. The main stages of the formation of the Old Russian state……………….10

4.1. First stage

4.2. Second phase

4.3.Norman theory of the origin of the ancient Russian state

4.4. Third stage.

5.Features and historical meaning formation of the state………13

Conclusion

Bibliography

Application

Introduction

The history of state and law of Russia studies the emergence and development of historically established state entities that have existed on the territory of our country since ancient times. During the 6th-8th centuries. alliances of tribes were formed that were not yet a state; at that time the conditions were only being prepared for its emergence. The first state formations were the Principality of Kiev, as well as Novgorod, Smolensk, Polotsk, etc. Archpriest Lev Lebedev writes: “... in the 4th-7th centuries, the formation of the first Russian statehood, known to us, took place - the cultural and political unification of tribal unions of glades and northerners under the common leadership tribe "Rus" with the princely dynasty of the Krivichi" (from the chronicles). State formations were formed on the basis of a union of Slavic tribes in order to protect the property interests of the rich part of society, forcibly compel the population to obey this nobility, and also protect the territory of the tribes from outside attack.

At the end of the ninth century in the territory of Eastern Europe a powerful Old Russian state emerged (Annex 1). In terms of the level of economic development, culture and state organization, it occupied an outstanding place among other European states. The Old Russian state maintained lively trade and diplomatic relations with Byzantium and the countries of Western Europe. It existed until the middle of the twelfth century, after which the local feudal centers that grew up in its depths achieved independence, and a period of feudal fragmentation began.

At the current stage of research into state and legal history, the need has matured and the conditions have developed for a transition from the study of individual political and legal realities of Ancient Rus' to their comprehensive, systemic analysis. A limited number of studies have been formally devoted to such an analysis of the political and legal system of Ancient Rus' in the domestic historical and legal literature. But the actual scope of works, which in one way or another touch upon various aspects of Russian historical state studies and jurisprudence, is very wide.

Here we should mention the works of P.I. Belyaeva, M.F. Vladimirsky-Budanov, A.A. Gorsky, B.D. Grekova, I.N. Danilevsky, M.A. Dyakonova, A.A. Zimina, N.M. Karamzina, V.O. Klyuchevsky, N.F. Kotlyar, V.V. Mavrodina, E.A. Melnikova, A.V. Nazarenko, A.P. Novoseltseva, V.T. Pashuto, A.E. Presnyakova, O.M. Rapova, V.A. Rogova, B.A. Rybakova, A.N. Sakharova, M.B. Sverdlova, V.I. Sergeevich, S.M. Solovieva, M.N. Tikhomirova, P.P. Tolochko, A.P. Tolochko, A.N. Filippova, I.Ya. Froyanova, L.V. Cherepnina, Z.M. Chernilovsky, O.I. Chistyakova, B.N. Chicherina, Ya.N. Shchapova, S.V. Yushkova and others.

Many fundamental provisions of the problem under study continue to remain controversial to this day. In particular, there is no consensus regarding the time, nature and specific historical conditions of the transition of East Slavic society to the state.

The purpose of this work is consider the emergence of the ancient Russian state.

To achieve this goal, the work solves the following: tasks:

- consider the prerequisites and reasons for the emergence of the Old Russian state;

— consider the stages of formation of the ancient Russian state;

Expand the concepts of “polyudye”, “squad”, “prince”.

Reasons for the emergence of the Old Russian state

The Old Russian state emerged as a result of the complex interaction of a whole complex of both internal and external factors, socio-economic, political and spiritual.

Here the question arises about the real relationship of the Slavs with their neighbors. These relations were very tense. The Slavs were under pressure from two sides: from the north they were under pressure from the Scandinavian tribes, and from the south they had to resist the attacks of the steppe nomads.

The economic development of the Slavs was seriously affected by the invasion of the Huns. As a result, their own development was delayed. As M.N. Tikhomirov believed, the reasons for the emergence of the state were “the development of agriculture and crafts in the field of economics, the development of feudalism in the field of social relations.” The development of agriculture, especially arable farming in the steppe and forest-steppe region of the Middle Dnieper, led to the emergence 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). In the North of Eastern Europe, where due to harsh climatic conditions agriculture could not become widespread, crafts continued to play a large role, and the emergence of excess product was the result of the development of exchange and foreign trade. So in the 7th-8th centuries. In connection with the growth of labor productivity, individualization of production became quite possible. The conditions were being prepared for the transition from early class relations to feudalism. Economic progress among the Eastern Slavs was the driving force of their social development. Given the existence of individual farms, the additional product obtained in them and reaching significant sizes became the property of the producer and could be a source of enrichment. 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. There was unevenness in the development of individual tribal unions, first property and then social inequality arose. At this time, private property among wealthy members of the community took shape and grew. The social elite of society was formed.

Tribal unions were of great importance for the formation of the state. At the beginning of the existence of such tribal unions, the form of organization of government was military democracy. For a long time, people's assemblies and the council of elders were preserved. But the national assembly turned into an assembly of warriors, to which the military leader, surrounded and supported by a squad, imposed his will, gaining more and more influence and power at the expense of other elders. The process of transforming public self-government bodies into state bodies began. Military democracy gradually ceased to be a military-hierarchical reign-rule. Bodies of public self-government turned into bodies of domination and oppression directed against the people. Registration was completed political system, the most important feature of which was the emergence of control extending to a certain territory. The military leader of a large alliance of tribes turned into a ruler - a prince. The supremacy of princes acquired the character of exercising powerful class functions ( appendix2). Those close to the prince became his advisers and governors. legends tell about the princes of Kyiv in the 9th and 10th centuries. - Oleg, Igor, Svyatoslav, Yaropolk, Vladimir. The squad turned into a union of several alliances of tribes or principalities, into a “union of alliances,” into a military force that suppressed the resistance of the exploited masses and waged wars of aggression and defensiveness. “Unions of unions,” which united several unions of tribal princedoms, became new entities and reflected a higher stage in the process of East Slavic consolidation. Around the turn of the VIII-IX centuries. The Dnieper union of tribal unions "Rus" grew into an even more powerful association with the name "Russian Land", which included a significant number of unions of Slavic tribes. The chronicle lists them: Rus', Polyane, Drevlyane, Polchane, Dregovichi, North. This is already almost half of the Eastern Slavs.

This process of transforming public self-government bodies into state bodies was not a one-time act for all unions of East Slavic tribes. In the 8th century. In the conditions of the fight against nomads in the Middle Dnieper region, the name “Rus” arose, the capital of which was Kyiv. Kyiv could not remain the capital city of one of the local Varangian principalities: it had all-Russian significance as a key point of the commercial and industrial movement. It became the center of political unification of the entire earth.

The reason for the unification of the masses was also protection from the advancing nomads and getting rid of wars between local princes. This explains the comparative ease and speed of unification. It occurred as a result of the campaign of the Novgorod prince Oleg against Kyiv, which he captured in 882, and his subjugation of a number of other eastern principalities; in 883 the Drevlyans were conquered, in 884 - the northerners, in 885 - the Radimichi. By the beginning of the 11th century. all tribes Eastern Slavs were brought under the arm of the Kyiv prince. The Old Russian state was one of the most powerful in Europe at that time. Already in 907, Oleg undertook a successful campaign against Byzantium, according to legend, erecting his shield on the gates of Constantinople (Appendix 3). Rus' maintained lively diplomatic and trade relations with many Western European states and Eastern countries.

The struggle to expand the territory of the Old Russian state and campaigns against Byzantium continued with Oleg’s successors - Igor, Olga and Svyatoslav ( appendix4). As a result of the campaigns, Russian-Byzantine treaties were concluded that regulated trade and political relations between states.
Expanding their possessions, the princes of Kyiv established state order in the subject countries, first of all, of course, tax administration. The old urban areas served as a ready-made basis for the administrative division of the land. In the subordinate city regions of the cities of Chernigov, Smolensk and others, the princes installed their governors, whose mayors were either their hired warriors or their own sons and relatives. These governors had their own squads, special armed detachments, acted quite independently, stood only in a weak connection with the state center, with Kiev, they were, like the Prince of Kiev, who was considered only the eldest among them and was called the “Grand Duke of Russia” in contrast to local princes, governors. To increase the importance of the Kyiv prince, these governors were called “grand princes” in diplomatic documents. Thus, according to a preliminary agreement with the Greeks in 907, Oleg demanded “structures” for the Russian cities of Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereslavl, Polotsk, Rostov, Lyubech and other cities. These were still Varangian principalities, only allied with the Kyiv principality: the prince then retained its former, military-squad significance, without having yet acquired dynastic significance.

TO political factors The formation of the state among the Eastern Slavs should include the complication of intra-tribal relations and inter-tribal clashes, which accelerated the formation of princely power, increased the role of princes and squads both defending the tribe from external enemies and acting as an arbiter in various kinds of disputes. The power of the prince, which he sought to turn into hereditary, depended less and less on the will of the veche meetings, became stronger, and his interests became increasingly alienated from the interests of his fellow tribesmen.

The establishment of the prince's power was also facilitated by the evolution of the pagan ideas of the Slavs of that era. As the military power of the prince grew, who brought booty to the tribe and defended it from external enemies, who took upon his shoulders the problem of resolving internal disputes, his prestige grew and, at the same time, alienation from free community members occurred.

As a result of military successes, his performance of complex managerial functions, the prince’s distance from the usual circle of affairs and concerns for the community members, which often resulted in the creation of a fortified inter-tribal center of the residence of the prince and the squad, he began to be endowed with supernatural powers and abilities by his fellow tribesmen, and they increasingly saw him as a guarantee well-being of the entire tribe, and his personality was identified with the tribal totem. All this led to the sacralization of princely power and created the spiritual prerequisites for the transition from communal to state relations. External prerequisites include the “pressure” that its neighbors, the Khazars and Normans, exerted on the Slavic world.

On the one hand, their desire to take control of the trade routes connecting the West with the East and South accelerated the formation of princely squad groups drawn into foreign trade. By collecting, for example, trade products, primarily furs, from their fellow tribesmen and exchanging them for products of prestigious consumption and silver from foreign merchants, selling them captives

foreigners, the local nobility increasingly subjugated tribal structures, became enriched and isolated from ordinary community members. Over time, she, having united with the Varangian warrior-traders, will begin to exercise control over trade routes and trade itself, which will lead to the consolidation of previously disparate tribal principalities located along these routes.

On the other hand, interaction with more developed civilizations led to the borrowing of some socio-political forms of their life. It is no coincidence that for a long time the great princes in Rus' were named after the example

Khazar Khaganate. The Byzantine Empire has long been considered the true standard of state and political structure.

The existence of a powerful public education- Khazar Kaganate, protected the Eastern Slavs from the raids of nomads, who in previous eras (the Huns in the 4th-5th centuries. 7th century) slowed down their development, interfered with peaceful labor and, ultimately, the emergence of the “embryo” of statehood.

In Soviet historical science, for a long time, priority in the formation of the state was given to internal socio-economic processes; some modern historians believe that external factors played a decisive role; however, it seems that only the interaction of both internal and external with insufficient socio-economic maturity of the East Slavic society could lead to the historical breakthrough that occurred in the Slavic world in the 9th-10th centuries. Thus, we can say that the prerequisites for the formation of the ancient Russian state were:

- an ethnic community of ancient Russian people who spoke the same language;

The desire to join forces in the fight against nomads and Byzantium;

The economic interests of the ancient Russian principalities along the route “from the Varangians to the Greeks”, the desire of the Russian princes to establish their control along the entire length of this trade route;

The attraction of a number of northern and Baltic peoples to Rus', who sought its help in the fight against external enemies;

- adoption of a single Christian religion.

The reasons for the emergence and features of the formation of the Old Russian state. "Norman theory".

Formation of the Old Russian State

The study of the problem of state formation among the Eastern Slavs for a long time was inseparable from the story "The Tale of Bygone Years", usually called the "legend of the calling of the Varangian princes" (or the "Norman" legend). It talks about the events of the early 60s. 9th century, when sharp disagreements arose among a number of northern Slavic tribes (“generation after generation rose”). It turned out that it was possible to resolve this conflict only by appealing to one of the Varangian princes (kings) Rurik, a representative of the tribe known to the chronicler as “Rus,” who agreed to “reign and rule” in Novgorod. Following this, his two boyars Askold and Dir settled in Kyiv, which meant the Varangians took possession of the main East Slavic centers. According to the chronicle, this happened in 862. Twenty years later, the Novgorod and Kyiv lands were united by Prince Oleg.
It is this story, discovered by German scientists working in Russia in the first half of the 18th century. (G.-F. Miller, G.-Z. Bayer, A.-L. Schletser) formed the basis of the theory called Normanism, and became the starting point of a long and fierce dispute, the echoes of which are heard to this day. Scientists (and not only) were divided into two camps - Normanists and anti-Normanists on the issue of the formation of the Old Russian state. Some of them treated the chronicler’s report with a great degree of confidence (N.M. Karamzin, S.M. Solovyov, etc.), while others sharply refuted a number of facts cited by the Tale of Bygone Years, such as, for example, ethnicity Rurik (he was called a Slav, a Finn, a Goth, etc.) or the origin of the name “Rus” from the name of the Scandinavian tribe “Rus” (among the most famous anti-Normanists is M.V. Lomonosov). However, today these debates have noticeably lost their relevance (although traces of them are still found from time to time, as a rule, in pseudo-scientific literature). Today, the center of discussion is increasingly shifting from secondary problems, which undoubtedly are the issues of Rurik’s pedigree or tribal name, to more significant issues - to the actual reasons for the emergence of early state formations.
And here, first of all, the question arises about the real relationship of the Slavs with their neighbors.
These relations were very tense. The Slavs were under pressure from two sides: from the north they were under pressure from the Scandinavian tribes, and from the south they had to resist the attacks of the steppe nomads. But if the latter were not only hostile to the Slavs, but also alien in their way of life, then they also had common interests with the Varangians: they were united by a common desire to carry out predatory campaigns against the rich possessions of Byzantium. Thus, conditions were created for concluding a kind of agreement between them that would establish a certain balance of power in this part of Europe: a Slavic-Varangian unification with the goal of a joint attack on Byzantium and confronting the nomads. Of course, this “agreement” was very conditional, it was largely “concluded” under pressure, but still the mutual interest of the Slavs and Varangians in each other was undoubted. In addition, as can be seen even from the chronicle story, Slavic society was increasingly immersed in the abyss of conflicts, which were becoming increasingly difficult to resolve on their own. A need arose for an external arbiter who could not be suspected of sympathizing with one or another conflicting party.
Thus, the Old Russian state arose as a result of the growth of contradictions within Slavic society, which could not be resolved from within this society itself and was therefore forced, for the purpose of self-preservation, to resort to help external force, with which it, moreover, had common interests.
Norman Theory.Norman Theory
- a direction in historiography, whose supporters consider the Normans (Varangians) to be the founders of the Slavic state. The concept of the Scandinavian origin of the state among the Slavs is associated with a fragment from the “Tale of Bygone Years”, which reported that in 862, to stop civil strife, the Slavs turned to the Varangians ("Rus" ) with a proposal to take the princely throne. As a result, Rurik sat down to reign in Novgorod, Sineus - in Beloozero and Truvor in Izborsk. The “Norman theory” was put forward in the 18th century by German historians G. Bayer and G. Miller, invited by Peter I to work at the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. They tried scientifically prove that the Old Russian state was created by the Varangians. An extreme manifestation of this concept is the assertion that the Slavs, due to their unpreparedness, could not create a state, and then, without foreign leadership, were unable to manage it. In their opinion, statehood was introduced to the Slavs from the outside (Bayer Gottlieb Siegfried (1694 - 1738) - German historian and philologist Graduated from the University of Königsberg From 1725 he occupied the department of antiquities and oriental languages ​​at the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. Bayer's works on Orientalism, philology, and historical geography were of great scientific importance; in particular, a dictionary of the Chinese language Miller Gerard Friedrich (1705-1783) was born in Westphalia From 1730, professor and member of the Academy of Sciences From 1732, editor of the first Russian historical magazine "Collection" published at his suggestion Russian stories"In 1733, he joined the Kamchatka expedition of Bering and spent almost ten years in Siberia, studying its geography, ethnic composition of the population, and archival materials. In 1747, Miller became a Russian citizen and was appointed Russian historiographer and rector of the university. In 1749, he gave a speech at ceremonial meeting of the Academy of Sciences in connection with the anniversary of Elizabeth Petrovna’s accession to the throne, in which he formulated the main provisions of the “Norman theory” of the emergence of the Russian state. The main theses of his report boiled down to the fact that: 1) the arrival of the Slavs from the Danube to the Dnieper can be dated no earlier than the reign of Justinian ; 2) the Varangians are none other than the Scandinavians; 3) the concepts of “Varangians” and “Rus” are identical. Among historical works, it is generally accepted that his largest work is “History of Siberia.” However, in addition to this book, he is also the author of another publication - “ Experience modern history about Russia", which he considered as a continuation of VN Tatishchev's "Russian History" Miller's great merit lies in the publication of many of the most important sources on Russian history) MV Lomonosov was the first to speak out against this theory. He and his supporters began to be called anti-Normanists. The dispute between Normanists and anti-Normanists became particularly acute in the 30s 1990s, against the backdrop of an aggravated political situation in Europe, the fascists who came to power in Germany used existing theoretical concepts to justify their aggressive plans. Trying to prove the inferiority of the Slavs, their inability to develop independently, German historians put forward the thesis about the organizing role of the German principle in Poland, Czech Republic, in Russia Today, a significant part of researchers are inclined to combine the arguments of “Normanists” and “anti-Normanists”, noting that the prerequisites for the formation of a state among the Slavs were realized with the participation of the Norman prince Rurik and his squad (For more details, see the reader, section “Problems of the origin of statehood among the Eastern Slavs")
In the 30-40s of the 18th century, German scientists Johann Gottfried Bayer and Gerard Friedrich Miller, who worked at the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, in their scientific works for the first time they tried to prove that the ancient Russian state was created by the Varangians. They laid the foundation for the Norman theory of the origin of the Russian state. The extreme manifestation of the concept was the assertion that the Slavs, due to their inferiority, could not create a state, and then, without foreign leadership, were unable to govern it. The Normanists are unanimous on two fundamental issues. 1-they believe that the Normans achieved dominance over the Eastern Slavs through external military conquest or through peaceful conquest. 2-they believe that the word “Rus” is of Norman origin.

Reasons and prerequisites: the decomposition of the tribal system among the Eastern Slavs, property inequality, the emergence of classes and private property.

The formation of a state among the Eastern Slavs was a natural result of a long process of decomposition of the tribal system and the transition to a class society.

The process of property and social stratification among the community members led to the separation of the most prosperous part from among them. The tribal nobility and the wealthy part of the community, subjugating the mass of ordinary community members, need to maintain their dominance in state structures.

The embryonic form of statehood was represented by East Slavic tribal unions, which united into super-unions, albeit fragile ones. One of these associations was, apparently, a union of tribes led by Prince Kiy (VI century). There is information about a certain Russian prince Bravlin, who fought in the Khazar-Byzantine Crimea in the 8th-9th centuries, passing from Surozh to Korchev ( from Sudak to Kerch). Eastern historians talk about the existence, on the eve of the formation of the Old Russian state, of three large associations of Slavic tribes: Cuiaba, Slavia and Artania. Kuyaba, or Kuyava, was then the name of the region around Kyiv. Slavia occupied territory in the area of ​​Lake Ilmen. Its center was Novgorod. The location of Artania - the third major association of the Slavs - has not been precisely established.

According to the Tale of Bygone Years, the Russian princely dynasty originates in Novgorod. In 859, the northern Slavic tribes, who were then paying tribute to the Varangians, or Normans (according to most historians, immigrants from Scandinavia), drove them overseas. However, soon after these events, internecine struggle began in Novgorod. To

To stop the clashes, the Novgorodians decided to invite the Varangian princes as a force standing above the warring factions. In 862, Prince Rurik and his two brothers were called to Rus' by the Novgorodians, marking the beginning of the Russian princely dynasty.

Norman theory

The legend about the calling of the Varangian princes served as the basis for the creation of the so-called Norman theory of the emergence of the Old Russian state. Its authors were invited in the 18th century. German scientists G. Bayer, G. Miller and A. Schlozer came to Russia. The authors of this theory emphasized the complete absence of prerequisites for the formation of a state among the Eastern Slavs. The scientific inconsistency of the Norman theory is obvious, since the determining factor in the process of state formation is the presence of internal prerequisites, and not the actions of individual, even outstanding, individuals.

If the Varangian legend is not fiction (most historians believe so), the story about the calling of the Varangians testifies only to the Norman origin of the princely dynasty. The version about the foreign origin of power was quite typical for the Middle Ages.

The date of formation of the Old Russian state is conventionally considered to be 882, when Prince Oleg, who seized power in Novgorod after the death of Rurik (some chroniclers call him Rurik’s governor), undertook a campaign against Kiev. Having killed Askold and Dir, who reigned there, he for the first time united the northern and southern lands as part of single state. Since the capital was moved from Novgorod to Kyiv, this state is often called Kievan Rus.

12. Mongol invasion. Golden Horde and Rus': problems of mutual influence.

The period of Mongol-Tatar rule in Rus' lasted about two and a half centuries.
The first clash with the Mongol-Tatars on the river. Kalka on May 31, 1223 showed: the futility of attempts by Russian troops to help the allies, the lack of a unified organization, the weakness of command.
All together made further battle with the invaders pointless for the Russians. IN December 1237 The Mongols, led by Batu, began an attack on the Russian principalities.
“Batu’s ruin” of Rus' took place in two stages: in 1237 - 1238- through the Ryazan principality to the Vladimir-Suzdal land (northeast) and to 1239 - 1240- to Southern Rus'. IN 1237 After the defeat of the Volga Bulgaria, Batu's troops headed to the Ryazan principality. After the pogrom of Ryazan, the Mongols moved to the northeast, where in February 1238 Kolomna, Moscow, Suzdal, Rostov and Vladimir fell under their onslaught. The decisive battle took place on the City River, March 4, 1238, which ended in disaster for the Russian army. After this, the troops of Khan Batu freely began to occupy individual principalities, moving north. However, the advance towards Novgorod was stopped for almost two months by fierce resistance from the inhabitants of the small town of Kozelsk. From Kozelsk the Mongols moved south, where Batu’s main nomadic camps were located between the Volga and Don.
In the spring of 1239 The second stage of the invasion began - this time on the southern Russian principalities. Pereslavl, Glukhov, and Chernigov were captured. IN 1240 g. The Mongols besieged Kyiv and took the city after a long siege, subjecting it to complete destruction. After the capture of Kyiv, Batu's hordes continued to move west and captured the Principality of Galicia-Volyn, which occupied a prominent place among the leading states of Europe.
The war did not affect the Orthodox Church.
The Mongols, being pagans, were distinguished by religious tolerance and understood the great ideological role of the clergy, trying to attract them to their side. Therefore, during the conquest, the Mongols did not touch the church, which was the main spiritual organization of the Russians.
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. 2) 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 the descendants of Rurik 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 the 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 change and significance of the prince in the state is the establishment of the despotic power of the prince, the continuation of the process of forming a dependent population.
Rus' and the Horde: problems of mutual influence.
In historical science, the problem of the influence of the Golden Horde on the development of medieval Rus' was considered from different positions.
First point of view: CM. Soloviev, V.O. Klyuchevsky, S.F. Platonov, M.N. Pokrovsky and other historians believed that the Mongol yoke brought ruin, loss of life, delayed development, but did not significantly affect the life and way of life of the Russians, their statehood. During the period of Mongol rule, Rus' continued to develop along the European path, but lagged behind significantly due to large-scale destruction, human losses, the need to pay tribute, etc.
Second point of view: N.M. Karamzin, N.I. Kostomarov, V.V. Leontovich, N.P. Zagoskin, V.I. Sergievich and the Eurasianists insisted on the thesis that the Mongols had a significant influence on the social and social organization of the Russians, on the formation and development of the Moscow state. Eurasians believed that Muscovy was part of the Great Mongol State. The main borrowings of Rus' from the Mongols were despotism in political sphere and serfdom - in the socio-economic sphere.

Third point of view: V.A. Kuchkin, B.V. Kobrin, L.I. Semennikova and other modern historians note that during the Mongol invasion North-Eastern Rus' depended on the Golden Horde, which entailed indirect Mongol influence on the process of formation of the Russian people and the Moscow state. The legal code of the Mongols - Genghis Khan's Yasa - was not in force on the territory of the Russian principalities. Special laws were not created for Rus', which lived on the basis of its own legal norms, which were later reflected in the Code of Laws. In addition, the Mongols did not remove the Russian princes from power and did not create their own dynasty in Rus', as was the case in Iran they conquered. They also did not have a permanent governor or governors with specific functions. Baskaks were appointed sporadically to individual places; they did not perform managerial functions, but only observed the collection of tribute. And finally, Rus' retained its spiritual basis - Orthodoxy, since the Mongols did not insist on a change of faith.

Read in the same book: History as a science. Subject and sources of studying history.

Branches of historical science. | Civilizational approach to the study of history: Western, Eastern, natural communities. | State foundations of Great Russia. Ivan Sh - “Sovereign of All Rus'”. | Tsar Ivan IV (the Terrible): main directions of domestic and foreign policy. | Grounds for the legitimacy of power and political ideas | The role of the Boyar Duma, Zemsky Sobor and the Consecrated Cathedral | The importance of custom, tradition and law in public administration| The crisis of the Moscow state at the turn of the 16th–17th centuries. "Troubles." | Stages of enslavement of the Russian peasantry. Cathedral Code of 1649 | Prerequisites for Peter's reforms. |mybiblioteka.su - 2015-2018. (0.183 sec.)

4. Old Russian state (Kievan Rus): prerequisites for formation, flourishing, reasons for collapse.

The question of the origin of the Old Russian state comes from two main theories: Norman and anti-Norman (Slavic).

The Norman theory was substantiated by Miller and Bayer in the 18th century, supported by Klyuchevsky and Solovyov. The basis for this theory was the message in The Tale of Bygone Years about the Slavs calling the Varangians with their squads to reign in Rus'.

The anti-Norman (Slavic) theory was put forward by Lomonosov in the 18th century and was most fully developed by Academician Rybakov. According to this theory, the origin of Kievan Rus has a southern origin.

Evidence: in the region of Kievan Rus the Ros River flows, where the Rossolani tribes lived.

Prerequisites for the formation of the Old Russian state:

An ethnic community of ancient Russian people speaking the same language.

The desire to join forces in the fight against nomads.

Economic interests of ancient Russian princes along the river route from the Varangians to the Greeks.

The unification of the ancient Russian state occurred during the campaign of the Novgorod prince Oleg to Kyiv at the end of the 9th century.

The territorial growth of Kievan Rus' mostly ended by the beginning of the 11th century under Vladimir I.

In the history of the Old Russian state, three stages can be distinguished:

second half of the 9th - 10th centuries. The main content is the unification of the entire ancient Russian nation in a single state, the creation of an apparatus of power and a military organization;

end of the 10th - first half of the 11th century. It was based on a new significant growth in large feudal land ownership, an increase in urban centers, and an increase in the size of the trade and craft population;

second half of the 11th - beginning of the 12th century. It is characterized by the onset of feudal fragmentation and the collapse of Kievan Rus.

In Kievan Rus, the supreme owner of the land was the state. Since the middle of the 12th century, princely, boyar and monastic land ownership has been successfully developing. In parallel to this, there was an increase in the feudal dependence of numerous categories of direct producers: smerds, purchases, rank and file, outcasts. In the X-XI centuries. There was an intensive growth of cities, which became the most important centers of crafts and trade, political and cultural life.

The feudal system existed along with slavery and primitive patriarchal relations. Under Yaroslav the Wise (1019-1054), Kievan Rus reached its greatest power. He managed to secure Rus' from Pecheneg raids, strengthen Russian positions in the Baltic states and take possession of the lands east of the Dnieper. Yaroslav became the sovereign prince of Kievan Rus. Under Yaroslav the Wise, Rus' achieved international recognition.

With the development of feudal relations and the strengthening of local political centers, the importance of the Kyiv national political center decreased, and tendencies towards the isolation of principalities intensified. On the initiative of Vladimir Monomakh, the Lyubech Congress of Princes was convened in 1097, at which it was decided to stop strife and the principle “Let everyone keep his fatherland” was proclaimed. Vladimir Monomakh and his eldest son Mstislav still held power over all ancient Russian lands. However, after the death of Mstislav, feudal strife intensified. As a result, the united Old Russian state fell apart into a number of sovereign principalities, and a period of fragmentation, or the appanage period, began.

Causes and stages of the emergence of the Old Russian state

Kievan Rus is one of the largest states of the Middle Ages in the 9th-12th centuries. Unlike Eastern and Western countries, the process of statehood formation had its own specific features - spatial and geopolitical. The geopolitical space in which Kievan Rus was located was at the junction of different worlds: nomadic and sedentary, Christian and Muslim, pagan and Jewish. During its formation, Rus' acquired the characteristics of both Eastern and Western state formations, since it occupied a middle position between Europe and Asia and did not have clearly defined natural geographical boundaries within the vast flat space. The need for constant protection of a large territory from external enemies forced peoples with different types of development, religion, culture, language to unite and create strong state power.

The Old Russian state arises in a heterogeneous society and is a way of regulating relations between various social strata, classes, etc.

Statehood among the Slavs began to take shape in the 6th century, when there was a transition from the clan and tribal community to the neighboring community, and property inequality was formed. There are many reasons for the formation of the Old Russian state, here are the main ones:

1. Social division of labor.

The sources from which people drew their livelihood became more diverse; Thus, military spoils began to play a major role in the life of the clan. Over time, professional artisans and warriors appeared. Frequent migrations of clans, the emergence and disintegration of inter-clan and inter-tribal unions, the separation from the clan of groups of war booty seekers (squads) - all these processes forced every now and then to deviate from tradition, based on custom; old solutions did not always work in previously unknown conflict situations.

2. Economic development.

Not only the changed individual and group identity and the established inter-tribal relations, but also economic activity encouraged people to search for more suitable forms of common existence. The importance of the economic factor in the emergence of the state is usually exaggerated in studies by supporters of Marxism and other teachings that consider production (or distribution of what is produced) the basis of social life. The relationship between the economy and the ideas that guide people, between economic activity and the ways of organizing power is much more complex than it seems to Marxists.

Without going into the details of the long-standing dispute between “materialists”, who highlight the economic needs of people, and “idealists”, who consider ideas to be the main factor in social development, we will limit ourselves to recognizing the close relationship between the material world and human consciousness. Private property could not arise until man realized his separation from the race; but the further development of the individual’s self-awareness was undoubtedly influenced by the practical, material results of the fragmentation of common tribal property. Economic factors influenced the formation of the state, but this influence was neither direct nor decisive. The state arose when property differences directly related to the economy were not too significant; The emerging state power initially made almost no claims to serious participation in economic life. The bearers of the new, pre-state and state power (princes, warriors) were distinguished from society not on property, but on professional grounds. At the same time, the often coinciding professions of a warrior and a ruler (standing above the traditional, patriarchal power of clan elders) were almost unanimously recognized as socially useful.

3. Society's interest in the emergence of a state.

The state arose because the overwhelming majority of members of society were interested in its emergence. It was convenient and beneficial for the community farmer to have the prince and warriors with weapons in their hands protect him and save him from burdensome and dangerous military affairs. From the very beginning, the state solved not only military, but also judicial problems, especially related to inter-tribal disputes. The princes and their warriors were relatively objective mediators in conflicts between representatives of various clans; the elders, who from time immemorial had to take care of the interests of their clan, their community, were not suitable for the role of impartial arbiters. Resolving communal disputes by force of arms was too burdensome for society; As the general utility of power was realized, above private and tribal interests, the conditions were created for the transfer of the most important judicial powers historically.

Stages of formation of the Old Russian state

The process of the collapse of primitive communalism and the emergence of feudal relations among the Eastern Slavs had gone so far by the 9th century that a state inevitably had to arise, since the state arises where conditions are created for its emergence in the form of dividing society into classes. Property and social stratification among the community members led to the separation of the most prosperous part from their midst. The tribal nobility and the wealthy part of the community, subjugating the mass of ordinary community members, need to maintain their dominance in state structures. The processes of decomposition of the primitive communal system and the split of society into classes precede the formation of the ancient Russian state and proceed immanently, of course in connection with the outside world, as evidenced by foreign trade, but without its decisive participation in the internal life of the Slavic population of Eastern Europe.

The beginning of the formation of the Old Russian people should be considered the 9th – 10th centuries. - the time of the emergence of feudal relations in Rus' and the formation of the Old Russian state.

VIII – IX centuries in the history of the Slavs were a time of decomposition of primitive communal relations. Moreover, the transition from one social system (primitive communal) to another, more progressive, namely feudal society, was ultimately the result of the development of productive forces, the evolution of production, which in turn was mainly a consequence of the change and development of tools, tools production.

Along with the development of productive forces in the field of agricultural production and the improvement of agricultural technology, a huge role in the disintegration of primitive communal relations was played by the social division of labor, the separation of handicraft activities from Agriculture.

When the division of labor penetrated into the community and its members each began to produce one product alone and sell it on the market, then the institution of private property became an expression of this material isolation of commodity producers.

Settlements become centers of craft production and exchange, turning into cities. Cities grow on the basis of old settlements from the times of the primitive system, and arise as craft and trading settlements. Finally, the princely fort often becomes overgrown with an urban-type settlement. This is how cities in Rus' arose: Kyiv, Peryaslavl, Ladoga, Pskov, Novgorod, Polotsk, Chernigov, Lyubech, Smolensk, Gurov, Cherven, etc.

The city is a phenomenon characteristic not of the primitive communal system, but of the feudal system. Merchant caravans stretched along rivers and land roads. The waterway “from the Varangians to the Greeks” passed along the Neva, Lake Ladzh, Lake Volokhov, Lovat and the Dnieper. Trade routes led through the Carpathians to Riza and German cities.

The growth of trade caused the development of money circulation. In Rus', mainly eastern silver coins were used, but Byzantine and Western European coins were also found. Once upon a time in Rus', fur money was used as money, which was pieces of fur (kun, cut, pogat, etc.). Over time, they were replaced by iron money, which retained the old names (muzzles, vekshi, etc.). Since the end of the 10th century, Rus' began to mint its own gold and silver coins. Then the minted coin gives way to silver bars - hryvnia.

Trade corrupted the community, further strengthening economically powerful families. The ruling elite in ancient Russian sources is called princes, warriors, boyars, old children, etc. She grows up from the old tribal nobility and from the local rich elite.

Accumulating valuables and land, creating a powerful druzhina organization, making campaigns ending with the capture of military booty and captives turned into slaves, accumulating tribute, collecting extortions, trading and engaging in usury, the ancient Russian nobility breaks away from tribal and communal associations and turns into a force standing above society and subjugating it to itself. previously free community members.

The basis of feudal society—feudal ownership of land—emerges and develops. We know the cities belonging to the princes: Izyaslavl, Vyshgorod, Belgorod; princely villages: Olzhichi, Berestovo, Rakoma. Around the villages there were fields (arable land), meadows, hunting and fishing grounds, and sidewalks. Princely tomgas, signs of ownership, were applied to stones, trees, and pillars marking princely lands. The princes either developed free lands or seized them from previously free community members, turning the latter, on a basis outside of economic coercion, into their own labor force and patrimony.

Various groups of dependent people are being formed. Some of them, slaves, lost their freedom as a result of the sale of debt obligations, family or official status, while other servants became slaves as a result of captivity. Over time, the term servant begins to mean the entire set of people dependent on the master. At the initial stage of the history of Kievan Rus, slavery played a very significant role.

A huge mass of the rural population was made up of free community members, subject only to tribute. In sources they are called people, but most often they are called smerds. Smerds were considered princely people, but as their lands were seized by princes and boyars, they, while retaining their old name - smerds, turned into feudal dependents and their duties in favor of the master began to have a feudal character. The tribute grew into quitrent. Among the dependent population there were many seasoned people who had lost their independence as a result of debt obligations. These enslaved people appear in sources under the name of ryadovichi and zakup. There were numerous outcasts, outdated people (goit - to live), that is, people knocked out of the usual rut of life and breaking with their social environment. This is how dependent groups of direct producers took shape in Kievan Rus. An early feudal class society began to form in Rus'.

The formation of feudal relations among the Eastern Slavs could not but determine the formation of an early feudal state. Such in Eastern Europe was the Old Russian state with the capital city of Kiev.

The struggle with the Scandinavian Vikings and Varangians in the northwest, with the Khazars, and later with the Pechenegs, Turks and other nomadic tribes in the southeast and south accelerated the process of the formation of powerful territorial associations that replaced tribal unions.

The formation of the Old Russian state is completed with the merger of Kyiv and Novgorod. The chronicle connected this event with the name of Oleg. In 882 As a result of the campaign of squads led by Oleg from Novgorod to Kyiv along the path “from the Varangians to the Greeks,” both of the most important centers of Rus' were united. The Kiev prince began to create strongholds in the lands of the Eastern Slavs, collect tribute from them and demand their participation in campaigns. But many lands of the Eastern Slavs were not yet connected with Kiev, and the Old Russian state itself stretched in a relatively narrow strip from north to south along the Great Waterway along the Dnieper, Lovat, and Volkhov.

Kyiv became the capital of the Old Russian state. This happened because it was the oldest center of East Slavic culture, with deep historical traditions and connections. Situated on the border between forest and steppe with a mild, even climate, black soil, dense forests, beautiful pastures and fallow lands iron ore, high-water rivers were the main means of transportation of those times, Kyiv was the core of the East Slavic world. In addition, Kyiv was equally close to Byzantium, to the east and to the west, which contributed to the development of trade, political and cultural ties of Rus'.

The end of the 10th century was marked by the completion of the unification of all Eastern Slavs within the state borders of Kievan Rus. This unification occurs during the reign of Vladimir Svyatoslavovich. In 981, the region of the Cherven cities of Przemysl was annexed, that is, the East Slavic lands to San. In 992, the lands of the Croats, lying on both slopes of the Carpathian Mountains, became part of the Old Russian state. In 989, Russian warriors marched against the Yatvingians and the Russian population inhabiting the region right up to the borders of the Prussian possessions marked the beginning of Black Rus'. In 981, the land of Vyatichi joined the Old Russian state, although traces of its former independence remained for a long time. 3 years later in 984 after the battle on the Pishchan River, the power of Kyiv extended to Radimichi. Thus the unification of all the Eastern Slavs in a single state was completed.

History of the Ukrainian SSR in ten volumes. Volume one Team of authors

1. FORMATION OF THE ANCIENT RUSSIAN STATE

1. FORMATION OF THE ANCIENT RUSSIAN STATE

Chronicle information about the beginning of the Old Russian state. The problem of the emergence of Kievan Rus is one of the most important and relevant in Russian historiography. Already the chronicler Nestor in The Tale of Bygone Years, answering the question “Where did the Russian land come from?”, paints a picture of the settlement of the East Slavic tribes at the stage of the emergence of their statehood. Listing individual groups of Slavs, he calls them by name - Polyans, Drevlyans, Northerners, Vyatichi, Slovenes, etc., and where he tries to give them social characteristics, - principalities. After the death of the Polyansky prince Kiya, the chronicler notes, “their family reigned in the fields, and the trees were theirs, and the Dregovichi were theirs, and their words were in Novgorod?, and the other in Polot?, like Polotsk?” “Kin” here appears in the understanding of dynasty. The principalities or unions of East Slavic tribes named in the chronicle date back to the 6th–8th centuries.

The leading role in the formation of the Old Russian state was played by the Polyansk principality with its center in Kyiv. The chronicle names Kiya as the first Polyan prince, who, together with his brothers Shchek and Khoriv and his sister Lybid, founded Kyiv. Chroniclers give two versions regarding the personality of Kiya, which existed at that time in the oral tradition. According to the first, Kiy was a carrier on the Dnieper, according to the second, he was a prince. Nestor wrote that Kiy went to Tsar Grad and was received with honors by the Byzantine emperor, whose name was unknown to the chronicler. Returning from Byzantium, Kiy had the intention of settling on the Danube, where he built a town, but under the pressure of local tribes he was forced to abandon his plans and return to Kyiv. After the death of Kiy, the Polyansk principality passed to his heirs. This story, as Soviet historians believe, is based on actual historical events that took place in the 6th century.

The chronicler does not say anything about Kiy's successors. Perhaps such information was contained in the text before the first edition of The Tale of Bygone Years, but later, during repeated revisions of the chronicle, it fell out. It is possible that they were deliberately removed by the editor, a supporter of the theory of the Norman origin of the Old Russian state, since this information contradicted his views.

An important stage in the development of the Old Russian state was the 8th–9th centuries. It was then, as can be concluded from Nestor’s story, that a state association was formed in the Middle Dnieper region - the Russian Land, which included the Polyans, Drevlyans, and Northerners. It is characteristic that at first the name “Russian Land” was used in relation to the Middle Dnieper region and only over time it spread to all the lands of the Eastern Slavs.

From about the middle of the 9th century. The chronicle begins a consistent presentation of the dynastic history of Kievan Rus. Under 862, the Kyiv princes are called Askold and Dir. According to a number of written sources, they were the last princes from the Slavic dynasty, which was started by Kiy. They probably reigned at different times. Dira mentions al-Masudi, according to his information based on earlier sources. According to Masudi, Dir was the most prominent of the Slavic princes, owned many cities and vast territories, and Muslim merchants came to his capital. Chronicle information about the reign of Askold is preserved in the Nikon Chronicle; they clearly refute the claims of his Norman origins. These records are conventionally called the Askold Chronicle and date back to the 9th century.

Separate principalities among the Eastern Slavs existed even later, when the Old Russian state had already been formed. One of them was the Drevlyanskoe, which was headed in the first half of the 10th century. Prince Mal stood. It opposed the unification policy of Kyiv, and therefore the Kyiv princes repeatedly equipped squads to fight the obstinate Drevlyans. In 945, the Drevlyans rebelled against Prince Igor and killed him. Princess Olga suppressed the uprising. Among the Vyatichi, a local princely dynasty existed even at the beginning of the 12th century. Vladimir Monomakh was twice forced to go on campaigns against their prince Khodot and his son.

The chronicles do not specifically report the existence of other principalities among the Eastern Slavs and their princes, but there is no doubt that before the formation of the Old Russian state, there were other principalities besides those known from the chronicles. This is confirmed, in particular, by the treaties between Rus' and Byzantium. In 907, the Greeks pledged to pay tribute to the Russian cities - Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereyaslav, Polotsk and other centers where “the great princes lived under Olga.” The Treaty of 911 also mentions the Light and Grand Dukes who were at Oleg's hand. Thus, Kievan Rus already by the beginning of the 10th century. had a complex state-political structure; it included many vassal principalities that were previously independent.

The foreign policy situation that developed in the second half of the 1st millennium AD. e., accelerated the processes of unification of individual Slavic principalities into a single political organization. The migration of peoples continued, and numerous nomads periodically rolled into the lands of the Eastern Slavs in waves. The Avars brought great grief to the latter, as information has been preserved in the chronicles. There is no chronicle data on how the position of the Eastern Slavs was affected by the movement of the Bulgarian horde to the Danube in the second half of the 7th century, but its path ran directly through the southern East Slavic lands, and, of course, the attitude of the nomads towards the local population was not favorable. The chronicle twice mentions the appearance in the 7th and 9th centuries. Ugrians near Kyiv during their movement to the Danube. Their stay in Kyiv is evidenced by the name of the Ugorsky tract and archaeological monuments.

In the 7th century In the lower reaches of the Volga and on the Don, the Khazars appeared, founding the so-called Khazar Khaganate with its center in the city of Itil at the mouth of the Volga. Modern bourgeois and bourgeois-nationalist historiography affirms the idea that this “peaceful trading state” had an extremely beneficial influence on the state and cultural development of the Eastern Slavs. In fact, the “civilizing” activity of the Khazars consisted in the fact that they forcibly subjugated some East Slavic tribes - the Polyans, the Northerners and the Vyatichi - and turned them into their tributaries. Excavations of early ancient Russian centers show that their layers contain only isolated things of Khazar origin, which did not have any noticeable impact on the development of East Slavic material culture. As for statehood, the only “merit” of the Khazars in this was that they forced the Eastern Slavs to consolidate forces to fight for their liberation. The state “Russian Land” developed and strengthened in the fight against Khazar expansion.

The Slavs were threatened from the north by the Normans. They, from across the sea, from Scandinavia, attacked the Slavs and other tribes, robbed them. According to the chronicle, the Varangians collected tribute from the Novgorod Slovenes, Krivichi, Chud and Meri. The local population repeatedly rebelled against the Varangians and drove them out. The Kyiv princes also equipped troops to fight them. It is possible that the emergence of Novgorod, which, located at the confluence of the Volkhov into Lake, had a certain connection with this struggle. Ilmen was called upon to block the Varangians’ path to Rus'. Novgorod retained this important strategic importance for quite a long time.

Unlike the coastal regions of Western Europe, where the Normans penetrated in large numbers, Rus' did not experience significant Varangian expansion. Geographical position Northwestern Rus' did not give the Normans the opportunity to surprise cities and capture them. It was difficult for large Norman detachments to quickly penetrate into the interior of the country through the system of rivers and portages undetected. They could only carry out isolated attacks on the nearest sea ​​coast land. The Normans came to Rus' more as merchants or as part of hired military squads. They did not seize Russian cities by force and never owned them. Moreover, the Normans did not even have the right to live in ancient Russian cities; They set up their fortified camps 10–15 kilometers away. In general, as many Varangians could enter Rus' as the princes of Kievan Rus allowed. It is no coincidence that in order to capture Kiev in 882, the Varangian king Oleg and his squad were forced to pretend to be Varangian merchants. Varangian settlements in Rus' are known in Gnezdovo, near Smolensk, and in Shestovitsy, near Chernigov. The Shestovitsky burial ground is one of the richest in finds of Scandinavian origin. Their analysis, comparison with locally produced items, as well as funeral rites indicate that the proportion of the Norman cultural element in Shestovitsy was insignificant. Living in a Slavic environment led to the fact that the Normans quickly assimilated into the local population.

The Normans, therefore, did not have any influence on the socio-economic, socio-political and cultural development of Rus'. They are not the creators of Russian statehood, as some Norman historians are trying to prove, but only participants in those qualitative changes in the socio-political life of Rus' that were prepared by the centuries-old socio-economic development of the Eastern Slavs. Arriving in Rus' at the end of the 9th - beginning of the 10th century, the Normans found established government organization and cities, paved trade routes, including the famous path “from the Greek”. As shown by Soviet historians V.V. Mavrodin, B.D. Grekov, M.N. Tikhomirov and others, who created the Marxist concept of the origin of the Old Russian state, the Norman dynasty survived in Rus' because it entered the service of the Russian ruling elite and quickly merged with her and, essentially, dissolved in her. This is confirmed, in particular, by the agreement between the Kyiv prince Oleg and the Greeks, written not in Swedish, but in Slavic.

The origin of the ethnonym “Rus” is one of the most important issues in Russian history. It is named first in the list of questions that the author of The Tale of Bygone Years tried to answer. To one degree or another, all historians of Kievan Rus touched upon it. As a result of a comprehensive study, it was found that the concept of “Rus” and “Russian land” have two meanings - a broad one, referring to all East Slavic lands that were part of the Old Russian state, and a narrow one, applied only to the southern part of these lands. Thus, Prince Yuri Dolgoruky set out with an army from the Rostov-Suzdal land “to Rus',” that is, to Kyiv. Izyaslav Mstislavich, forced to leave Kiev, left the “Russian Land” for Volyn, and then returned from Volyn to the “Russian Land”.. These and similar chronicle information localize Rus' in its narrow sense in the south of the East Slavic lands, in the region of the Middle Dnieper. Thus, according to this evidence, Rus' occupied the territory from the Upper Podesenye - in the north to Ros and Tyasmin - in the south and from Seim and Sula - in the east to Irpen - in the west, i.e. covered the lands of the glades, Drevlyans, northerners and streets. These groups of East Slavic tribes constituted Rus' in the narrow sense of the word. The main role in the creation of an intertribal association, which became known as “Rus,” belonged to the Polyans; the chronicler considered it necessary to emphasize this - “the glades, like now called Rus'.” It is characteristic that it was on the lands of the glades that most of the hydronyms associated with the name “Rus” were preserved - Ros, Rosava, Rostavitsa. The political centers of the state formation “Russian Land” were Kiev, Chernigov, Pereyaslav.

In the IX - X centuries. Rus' as a country and its people are already known far beyond the borders of the East Slavic lands. They are repeatedly mentioned by Arab writers of that time, who were the best experts on the historical geography of the medieval world. “They (Russians) are one of the divisions of the Slavs,” emphasized the writer of the mid-9th century. Ibn Hardadbeg. His contemporary anonymous geographer, specifying the location of Rus', wrote that it is located in an area, “to the east of which is the Pecheneg mountain, to the south of it is the river Ruta, to the west of it are the Slavs, to the north are the uninhabited lands of the north, and the region This one is big." Ibn - Hardadbeg and other authors of that time (Ibn - Ruste, Gardizi) noted that the cities of the Slavs " a large number of and they live in abundance."

The geographical information of Arab writers about Rus' and the Slavic lands is sometimes very difficult to accurately localize on a map, since the specifics of Arabic writing complicate the transfer of foreign names. In addition, writers did not always use direct or reliable data in their reports about Rus', as a result of which proper names were distorted, accurate information became overgrown with legendary details. But in combination with archaeological materials, they are still a valuable source for illuminating the initial period of the history of Rus'.

As a result of the political, ethnic and cultural consolidation of the East Slavic tribes at the end of the 9th century. The long process of formation of the Old Russian state was completed.

The composition of the ancient Russian people. Simultaneously with the formation and development of the state, the formation of the Old Russian nationality took place, which became a new, higher form of ethnic community in comparison with the clan and tribe. At a certain stage of the development of the East Slavic tribes (VI–VIII centuries), due to their internal consolidation - linguistic, cultural and economic - the need and opportunity arose to create first several, and then (at the end of the 9th century) a single state entity - Kievan Rus. Born on the territorial basis of related East Slavic tribes, the young Old Russian state itself became a condition for their further consolidation, transformation into a single Old Russian nation.

On the eve of the formation of a single state, the East Slavic tribes were unions of tribes, and perhaps even larger ethnic communities. In the chronicle they are called Polans, Drevlyans, Krivichi, Volynians, Slovenes, etc. F. Engels, studying ethnic processes in Western Europe, named the Swabians, Lombards, Aquitani and other associations that were at approximately the same level of ethnic development as East Slavic chronicle tribes, “peoples”.

The merging of such East Slavic “peoples” into the Old Russian nationality took place especially intensively when their linguistic and cultural unity was complemented by the unity of political and state life. Education and development of the Old Russian state of the 9th - 10th centuries. caused great changes in the ethnic composition of the population of Eastern Europe. Some non-Slavic tribes were also drawn into the process of formation of the Old Russian nationality.

The intensification of social development processes that led to the replacement of the primitive communal system in Rus' with a feudal one, the emergence of classes, the strengthening of trade ties, the development of writing and the Old Russian literary language - all this led to the overcoming of tribal isolation and the formation of a single Old Russian nationality. Since the most important means of communication and establishing connections was language, which is the basis of every ethnic formation, integration processes among the Eastern Slavs took place primarily by strengthening the commonality of their language. In the 9th–11th centuries. Daytime Russian developed literary language, which was based on the folk spoken language, which, although it retained certain dialectal features, was understandable throughout the entire territory of the Old Russian state. The decisive role in its formation belonged to the broad masses of Rus'.

Created on the linguistic basis of related East Slavic tribes and formed under the conditions of a single state, the Old Russian language significantly outlived Kievan Rus. The activity of the social life of Rus' in the era of feudal fragmentation not only did not contribute to regional linguistic isolation, but practically excluded it.

Along with the linguistic one, the territorial community of the Eastern Slavs also developed. Characteristic feature This process is the coincidence of ethnic and state borders, the boundaries of settlement of the Eastern Slavs and the borders of Kievan Rus. This territorial unity of the Eastern Slavs turned out to be extremely strong and stable. Suffice it to say that the western borders of the Ukrainian and Belarusian nations, the heirs of the Old Russian people, basically coincide with the ethnic borders of the Eastern Slavs in the west and the state border of Kievan Rus.

The practical coincidence of the borders of Kievan Rus with the borders of its nationality became one of the factors that ensured its very rapid progress in the socio-economic and cultural fields. In the Middle Ages, this was the situation for the majority European countries. F. Engels, noting the facts of the lack of coincidence of the boundaries of language and state, emphasized that in the Middle Ages “... every nationality, with the exception, perhaps, of Italy, was represented in Europe by a special large state, and the tendency towards the creation of national states, emerging more and more clearly and consciously , is one of the most important levers of progress in the Middle Ages."

The consolidation of the Old Russian people was accompanied and stimulated by the common economic development of Kievan Rus, manifested in the deepening of the processes of separation of crafts from agriculture, the formation of local markets, the expansion of the network of trade routes, the wide exchange of handicraft products and the growth of commodity production.

Under the conditions of the existence of Kievan Rus, a unified material and spiritual culture of the ancient Russian people is being formed. Moreover, this unity can be traced not only in a wide range of urban and rural craft products, but also in house construction, monumental architecture, applied and fine arts, everyday life, ideology, and all folk art.

Obviously, the most complete manifestation high level ethnic cohesion was the awareness of the ancient Russian people of the need to preserve their unity. Eloquent evidence of this is such monuments of ancient Russian literature as “The Tale of Bygone Years”, “The Tale of Law and Grace”, “The Teachings of Monomakh”, “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”, etc. The idea of ​​​​the need to preserve the unity of the Russian land is heard with unflagging force , the unity of the ancient Russian people, displays feelings of love for their homeland. The authors of these works glorify the strength and glory of Rus', its heroic defenders, and the wealth of populous cities. The roads of Kiev and Novgorod, Chernigov and Smolensk, Galich and Vladimir on the Klyazma, Pereyaslav and Ryazan, Rostov and Polotsk, Suzdal and Novgorod - Seversky, all of Rus' from the Novgorod north to the Kiev south and from Transcarpathia to the Volga and Don are equally close to them.

The unity of the Old Russian people was so strong that even under conditions of long-term foreign domination - Mongol-Tatar, Lithuanian-Polish and Hungarian - in different parts of the former Old Russian state, much in common in language, culture, life and customs was preserved.

The ethnocultural heritage of the ancient Russian people became the basis on which they were formed in the 14th–15th centuries. fraternal East Slavic peoples - Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian, who have preserved and carried through the centuries a sense of not only a common origin, cultural unity, but also a commonality of their historical destiny.

From the book History Russian state in verse author Kukovyakin Yuri Alekseevich

Chapter I The formation of the Old Russian state With the mirror of existence and the ringing of bells, a huge country is sung by the chroniclers. On the banks of the Dnieper, the Volkhov and Don rivers, names of peoples are known to this history. They were mentioned much earlier, before the birth of Christ, in the past

author Milov Leonid Vasilievich

§ 2. Formation of the Old Russian state. Rus' in the middle - second half of the 10th century. Formation of the Old Russian state. According to ancient Russian chronicles, at the end of the 9th century. (chronicles date this event to 882) Prince Oleg, who was sitting on the “Rurik settlement”, collected

From the book History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 17th century author

Chapter 2. East Slavs and education of Old Russian

From the book History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 17th century author Bokhanov Alexander Nikolaevich

author

CHAPTER III. Formation of the Old Russian State The concept of “state” is multidimensional. Therefore, in philosophy and journalism for many centuries, different explanations of it and different reasons for the emergence of associations denoted by this term were proposed. English philosophers of the 17th century.

From the book HISTORY OF RUSSIA from ancient times to 1618. Textbook for universities. In two books. Book one. author Kuzmin Apollon Grigorievich

TO CHAPTER III. FORMATION OF THE ANCIENT RUSSIAN STATE Below are reproduced extracts from the works of authors whose opinions and arguments have not lost their significance to this day. S. Russov noted in 1836 that the founders of Normanism Z. Bayer, G. Miller and A. Schletser did not consciously pay attention to

From the book Ancient Rus' through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (IX-XII centuries); Lecture course author Danilevsky Igor Nikolaevich

From the book History of Russia [for students of technical universities] author Shubin Alexander Vladlenovich

§ 2. FORMATION OF THE ANCIENT RUSSIAN STATE The concept of “state”. There is a widespread idea that the state is a special apparatus of social coercion that regulates class relations, ensures the dominance of one class over other social

From the book History of Russia author Munchaev Shamil Magomedovich

From the book Domestic History: Lecture Notes author Kulagina Galina Mikhailovna

1.2. The formation of the Old Russian state and its first princes As a result of the unification of the East Slavic tribes, the process of formation of the Old Russian state began. There was a lot of scientific controversy regarding the formation of the Old Russian state. More than 200 years ago in

From the book A Short Course in the History of Russia from Ancient Times to beginning of the XXI century author Kerov Valery Vsevolodovich

Topic 2 Formation of the Old Russian state PLAN1. Prerequisites.1.1. Socio-economic prerequisites: Development of agriculture. – Crafts and foreign trade. – Neighborhood community.1.2. Socio-political prerequisites: Complication of intra-tribal relations. –

From the book The Formation of the Old Russian State and its First Ruler author Novoseltsev Anatoly Petrovich

Anatoly Petrovich Novoseltsev The formation of the ancient Russian state and its first ruler The article poses broader problems than just the biography of Prince Oleg, whom the ancient chronicle calls “the Prophetic” and who, in fact, is the first reliable

From the book History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 17th century author Sakharov Andrey Nikolaevich

Chapter 2 Eastern Slavs and the formation of Old Russian

From the book History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 17th century author Sakharov Andrey Nikolaevich

§ 3. The struggle between North and South and the formation of the Old Russian state The main occupation of the Eastern Slavs in the era known to us was agriculture in combination with livestock breeding and various kinds of crafts. The further north you go, the higher value acquired trades, so

From the book History of the Ukrainian SSR in ten volumes. Volume one author Team of authors

1. FORMATION OF THE OLD RUSSIAN STATE Chronicle information about the beginning of the Old Russian state. The problem of the emergence of Kievan Rus is one of the most important and relevant in Russian historiography. Already the chronicler Nestor in the Tale of Bygone Years, responding to

From the book Course of Russian History author Devletov Oleg Usmanovich

1.1. Eastern Slavs in the 1st millennium AD. e. Education and flourishing of the ancient Russian state First millennium new era called the time of the “great migration of peoples.” Its first wave was the migration of Asian tribes (Goths, Huns). In the middle of the first millennium, under their

8. Oprichnina: its causes and consequences.

9. Time of Troubles in Russia at the beginning of the 19th century.

10. The fight against foreign invaders at the beginning of the 15th century. Minin and Pozharsky. The accession of the Romanov dynasty.

11. Peter I – Tsar-Reformer. Economic and government reforms of Peter I.

12. Foreign policy and military reforms of Peter I.

13. Empress Catherine II. The policy of “enlightened absolutism” in Russia.

1762-1796 The reign of Catherine II.

14. Socio-economic development of Russia in the second half of the xyiii century.

15. Internal policy of the government of Alexander I.

16. Russia in the first world conflict: wars as part of the anti-Napoleonic coalition. Patriotic War of 1812.

17. Decembrist movement: organizations, program documents. N. Muravyov. P. Pestel.

18. Domestic policy of Nicholas I.

4) Streamlining legislation (codification of laws).

5) The fight against liberation ideas.

19 . Russia and the Caucasus in the first half of the 19th century. Caucasian War. Muridism. Gazavat. Imamat of Shamil.

20. The Eastern question in Russian foreign policy in the first half of the 19th century. Crimean War.

22. The main bourgeois reforms of Alexander II and their significance.

23. Features of the internal policy of the Russian autocracy in the 80s - early 90s of the XIX century. Counter-reforms of Alexander III.

24. Nicholas II – the last Russian emperor. Russian Empire at the turn of the 19th – 20th centuries. Class structure. Social composition.

2. Proletariat.

25. The first bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia (1905-1907). Reasons, character, driving forces, results.

4. Subjective attribute (a) or (b):

26. P. A. Stolypin’s reforms and their impact on the further development of Russia

1. Destruction of the community “from above” and the withdrawal of peasants to farms and farms.

2. Assistance to peasants in acquiring land through a peasant bank.

3. Encouraging the resettlement of land-poor and landless peasants from Central Russia to the outskirts (to Siberia, the Far East, Altai).

27. The First World War: causes and character. Russia during the First World War

28. February bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1917 in Russia. Fall of the autocracy

1) Crisis of the “tops”:

2) Crisis of the “grassroots”:

3) The activity of the masses has increased.

29. Alternatives to the autumn of 1917. The Bolsheviks came to power in Russia.

30. Exit of Soviet Russia from the First World War. Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

31. Civil war and military intervention in Russia (1918-1920)

32. Socio-economic policy of the first Soviet government during the civil war. "War communism".

7. Housing fees and many types of services have been cancelled.

33. Reasons for the transition to NEP. NEP: goals, objectives and main contradictions. Results of NEP.

35. Industrialization in the USSR. The main results of the country's industrial development in the 1930s.

36. Collectivization in the USSR and its consequences. The crisis of Stalin's agrarian policy.

37.Formation of a totalitarian system. Mass terror in the USSR (1934-1938). Political processes of the 1930s and their consequences for the country.

38. Foreign policy of the Soviet government in the 1930s.

39. USSR on the eve of the Great Patriotic War.

40. Attack of Nazi Germany on the Soviet Union. Reasons for the temporary failures of the Red Army in the initial period of the war (summer-autumn 1941)

41. Achieving a fundamental turning point during the Great Patriotic War. The significance of the Battles of Stalingrad and Kursk.

42. Creation of an anti-Hitler coalition. Opening of a second front during the Second World War.

43. Participation of the USSR in the defeat of militaristic Japan. End of the Second World War.

44. Results of the Great Patriotic War and the Second World War. The price of victory. The meaning of the victory over fascist Germany and militaristic Japan.

45. The struggle for power within the highest echelon of the country's political leadership after the death of Stalin. N.S. Khrushchev's rise to power.

46. ​​Political portrait of N.S. Khrushchev and his reforms.

47. L.I. Brezhnev. The conservatism of the Brezhnev leadership and the increase in negative processes in all spheres of life of Soviet society.

48. Characteristics of the socio-economic development of the USSR from the mid-60s to the mid-80s.

49. Perestroika in the USSR: its causes and consequences (1985-1991). Economic reforms of perestroika.

50. The policy of “glasnost” (1985-1991) and its influence on the emancipation of the spiritual life of society.

1. It was allowed to publish literary works that were not allowed to be published during the time of L. I. Brezhnev:

7. Article 6 “on the leading and guiding role of the CPSU” was removed from the Constitution. A multi-party system has emerged.

51. Foreign policy of the Soviet government in the second half of the 80s. “New political thinking” by M.S. Gorbachev: achievements, losses.

52. The collapse of the USSR: its causes and consequences. August putsch 1991 Creation of the CIS.

On December 21 in Almaty, 11 former Soviet republics supported the Belovezhskaya Agreement. On December 25, 1991, President Gorbachev resigned. The USSR ceased to exist.

53. Radical transformations in the economy in 1992-1994. Shock therapy and its consequences for the country.

54. B.N. Yeltsin. The problem of relationships between branches of government in 1992-1993. October events of 1993 and their consequences.

55. Adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian Federation and parliamentary elections (1993)

56. Chechen crisis in the 1990s.

1. Formation of the Old Russian state - Kievan Rus

The state of Kievan Rus was created at the end of the 9th century.

The emergence of a state among the Eastern Slavs is reported in the chronicle “The Tale of Bygone Years” (XIIV.). It tells that the Slavs paid tribute to the Varangians. Then they drove the Varangians overseas and the question arose: who will rule in Novgorod? None of the tribes wanted to establish the power of a representative of a neighboring tribe. Then they decided to invite a stranger and turned to the Varangians. Three brothers responded to the invitation: Rurik, Truvor and Sineus. Rurik began to reign in Novgorod, Sineus in Beloozero, and Truvor in the city of Izborsk. Two years later, Sineus and Truvor died, and all power passed to Rurik. Two of Rurik’s squad, Askold and Dir, went south and began to reign in Kyiv. They killed the rulers there, Kiya, Shchek, Khoriv and their sister Lybid. In 879 Rurik died. His relative Oleg began to rule, since Rurik’s son Igor was still a minor. After 3 years (in 882), Oleg and his squad seized power in Kyiv. Thus, Kyiv and Novgorod united under the rule of one prince. This is what the chronicle says. Were there really two brothers - Sineus and Truvor? Today historians believe that there were none. “Rurik sine hus truvor” means, translated from ancient Swedish, “Rurik with house and squad.” The chronicler mistook the incomprehensible-sounding words for personal names, and wrote that Rurik arrived with two brothers.

Exists two theories of the origin of the ancient Russian state: Norman and anti-Norman. Both of these theories appeared in the XYIII century, 900 years after the formation of Kievan Rus. The fact is that Peter I - from the Romanov dynasty, was very interested in where the previous dynasty - the Rurikovichs - came from, who created the state of Kievan Rus and where this name came from. Peter I signed a decree on the creation of the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg. German scientists were invited to work at the Academy of Sciences.

Norman theory . Its founders are the German scientists Bayer, Miller, Schletser, who were invited back under Peter I to work at the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. They confirmed the calling of the Varangians and made the assumption that the name of the Russian Empire was of Scandinavian origin, and that the state of Kievan Rus itself was created by the Varangians. “Rus” is translated from ancient Swedish as the verb “to row”; the Rus are rowers. Perhaps “Rus” is the name of the Varangian tribe from which Rurik came. At first, the Varangian warriors were called Rus, and then this word gradually passed on to the Slavs.

The calling of the Varangians was confirmed at a later time by data from archaeological excavations of mounds near Yaroslavl, near Smolensk. Scandinavian burials in a boat were discovered there. Many Scandinavian objects were clearly made by local – Slavic craftsmen. This means that the Varangians lived among the local residents.

But German scientists exaggerated the role of the Varangians in the formation of the ancient Russian state. As a result, these scientists agreed to such an extent that supposedly the Varangians were immigrants from the West, which means that it was they - the Germans - who created the state of Kievan Rus.

Anti-Norman theory. It also appeared in the 18th century, under the daughter of Peter I, Elizaveta Petrovna. She did not like the statement of German scientists that the Russian state was created by Westerners. In addition, during her reign there was a 7-year war with Prussia. She asked Lomonosov to look into this issue. Lomonosov M.V. did not deny the fact of the existence of Rurik, but began to deny his Scandinavian origin.

The anti-Norman theory intensified in the 30s of the twentieth century. When the Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, they tried to prove the inferiority of the Eastern Slavs (Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks), that they were not able to create states, that the Varangians were Germans. Stalin gave the task to refute the Norman theory. This is how a theory emerged according to which the Ros (Ross) tribe lived south of Kyiv on the Ros River. The Ros River flows into the Dnieper and this is where the name of Rus' comes from, since the Russians supposedly occupied a leading place among the Slavic tribes. The possibility of a Scandinavian origin for the name of Rus' was completely rejected. The anti-Norman theory tries to prove that the state of Kievan Rus was created by the Slavs themselves. This theory penetrated into textbooks on the history of the USSR, and was prevalent there until the end of “perestroika.”

The state appears there and then when opposing interests and classes appear in society, hostile to each other. The state regulates relations between people, relying on armed force. The Varangians were invited to reign, therefore, this form of power (princeship) was already known to the Slavs. It was not the Varangians who brought property inequality and the division of society into classes to Rus'. The ancient Russian state - Kievan Rus - arose as a result of the long, independent development of Slavic society, not thanks to the Varangians, but with their active participation. The Varangians themselves quickly became glorified and did not impose their language. The son of Igor, the grandson of Rurik, already bore the Slavic name - Svyatoslav. Today, some historians believe that the name of the Russian Empire is of Scandinavian origin and the princely dynasty begins with Rurik, and was called the Rurikovichs.

The ancient Russian state was called Kievan Rus.

2 . Socio-economic and political system of Kievan Rus

Kievan Rus was an early feudal state. It existed from the end of the 9th to the beginning of the 12th century (approximately 250 years).

The head of state was Grand Duke. He was the highest military leader, judge, legislator, and recipient of tribute. He led foreign policy, declared war, made peace. Appointed officials. The power of the Grand Duke was limited:

Council under the prince, which included military nobility, city elders, clergy (since 988)

Veche - a national assembly in which all free people could take part. The veche could discuss and resolve any issue that interested it.

Appanage princes - local tribal nobility.

The first rulers of Kievan Rus were: Oleg (882-912), Igor (913-945), Olga - Igor’s wife (945-964).

The unification of all East Slavic and part of the Finnish tribes under the rule of the Grand Duke of Kyiv.

Acquisition of overseas markets for Russian trade and protection of trade routes that led to these markets.

Protection of the borders of the Russian land from attacks by steppe nomads (Khazars, Pechenegs, Polovtsians).

The most important source of income for the prince and his squad was the tribute paid by the conquered tribes. Olga organized the collection of tribute and established its size.

The son of Igor and Olga, Prince Svyatoslav (964-972), made campaigns against Danube Bulgaria and Byzantium, and also defeated the Khazar Khaganate.

Under Svyatoslav’s son, Vladimir the Holy (980-1015), Christianity was adopted in Rus' in 988.

Socio-economic system:

The main branch of the economy is arable farming and cattle breeding. Additional industries: fishing, hunting. Rus' was a country of cities (more than 300) - in the 12th century.

Kievan Rus reached its peak under Yaroslav the Wise (1019-1054). He became related and became friends with the most prominent states of Europe. In 1036, he defeated the Pechenegs near Kiev and ensured the security of the eastern and southern borders of the state for a long time. In the Baltic states, he founded the city of Yuryev (Tartu) and established the position of Rus' there. Under him, writing and literacy spread in Rus', schools were opened for the children of the boyars. The higher school was located in the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery. The largest library was in St. Sophia Cathedral, also built under Yaroslav the Wise.

Under Yaroslav the Wise appeared the first set of laws in Rus' - “Russian Truth”, which operated throughout the XI-XIII centuries. There are 3 known editions of “Russian Truth”:

1. Brief truth of Yaroslav the Wise

2. Extensive (grandchildren of Yar. the Wise - Vl. Monomakh)

3. Abbreviated

“Russian Truth” consolidated the feudal property that was emerging in Rus', established harsh punishments for attempts to encroach on it, and defended the lives and privileges of members of the ruling class. According to “Russian Truth” one can trace the contradictions in society and the class struggle. “Russian Truth” of Yaroslav the Wise allowed blood feud, but the article on blood feud was limited to defining the exact circle of close relatives who have the right to take revenge: father, son, brother, cousin, nephew. This put an end to the endless chain of murders exterminating entire families.

In the Pravda of the Yaroslavichs (under the children of Yar. the Wise), blood feud is already prohibited, and instead a fine for murder has been introduced, depending on the social status of the person killed, from 5 to 80 hryvnia.