The origin and formation of feudal relations in Europe and Asia.
The term "feudalism" appeared in France in the 17th century and was originally
used in the field of law: it was introduced into historical science in the 19th century
century by the famous French historian Francois Guizot.
Feudalism arose as a result of the disintegration of slave-owning orders
only in a few countries whose peoples have created high civilizations in
antiquity (China, India, Greece, Rome). Most other nations
feudal relations arose as a result of the decomposition
primitive communal formation (in Germany, among many Slavic peoples, in
Scandinavia, Japan, the Mongols, and a number of African countries). Known and
the path of formation of feudalism, which is characterized by interaction
named processes (an example is the Frankish state, which
arose in the 5th century. AD under King Clovis).
In many countries, feudal relations developed over the course of
for a long time, which was determined by the nature and slow pace
development of productive forces.
Defining the medieval era as a time of feudal dominance
relations, it should be borne in mind that the concept of “Middle Ages” and “feudalism”
are not entirely identical even for Europe, where in the early Middle Ages
feudal relations to a certain extent coexisted with patriarchal
way of life, and later with the capitalist one. Feudal period in Russia
falls on the IX-XIX centuries.
Feudalism is considered as a progressive social system according to
compared to slave ownership. Progressive was also the transition to
feudalism from the primitive communal system, since the established
individual production was more in line with the level of development
productive forces, and therefore was more efficient.
The progressive features of feudalism were most consistently manifested in
its Western European version. The economy of feudalism was based on
practically monopoly ownership of the land by the class of feudal landowners
and was natural in nature.
In an agrarian economy, land was the main means
production, and feudal property made it possible
exploit the direct producers-peasants, determined
social structure of society, its political structure. Feudal lords
part of their land was distributed to the peasants who lived on it
independent small-scale farming with your own tools. labor giving
part of the produced product goes to the landowners in the form of rent or tax. Rent
for the farmer was the only way to receive income from his
land ownership, and for peasants - duty for the use
earth. Historically, it came in three forms: labor labor (corvée),
produtovy (natural quitrent) and monetary.
Collecting payments on land on which peasants have toiled for centuries, but
did not have the right to freely dispose of either it or the products of their labor,
accompanied by coercive measures (non-economic coercion). IN
Western Europe, the dependence of the peasants was of a personal nature - the peasant
was considered attached to the lord and not to the land. Attaching the peasants
to land existed in Eastern and some Central European countries
(for example, in Russia, Poland, the Czech Republic, some areas of Northern Germany).
Commodity production (simple) and trade under feudalism
mainly related to urban development. European cities are becoming
center of craft production and trade since the 11th century. Product development
monetary relations and exchange between city and village developed natural
nature of the economy.
The needs, mainly of the nobility, were increasingly satisfied with
through trade, but reproduction was still carried out on
natural basis.
In cities, in addition to artisans, there were other social groups:
merchants, bankers, officials, intelligentsia. During the period of decomposition of feudalism and
the emergence of capitalist relations, new classes were formed -
proletariat and bourgeoisie. Feudal society was divided into classes,
each of which had its own rights and responsibilities and performed certain
functions. These are the clergy (praying), the nobility (warring), baptism and
artisans who were part of the third estate (producing material
Class rights and obligations existed in unity: the presence of rights
implied duties, failure to fulfill the latter led to deprivation of rights. So,
Vossal who ignored military service was deprived of rights to allotments
lands: those who used “market law” had to comply with their
obligations to the workshop or guild.
The classes also had their own special system of relations. IN
clergy it corresponded to the hierarchical structure of the Catholic
churches. The military class was subject to vassalage, which bound the vassal and
lord through personal relationships of service and obligatory patronage.
Corporate connections played a significant role in social relations.
Medieval man was subject to the ethical and legal norms of the corporation,
her traditions. Gradually a special psychological type of knight emerged,
clergyman, merchant, guild artisan, etc., that is, the mentality
medieval man.
Such was feudalism, which manifested itself in different forms and
not simultaneously in different countries of the world.
Answer to question 10: Russia under Ivan 4. Reforms of the elected Rada and Oprichnin.
Young Ivan IV, nicknamed the Terrible, was anointed king in January 1547 in the Assumption Cathedral by Metropolitan Macarius. A circle of like-minded people formed around the tsar, whose goal was to develop and carry out reforms (the Elected Rada). In 1549, the Zemsky Sobor, a representative body under the tsar, was convened for the first time, which approved the planned reform program.
By the end of the 40s, a small circle of people close to him had formed around the tsar, later called the Chosen Rada by Prince Andrei Kurbsky. In essence, it was the Near Sovereign Duma, which reflected the compromise nature of the internal policy pursued by Ivan IV at that time. It included: a representative of the humble but large landowners Alexei Adashev, Prince Andrei Kurbsky, priest Sylvester, Metropolitan Macarius, clerk Ivan Viskovaty. As the historian wrote, these were “reasonable and perfect men.” The elected Rada was not an official government body, but in fact for 13 years it was the government and governed the state on behalf of the Tsar.
3. In 1549, the first Zemsky Sobor was convened - an advisory body, a meeting of class representatives from boyars, nobles, clergy, merchants, townspeople and black-growing peasants. At the Council, measures were taken that expanded the rights of the nobles and limited the rights of large feudal lords - boyar-governors. The councils did not limit the power of the king, but contributed to the local political activities of the central government. They did not become permanent, but were subsequently gathered several times as needed. Based on the decisions of the Zemsky Sobor in the 50s of the 16th century. The following reforms were carried out:
> military; We started with military transformations. Local disputes between governors during campaigns were prohibited; all of them were subordinate to the first governor of a large regiment, i.e., the commander-in-chief. At the same time, it was decided to “place” a “selected thousand” in the Moscow district, that is, from 1070 nobles to create the core of a noble militia, which would be the support of autocratic power. A new procedure for recruiting the army was introduced. Each landowner was obliged to field one armed warrior on horseback for every 150 acres of land. A nobleman could serve from the age of 15, the service was inherited. For service, the nobleman received from 150 to 450 acres of land. A new standing army was created from archers armed with arquebuses. The archers received uniforms, cash and grain salaries, and in peacetime they lived like townspeople. At first, 3,000 people were recruited into the Streltsy army. They were divided into 6 “orders” (regiments) of 500 people each and constituted the Tsar’s personal guard. By the end of the 16th century, there were already 25,000 Streltsy in Russia. The Streltsy army was a powerful fighting force of the Russian state.
> judicial - a new all-Russian Code of Law of 1550 was adopted. The judicial functions of governors and volostels were limited, and the court was locally supervised by royal clerks. Bribery was punishable by monetary fines. The “judgment of God” (a duel between those disputing, “might belongs to the right”) was also preserved. The death penalty was introduced “for robbery.” During the trial of cases on the ground, the presence of land elders, selected from among local servicemen and “kissers”, who were elected from the townspeople and the black peasantry, became mandatory. The norm of the Code of Law of 1497 on St. George's Day was confirmed: peasants could leave the feudal lord only once a year, and the size of the “elderly” was even slightly increased. In 1581, reserved years were introduced for the first time, prohibiting the transition of a peasant from one feudal lord to another during a certain period of time. year.;
> church; In 1551, on the initiative of Ivan IV, a church council was held, which went down in history as the Hundred-Glavy Council, since the final document contained exactly 100 chapters. He compiled a pantheon (list) of all Russian saints, checked church books, unified worship and all church rituals, and decided to open schools for the training of priests and deacons. The council set the task of improving the morals of the clergy: monks were forbidden to drink vodka, they were allowed to drink kvass and grape wines, and shaving beards was condemned.
The council did not allow the tsar to confiscate church lands, but the monasteries themselves could sell or acquire lands only with the tsar's permission, and they were also prohibited from usurious activities.
> reforms of central and local governments. In the mid-50s, a lip reform was carried out. Power in the districts passed to provincial and zemstvo elders. They obeyed the Robbery Order. The system of “feeding” governors was abolished (1555), it was replaced by a national tax, from which the salaries of service people were paid. A restriction on localism was introduced. The reforms strengthened public administration, the military system, and significantly contributed to centralization. All transformations were aimed primarily at strengthening the power of the state and royal power.
A. On the eve of the oprichnina
1. Public administration reforms of the 50s strengthened the central government and undermined the political power of the boyars. The tsar, who was assisted by the Boyar Duma and the Zemsky Sobor, had the highest power, which limited the autocracy. In 1560, Ivan IV got rid of the Chosen Rada. But long and difficult wars, new taxes ruined the country, there were many dissatisfied among the nobles, priests and townspeople. Heretics called for the destruction of icons and the church itself; they preached the equality of all people and the community of property. Ivan Vasilyevich himself saw only slaves in all his subjects. Their duty, according to the king, was unquestioning submission to his will. In 1553, Ivan IV became seriously ill and made a will in favor of the infant Dmitry (the first son born from Anastasia). However, close boyars and many appanage princes did not want to support his heir Dmitry. According to rumors, they wanted "to the state" the Staritsky prince Vladimir Andreevich, the cousin of Ivan IV. The Tsar recovered, but his peace of mind was broken. The Tsar was afraid of Prince Vladimir Staritsky, who had great authority in the country. In addition, many boyars, having large estates , retained economic independence. In 1564, fearing execution, a former friend of Ivan IV, Prince Andrei Kurbsky, fled to Lithuania. The Tsar looked for treason everywhere, executed boyars. A very tense situation was created in the country. Then Ivan IV undertakes a major political maneuver: he decided voluntarily leave the throne and leave the reigning city of Moscow.
B. Events of early January 1565
1. At the beginning of December 1564, the tsar and his family, guarded and accompanied by a huge convoy, left Moscow for Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. In January 1565, Ivan sent two letters: the first, “angry” letter was addressed to Metropolitan Athanasius, the second, “tearful”, “to the posad, to all people” and was read “in the assembly of the people in a loud voice.” In the first message, the tsar accused the boyars and officials of treason, and the metropolitan and clergy of malicious complicity with the boyars; in another message, he assured the townspeople that he was not angry with them and would not subject them to disgrace. The boyars found themselves, as it were, between two fires - the king and the people. The people unanimously supported the sovereign. Boyars, clergy, nobles, officials, merchants and townspeople sent a delegation to Alexandrovskaya Sloboda to ask the sovereign to return to the throne. Ivan IV agreed to return to Moscow, but under certain conditions. In general terms, they boiled down to the fact that from now on the tsar would, at his own discretion, execute traitors “by disgrace, death, deprivation of dignity”...
B. Oprichnina politics 1565-1572.
1. On February 2, 1565, Ivan Vasilyevich solemnly returned to Moscow and the next day announced to the clergy and noble boyars the establishment of the oprichnina. Voprichnina (from the word “oprich” - except, especially), subject to the tsar (royal inheritance), included lands that included 20 cities in the central and richest regions of the country. It had its own Boyar Duma, orders, oprichnina army. The rest of the territory was called zemshchina , the old order was preserved in it, led by the boyars. Even Moscow was divided into the oprichnina (Arbat, Prechistenka, Znamenka) and the zemshchina. From the oprichnina, patrimonial boyars, nobles and officials were forcibly evicted if they did not voluntarily register as oprichniki; all this was accompanied robberies, murders by the oprichniki. Oprichnina opponents were destroyed: 200 deputies of the Zemsky Sobor of 1566, Metropolitan Efim Kolychev, the richest boyar Ivan Fedorov, the famous diplomat Ivan Viskovaty were executed, Prince Vladimir Staritsky and many, many others were poisoned.
2. The lands seized from the boyars were distributed to the guardsmen-nobles and feudal nobility, loyal to the tsar. A special oprichnina army was created, first from one thousand, then it was brought to five thousand people. When the first thousand guardsmen were selected, in the presence of the metropolitan, all the Kremlin clergy and boyars, they swore an oath to be faithful to the sovereign Grand Duke and his state, to eradicate “sedition” and report everything bad that was being plotted against the tsar and his state. The guardsmen were attached to their saddles the horses had dog heads and brooms, which symbolized their canine devotion to the Tsar and their determination to sweep away any treason.The guardsmen turned into the police force of the state, those suspected of treason were tortured and executed.
3. Fratricide in the country caused discontent and vague rumors among the people. At this time, a “normative” denunciation appeared that the Novgorodians were plotting treason and wanted to “surrender” to the rule of the Principality of Lithuania. In 1570, under the pretext of fighting treason, a punitive expedition was carried out against
In 1572, Ivan the Terrible abolished the oprichnina and forbade even mentioning this word, hated by the people. The oprichnina and zemstvo territories, the oprichnina and zemstvo troops, the oprichnina and zemstvo service people were reunited. The unity of the Boyar Duma was restored. Some zemstvo boyars received their estates back, but executions continued long after the abolition of the oprichnina.
reason contributed to the development of the despotic nature of the Russian autocracy; in fact, it turned both feudal lords and peasants into slaves;
> the country's economy was undermined, many lands were devastated, peasants fled from fiefdoms and estates. In 1581, Ivan the Terrible introduced “reserved years” - temporarily prohibited peasants from leaving the feudal lord even on St. George’s Day, i.e. serfdom was temporarily introduced in Russia;
> oprichnina policies led to a worsening of Russia’s position in the Livonian War
Answer to question 11: Troubles: 16th-early 17th century. Causes. Main stages. Consequences.
The origin of the Time of Troubles is associated with the extinction of the Rurik dynasty. The son of Ivan IV Fedor (1584–1598) was incapable of governing the state. He died childless, his younger brother, young Dmitry, died under very mysterious circumstances in Uglich in 1591. The dynasty of the descendants of Ivan Kalita came to an end. The question of succession to the throne was decided by the Zemsky Sobor, which elected the brother-in-law of the deceased tsar, boyar Boris Godunov (1598–1605), to the kingdom. This was the first time in the history of the Moscow kingdom. Before Godunov, not a single tsar had been elected, so it seems natural that the new tsar would strive in every possible way to emphasize his connection with the previous dynasty. He even used an obvious fiction about the will of Ivan IV, who allegedly “denied” the Moscow throne to Godunov. Godunov’s internal policy, reformist in content, was aimed at stabilizing the situation in the country, brought to a state of crisis by the oprichnina
An improvement in the economic situation was only just beginning, but the way out of the crisis was going through serfdom. To keep the peasants on the lands of the previous owners, according to the assumption of a number of researchers, in 1592 a decree was issued banning peasant crossings, and in 1597 a decree “on scheduled flights” was issued: the owner’s right to search for fugitives for five years. All this increased discontent among the peasantry. And then came crop failures and a terrible famine of 1601–1603.
Intra-class disagreements between different layers of the boyars, between the Moscow and provincial nobility, intensified, since the latter was denied access to the real governance of the country. In the struggle for influence in the army, the interests of the nobility and the Cossacks collided. In the end, everyone was unhappy. Added to this was the people’s idea that power in the country should belong to the “natural king”, a representative of the Rurik dynasty. Thus, the dynastic crisis with iron necessity gave rise to imposture. The impostor turned into an expected hero, capable of saving the people from oppression and social injustice. Various socio-political forces in the country will use impostors for their own purposes. Imposture will become a convenient form of organizing a mass anti-government movement. The first of the impostors, “the fugitive monk of the Chudov Monastery, the “defrocked” Grishka Otrepiev,” will declare himself the son of Ivan IV Dmitry, who supposedly survived by a miracle. The death of Boris Godunov in April 1605 also helped the impostor. Already in May, the governors recognized the impostor as the legitimate tsar; a significant part of the army followed their example, then the Moscow boyars. On June 20, 1605, he solemnly entered Moscow. Even before this, all the relatives of Boris Godunov were killed, including his son Fedor, who succeeded him.
Why did the man who came to the Russian state surrounded by foreigners and people of other faiths – “Latins” and the Cossacks, unpopular in the Moscow possessions – win?
The main reasons for the victory of False Dmitry I are as follows:
1. A social crisis from which no way out was found.
2. Weak legitimation of Godunov’s power, which resulted in the unpopularity of himself and his family, doubt about the legitimacy of his son Fedor to the throne.
3. The people’s faith in the “good king”, including faith in the story of the prince’s miraculous salvation, which ultimately turned into a people’s utopia, into a political intrigue.
4. Anti-Godudunov sentiments of part of the Moscow boyars, the majority of the capital's merchants and townspeople.
At the impromptu Zemsky Sobor, Prince Vasily Shuisky was “called out” by the tsar. For the first time in the history of Russia, he swore allegiance to his subjects - he gave a “record” (obligation), the observance of which he secured by kissing the cross. The “cross-record” contained obligations that gave subjects certain guarantees against arbitrariness. Of course, it must be borne in mind that this intriguer, who repaid the False Dmitry who pardoned him with a conspiracy, was guided by politicking considerations, nevertheless, this was “the first experience of building a state order on the basis of formally limited supreme power.” When False Dmitry II appeared within the Moscow kingdom, the country was divided: some were for Tsar Vasily, others were for the new pretender to the throne, who was located far from Moscow, in Tushino. Seeing no other way to deal with the Tushins, who were secretly supported by the Polish king Sigismund III, Vasily Shuisky turned to the Swedish king for help. He sent an auxiliary detachment. This became a convenient pretext for Poland to interfere in Russian affairs. In September 1609, Sigismund III besieged Smolensk. In December, False Dmitry II fled from the Tushino camp to Kaluga (there he would be killed by Prince Pyotr Urusov). In February 1610, the embassy led by boyar Mikhail Saltykov, disappointed in the “Tushino king,” concluded an agreement with the Polish king on the conditions for the accession of his son Vladislav to the Moscow throne. The document provided guarantees for Russia against absorption by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and reflected the personal rights of its subjects.
The idea of calling Prince Vladislav to the Russian throne also found its supporters in Moscow. Boyars and nobles overthrew Shuisky in July 1610 and forced him to become a monk. Power temporarily passed into the hands of a government of seven boyars (“seven boyars”), which decided to place Vladislav on the Russian throne. Some historians believe that in this way an opportunity arose to strengthen Russia’s ties with Europe, which was not realized due to the prince’s Catholic faith. Another point of view is that those boyars who swore allegiance to Vladislav and allowed Polish troops led by Hetman Gonsevsky into Moscow on the night of September 21, 1610, committed an act of national treason. The Time of Troubles was not so much a revolution as a severe shock to the life of Moscow states. Its first, immediate and most severe consequence was the terrible ruin and desolation of the country; In the inventories of rural areas under Tsar Michael, many empty villages are mentioned, from which the peasants “escaped” or “went to an unknown place,” or were beaten by “Lithuanian people” and “thieves.” In the social composition of society, the Time of Troubles produced a further weakening of the power and influence of the old noble boyars, who in the storms
During the Time of Troubles, some died or were ruined, and some morally degraded and discredited themselves with their intrigues, “pranks” and their alliance with the enemies of the state. In relation to the political, the Time of Troubles - when Russia, having gathered its strength, itself restored the destroyed state - showed with its own eyes that the Moscow state was not the creation and “patrimony” of its own
"master" - the sovereign, but was a common cause and a common creation of "all cities and all ranks of people of the entire great Russian Kingdom."
Answer to question 12: The first Romanovs on the Russian throne: Mikhail and Alexei Romanov.
The Romanov dynasty ruled Russia for 304 years. During this time, one of the strongest and most powerful states in the world arose - the Russian Empire. It was great not only for its territory, its natural and economic potential, but above all for its spiritual power, the highest culture and the remarkable rise of scientific thought. Representatives of the Romanov family made a huge contribution to the creation of this unique civilization. The election of the new Tsar by the Zemsky Sobor was very stormy. Seventeen-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich was crowned king in the summer of 1613. Kazan Metropolitan Ephraim crowned him with the royal crown. The gentleness and kindness of the new king, noted by the sources of that time, gave hope to ordinary people and made a good impression on them. True, everyone knew that without the boyars and their advice, Tsar Mikhail would not be able to take a step. Indeed, Tsar Mikhail entrusted all matters to the Romanovs, Cherkasskys, Saltykovs, Sheremetevs, Lykovs, and Repnins. They controlled everything, even “disdained” the king, and he turned a blind eye to all their tricks, tricks, untruthful deeds. Liveliness, covetousness, and greed reigned at court. In the summer of 1619, Mikhail Fedorovich’s father, Filaret, returned from Polish captivity. Upon arrival in the capital, a week and a half later, the Jerusalem Patriarch Theophan, who had arrived in Russia for alms, and the Russian hierarchs offered Philaret the patriarchal throne - “he is worthy of such a rank, especially because he was a royal father in the flesh; let him be a helper and builder for the kingdom, a protector for the poor and a representative for the offended.” 1 Dual power began - the young Tsar and the wise Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', two “great sovereigns,” as they were called in official charters. Together with them, the Boyar Duma and the Zemsky Sobor participated in governing the state. Contemporaries report that the “great sovereigns” together listened to reports on cases, made decisions on them, received ambassadors, gave double charters, double gifts.
After the death of Filaret in 1633, Mikhail Fedorovich began to rule independently, relying on a narrow circle of trusted in-laws, in whose hands the leadership of the main orders was concentrated (Prince I. B. Cherkassky, boyar F. I. Sheremetev).
The military alliance with Sweden did not take place; the very idea of war with Poland was unpopular in society. In June 1634, the Peace of Polyanovsky was concluded; the former border was declared “eternal”, and King Vladislav IV renounced his rights to the Russian throne. In the few surviving sources, Mikhail Fedorovich appears as a complacent, deeply religious person, prone to pilgrimage to monasteries. His favorite pastime is hunting, “animal catching”. His government activities were limited by poor health
ALEXEY MIKHAILOVICH, Russian Tsar from the Romanov dynasty. Took the throne in 1645 after the death of his father, Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich.
In the first years of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, the power was actually controlled by the boyar B.I. Morozov (“the guy”, the tsar’s educator). In 1646, duties on salt were introduced, as a result of which the products rose in price, became unavailable to the population, and merchants' stale goods rotted. In 1647, the tax was abolished, but in order to compensate for losses, they decided to reduce the salaries of service people. This caused the Salt Riot of 1648, during which the Tsar’s relatives L.S. Pleshcheev and P.T. Trakhaniotov died, and Morozov miraculously survived. The government was forced to make concessions, and the collection of arrears was stopped. In fulfillment of the wishes of the nobility and merchants, in September 1649 the Zemsky Sobor approved a set of laws - the Code, prepared by the commission of Prince N.I. Odoevsky, it is believed, with the participation of Alexei Mikhailovich. The Code, which represented a new level of legislative practice for Russia, included special articles that regulated the legal status of certain social groups of the population. The local salary of service people was increased, and additional allotments were introduced for impoverished landowners. According to the Code, the serfdom of peasants was established as hereditary, and the period for searching for runaway peasants was indefinite. Thus, the process of legislative registration of serfdom was completed. The forced conversion of peasants into slaves was prohibited. The demands of the townspeople, dissatisfied with the existence of the “white” settlements, were also satisfied, since they were included in the tax, which made life easier for the towns as a whole. The Code established the concept of a crime against the state, which included treason, conspiracy against the sovereign and criminal intent to harm the “state’s health.” Certain legal norms of the Council Code of 1649 continued to be in force until the beginning of the 19th century.
Under Alexei Mikhailovich, the strengthening of the autocratic, unlimited power of the tsar continued in the second half of the 17th century. Zemstvo councils were not convened, but the order system of administration reached its peak, and the process of its bureaucratization was intensively underway. A special role was played by the Secret Order established in 1654, subordinate directly to Alexei Mikhailovich and allowing him to manage other central and local institutions. Important changes took place in the social sphere: there was a process of rapprochement between the estate and the estate, and the decomposition of the “service town” system began. The government of Alexei Mikhailovich supported the interests of the Russian merchants, the Customs (1653) and New Trade (1667) Charters protected merchants from foreign competitors. A reflection of new trends in Russian life was the invitation to serve in Russia of foreign specialists and the creation of regiments of a “foreign system.”
Foreign Asia is a region that leads the world not only in area, but also in population. Moreover, he has held this championship for more than one millennium. The countries of foreign Asia, despite their many differences, also have a number of common features. They will be discussed in this article.
General characteristics of foreign Asian countries
Foreign Asia is the cradle of many civilizations and the birthplace of agriculture. The world's first cities were built here and a number of great scientific discoveries were made.
All countries of foreign Asia (and there are 48 of them in total) occupy an area of 32 million square kilometers. Large states predominate among them. There are also giant countries, the area of each of which exceeds 3 million km2 (India, China).
Experts classify most states in this region as developing. Only four countries out of 48 can be called economically developed. These are Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Israel.
There are 13 monarchies on the political map of foreign Asia (and half of them are located in the Middle East). The remaining countries in the region are republics.
According to the characteristics of their geographical location, all countries of foreign Asia are divided into:
- island (Japan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, etc.);
- coastal (India, South Korea, Israel, etc.);
- inland (Nepal, Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan, etc.).
It is obvious that countries from the latter group are experiencing great difficulties in terms of introducing their goods to world markets.
Regions and countries of foreign Asia
Geographers divide overseas Asia into five subregions:
- South-West Asia - includes all countries on the territory of the Arabian Peninsula, the Transcaucasian republics, Turkey, Cyprus, Iran and Afghanistan (20 states in total);
- South Asia - includes 7 states, the largest of which are India and Pakistan;
- Southeast Asia is made up of 11 countries, ten of which are developing (all except Singapore);
- East Asia - includes only five powers (China, Mongolia, Japan, South Korea and North Korea);
- Central Asia consists of five post-Soviet republics (Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan).
How do the countries of foreign Asia border? The map below will help you navigate this issue.
Population and natural resources
This region, due to its tectonic structure, is distinguished by its enormous diversity. Thus, India and China can boast of significant reserves of coal, iron and iron. However, the most important wealth here is black gold. The largest oil fields are concentrated in Saudi Arabia, Iran and Kuwait.
As for the conditions for the development of agriculture, in this regard, some states are more fortunate, others much less fortunate. Many of the countries in South and Southeast Asia have excellent conditions. But states such as Syria or Mongolia are an almost continuous lifeless desert, where only certain branches of livestock farming can be developed.
According to various estimates, from 3.5 to 3.8 billion people live within the region. This is more than half of the entire population of the Earth. Almost all countries of Foreign Asia are characterized by high birth rates (the so-called second type of reproduction). Many states in the region are experiencing today, which entails food and other problems.
The ethnic structure of the population in this region is also very complex. At least a thousand different nationalities live here, the most numerous of which are the Chinese, Japanese and Bengalis. In terms of linguistic diversity, this region also has no equal on the entire planet.
Most of the population of foreign Asia (about 66%) lives in rural areas. Nevertheless, the pace and nature of urbanization processes in this region are so great that the situation has already begun to be called an “urban explosion.”
Foreign Asia: economic features
What is the role of modern countries in the region in the global economy? All states of foreign Asia can be collected into several groups. There are so-called ones (Singapore, Korea, Taiwan and others) who, in a short period of time, were able to rebuild their national economy and achieve certain successes in development. A separate group in the region are oil-producing countries (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, UAE, etc.), whose economies are entirely based on this natural wealth.
Japan (the most developed country in Asia), China and India cannot be classified into any of these categories. All other states remain underdeveloped, and in some of them there is no industry at all.
Conclusion
Foreign Asia is the largest historical and geographical region of the planet, within which more than one civilization arose. Today there are 48 independent states. They differ in size, population, and government structure, but they also have several common features.
Most of the countries of Foreign Asia are developing countries with rather backward economies. Only four of them can be classified as economically developed powers.
The origin and formation of feudal relations in Europe and Asia.
The term "feudalism" appeared in France in the 17th century and was originally
used in the field of law: it was introduced into historical science in the 19th century
century by the famous French historian Francois Guizot.
Feudalism arose as a result of the disintegration of slave-owning orders
only in a few countries whose peoples have created high civilizations in
antiquity (China, India, Greece, Rome). Most other nations
feudal relations arose as a result of the decomposition
primitive communal formation (in Germany, among many Slavic peoples, in
Scandinavia, Japan, the Mongols, and a number of African countries). Known and
the path of formation of feudalism, which is characterized by interaction
named processes (an example is the Frankish state, which
arose in the 5th century. AD under King Clovis).
In many countries, feudal relations developed over the course of
for a long time, which was determined by the nature and slow pace
development of productive forces.
Defining the medieval era as a time of feudal dominance
relations, it should be borne in mind that the concept of “Middle Ages” and “feudalism”
are not entirely identical even for Europe, where in the early Middle Ages
feudal relations to a certain extent coexisted with patriarchal
way of life, and later with the capitalist one. Feudal period in Russia
falls on the IX-XIX centuries.
Feudalism is considered as a progressive social system according to
compared to slave ownership. Progressive was also the transition to
feudalism from the primitive communal system, since the established
individual production was more in line with the level of development
productive forces, and therefore was more efficient.
The progressive features of feudalism were most consistently manifested in
its Western European version. The economy of feudalism was based on
practically monopoly ownership of the land by the class of feudal landowners
and was natural in nature.
In an agrarian economy, land was the main means
production, and feudal property made it possible
exploit the direct producers-peasants, determined
social structure of society, its political structure. Feudal lords
part of their land was distributed to the peasants who lived on it
independent small-scale farming with your own tools. labor giving
part of the produced product goes to the landowners in the form of rent or tax. Rent
for the farmer was the only way to receive income from his
land ownership, and for peasants - duty for the use
earth. Historically, it came in three forms: labor labor (corvée),
produtovy (natural quitrent) and monetary.
Collecting payments on land on which peasants have toiled for centuries, but
did not have the right to freely dispose of either it or the products of their labor,
accompanied by coercive measures (non-economic coercion). IN
Western Europe, the dependence of the peasants was of a personal nature - the peasant
was considered attached to the lord and not to the land. Attaching the peasants
to land existed in Eastern and some Central European countries
(for example, in Russia, Poland, the Czech Republic, some areas of Northern Germany).
Commodity production (simple) and trade under feudalism
mainly related to urban development. European cities are becoming
center of craft production and trade since the 11th century. Product development
monetary relations and exchange between city and village developed natural
nature of the economy.
The needs, mainly of the nobility, were increasingly satisfied with
through trade, but reproduction was still carried out on
natural basis.
In cities, in addition to artisans, there were other social groups:
merchants, bankers, officials, intelligentsia. During the period of decomposition of feudalism and
the emergence of capitalist relations, new classes were formed -
proletariat and bourgeoisie. Feudal society was divided into classes,
each of which had its own rights and responsibilities and performed certain
functions. These are the clergy (praying), the nobility (warring), baptism and
artisans who were part of the third estate (producing material
Class rights and obligations existed in unity: the presence of rights
implied duties, failure to fulfill the latter led to deprivation of rights. So,
Vossal who ignored military service was deprived of rights to allotments
lands: those who used “market law” had to comply with their
obligations to the workshop or guild.
The classes also had their own special system of relations. IN
clergy it corresponded to the hierarchical structure of the Catholic
churches. The military class was subject to vassalage, which bound the vassal and
lord through personal relationships of service and obligatory patronage.
Corporate connections played a significant role in social relations.
Medieval man was subject to the ethical and legal norms of the corporation,
her traditions. Gradually a special psychological type of knight emerged,
clergyman, merchant, guild artisan, etc., that is, the mentality
medieval man.
Such was feudalism, which manifested itself in different forms and
not simultaneously in different countries of the world.
In terms of its geographical location and ethnic composition, Russia combines Europe and Asia. Some historians see Russia as part of Europe, although they note that in comparison with it it is developing more slowly. Others argue that Russia has its own unique path of development and its own civilization. The entire history of Russia is a continuous process of territorial expansion. Vast spaces gave Russia great economic and trade advantages, but they were also associated with difficulties in the development of civilization - after all, the territory needed to be developed and protected, and this always required large resources and time. In matters of choosing a religion, combined with Christianity, Ancient Rus' received from Byzantium the idea of monarchical power, which quickly entered into political consciousness. The sole power was supported by the church group. This was especially evident during the time of Ivan the Terrible. He adhered to the principle that the whole country was his property and he was the absolute owner there. The behavior and actions of Ivan the Terrible clearly show a tendency towards eastern despotism. In contrast to the tsar, the new nobility puts forward the idea that the tsar should rule with his advisers and the Duma and in public. This is already a bias towards Europe. It was from this time that Russian political thought began to develop, close in its ideals to Western theory. A feature of Russian society was the community. It also existed in Western Europe during the era of feudalism. However, the Western community is more dynamic than the Russian one. Ancient Rus' gave a version of the non-synthetic and therefore slow development of feudalism. Like some countries of Western Europe, the Eastern Slavs switched to feudalism directly from the primitive communal system. The history of medieval Russia shows that during this period social processes nevertheless took place along a path closer to Western Europe than to the East, although not as brightly as in Europe. Choosing the Christian path of development and assimilating the religious and moral values accumulated by Byzantium allowed Russia to immediately determine its position in the Christian world. The differences in religion were so serious that Europe was perceived as the center of “Latinism.” Therefore, interest in the fruits of Western civilization manifested itself very slowly. Thus, at the very time when Europe had already parted with the medieval value system and established the ideals of humanism and rationalism, Russia received from Byzantium ideas of a mystical-ascetic direction. Issues of orientation in politics, economics and culture irrevocably turned towards the West only during the reign of Peter I and subsequent ones.
14. Europe: transition to the New Age. Consequences of great geographical discoveries.
Even now, historians continue to argue when the Middle Ages gave way to the Modern Age in Europe. For many historians, the boundary is considered to be the English bourgeois revolution, during which the old political system was broken and the way was opened for the development of capitalist relations. Others believe that the decline of the Middle Ages began much earlier - back in the 15th century. It is no coincidence that this era is called the era of the great breakthrough. In the 15th century Dramatic changes are sweeping across all areas of Western civilization. The pace of life also became different: patriarchal Europe, with its slow lifestyle, was retreating into the past. This era of hysteria is unanimously called the transitional stage to the New Age, or the early stage of the Modern Age. Even then the foundations of modern Western civilizations were laid. XV century became a turning point in Europe's relations with other countries. The prosperity of trade created a need to find sources of precious metals and stones. Merchants and travelers were attracted by stories about the treasures of the East. The Portuguese were the first to go in search of the treasures of the East, and a little later - the Spaniards. Expeditions went along the coast of Africa and finally in 1456. The Portuguese reached the coast of Cape Verde, and in 1486. The Spaniards circumnavigated the African continent around the Cape of Good Hope. As a result of sailing in the open ocean, the Portuguese discovered the Azores and Madeira Islands. Geographical discoveries followed one after another. In 1498 Vasco da Gamma led his ships to the shores of India. In 1492 H. Columbus, in search of a route to India, crossed the Atlantic Ocean and discovered America. From the 16th century, Europeans penetrated into China and Japan, about which they had only a vague idea. In 1510, the conquest and conquest of America (Conquest) began. Ferdinand Magellan, in his trip around the world (1519-1522), confirmed that the earth is spherical. In the 17th century Australia was discovered by the British. The Age of Great Geographical Discovery created the basis for the formation of a global civilization. But not only positive results characterize this period. When faced with other civilizations, Europeans were guided by the principles: “God, glory and gold.” Many ancient civilizations simply died during the process of colonization (until the middle of the 17th century) (Mayans, Aztecs, Incas). Since 1501 Portugal, England, Holland and France revived the slave trade. China and Japan, not wanting to associate themselves with Europe, simply closed their countries to visits from Europeans. For Europe itself, the unfolding expansion also had its consequences. Shopping centers have shifted: the Mediterranean began to lose its former importance. The influx of gold caused a price revolution. Finance and banking have become more complicated. New markets stimulated the development of industry and trade, which ultimately led to the formation of capitalist relations.
15. The Russian state in the 16th century. The elected Rada and the oprichnina of Ivan the Terrible: two options for centralizing the country.
In the 16th century, the territory of Russia expanded almost twice as much as in the 15th century. The main directions in the field of foreign policy were: in the west access to the Baltic Sea, in the east and southeast the fight against the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates, as well as the development of Siberia. In the south - protecting the borders from the attacks of the Crimean Khan. The total population was approaching 7 million people. The bulk of the population was concentrated in the Novgorod-Pskov land and the central part of the country. The country was ruled by Grand Duke Ivan IV Vasilyevich, who ascended the throne in December 1533, and took the royal title on January 16, 1547. According to the state structure, the Russian state was considered a feudal-serf monarchy. The Moscow uprising of 1547, caused by the long-term instability of the supreme power in the country, led to deep state reforms. A small circle of people close to him formed around the young Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich (the Terrible). This circle later received the name “Chosen Rada” based on the Polish analogue and model. While not formally a state institution, the Elected Rada was the de facto government of the country for 13 years, consistently implementing a policy of major reforms. In their content, they proclaimed the strengthening of the foundations of the Russian state in the interests of a united serving nobility. An important stage in the evolution of the state-political development of Russia was created in Moscow in 1549. the first estate-representative legislative institution - the Zemsky Sobor. It consisted of the Boyar Duma, the “Consecrated Council” of the highest hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church and representatives of various layers of farmers (landowners). In line with the centralization of the state, the Elected Rada adopted in 1550 a new set of laws - the Code of Laws, to which changes and additions were made related to the strengthening of central power. He also streamlined the articles on the rules for the transition of peasants and allowed the conversion of slaves into peasants. In order to strengthen the armed forces, the Elected Rada in 1550. began to implement military reform, as a result of which the Streltsy army was formed and the “Code of Service” was adopted - the first military charter. In May 1551 The elected Rada carried out church reform. For this purpose, in January - May 1551. The Council of the Russian Church gathered, named Stoglav, according to the number of chapters in the collection, which consolidated the unification of the all-Russian pantheon of saints, a single cult of rituals, and canons - rules for church painting. In 1552 public administration reform was carried out. As a result of the reform, an order system was created - a system of “orders” of the central bodies of State Power. The Elected Rada itself existed until 1560. and ended due to differences in the choice of the main direction of foreign policy. The leaders of the Chosen Rada were supporters of the fight against the Crimean Khan, and Tsar Ivan insisted on moving towards the Baltic. In addition, the leaders were glad to be supporters of gradual reforms in solving the problems of the political course and development of Russia. The Tsar was a supporter of the rapid strengthening of his autocracy through terror. 03.12.1564 Ivan IV unexpectedly leaves Moscow with a group of supporters and after some time sends two letters. In one he names the traitors, in the other he promises not to touch the civilian population. The tsar divided the entire state into two parts - zemshchina and oprichnina, into which he included the most important economic regions, trading cities, fishing areas, etc. A special noble army was formed from noble landowners who settled on the lands indicated in the oprichnina. The maintenance of the troops was collected from the zemstvo part of the state. Only one thing was required from the guardsmen - complete submission and devotion to the tsar. In return, the guardsmen received the right of unlimited arbitrariness, extortion and enrichment. In fact, it was a punitive mechanism designed to strengthen the autocratic power of the tsar. In an effort to destroy the separatism of the boyar nobility, Ivan IV does not stop at any cruelty. Klin, Torzhok, Tver, and Novgorod were destroyed. Mass repressions unfolded in Moscow. The end of the oprichnina was marked by the defeat of Moscow by Khan Dovlat-Girey in 1571, when the oprichnina army offered no resistance to him. The city was not taken, but was completely burned. The oprichnina was abolished in 1572. after which the lands were united again. The very mention of the word oprichnina was prohibited. The result of the oprichnina was the deterioration of the political and economic situation of the country.
16. Russia at the turn of the 16th - 17th centuries. Time of Troubles: causes, essence, consequences.
The general characteristic of the period is a complex set of internal and external contradictions that shook Russia at the turn of the 16th-17th centuries. The result of the reign of Ivan the Terrible in the field of domestic and foreign policy was the strengthening of tsarist power and the Russian centralized state itself. It acquired wide international authority and had a powerful bureaucratic and military apparatus. The enslavement of peasants continued, which led to the fact that it was in the 16th century that a system of serfdom developed in Russia. The situation was aggravated by a terrible famine, which in 1601-1603. struck Russia. People died in tens of thousands. Robbers roamed the forests and roads. As a result of dissatisfaction with the government in 1603. There was an uprising led by Khlopko. Although the uprising was dealt with, the authority of the king fell sharply. Added to the internal contradictions are international problems that resulted from the strengthening of Russia’s enemies – the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Poland), Turkey and Sweden, who sought to expand their territories at the expense of Russia. Time of Troubles (or Time of Troubles), a term denoting events that occurred in Russia at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th centuries. This is a time of crisis of statehood in Russia, which is also interpreted by a number of historians as a civil war. Accompanied by popular uprisings and riots; the reigns of impostors (False Dmitry I, False Dmitry II), Polish and Swedish interventions, the destruction of state power and the ruin of the country. The term was introduced by Russian historians at the end of the 17th century. Causes of the Time of Troubles: 1. A severe systemic crisis of the Moscow state, largely associated with the reign of Ivan the Terrible. Conflicting domestic and foreign policies led to the destruction of many economic structures. Weakened key institutions and led to loss of life. 2. Important western lands were lost. 3. Social conflicts within the Moscow state sharply intensified, which covered all societies (tsarist power and boyar aristocracy, boyars and nobles, feudal lords and peasantry, church and secular feudal lords, patrimonial aristocracy and service aristocracy, etc.) 4. Intervention of foreign states (Poland, Sweden, England, etc. regarding land issues, territory, etc.) 5. Dynastic crisis: - 1584. After the death of Ivan the Terrible, the throne was taken by his son Fedor. - 1591. Under mysterious circumstances, the youngest son of Grozny, Dmitry, died in Uglich. - 1598. Fyodor dies. Stages and essence: Stage 1. 1598-1605. The key figure is Boris Godunov. By decision of the Zemsky Sobor, he was elected to the royal throne in 1598. He was known as a cruel politician, was a guardsman, and had an extraordinary mind. With his active participation, the patriarchate was established in Moscow in 1598. He dramatically changed the nature of the state's domestic and foreign policy (development of the southern outskirts, development of Siberia, return of western lands, truce with Poland). Consequently, there is a rise in the economy and an intensification of the political struggle. In 1601-1603, the harvest failed, famine and food riots began. During this period, the first False Dmitry appeared on the territory of Poland, received the support of the Polish gentry and entered Russian land in 1604. In April 1605, Godunov died unexpectedly. In June, False Dmitry I entered Moscow. 11 months later, in 1606, he was killed as a result of a conspiracy. Stage 2. 1606-1610. This stage is associated with Vasily Shuisky, the first “boyar tsar”. He ascended the throne immediately after the death of False Dmitry 1 by decision of Red Square, giving a cross-kissing record about his good attitude towards the boyars. On the throne he faced many problems (Bolotnikov's uprising, False Dmitry 2, Polish troops, famine). Shuisky managed to solve only part of the problems. In 1610, Polish troops defeated Shuisky's troops and he was overthrown from the throne and the regime of the seven-boyars was established; the boyars wanted to invite the Polish prince Vladislav to the throne, guaranteeing the inviolability of the faith and the boyars, and also for him to change his faith. The church protested this, and there was no answer from Poland. Stage 3. 1611-1613. Patriarch Hermogenes in 1611 initiated the creation of a zemstvo militia near Ryazan. In March it besieged Moscow and failed due to internal divisions. The second was created in the fall, in Novgorod. It was headed by K. Minin and D. Pozharsky. The money raised was not sufficient to support the militia, but not small. The militia called themselves free people, headed by the zemstvo council and temporary orders. On October 26, 1612, the militia managed to take the Moscow Kremlin. By decision of the boyar duma, it was dissolved. Consequences: 1. The total number of deaths is equal to one third of the population. 2. Economic catastrophe, the financial system and transport communications were destroyed, vast territories were withdrawn from agricultural production. turnover. 3. Territorial losses (Chernigov land, Smolensk land, Novgorod-Seversk land, Baltic territories). 4. Weakening of domestic merchants and entrepreneurs and strengthening of foreign merchants. 5. The emergence of a new royal dynasty On February 7, 1613, the Zemsky Sobor elected 16-year-old Mikhail Romanov. The first representatives of the dynasty (M.F. Romanov - 1613-1645, A.M. Romanov - 1645-1676, F.A. Romanov - 1676-1682). They had to solve 3 main problems - restoring the unity of the territories, restoring the state mechanism and economy.
17. Europe and the world in the 18th century: early bourgeois states and enlightened absolutism. The French Revolution. The War of Independence in the British Colonies of North America.
At the end of the 17th and beginning of the 18th centuries, the formation of an industrial civilization began in Europe and the world, which stands on fundamentally different foundations than the previous traditional civilization. The destruction of the foundations of traditional civilization is called modernization. In this sense, the 18th century became a transitional era that prepared Western Europe for the transition to the industrial era. The modernization process is a rather complex and lengthy process, covering all aspects of society. It includes: urbanization (growth of cities); industrialization (constant increase in machine production in industry); democratization of political structures (the foundations of civil society and the rule of law are laid); secularization (liberation of spiritual and social life from human influence). During this period, man’s attitude to power became fundamentally new. It seemed to have lost divine sanction, it began to be perceived rationally, it was judged by the results of the activities of those who were given the reins of power. Mass consciousness is also becoming different. Thanks to the sciences, the gap separating the ordinary citizen from the scientific elite is narrowing. The process of a country's entry into capitalism depended on how quickly modernization proceeded. Capitalism and modernization drew a clear line in the 18th century. between West and East. During this period, the superiority of Western countries over Russia was finally determined. England, Holland and France have reached the level of advanced countries, where favorable conditions have developed for success in the development of capitalism and modernization. Another center of capitalism and modernization emerged in the North American English colonies. In these colonies, capitalism gained great opportunities almost from the very beginning. The first English settlements in North America appeared at the beginning of the 17th century, but their numbers grew rapidly. The American Revolution, which eliminated the weak shoots of feudalism in the colonies and broke with the dictatorship of the metropolis, opened at the end of the 18th century. a way to quickly increase modernization potential. The new state had a good basis for the development of capitalism. This was facilitated by the democratic traditions brought by the colonists, advanced farming methods, and the rapid development of industry. In Russia, the process of development of capitalism and modernization was largely determined by the policies pursued by tsarist absolutism. The complex of reforms of Peter the Great dealt a crushing blow to traditionalism in Russia, and this period became the basis for the emergence of capitalism and the modernization of the country. But the reforms were carried out using truly barbaric methods. Fighting against traditionalism, Russian absolutism strengthened its basis - the serfdom of the peasants. This gave rise to contradictions. The development of industry was due to the increase in the labor of serfs. Russia's lag behind the United States and other Western European countries was primarily explained by the fact that there were no difficulties with the development of capitalist relations in the form of feudal remnants such as serfdom in Russia. The time of “enlightened absolutism” in Europe is usually referred to as the several decades before the French Revolution of 1789. This era in Western Europe is characterized by a belief in the omnipotence of the human mind. It is no coincidence that the 18th century is called the Age of Enlightenment. Scientific knowledge, previously the property of a narrow circle of scientists, came out into the wider world and filled the secular salons of Paris and London. At this time, the most progressive and educated writers, artists, and philosophers criticized everything that oppressed man and limited his abilities. They entered into a struggle with all feudal remnants. Thinkers of the 18th century. He was distinguished by a great faith in the inexhaustible strengths and capabilities of man, and an understanding of the need to educate the broad masses of the people. Among the great people of the era of enlightenment, the following names stand out: Voltaire, Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Denis Diderot, Adam Smith (philosophers and scientists), Daniel Defoe, Beaumorchais, Schiller and Goethe (writers), Bach, Mozart (musicians). The struggle for American independence. The English king and parliament in the mid-18th century. introduced many taxes and prohibitions in the English colonies. Taxes had to be paid for the purchase of the smallest goods, even newspapers. This gave rise to many dissatisfied colonists. A boycott of imported British goods is introduced. This led to the closure of the Boston port. In 1774 The 1st Continental Congress is held in Philadelphia, which determined the colonists' policy towards England. The armed struggle began on April 10, 1775. when English troops marched on Boston with the mission of capturing the rebels. The first clashes between volunteers and troops took place there. Thus began the War for American Independence. The creation of a regular army was entrusted to planter George Washington. 04/04/1776 A declaration of independence and separation from England was adopted. The creation of an independent state, the United States, was proclaimed. The leaders of the revolution were the bourgeoisie and planters, the driving force was the masses. Military operations took place mainly in the north. Despite the difficulties, the turning point in the war came in October 1777. when the English army was surrounded and capitulated. The war ended with the signing of a peace treaty in 1783, according to which England recognized the independence of the United States and the expansion of its territories westward to the Mississippi River. The Great French Revolution occurred on July 14, 1789. It began with the storming of the Bastille, a gloomy fortress-prison. The garrison was offered to capitulate, but the troops responded with volleys of weapons. King Louis the 16th recognized the legitimacy of the Constituent Assembly. Power passed into the hands of the City Council (the commune of Paris). After the victory in Paris, the revolutionary movement spread throughout France. Within 2-3 weeks, the royal administration was removed everywhere. However, with the fall of absolutism, things did not become calmer. The peasants began uprisings, refused to fulfill duties, burned castles and plundered food warehouses. Due to pogroms and unstable conditions, famine began in Paris in early October. Crowd of 6-7 thousand people. Mostly women moved to Versailles where the king was. The situation was saved by the king's promise to rectify the situation. At the beginning of 1791 The Legislative Assembly adopts the first Constitution in French history. The revolution ended as a result of the coup d'etat that took place on November 9, 1799. and brought Bonaparte (Napoleon) to power. The result of the revolution was the destruction of the old order (the feudal structure and absolutism were destroyed, power passed to the bourgeoisie, the beginnings of the formation of a legal state and society were laid). The revolution was a turning point for the entire world history. The ideas she carried influenced the course of events not only in Europe, but also in the world.
18. Russia at the end of the 17th – first quarter of the 18th century. V. Peter's transformations. Discussions about Peter I.
In the history of the Russian state, the period usually called the Peter the Great era occupies a special place. In this short period of time, covering the last years of the 17th century - the first quarter of the 18th century, transformations took place that were comprehensive in nature, affecting all spheres of the life of the state and had a huge impact on the development of the political, economic and cultural life of the country. They were prepared by the previous development of the state and especially significant changes that took place in the second half of the 17th century. It was at the end of the 17th century that a new period of Russian history began. It was a transitional time, characterized primarily by the gradual formation of new social knowledge, a time when the economic and cultural lag of the Russian state from the advanced countries of Western Europe became obvious. During this period, attempts were made to transition the Russian state system from autocracy with the Boyar Duma to an bureaucratic-noble (or class-representative) monarchy. Attempts were made to reorganize the army and create a navy. A system of central institutions began to develop - orders, departments responsible for one or another direction in governing the country. Localism was abolished, which meant a certain deviation from the principle of birth, which determined the position of a person during his appointment. A Secret Order was created, headed by the tsar himself, which concentrated control over all important state affairs. Having ascended the throne, after a long struggle between various boyar factions, Peter I correctly understood and assessed the prevailing conditions, and realized the urgent tasks of his time. His political program mainly took shape abroad, where Peter was part of the “Great Embassy” in 1697. Its ultimate goal was the creation of a regular police state based on universal service; the state was understood as the “common good.” The tsar himself considered himself the first servant of the fatherland, who was supposed to teach his subjects by his own example. Peter’s unconventional behavior, on the one hand, destroyed the centuries-old image of the sovereign as a sacred figure, and on the other, it aroused protest among part of society (primarily the Old Believers, whom Peter cruelly persecuted), who saw the tsar as their enemy, i.e. enemy of the old foundations. He supervised the construction of the fleet and the creation of a regular army. He aimed his reforms at solving the following, in his opinion, main issues: - measures regarding estates; - measures regarding management; - military device; - measures for economic development; - measures regarding church governance; Under Peter, a new type of regular army was created, with a unified system of recruitment, weapons and uniforms. Since 1705 Conscription was introduced in the country. First, they began to take one soldier from 20 households for lifelong service, and then they took from a certain number of male souls. New military regulations were introduced, officer schools were opened. In order to strengthen local power in 1708. The country was divided into 8 provinces, headed by governors in charge of the troops and affairs of the subordinate territory. The voivodeship administration was replaced by a provincial government system. In 1711, Peter, instead of the Boyar Duma, founded the Governing Senate, which had the functions of the main body of executive, judicial and legislative power. It included 9 dignitaries closest to Peter. The Senate was required to develop new laws, monitor the country's finances, and control the activities of administrative bodies. The leadership of the work of the senators was entrusted to the prosecutor general. In 1714, the “Decree on Single Inheritance” was issued, equalizing the rights of owners of estates and estates. The decree marked the merger of the two classes into a single class. This was important for the formation of the Russian nobility as a full-fledged single class. In 1717, the creation of collegiums began - the central bodies of sectoral management of the country. There were 12 boards, and each board was in charge of a strictly defined branch of government of the country (Admiralty - fleet affairs, Foreign Affairs - foreign relations, Chamber Board - tax collection, etc.) The boards were created to replace the cumbersome system of orders, whose functions in managing the country were tangled and often intertwined. New authorities - executive, financial, judicial and control - were also created locally. In 1720, the General Regulations were published - detailed instructions for organizing the work of new institutions. Of primary importance for the social sphere was the tax reform, which began in 1718. In Russia, a poll tax was introduced for males, for which regular population censuses (“audits of souls”) were carried out. During the reform, the social category of serfs was eliminated and the social status of some other categories of the population was clarified. With approval in January 1721. “Spiritual Regulations”, a spiritual collegium (Holy Governing Synod) of 12 church hierarchs was created. The leadership was carried out by the Chief Prosecutor. In 1722, Peter signed the Table of Ranks, which determined the order of organization of military and civil service and was in force until 1917. The Table of Ranks divided the service into civil, military and court. The new law defined 14 classes (ranks) of officials. For the first time in the history of the country, not origin, but the personal qualities of a person were recognized as the main principle of bureaucratic division. In 1724 the Academy of Sciences was founded (opened in 1725) and a civil charter was adopted. When discussing Peter's reforms, almost all historians agree that the transformations of the first quarter of the 18th century. were progressive in nature. The most important result of Peter's reforms was to overcome the crisis of traditionalism by modernizing the country. Russia became a full participant in international relations, pursuing an active foreign policy. Russia's authority in the world grew significantly, and Peter himself became for many an example of a reformer sovereign. Under Peter, the foundations of Russian national culture were laid. Peter made the success of the nobles' careers dependent on education. By a special decree of the tsar, assemblies were introduced, representing a new form of communication between people for Russia. Of particular importance was the construction of stone Petersburg, in which foreign architects took part and which was carried out according to the plan developed by the Tsar. The Tsar also created a system of governance and administrative-territorial division of the country, which remained in place for a long time. At the same time, a negative factor in the reforms being carried out was that the instrument of reform was violence. Reforms were carried out using cruel methods, through extreme strain of material and human forces (poll tax), which entailed uprisings (Streletskoye 1698, Astrakhan 1705-1706, Bulavinskoye 1707-1709). Petrine reforms not only did not rid the country of the previously established system of social relations embodied in serfdom, but, on the contrary, preserved and strengthened its institutions. This was the main contradiction of Peter's reforms, and as a consequence of this, the prerequisites for a future new crisis.
1. The origin and formation of feudal relations in Europe and Asia....p.2
2. Specifics of the formation of a unified Russian state…………… p.4
3. The Rise of Moscow…………………………………………………….page 9
The origin and formation of feudal relations in Europe and Asia.
The term "feudalism" appeared in France in XVII century and was originally used in the field of law: it was introduced into historical science in XIX century by the famous French historian Francois Guizot.
Feudalism arose as a result of the disintegration of slave-owning orders in only a few countries whose peoples created high civilizations in ancient times (China, India, Greece, Rome). For most other peoples, feudal relations arose as a result of the decomposition of the primitive communal formation (in Germany, among many Slavic peoples, in Scandinavia, in Japan, among the Mongols, in a number of African countries). The path of formation of feudalism is also known, which is characterized by the interaction of these processes (an example is the Frankish state, which arose in the 5th century AD under King Clovis).
In many countries, feudal relations developed over a long period of time, which was determined by the nature and slow pace of development of the productive forces.
When defining the medieval era as a time of dominance of feudal relations, it should be borne in mind that the concepts of “Middle Ages” and “feudalism” are not entirely identical even for Europe, where in the early Middle Ages feudal relations coexisted to a certain extent with the patriarchal structure, and later with the capitalist one. . In Russia, the feudal period falls on IX-XIX century
Feudalism is seen as a progressive social system compared to the slave system. The transition to feudalism from the primitive communal system was also progressive, since the established individual production was more consistent with the level of development of the productive forces, and therefore was more efficient.
The progressive features of feudalism were most consistently manifested in its Western European version. The economy of feudalism was based on the practically monopoly ownership of the land by the class of feudal landowners and was of a natural nature.
In the conditions of an agrarian economy, land was the main means of production, and feudal property made it possible to exploit the direct producers-peasants and determined the social structure of society and its political structure. The feudal lords gave away most of their land to the peasants, who carried out independent small-scale farming on it with their own tools. labor by giving part of the product produced to landowners in the form of rent or tax. Rent for the farmer was the only way to receive income from his land property, and for the peasants it was a duty for the use of the land. Historically, it came in three forms: labor (corvee), produtovy (in-kind rent) and money.
The collection of payments for land on which peasants had worked for centuries, but did not have the right to freely dispose of it or the products of their labor, was accompanied by coercive measures (non-economic coercion). In Western Europe, the dependence of peasants was personal in nature - the peasant was considered attached to the lord, and not to the land. The attachment of peasants to the land existed in Eastern and some countries of Central Europe (for example, in Russia, Poland, the Czech Republic, and some regions of Northern Germany).
Commodity production (simple) and trade under feudalism are mainly associated with the development of cities. European cities are becoming centers of craft production and trade with XI century. The development of commodity-money relations and exchange between city and village developed the natural character of the economy.
The needs, mainly of the nobility, were increasingly satisfied through trade, but reproduction was still carried out on a subsistence basis.
In cities, in addition to artisans, there were other social groups: merchants, bankers, officials, and intelligentsia. During the period of the decomposition of feudalism and the emergence of capitalist relations, the formation of new classes took place - the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Feudal society was divided into classes, each of which had its own rights and responsibilities and performed certain functions. These are the clergy (praying), the nobility (warring), godparents and artisans who were part of the third estate (producing material goods).
Class rights and obligations existed in unity: the presence of rights implied obligations, and failure to fulfill the latter led to deprivation of rights. Thus, a vossal who ignored military service was deprived of rights to plots of land: those who enjoyed “market rights” had to comply with their obligations to the workshop or guild.
The classes also had their own special system of relations. In the clergy, it corresponded to the hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church. The military class was subject to vassalage, which bound the vassal and the lord through personal relations of service and obligatory patronage.
Corporate connections played a significant role in social relations. Medieval man obeyed the ethical and legal norms of the corporation and its traditions. Gradually, a special psychological type of a knight, clergyman, merchant, guild artisan, etc. emerged, that is, the mentality of a medieval person.
Such was feudalism, which manifested itself in different forms and at different times in different countries of the world.
Specifics of the formation of the Moscow state.
The Moscow state still remained an early feudal monarchy. Because of this, relations between the center and the localities were initially built on the basis of sovereignty - vassalage. However, over time, the situation gradually changed. The Moscow princes, like all others, divided their lands among their heirs. The latter received the usual inheritances and were formally independent in them. However, in fact, the eldest son, who acquired the “table” of the Grand Duke, retained the position of senior prince. From the second half XIV V. a procedure was introduced according to which the eldest heir received a larger share of the inheritance than the others. This gave him a decisive economic advantage. In addition, along with the grand-ducal “table” he necessarily received the entire Vladimir land.
The legal nature of the relationship between the great and appanage princes gradually changed. These relations were based on letters of immunity and treaties concluded in large numbers. Initially, such agreements provided for the service of an appanage prince to the Grand Duke for a reward. then she began to get involved with the ownership of vassals or fiefdoms. It was believed that appanage princes received their lands from the Grand Duke for their service. And already the beginning XV V. an order was established according to which the appanage princes were obliged to obey the Grand Duke simply by virtue of his position.
Grand Duke. The head of the Russian state was the Grand Duke, who had a wide range of rights. He issued laws, supervised government administration, and had judicial powers.
The real content of princely power changes over time towards greater completeness. These changes went in two directions - internal and external. Initially, the Grand Duke could exercise his legislative, administrative and judicial powers only within his own domain. Even Moscow was divided in financial, administrative and judicial relations between the brother princes. IN XIV - X centuries the grand dukes usually left it to their heirs as common property. With the fall of power and appanage princes, the Grand Duke became the true ruler of the entire territory of the state. Ivan III and Vasily III they did not hesitate to throw into prison their closest relatives - appanage princes who tried to contradict their will.
F. Engels considered the power of the head of a centralized state to be a progressive phenomenon, “a representative of order in disorder, a representative of the emerging nation as opposed to fragmentation into rebellious vassal states.” Thus, the centralization of the state was an internal source of strengthening the grand ducal power. The external source of its strengthening was the fall of the power of the Golden Horde. At the beginning, the Moscow grand princes were vassals of the Horde khans, from whose hands they received the right to the grand-ducal “table”. After the Battle of Kulikovo, this dependence became only formal, and after 1480 The Moscow princes became not only factually, but also legally independent, sovereign sovereigns. The new content of grand-ducal power was given new forms. Starting with Ivan III Moscow grand princes called themselves “sovereigns of all Rus'.” Ivan III and his successor tried to appropriate the royal title to themselves.
In order to strengthen international prestige, Ivan III married the niece of the last Byzantine emperor Sophia Paleologus - the only heir to the no longer existing throne of Constantinople. Attempts were made to substantiate Ivan's claims ideologically III to autocracy. In addition to marriage ties with Sophia, Paleologus is trying to establish, of course, the mythical origin of the Russian princes from the Roman emperors. A theory of the origin of princely power was created.
Noble historians, starting with N.M. Karamzin, believed that from Ivan III Autocracy is established in Russia. This is true in the sense that Ivan III, who completed the liberation of Rus' from the Tatars, “kept” his princely table, independently of the Horde. However, talking about autocracy in the full sense of the word, i.e., about an unlimited monarchy in XV and even XVI V. Not yet. The power of the monarch was limited by other bodies of the early feudal state, primarily the Boyar Duma. Boyar Duma. An important body of the state was the Boyar Duma. It grew out of the council under the prince, which existed in the ancient Russian state.
The design of the Duma should be attributed (... XV V. The Boyar Duma differed from the previous council in its greater legal and organizational structure. It was a body that did not meet sporadically, but acted constantly. The Duma had a relatively stable composition. It included the so-called “Duma ranks” - introduced boyars and okolnichy. The competence of the Duma coincided with the powers of the Grand Duke, although this was not formally recorded anywhere. The Grand Duke was not legally obliged to take into account the opinion of the Duma, but in fact could not act arbitrarily, because any of his decisions was not implemented unless it was approved by the boyars. Through the Duma, the boyars carried out policies that were pleasing and beneficial to them. True, over time, the great princes increasingly subordinated the Boyar Duma to themselves, which is associated with the general process of centralization of power. This especially applies to the reigns of Ivan III and Vasily III. The significant role of the Boyar Duma in the system of state bodies and the dominance of large feudal lords in it are one of the characteristic features of the early feudal monarchy. Feudal congresses. They had the same character as during the times of Kievan Rus, but as centralization of the state strengthened, they gradually withered away.
The palace-patrimonial system of government continued to be an early feudal monarchy. The Moscow state also inherited from the previous period central government bodies, built according to the palace-patrimonial system. However, the expansion of the territory of the state and the complication of its activities come into conflict with the old forms of management, preparing for the gradual withering away of the palace-patrimonial system and the emergence of a new, administrative management. The transformation of the old system begins with its complication. It is divided into two parts. One is the administration of the palace, headed by a butler (dvorsky), who has numerous servants at his disposal. The butler was also in charge of the arable land of the princely peasants. The other part was formed by the so-called “paths”, providing for the special needs of the prince and his entourage. Their very names speak eloquently about the purpose of the paths: Sokolnichiy, Lovchiy, Konyushiy, Stolnichy, Chashnichy. To carry out their tasks, certain princely villages and entire areas were allocated to maintain the routes. The paths were not limited to collecting certain products and all kinds of benefits from designated places. They acted both as administrative and judicial bodies. Their leaders were called respectable boyars. Following the complication of the system of palace-patrimonial bodies, their competence and functions increased. From bodies that primarily served the personal needs of the prince, they increasingly turned into national institutions that performed important tasks in managing the entire state. Yes, the butler XV V. began to be, to a certain extent, in charge of issues related to land ownership of church and secular feudal lords, to carry out other duties in state administration, the previous nature of the temporary princely assignment was restored and turned into a permanent and fairly defined service. The increasing complexity of the functions of palace bodies required the creation of a large and ramified apparatus. The officials of the palace - clerks - specialized in a certain range of matters. The grand ducal treasury was separated from the palace service and became an independent department. A large palace office was created with an archive and other appendages.
All this prepared the transition to a new, command-based management system, which grew out of the previous one. This outgrowth began at the end XV V. But as a system, command management took shape only in the second half XVI V. At the same time, the term “order” itself was established. The first institutions of the order type were the Grand Palace, which grew out of the butler's department, and the State Prikaz. The Konyushenny Path turned into the Konyushenny Prikaz, which now not only served the personal needs of the prince, but was also associated with the development of the equestrian noble militia. At first XVI V. a Rank (Rank Order) was formed, which was in charge of accounting for service people, their ranks and positions. The development of the palace-patrimonial system into the order system was one of the indicators of the centralization of the Russian state, for the palace bodies, which had previously been in charge of essentially only the princely domain, now became institutions governing the entire huge Russian state.
Local authorities. The Russian state was divided into counties - the largest administrative-territorial units. Counties were divided into camps, camps into volosts. However, complete uniformity and clarity in the administrative-territorial division has not yet been developed. Along with the districts, in some places more lands were preserved. There were also categories - military districts, provincial judicial districts. At the head of individual administrative units were officials - representatives of the center. The districts were headed by governors, the volosts - by volostels. These officials were supported at the expense of the local population - they received “feed” from them, that is, they carried out in-kind monetary collections, collected judicial and other duties in their favor. Feeding, thus, was both a public service and a form of compensation for princely vassals for their military and other service. Feeders were obliged to manage the corresponding districts and volosts on their own, that is, to maintain their own administrative apparatus (tiuns, closers, etc.) and have their military detachments to ensure the internal and external functions of the feudal state. Sent from the center, they were not personally interested in the affairs of the districts or volosts they governed, especially since their appointment was usually relatively short-term - for a year or two. All the interests of the governors and volostels were focused primarily on personal enrichment through legal and illegal exactions from the local population. The feeding system was unable, in the conditions of the intensifying class struggle, to adequately suppress the resistance of the rebellious peasantry. Small patrimonial owners and landowners especially suffered from this, who were unable to independently protect themselves from “dashing people.”
The rising nobility was dissatisfied with the feeding system for another reason. He was not satisfied that income from local government went into the pockets of the boyars and that feeding provided the boyars with great political weight. Local authorities and administration did not extend their competence to the territory of the boyar estates. The princes and boyars, as before, retained immunity rights in their estates. They were not just landowners, but administrators and judges in their villages and villages.
City government bodies. City government in the Moscow state has changed compared to Kyiv times. Cities did not have self-government during this period. In appanage principalities, cities were governed on an equal basis with rural areas. With the annexation of appanage principalities to Moscow, the great princes, retaining all appanage lands usually with their former owners, always removed cities from the jurisdiction of the former appanage princes and directly extended their power to them. This was done based on the importance of cities not only as economic centers, but primarily for military reasons. Cities were fortresses. Possession of them ensured the great princes both retention of the former inheritance in their hands and defense from external enemies. Initially, the great princes ruled the cities in the same way as the previous appanage princes, that is, without separating them from their other lands. Governors and volosts, governing their district or volost, ruled to the same extent the cities located on their territory. Later, some special city government bodies appeared. Their emergence is associated with the development of cities primarily as fortresses. In the middle XV V. the position of town dweller appeared - a kind of military commandant of the city. He was obliged to monitor the condition of the city fortifications and the fulfillment of defense-related duties by the local population. Already in XV V. The towns were also used for other grand-ducal matters, in particular land matters.
The position of town dwellers was filled by local landowners, mainly nobles and boyar children. The town dwellers, who were initially rather insignificant figures in government, by the end XV V. began to play a serious role. First temporarily, and then more and more permanently, they were assigned broad powers in land, financial and other branches of management, not only within the city, but also in the adjacent county. In accordance with the expansion of functions, the names of these officials also changed. They begin to be called city officials and clerks. In charge of a number of military-economic and simple economic issues, city clerks were subordinate to the grand ducal treasurers. Sometimes two or more such clerks were appointed to one city. In the person of the city clerks, the nobles and boyar children received their own local government body, and the Grand Duke received reliable conductors of the policy of centralization.
The rise of Moscow.
The unification of Russian lands was caused by the need for protection from external enemies: the Golden Horde, Poland and Lithuania.
Moscow becomes the center of unification of Russian lands. According to legend, it was founded in 1147 year by Yuri Dolgoruky and is mentioned in the chronicle as “Moskov”. Moscow belonged to the Vladimir princes, and Daniil, the son of Alexander Nevsky, became the first prince of Moscow.
The exceptionally advantageous geographical position of Moscow made it the center of routes, both water and land. Moscow was located in the center of the Russian principalities, which closed it from external enemies, and became a kind of refuge for artisans and traders. Here are the objective economic and political prerequisites for the unification of Rus'.
The first “collector” of Russian lands should be considered Ivan Danilovich Kalita ( 1325 – 1340 ) - grandson of Alexander Nevsky. On this occasion, the chronicle says: “From then on, there was great silence throughout the Russian land for forty years and the Tatars stopped fighting the Russian land.” He maintained very close, friendly relations with the khan, often visited him, and generously presented gifts to the khan's wives and nobles. Having earned trust in the Horde, Ivan Kalita obtained from the khan the right to collect tribute and liquidate the Baskas.
Kalita's authority was also promoted by dynastic marriages. His daughters Maria, Feodosia, Evdokia were married to the Rostov, Belozersky and Yaroslavl princes, respectively. Under Kalita, Moscow became the ideological (spiritual) center of Rus'. The residence of the Russian Metropolitan was moved from Vladimir to Moscow. Peter, who founded the famous Assumption Cathedral, where he was buried after his death. Sons of Ivan Kalita Semyon Proud ( 1341-1353 ) and Ivan Krasny ( 1353-1359 ) further strengthened the Moscow principality, and according to the chronicler, “all the Russian princes were given arm’s length.”
A worthy successor to the policy of unifying Russian lands was Ivan Kalita’s grandson Dmitry Ivanovich. At the age of ten, Dmitry, sent by Metropolitan Alexy, took possession of the great reign of Vladimir.
Moscow's main rival at that time was Tver. Prince Mikhail of Tver concluded an alliance against Moscow with his son-in-law, Prince of Lithuania Olgerd, and tried to take Moscow three times ( 1368 ,1370 And 1372 ), but each time he was defeated at the impregnable walls of the Moscow Kremlin.
Then Mikhail found an ally in the Horde and received a label for a great reign. But this did not stop Dmitry. The war has begun. Mikhail was forced to sign a peace treaty with Moscow and recognize himself as the “younger brother” of the Moscow prince. Next, Dmitry peacefully settled the conflict with the Ryazan prince Oleg Ivanovich, pacified Novgorod and forced him to pay a “payback” (indemnity) in the amount of 8,000 rubles.
Under Dmitry, Rus' for the first time dared to openly fight the Horde. Russian warriors in 1378 year they defeated the Mongol-Tatars on the Vozha River. The next battle took place on the Kulikovo field 8 September 1380 of the year. Khan Mamai gathered a huge army, mobilized not only in the Horde, but also in the subject lands of the Volga region and the North Caucasus. The Lithuanian prince Jagiello and the Ryazan ruler Oleg, a rival of the Moscow prince, promised their help to the khan. The Monk Sergius gave Dmitry a blessing for the battle and allocated two of his heroes to help the Grand Duke.
Mamaev's army was defeated. Retreating, it was finally defeated by another Golden Horde khan, Takhtamysh. IN 1382 year he appeared at the walls of Moscow. The city recognized itself as a tributary of the Tatars and handed over its son Vasily to the khan as a hostage.
The Battle of Kulikovo was extremely important. It showed the ability of the Russian people to get rid of the yoke of the Golden Horde, dispelled the myth of the invincibility of the Horde, and gave impetus to nationwide unification under the rule of the Moscow Prince.
After the death of Vasily Dmitrievich, his brother, Prince Yuri of Galitsky, declared his rights to the Moscow throne. The struggle of Yuri and his sons Vasily Kosoy and Dmitry Shemyaka for the great reign began, which lasted almost twenty years. The internecine war was very brutal. For example, Vasily Kosoy, who was captured by Vasily Vasilyevich, was blinded by Dmitry Shemyaka. Moscow passed from hand to hand. After defeating Shemyaka in 1446 year, Vasily Vasilyevich the Dark annexed many lands of northeastern Rus' to the Principality of Moscow, strengthened his influence on Veliky Novgorod and the Principality of Lithuania, under him many Tatar warriors went into the service of the Moscow prince, which caused discontent among Muscovites.
Under Vasily the Dark, the Russian Orthodox Church refused to recognize the decisions of the Council of Orthodox and Catholic clergy in Florence and the Union of 5 July 1439 year about the union of two churches - Orthodox and Catholic and began to elect patriarchs from among Russian clergy.
Thus, feudal wars in Rus' in the second quarter XV centuries led to the strengthening of Moscow, the establishment of a new order of transfer of power (from father to son), the further expansion of the possessions of the Moscow Prince and the creation of ideological and political prerequisites for the unification of all Russian principalities. This process is actively promoted by the church, advocating strong, centralized power.
Literature:
Klyuchevsky V.O. “A short guide to Russian history.” M. 1992.
Karamzin N.M. “History of the Russian State” - // Collected works - T.V. - Book 2. - Petersburg, 1843.
Platonov S.F. “Textbook of Russian History.” - M. 1992.
Gumilev L.N. “From Rus' to Russia.” - M. 1992.
“History of Russia.” - M. 1993 (Published by the Russian Economic Academy named after G.V. Plekhanov).
Orgish V.P. “Ancient Rus'. Formation of the Kyiv State and the Introduction of Christianity.”
Korolyuk V. D. “Slavs and Oriental Romances in the Early Middle Ages.” M. Science 1985
Nasonov A.N. "Russian land and the formation of the territory of the ancient Russian state."
Rybakov B.A. “History of the USSR from ancient times to XVII- centuries."
Klyuchevsky V.O. Russian history course. volume 2.