Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

Conclusion

Introduction

The middle of the 15th century found the Russian lands and principalities in a state of political fragmentation. There were several strong centers towards which all other areas gravitated; Each of these centers pursued a completely independent internal policy and resisted all external enemies.

Such centers of power were Moscow, Novgorod the Great, Tver, as well as the Lithuanian capital - Vilna, which controlled the entire colossal Russian region, called “Lithuanian Rus”. A century and a half earlier, the dispersion of political power and strength was much greater: independent centers, in fact independent states, on the same territory could be numbered in the dozens.

Political games, civil strife, external wars, economic and geographical factors gradually subjugated the weak to the strong (primarily Moscow and Lithuania); the strongest acquired such influence and such power that they could lay claim to power over all of Russia.

The possibility of creating a unified state arose. The benefits of his education consisted primarily in the ability joint forces organize opposition to numerous external enemies: the Tatar khanates formed after the collapse of the Golden Horde, Lithuanians, Livonian knights and Swedes. In addition, internal civil wars would be impossible, and economic development would be facilitated by the introduction of uniform legislation.

In the last quarter of the 15th - early 16th centuries, a single all-Russian state was emerging, with a recognized political center - Moscow, governed by the Grand Duke of Moscow and the metropolitan administration subordinate to him, as well as local institutions in large Russian cities and counties subordinate to the central government.

Without forgetting the importance in the study of any era of the peculiarities of the manifestation of economic patterns, the work places emphasis on a thorough study of the socio-political institutions of power and management, their relations to various segments of the Russian population.

The purpose of this work is to analyze the reasons and conditions that contributed to the unification of Russian lands and principalities into a powerful power, which required a series of brutal, bloody wars, in which one of the rivals, in turn, had to crush the forces of all the others. This period was the most fateful in the history of Russia and influenced the final strengthening of the Moscow state. Also in the work, namely in its first part, we will reveal the reasons that contributed to the birth and strengthening of the Moscow state and give an assessment of the internal transformation, in particular the transformations in the sphere of the state and social system, as well as legal reform during the period of Ivan III.

To achieve these goals, it is necessary to solve the following problems:

Consider the reasons and features of the formation of a single state;

Study the stages of political unification in Rus';

To identify the specifics of the formation of a unified Russian state in the 15th - early 16th centuries;

Reveal the political system during the formation of the Russian centralized state;

Consider the sources of law in the Russian centralized state;

Analyze the socio-economic and political system of Russia at the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries.

Chapter 1. Formation of the Russian centralized state (second half of the XV - first half of the XVI)

Rus' political state system

1.1 Reasons and features of the formation of a single state

The process of formation of the Russian centralized state began in the second half of the 13th century and ended at the beginning of the 16th century.

Certain economic, social, political and spiritual prerequisites led to the formation of the Russian centralized state:

The relevance of this topic is to reveal the development of feudal relations “in breadth” and “in depth” - the emergence, along with fiefdoms, of conditional feudal land ownership, which was accompanied by increased feudal exploitation and aggravation of social contradictions. The feudal lords needed a strong centralized power that could keep the peasants in obedience and limit the feudal rights and privileges of the patrimonial boyars;

The internal political reason is the rise and growth of the political influence of several feudal centers: Moscow, Tver, Suzdal. There is a process of strengthening of princely power, seeking to subjugate appanage princes and boyars - patrimonial lords;

The foreign policy reason was the need to confront the Horde and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

Features of the formation of the Russian centralized state:

1. The absence in Rus' of sufficient socio-economic prerequisites for the formation of a single state. Since, in Western Europe:

Seignorial relations prevailed

The personal dependence of peasants was weakened

The cities and the third estate grew stronger

2. In Rus':

State-feudal forms predominated

The relationship of personal dependence of the peasants on the feudal lords was just forming

Cities were in a subordinate position in relation to the feudal nobility.

3. The leading role in the formation of the state is the foreign policy factor.

4. East style political activity.

1.2 Stages of political unification in Rus'

Stage 1 (1301-1389).

In my work I wanted to express that the rise of Moscow (late XIII - early XIV centuries). By the end of the 13th century. the old cities of Rostov, Suzdal, Vladimir are losing their former significance. The new cities of Moscow and Tver are rising.

Stage 2 (1389-1462).

Moscow is the center of the fight against the Mongol-Tatars (second half of the 14th - first half of the 15th centuries). The strengthening of Moscow continued under the children of Ivan Kalita - Simeon Gordom (1340-1353) and Ivan II the Red (1353-1359). This would inevitably lead to a clash with the Tatars.

Stage 3 (second quarter of the 15th century)

Feudal War - 1431-1453 Civil war of the second quarter of the 15th century. The feuds, called the feudal war of the second quarter of the 15th century, began after the death of Vasily I. By the end of the 14th century. In the Moscow principality, several appanage estates were formed, belonging to the sons of Dmitry Donskoy. The largest of them were Galitskoye and Zvenigorodskoye, which were received younger son Dmitry Donskoy Yuri. After the death of the Grand Duke, Yuri, as the eldest in the princely family, began the struggle for the Grand Duke's throne with his nephew, Vasily II (1425-1462). After the death of Yuri, the fight was continued by his sons - Vasily Kosoy and Dmitry Shemyaka. The fight followed all the “rules of the Middle Ages”, i.e. Blinding, poisoning, deception, and conspiracies were used. The feudal war ended with the victory of the forces of centralization. By the end of the reign of Vasily II, the possessions of the Moscow principality increased 30 times compared to the beginning of the 14th century. The Moscow Principality included Murom (1343), Nizhny Novgorod (1393) and a number of lands on the outskirts of Rus'.

Stage 4 (1462-1533).

The process of completing education Russian state falls during the reign of Ivan III (1462-1505) and Vasily III (1505-1533).

On March 28, 1462, Moscow welcomed its new ruler - Ivan III Ivan. III - (1440-1505) Grand Duke of Moscow, son of Vasily II and Princess Maria Yaroslavovna. Opens the era of Muscovite Rus', which lasted until Peter I moved the capital to St. Petersburg. A troubled childhood taught the future Grand Duke a lot. He was ten years old when his blind father appointed him as his co-ruler. It was Ivan III who completed the two-century process of unifying Russian lands and overthrowing the Golden Horde yoke.

Ivan III pursued a consistent policy of unifying Russian lands around Moscow and was in fact the creator of the Moscow state. He inherited from his father the Principality of Moscow with a territory of 4,000 thousand km, and left a huge power to his son: its area increased 6 times and amounted to more than 2.5 million square meters. km. The population was 2-3 million people.

Under him, the Grand Duchy of Yaroslavl (1463) and Rostov (1474), which had already lost their real political power, were relatively easily annexed to Moscow. Things related to the annexation of a strong and independent Novgorod were more complicated. It took Ivan III seven long years, during which, with the help of military and diplomatic measures, Veliky Novgorod lost its independence. In Novgorod there was a struggle between pro-Moscow and anti-Moscow parties. The Boretskys intensified their activities and led activities aimed against the strengthening of the pro-Moscow party. The Boretsky party pursued a policy aimed at bringing Novgorod closer to Lithuania. Ivan 3 in July 1471 went to war against the traitors. The Novgorod land was devastated and destroyed. The Moscow army inflicted a crushing defeat on the Novgorodians on the river. Shelon. According to the Treaty of Korostyn, signed on August 11, 1471, Novgorod recognized itself as the fatherland of the Moscow prince. From the document “And for the king and for the Grand Duke of Lithuania, whatever the king or grand duke in Lithuania may be, from you, from the great princes, we, your fatherland Veliky Novgorod, are free husbands, not to give in to any cunning, but to us being from you, from great princes, unrelenting to anyone." Thus, the first step was taken aimed at eliminating the republic. The final, main blow to Novgorod was dealt by the campaign of 1478, as a result of which the Novgorod boyar republic ceased to exist. The veche system was liquidated, the bell, as a symbol of freedom, was taken to Moscow.

In 1485, Ivan III annexed another long-time enemy and rival of Moscow - Tver. Thus, Ivan III was able to unite North-Eastern and North-Western Rus'. In 1489, Vyatka was annexed to Moscow.

As an independent sovereign, Ivan III began to behave towards the Tatars. Even by the beginning of the reign of Ivan III Golden Horde has already split into several uluses. As it lost strength, Rus', on the contrary, strengthened its power. In 1476, Ivan III refused to pay them an annual tribute and entered into an alliance with the Crimean Khan, an enemy of the Golden Horde. Khan of the Great Horde Akhmat, who considered himself the successor to the khans of the Golden Horde that had disintegrated by this time, watched with alarm the strengthening of Moscow. In 1480, he gathered an army and moved to Rus', trying to restore the shaky power of the Horde. In the autumn, the army of Khan Akhmat approached the Ugra River, but on the opposite bank there was a large Moscow army. Khan Akhmat did not dare to enter the battle and, after standing for two months, returned to the Nogai steppes, where he died in a skirmish with the Siberian Tatars. “Standing on the Ugra” ended the hated Horde yoke. The Russian state regained its independence. Information about the end of the Tatar yoke is contained in the “Second Sofia Chronicle”. "In 1480. The news came to the Grand Duke that King Akhmat was definitely coming (against him) with his entire horde - with princes, lancers and princes, as well as with King Casimir in the general Duma; the king and led the king against the Grand Duke, wanting to ruin the Christians.

Grand Duke, took the blessing, went to the Ugra... The king with all his Tatars walked along the Lithuanian land, past Mtsensk, Lyubutsk and Odoev and, having reached it, stood at Vorotynsk, expecting help from the king. The king himself did not go to him, nor did he send help, because he had his own affairs: at that time Mengli-Girey, the king of Perekop, was fighting the Volyn land, serving the Grand Duke.

And the Tatars were looking for roads where they could secretly cross (the river) and quickly go to Moscow. And they came to the Ugra River, near Kaluga, and wanted to ford it. But they were guarded and let the son of the Grand Duke know. The Grand Duke, the son of the Grand Duke, moved with his army and, having gone, stood on the bank of the Ugra River and did not allow the Tatars to cross to this side.

The king was afraid and ran away with the Tatars, because the Tatars were naked and barefoot, and they were ragged. When the king arrived in the Horde, he was killed there by the Nogais..."

Ivan III himself played a significant role in overthrowing the yoke, who, in the difficult situation of 1480, showed prudence, reasonable restraint and diplomatic skill, which made it possible to unite Russian forces and leave Akhmat without allies.

In 1493, Ivan III was the first of the Moscow princes to call himself the sovereign of “all Rus',” openly laying claim to the lands of Lithuanian Rus'. Acting as a defender of the Orthodox faith and leading the movement for the creation of the Great Russian nation, Ivan III fought a series of successful wars with Lithuania, tearing away the Vekhi and Chernigov-Seversk principalities from it. Under the terms of the truce with the Grand Duke of Lithuania Alexander (1503), 25 cities and 70 volosts went to Moscow. So, by the end of the reign of Ivan III, the bulk of the Russian lands were again gathered under the rule of the Moscow prince.

Thus, at the end of the 15th century, a powerful state arose in eastern Europe - Russia. According to Karl Marx, “amazed Europe, which at the beginning of Ivan’s reign barely noticed the existence of Muscovy, squeezed between the Tatars and Lithuanians, was amazed by the sudden appearance of a huge state on its eastern borders, and Sultan Bayazet himself, before whom all of Europe was in awe, heard arrogant speeches for the first time Moscovita."

Being a far-sighted politician, Ivan III intensified trade and diplomatic relations with the countries of Western Europe. Under Ivan III, diplomatic relations were established with Germany, Venice, Denmark, Hungary and Turkey. This was facilitated by his second marriage to Sophia Paleologus, the niece of the last Byzantine emperor. Having become the head of a vast Orthodox power, Ivan III considered the Russian state as the successor to the Byzantine Empire. Moscow is beginning to be called the “third Rome”. It was at this time that the name “Russia” appeared.

Important symbolic and political significance was attached to the (second) marriage of Ivan III with the niece of the last Byzantine emperor, Sophia Fominichna Paleolog. “Sophia’s marriage to the Russian Grand Duke had the significance of transferring the inheritance rights of the descendants of the Paleologians to the grand-ducal house of Rus',” wrote the Russian historian N. Kostomarov. - But most important and significant was the internal change in the dignity of the Grand Duke, strongly felt and clearly visible in the actions of the slow Ivan Vasilyevich. The Grand Duke became an autocrat."

The equality of Ivan III with the first monarchs of Europe was emphasized by the appearance on the seal of the Russian sovereign of a double-headed eagle, crowned with two crowns. With this seal in 1497, Ivan III sealed the sovereign's letter of grant to his nephews, the Volotsk princes Fyodor and Ivan. The images placed on the seal of 1497 formed the basis of Russian state symbols. Its later interpretation is as follows: the first head of the eagle is turned to the east, the second - to the west, for it is impossible to survey such great expanses of the Russian state with one head. Another component of the coat of arms inherited from Byzantium was the horseman St. George the Victorious, striking a serpent with a spear - the enemies of the Fatherland. George the Victorious became the patron saint of the Moscow Grand Dukes and the city of Moscow. The symbol of supreme power became the Monomakh cap, a luxuriously decorated headdress of the ruler of the state. The foundations were laid for the cult of personality of the top leadership, which later became known as the tsar: special ceremonies of appearances to the people, meetings with ambassadors, signs of royal power. The Moscow Grand Duke's court under Ivan III acquired special pomp and splendor. Unprecedented construction has unfolded on the territory of the Kremlin. It was at the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th century that the Kremlin ensemble was formed, which amazes with its grandeur and monumentality. In 1485, construction began on the new residence of the sovereign - the princely palace. Special attention was given to the fortress walls. Built during the reign of Prince Dmitry Donskoy, they fell into disrepair. During the years 1485-1495, the red brick walls and towers of the Kremlin rose, which still exist today.

Vasily III (1479-1533) - Grand Duke of Moscow and All Rus', was the eldest son of Ivan III and Sophia Paleologus. According to the marriage agreements, the children of the Grand Duke from the Greek princess could not occupy the Moscow throne. But Sophia Paleologue could not come to terms with this and continued to fight for power. With his second marriage he married Elena Glinskaya, the mother of Ivan the Terrible. He ascended the throne in 1505 and sought to continue his father’s traditions. Baron S. Herberstein visited the Russian state as an ambassador of the German Emperor. Subsequently, he created an extensive scientific work, in which he emphasized the desire of Vasily III to strengthen centralization. “The power he exercises over his subjects easily surpasses all the monarchs of the world. And he also finished what his father began, namely: he took away all their cities and fortifications from all the princes and other rulers. In any case, he does not even entrust fortresses to his own brothers, not trusting them. He oppresses everyone equally with cruel slavery, so that if he orders someone to be at his court or to go to war, or to rule some embassy, ​​he is forced to do all this at his own expense. The exception is the young sons of boyars, that is, noble persons with more modest incomes; He usually accepts such persons, oppressed by their poverty, every year and supports them, assigning a salary, but not the same.” During the reign of Vasily III, the foreign policy of the Russian state also continued the traditions of its predecessor. Under him, Pskov (1510) and Ryazan (1521) were completely annexed. In addition, successful wars with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania led to the annexation of the Seversk and Smolensk lands. This completes the process of gathering Russian lands around Moscow. In general, in contrast to the advanced countries of Western Europe, the formation of a single state in Russia took place under the complete dominance of the feudal method of economy, i.e. on a feudal basis. This allows us to understand why a bourgeois, democratic, civil society began to form in Europe, while in Russia serfdom, class, and inequality of citizens before the law will dominate for a long time.

1.3 Specifics of the formation of a unified Russian state in the 15th - early 16th centuries.

The unification of Russian lands and the final liberation from the Tatar yoke and general socio-economic changes occurring in the country led to the establishment of autocracy and created the preconditions for the transformation of the great Moscow reign into an estate-representative monarchy.

The supreme ruler of the state was the Moscow prince. He was the supreme owner of the land and had full judicial and executive power. Under the prince, there was a Boyar Duma, which included the most notable feudal lords and clergy. The Metropolitan and the Consecrated Cathedral, the meeting of the highest clergy, began to play a significant role in the state. National bodies appeared - the Palace and the Treasury. The butlers were in charge of the personal lands of the Grand Duke, sorted out land disputes, and judged the population. The treasury was in charge of state finances. The formation of central authorities - orders - began.

The palace order was in charge of the Grand Duke's own possessions, the ambassadorial order was in charge of external relations, the discharge order was in charge of military affairs, etc. Clerks and clerks were engaged in office work.

Under Ivan III, local government remained conservative. As before, it was based on the feeding system - one of the sources of enrichment for the upper classes at the expense of the population. “Feeders”, i.e. governors and volostels (governors of volosts) were supported by the local population - literally fed. Their powers were varied: rulers, judges, collectors of princely taxes. Princes, boyars, and former “free servants” of the Grand Duke had the right to receive feedings.

The institution of localism was important, according to the system of which all boyar families were distributed along the steps of the hierarchical ladder, and all their appointments (military and civilian) had to correspond to their birth.

For the first time after Yaroslav the Wise, Ivan III began to streamline legislation. In 1497, a new collection of laws was published - the Code of Laws. The new collection of laws established a unified procedure for judicial and administrative activities. Laws on land use, especially the law on St. George's Day, occupied an important place in the Code of Laws. In Rus' there was an old custom: in the fall, after harvesting, peasants could move from one owner to another. By the beginning of the 16th century. this custom took on the character of a disaster: the peasants left their master even before the harvest, and often the fields remained unharvested. The Code of Law of Ivan III limited the right of peasants to transfer from one owner to another to two weeks a year - before and after St. George's Day (November 26).

The formation of serfdom began in Rus'.

Serfdom is the dependence of the peasant on the feudal lord in personal, land, property, and legal relations, based on their attachment to the land.

This was still the period when they ruled in the old way, having all gathered together in harmony - conciliarly: all authoritative forces were involved in resolving the most important issues of the country - the Grand Duke himself, the Boyar Duma, the clergy. The Grand Duke was a strong and respected figure, but the attitude towards him was “simple”; in the eyes of the Russians he was only the eldest among equals.

Under Ivan III, important changes took place in the system of government: the process of establishing an unlimited monarchy began.

The reasons for the formation of an unlimited monarchy are Mongol and Byzantine influence.

Mongolian influence - by this time, the Mongol-Tatar yoke had lasted in Rus' for more than 200 years. Russian princes began to adopt the style of behavior of the Mongol khans, the model of the political structure of the Horde. In the Horde, the khan was an unlimited ruler.

Byzantine influence - the second marriage of Ivan III was married to the niece of the last Byzantine emperor, Sophia Paleologus. In 1453 Byzantine Empire fell under the blows of the Ottoman Turks. The emperor died on the streets of Constantinople defending the city. His niece Sophia found refuge with the Pope, who later had the idea to marry her to the widowed Russian ruler. The Byzantine princess brought the idea of ​​absolute monarchy to distant Rus'.

Ivan III was the first of the Russian princes to pursue a policy of increasing the power of the Grand Duke. Before this, appanage princes and boyars were free servants. At their own request, they could serve the Moscow Grand Duke or go to serve in Lithuania and Poland. Now they began to swear allegiance to the Moscow prince and sign special oaths. From now on, the transfer of a boyar or prince to the service of another sovereign began to be considered as treason, a crime against the state. Ivan III was the first to take the title “Sovereign of All Rus'”. In 1497, Ivan III for the first time adopted the coat of arms of the Moscow State. unofficial coat of arms Byzantium - the double-headed eagle - a sacred religious symbol (By this time, the double-headed eagle in Byzantium symbolized the unity of spiritual and secular power). Under him, signs of grand-princely dignity were adopted: the “Monomakh cap”, which became a symbol of autocracy, precious mantles - barmas and a scepter. Under the influence of Sophia, a magnificent court ceremony according to the Byzantine model was introduced at the court of Ivan III.

Ideology of the times of Ivan III and Vasily III. At the end of the 15th century. A number of important events took place in Russian statehood:

The unification of Russian lands was basically completed;

In 1480, the Russian lands were freed from the Mongol-Tatar yoke;

Ivan III, in the Byzantine manner, began to call himself the title “Tsar”.

The historical process in Rus' was led by the Moscow princes. The Moscow princes rose rapidly. According to the ancient right of inheritance, they did not have the right to the first throne in Rus'. “In truth” the Tver princes should have owned the first throne. The Moscow princes, using a whole range of political means, “wrested” the right to all-Russian primacy from the Tver princes.

And now the moment had come when the Moscow princes needed to prove to everyone by what right they owned the Russian land.

In addition, Ivan III needed to establish himself among Western European monarchs. The Russian state appeared at the beginning of the 16th century. suddenly for Western Europe. Large Western European states had already taken shape, the system of relationships between them had also already taken shape, the most important trade routes were already occupied.

To survive in these conditions, the huge Moscow state needed ideas, an ideology that would reflect the dominant position of the Moscow princes in Rus', the antiquity of the state, the truth of the Orthodox faith, the importance and necessity of the existence of Muscovy among other states. Such ideas appeared at the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th centuries.

Three ideas became the most important.

1. The idea of ​​succession of power of the Moscow princes from the princes of Vladimir and Kyiv. Chronicles appeared in which it was stated that the Moscow princes received power over the Russian land from their ancestors - the Vladimir and Kyiv princes. After all, the head of the Russian Church - the Metropolitan - lived first in Kyiv, then in Vladimir (1299-1328) and Moscow (from 1328). Therefore, the Russian land was owned by the Kyiv, Vladimir, and then Moscow princes. This idea also emphasized the idea that the source of grand-ducal power is the will of the Lord himself. The Grand Duke is the deputy of the Lord - God on earth. The Lord God gave the Grand Duke the control of the Russian land. Therefore, the Russian sovereign bore personal responsibility before the Lord - God for the way he ruled the Russian land. Since it was handed over by the Lord himself - God, the Orthodox sovereign should not share his power (responsibility) with anyone. Any refusal of power is sacrilege.

2. The idea of ​​kinship between Russian princes and Roman emperors. At this time, “The Tale of the Princes of Vladimir” appears. The “Tale” is based on two legends. One contained a statement that the family of Russian princes was connected with the king of “the whole universe” Augustus. In Rome from 27 BC. Octavian ruled. He managed to unite under his rule all the territories of the inhabited world. After this, the Roman state began to be called an empire, and Octavian was given the title “Augusta”, i.e. "divine". The Tale said that Augustus had a younger brother named Prus. Augustus sent Prus as ruler to the banks of the Vistula and Neman (This is how Prussia arose). And Prus had a descendant, Rurik. It was this Rurik that the Novgorodians called to reign in Novgorod (It should be noted that almost all Western European monarchs tried to connect their ancestry with the Roman emperors). Another legend said that in the 12th century. the heir to the Roman emperors, the Byzantine emperor Constantine Monomakh, passed on to his grandson - to the prince of Kyiv Vladimir Monomakh - symbols of imperial power: a cross, a crown (in Rus' they began to call Monomakh's cap), the cup of Emperor Augustus and other objects. It followed that the Russian rulers (Monomashichi) had the legal right to the title “Caesar” (in Rus', tsar).

3. The idea of ​​Moscow - as the keeper of the true Christian faith. This idea is better known as “Moscow - the third Rome”. This idea was formulated by the monk of the Pskov Eleazar Monastery Philotheus in his letters to Vasily III in 1510-1511. Monk Philotheus was sure that Moscow was called upon to play a special role in history. After all, it is the capital of the last state where the true Christian faith has been preserved in its original, unspoiled form. At first, Rome preserved the purity of the Christian faith. But the apostates muddied the pure source, and as punishment for this, in 476 Rome fell under the blows of the barbarians. Rome was replaced by Constantinople, but even there they abandoned the true faith, agreeing to a union (union) with Catholic Church. By the middle of the 15th century. The Byzantine Empire perished under the blows of the Ottoman Turks. Hoping for help from Western European powers, the Patriarch of Constantinople signed a union with the Pope in Florence in 1439. Under the terms of the union, the Orthodox recognized the primacy of the Pope over themselves, and not Orthodox Patriarch, switched to Catholic dogmas during worship, but Orthodox rituals were preserved. Before this, the power of the Patriarch of Constantinople had universal significance. It extended to Byzantium, Rus', Serbia, Georgia, and Bulgaria. The conclusion of a union with the Pope meant that the Greeks abandoned the universal mission of guardians Orthodox tradition which they took upon themselves. The Russian Orthodox Church did not recognize the union and broke off relations with the Patriarch of Constantinople.

Philotheus wrote that for apostasy from Orthodoxy - the true Christian faith - ancient Constantinople was captured by the Turks. Since then, Moscow has become the center of world Orthodoxy, the “third Rome” - the capital of the largest Orthodox state. “Watch and listen, for two Romes have fallen, and the third (Moscow) stands, but the fourth does not exist,” wrote Philotheus. Therefore, the role of Rus' in world history is to be the patroness of all Orthodox peoples.

1.4 The political system during the formation of the Russian centralized state

During the period of formation of a single centralized state, Rus' was an early feudal monarchy.

Signs of the presence of centralized power at the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries: - the presence of central authorities throughout the territory of the Russian state;

Replacement of vassal relations with relations of citizenship;

Development of national legislation;

A unified organization of armed forces subordinate to the supreme authority.

Characteristic features of the political system of this period:

The concept of “tsar” appeared, which unites all other princes under his rule, all of them are vassals of the tsar (this was formed thanks to the experience of the Golden Horde);

Centralized management of the outskirts by the monarch's viceroys;

The term “autocracy” appears (i.e., a form of limited monarchy, the power of a single monarch is limited by the power of rulers, local princes; autocracy and absolutism are not identical);

Settled relations between the Grand Duke and the Boyar Duma are formed, localism is born (i.e., the appointment of persons to positions based on the merits of their parents), the Boyar Duma is of a formal nature, the relationship between the Tsar and the Duma develops according to the principle: the Tsar said - the boyars sentenced. Monarch in the XV-XVI centuries. - Grand Duke of Moscow.

Although his power has not yet acquired the features of absolute power, it has nevertheless expanded significantly. Already Ivan III in all documents calls himself the Grand Duke of Moscow.

The increase in the power of the Grand Duke occurred against the backdrop of restrictions on the rights of patrimonial owners. Thus, the right to collect tribute and taxes passed from the latter to government agencies. Secular and ecclesiastical feudal lords lost the right to trial for the most important criminal offenses - murder, robbery and red-handed theft. The political consolidation of the power of the Moscow prince is connected with:

With the marriage of Ivan III and the niece of the Byzantine emperor Sophia Paleologus (this strengthened the importance of the power of the Moscow Grand Dukes within the state and in Europe; the Moscow Grand Dukes began to be called “sovereigns of all Rus'”);

With the crowning of Ivan IV in 1547 (the title of Tsar appeared).

Boyars in the XV-XVI centuries. - people already close to the Grand Duke.

The Boyar Duma is the highest body of the state in the 15th-16th centuries.

Initially, the Duma was convened, but under Ivan IV it became a permanent body. The Boyar Duma included the so-called Duma ranks, i.e. introduced boyars and okolnichy. In the 16th century The Consecrated Cathedral began to participate in the meetings of the Duma.

Powers of the Boyar Duma:

Resolution, together with the prince, of all major issues of public administration, court, legislation, foreign policy;

Monitoring the activities of orders and local authorities;

Diplomatic activities of the state (negotiations with foreign ambassadors, sending Russian and foreign ambassadors, assigning their contents, sending sovereign letters to neighboring states);

- “administration of Moscow” (a special power of this body) is the management of the entire city economy during the absence of the sovereign.

Chapter 2. Development of law. Law books of 1497 and 1550

2.1 Sources of law in the Russian centralized state

As the main legislative act of the Moscow state of the 14th-15th centuries. Russian Truth continued to operate. A new edition of this law was created - the so-called Abbreviated from Prostransnaya, which adapted ancient Russian law to Moscow conditions. Customary law was also in effect. However, the development of feudal relations and the formation of a centralized state required the creation of new legislative acts. In order to centralize the state and subordinate the places of power of the Moscow prince, statutory charters of the viceroyal administration were issued, regulating the activities of feeders and limiting to some extent their arbitrariness. The earliest statutory charters were Dvinskaya (1397 or 1398) and Belozerskaya (1488). A monument of financial law is the Belozersk customs charter of 1497, which provided for a tax-farm procedure for collecting internal customs duties.

The largest legal monument of this period was the Sudebnik of 1497 (Diagram 11). He brought uniformity to judicial practice Russian state. The Code of Law also had another goal - to consolidate new social orders, in particular the promotion of small and medium-sized feudal lords - nobles and children of boyars. The Code of Law contains various norms, but its main content is the norms of criminal and criminal procedural law. The sources of the Code of Laws were the Russian Pravda, the Pskov Judicial Charter, and the current legislation of the Moscow princes.

Civil and family law. The Code of Law of 1497 contained mainly the norms of criminal procedural law. Issues of civil law are regulated here less fully than in “Russian Pravda” or the Pskov Judicial Charter.

Ownership. The development of land relations was characterized by the complete or almost complete disappearance of independent communal ownership of land. Communal lands passed into the hands of patrimonial owners and landowners and were included in the princely domain. The votchina was distinguished by the fact that the owner had almost unlimited rights to it. He could not only own and use his land, but also dispose of it: sell, donate, pass on by inheritance.

An even more conventional form of land ownership is an estate. It was given by the lord to his vassals only for the duration of their service as a reward for it.

Therefore, the landowner could not dispose of the land.

The Grand Duke's domain was divided into black tax and palace lands.

They differed only in the form of exploitation of the peasants who inhabited these lands and in the organization of their management. The palace peasants bore corvée or quitrent in kind and were controlled by representatives of the palace authorities. The black tax people paid cash rent and were subordinate to state officials. The lands of the domain were gradually distributed by the grand dukes into fiefs and estates.

Several articles of the Code of Law of 1497, devoted to land disputes (60 - 63), determine the procedure for proceedings regarding the ownership of property. The verbosity of the content of these articles indicates the scrupulous attitude of the authorities to the protection of property rights to real estate.

The norms of the law of obligations are also very incompletely presented in the Code of Laws. Contracts of purchase and sale (Articles 46 - 47), loans (Articles 6, 38, 48, 55), personal hire (Article 54) are mentioned.

The code of law of 1497, more clearly than the Russian Truth, distinguished obligations from causing harm, however, only in one case: Art. 61 provided for property liability for damage. The Code of Law considers some offenses related to judicial activities as a kind of obligation to cause harm. The judge who made an incorrect decision was obliged to compensate the parties for the losses incurred as a result. The same measure was applied to false witnesses. The law directly states that a judge is not subject to punishment for his misconduct (Article 19).

Inheritance law. Inheritance law has changed little. The Code of Law established a general and clear rule on inheritance. When inheriting by law, the son received the inheritance; in the absence of sons, the daughter received the inheritance. The daughter received not only movable property, but also the land (Art. 60). In the absence of daughters, the inheritance passed to the closest relative.

Criminal law. If civil legal relations developed relatively slowly, then criminal law during this period underwent significant changes, reflecting the aggravation of the contradictions of feudal society.

By crime the legislator understood any actions that in one way or another threaten the state. The serf is already considered as a person and, unlike Russian Pravda, is considered capable of independently answering for his actions.

In accordance with the change in the concept of crime, the system of crimes became more complex. The Sudebnik introduces crimes unknown to Russkaya Pravda and only outlined in the Pskov Judgment Charter - state crimes. The judge indicated two such crimes - sedition and incitement. Sedition was understood as an act committed primarily by representatives of the ruling class. The concept of "lift" is controversial. Podymschiki were people who incited people to revolt. The death penalty was established as a punishment for state crimes.

The law provided for a developed system of property crimes.

These include robbery, theft, destruction and damage to other people's property. All these crimes, which undermined the basis of feudal relations - property, were strictly punished. The judge also knew crimes against the person: murder (murder), insult by action and word.

Goals change, and along with them, the system of punishments. If earlier the princes saw in punishments - vires and sales - one of the income items that significantly replenished the treasury, now another interest came to the fore. In punishment, deterrence came first. For most crimes, the Code of Law introduces the death penalty (for 10 offenses, while according to the PST there are only 4) and the trade penalty. Trade execution consisted of whipping on the trading floor and often entailed the death of the person punished. The Sudebnik, like Russian Pravda, knows the sale, but it is now rarely used and usually in combination with the death or trade penalty. In addition to those indicated, the Code of Practice also knew such punishments as imprisonment and self-harm. Self-mutilating punishments (cutting of ears, tongue, branding), introduced by the Code of Law, in addition to intimidation, performed an important practical function - separating the criminal from the general mass.

Procedural law. The process was characterized by the development of the old form, i.e. adversarial process, and the emergence of a new one - the search. In an adversarial process, the case began based on a complaint from the plaintiff, which was called a petition. It was usually given orally. Upon receipt of the petition, the judicial authority took measures to bring the defendant to court. The appearance of the defendant was ensured by guarantors. If the defendant evaded trial in any way, he lost the case even without a trial. In this case, the plaintiff was issued a so-called non-court certificate. The plaintiff's failure to appear in court meant the case was dismissed.

The system of evidence has changed somewhat. Unlike Russkaya Pravda, Sudebnik does not distinguish between rumors and vidoks, calling them all rumors. Serfs could now listen (i.e., testify).

The “field” - a judicial duel - was also recognized as evidence.

The winner in single combat was considered right and won the case.

The loser was the one who did not show up for the duel or who ran away from it.

The investigative (or inquisitorial) process was used in the consideration of the most serious criminal cases, including political crimes. The search differed from the adversarial process in that the court itself initiated, conducted and completed the case on its own initiative and solely at its discretion. The defendant was the object of the trial. The main method of “finding out the truth” during a search was torture. The main evidence of guilt was the confession of the accused himself.

The Code of Law of 1550, called the Tsar's Code of Law. It was a new edition of the Code of Laws of 1497. It reflected changes in Russian legislation over the past half century. The Code of Law was approved during the reforms of Ivan IV and served as the legal basis for their implementation at the height of the government’s reform activities in the 50s. XVI century It consisted of 100 articles and, in terms of the variety of regulated situations and the legal institutions reflected in it, surpassed the Code of Laws of 1497. It presented the relations of nobles and peasants in more detail and in more detail. The Code of Law was adopted after its discussion by representatives of various classes. It was aimed at achieving national stability after a period of inter-class disagreements during the childhood of Ivan IV. After the death of Ivan IV, various governments in Russia sought to restore in full legal principles, enshrined in the Code of Laws of 1550.

2.2 Socio-economic and political system of Russia at the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries.

The creation of a centralized state had an impact on the development of the economy and social system of Russia. The cessation of feudal strife contributed to the development of productive forces. The development of new territories by Russian peasants continued: colonization flows moved to the Urals, beyond the Oka, and the population of Pomerania increased.

The extensive slash-and-burn farming system retained its leading role in many regions of the country. At the same time, two-field and, in some places, three-field crop rotations appeared.

Important changes occurred in the structure of feudal land ownership. The nature of land ownership of princes changed. Having become subjects of the sovereign of all Rus', they largely retained their former domain lands, which were increasingly closer to ordinary feudal estates.

Under Ivan III, land distributions were widely carried out to service people at the expense of the possessions of Novgorod patrimonial lands and other annexed lands.

Such feudal lords, resettled to new places and “settled” there, began to be called landowners, and their possessions - estates. Initially, estates were not much different from votchinas: they were practically inherited, and votchinniki were also obliged to serve. The main thing was that the estates were prohibited from being sold or given away. Soon, landowners began to distribute the lands of black-sown peasants; in the first third of the 16th century, there were already estates in almost all districts of the country, and in many of them mass local distributions were carried out. Service people - landowners were the main social support of the emerging autocracy.

The creation of a centralized state served as one of the prerequisites for the enslavement of the peasantry. There has long been a rule according to which a peasant could leave his owner only for two weeks a year. Now this has become a national norm. The Code of Law of 1497 established a single deadline for the transition of peasants: a week before the autumn St. George’s Day (November 26) and a week after. This was the first nationwide restriction of peasant freedom, but not yet the enslavement of the peasants.

Among the feudal duties of peasants, quitrent in kind dominated, although in some places monetary taxes were also collected. The corvee industry was still poorly developed, and the feudal lord's own plowing was worked mainly by slaves.

Crafts continued to develop, the main centers of which were cities. Craft specialization grew, major cities often there were settlements inhabited by artisans of the same specialty (pottery, blacksmithing, armor in Moscow, etc.). Weapons manufacturing has reached a high level. At the end of the 15th century, the Cannon Yard was created in Moscow, where artillery pieces. The development of the craft of masons made it possible to carry out work on an unprecedented scale in Moscow on the construction of new Kremlin walls.

In the second half of the XV - first third of the XVI centuries. economic ties continued to develop between different areas countries. This was facilitated by the creation of a centralized state. But it would be wrong to exaggerate these connections. The share of the urban population was too insignificant for the development of lively trade. Subsistence farming retained its undivided dominant position.

The speed with which the political unification of the Russian lands took place led to the fact that the old, associated with specific times, turned out to be tenacious and intricately intertwined with the new, national. Along with the sovereign of all Rus', “sovereigns” of lower rank, former princes, retained a share of their power locally.

Some princes from the relatives of the Grand Duke (usually his brothers) even had their own appanages and issued letters of grant.

But the political system of the Russian state at the turn of the 15th-16th centuries. developed towards greater centralization. The Grand Dukes Ivan III and Vasily III increasingly showed themselves as autocrats. Even appearance The sovereign had to show his difference from his subjects during ceremonies. In his hands he held a scepter and an orb, on his head was a grand-ducal crown, “Monomakh’s cap” - a skullcap forged from gold, trimmed with fur and crowned with a cross. It was assumed that it was presented to Ivan Kalita by Uzbek Khan. The official Moscow legend “The Tale of the Princes of Vladimir” said that this was supposedly a Byzantine crown that passed to Vladimir Monomakh from his grandfather, the Byzantine emperor1 Constantine Monomakh, as a sign of royal dignity.

In 1472, the widowed Ivan III married the niece of the last emperor of Byzantium, Sophia (Zoe) Palaeologus, after which the grand ducal coat of arms of the flock was the Byzantine double-headed eagle. At the same time, the idea of ​​Moscow as the third Rome was spreading.

The advisory body under the Grand Duke was the Boyar Duma. Until the middle of the 15th century, only people from the old Moscow boyar families sat in it, but with the formation of a centralized state, the boyars included princes of previously independent principalities. Formally, they were “favored” as boyars, but in fact, the transition to the boyar rank was a sign of their transformation from vassals into subjects of the Grand Duke, that is, it reduced their social status. Due to the fact that the Duma was small, the sovereign could make his advisers only those aristocrats on whose loyalty he could firmly count.

The management system of a centralized state at the beginning of the 16th century had not yet taken shape and was quite archaic; many remnants of feudal fragmentation still remained. In 1497, the Code of Laws was adopted

The first set of laws of a centralized state. Although the Sudebnik was used in practice, it was not widely used and, probably after the death of Ivan III (1505), was almost forgotten: only one copy of this document has reached us.

In the 15th century, as a result of a long process of development, the Great Russian people with their own language emerged. On the territory of North-Eastern Rus', due to the influx of population moving there from other regions under the threat of external danger, there was a mixture of features of various dialects: “Akanya”, typical of the South-Eastern Russian lands, and “Okanya”, characteristic of the North-Western regions. The Rostov-Suzdal dialect acquired leading importance in the emerging Russian language. Subsequently, dialect diversity began to increase on the expanding1 territory of the Russian state due to the annexation of new lands.

The process of formation of the Great Russian nationality found a vivid expression in the rise of Russian culture, which, developing on the basis of cultural traditions ancient Rus', acquired a number of specific features at this time.

Thus, as a result of complex historical processes, by the beginning of the 16th century, a Russian centralized state had emerged. The circumstances in which it was formed left an imprint on the entire subsequent history of Russia.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it should be noted that the peculiarity of the formation of the Russian centralized state was that it developed as a multinational one. Russia included the Mari, Udmurts, Sami, Komi, Khanty, Mordovians, Karelians, Chuvash, Meshchera, etc. Under the influence of the more developed economy and culture of the Russian people, their economic and cultural growth accelerated, and their strength to resist feudal and foreign oppression increased.

The elimination of the borders of individual principalities on the territory of the country and the cessation of feudal wars created more favorable conditions for the development of the national economy and for repelling external enemies.

The unified Russian state was based on feudal socio-economic relations. It was a state of feudal lords. Secular and spiritual, its development was based primarily on the growth of serfdom and serfdom. Secular and spiritual feudal lords had greater independence, resting on their land ownership and economy, while the nobility and townspeople as classes were still relatively poorly developed. The process of forming the economic development of the country was a matter of the future. Using purely feudal methods, the grand ducal government achieved the unity of the governance system in the country.

The prestige of the Russian state in Europe gradually increased with the beginning of centralization. They began to reckon with Muscovy. One of the leading countries in the world has appeared on the world stage.

Thus, the formation of a centralized Russian state was a progressive phenomenon in the history of Russia. The elimination of feudal fragmentation created the opportunity for the further development of production forces, the economic and cultural development of the country, and the international authority of the Russian state.

So, at the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th centuries. The process of creating a Russian centralized state is being completed. Moscow became the capital of a huge, independent power, and the Moscow prince became the sovereign of all Rus'.

List of used literature

1. PLDR: The end of the 15th - the first half of the 16th century. M., 1984.

2. V.M. Solovyova. "Essays". T. t. 1-20. M., 1988-1993;

3. V.O. Klyuchevsky. "Essays in 3 volumes." M., 1987-1990;

4. Power and property in medieval Russia (XV-XVI centuries). M., 1985.

5. History of the Russian state and law / Ed. O.I. Chistyakova. Part I. and Part II M., 2006

6. History of state and law of Russia: Textbook. allowance. / I.A. Isaev. - M., 2006.

Similar documents

The process of formation of the Russian centralized state. Stages of political unification in Rus'. Reasons for the formation of an unlimited monarchy, Mongol and Byzantine influence. Law books of 1497 and 1550: their general characteristics and sources.

course work, added 10/28/2013


Socio-economic prerequisites for the formation of a unified state in Rus'. Foreign policy factor of the centralization process, the role of the boyars and nobility. The era of Ivan III. The beginning of absolutism. Russian empire at the beginning of the 20th century. Revolution 1905-1907

abstract, added 05/18/2014


Studying the history of the emergence and formation of the Spartan state. Analysis of the state and social system of Sparta. Study of political and government system China. Parties, public organizations and the People's Assembly of Representatives.

test, added 01/27/2012


The subject of science is the history of the Russian state and law. Formation of the Russian centralized state and its legal system. Creation of the Soviet state. Difficulties in becoming Russian statehood. Formation of the legal system.

training manual, added 07/08/2009


Research of economic, political state Union State, the state and principles of formation of the bodies of the Union State. Union of Russia and Belarus: meaning, functions, prospects. Prospects for economic and political development.

course work, added 04/23/2012


Study of the concept of legitimacy of a political regime. Identification of mechanisms and technologies for legitimizing the political regime of the modern Russian Federation. Characteristics of the features of political technologies for legitimizing the political regime of the Soviet state.

thesis, added 06/18/2017


Generalization of the stages of development of the idea of ​​​​the formation of a rule of law state, study of its essential features and features in the Russian Federation. The legal system and government system of Sweden, as an example of the experience of other countries modern world in the formation of the rule of law.

course work, added 01/09/2013


Characteristics of the essence of the state. Concept, characteristics, functions of the state. Many different definitions of the state. The social purpose of the state and the relationship between the state, society and the individual. general characteristics political regime.

course work, added 03/02/2009


Study of the socio-political system and economic relations of the Russian State (before 1721), as conditions and prerequisites for the emergence of prosecutorial supervision. Determining the place of the prosecutor's office in the system of state bodies. Powers of the prosecutor's office.

course work, added 07/22/2010


The emergence of the Old Russian state. Social system of the Novgorod and Pskov feudal republics. State and social system of the Golden Horde. Civil law according to Code of Laws. Features of the formation of the Russian centralized state.

The Russian centralized state developed in XIV–XVI centuries

Groups of prerequisites for the formation of a Russian centralized state.

1. Economic background: by the beginning of the 14th century. In Rus', after the Tatar-Mongol invasion, economic life was gradually revived and developed, which became the economic basis for the struggle for unification and independence. Cities were also restored, residents returned to their homes, cultivated the land, engaged in crafts, and established trade relations. Novgorod contributed a lot to this.

2. Social prerequisites: by the end of the 14th century. The economic situation in Rus' has already completely stabilized. Against this background, late feudal characteristics develop, and the dependence of peasants on large landowners increases. At the same time, peasant resistance also increases, which reveals the need for a strong centralized government.

3. Political background, which in turn are divided into internal and foreign policy:

1) internal: in the XIV–XVI centuries. The power of the Moscow Principality increases and expands significantly. Its princes build a state apparatus to strengthen their power;

2) foreign policy: the main foreign policy task of Rus' was the need to overthrow the Tatar-Mongol yoke, which hindered the development of the Russian state. The restoration of the independence of Rus' required universal unification against a single enemy: the Mongols from the south, Lithuania and the Swedes from the west.

One of the political prerequisites for the formation of a unified Russian state was union of the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Western Church, signed by the Byzantine-Constantinople patriarch. Russia became the only Orthodox state that simultaneously united all the principalities of Rus'.

The unification of Rus' took place around Moscow.

The reasons for the rise of Moscow are:

1) favorable geographical and economic position;

2) Moscow was independent during foreign policy, it did not gravitate towards either Lithuania or the Horde, therefore it became the center of the national liberation struggle;

3) support for Moscow from the largest Russian cities (Kostroma, Nizhny Novgorod, etc.);

4) Moscow is the center of Orthodoxy in Rus';

5) the absence of internal hostility among the princes of the Moscow house.

Features of the association:

1) the unification of Russian lands did not take place under the conditions of late feudalism, as in Europe, but under the conditions of its heyday;

2) the basis for unification in Rus' was the union of Moscow princes, and in Europe - the urban bourgeoisie;

3) Rus' united initially for political reasons, and then for economic ones, while European states united primarily for economic reasons.

The unification of Russian lands took place under the leadership of the Prince of Moscow. He was the first to become Tsar of All Rus'. IN 1478 After the unification of Novgorod and Moscow, Rus' was finally freed from the yoke. In 1485, Tver, Ryazan, etc. joined the Moscow state.

Now the appanage princes were controlled by proteges from Moscow. The Moscow prince becomes the highest judge, he considers especially important cases.

The Principality of Moscow creates a new class for the first time nobles(service people), they were soldiers of the Grand Duke who were awarded land on the terms of service.

Overcoming feudal fragmentation and the creation of centralized states is a natural process of development of feudalism, which was based primarily on socio-economic factors:

the growth of feudal land ownership and the inclusion of the feudal economy in trade relations;

the emergence of new and strengthening of old cities - centers of trade and craft;

expansion of economic ties and commodity-money relations.

Changes in the socio-economic order inevitably led to more intensive exploitation of the peasants and their enslavement. The intensification of the class struggle required the ruling classes to carry out political reforms that could help strengthen their power.

The strengthening of economic ties, as well as the intensification of the Class struggle, required the organization of administration, courts, and collection of taxes; and new ones: the creation of roads, postal services, etc. A politically important point in the process of centralization could be the need for protection from external enemies.

The process of creating the Russian neutralized state was in many ways identical to the general patterns of the historical development of the feudal state, but it also had its own characteristics.

The prerequisites for the elimination of feudal fragmentation in Rus' were outlined in the 13th century, especially in the northeast, in the Vladimir principality. However, the further development of the Russian lands was interrupted by the Mongol conquest, which caused great damage to the Russian people and significantly slowed down their progress. Only in the 14th century did the Russian principalities begin to gradually revive: agricultural production was restored, cities were rebuilt, new trade and craft centers emerged, and economic ties were strengthened. Moscow, the Moscow Principality, and the territory acquired great importance . which was constantly (since the 111th century) expanding.

The process of formation of a unified Russian state was expressed, firstly, in unification of territories previously independent states-principals into one - the Moscow Grand Duchy; and secondly, in changing the very nature of statehood, in transforming the political organization of society.

The unification of lands around Moscow and the Moscow Principality begins at the end of the 13th century. and ends at the end of the 15th century. - early 16th century At this time, the Novgorod Republic and Pskov, the Ryazan Principality, Smolensk and others were annexed to Moscow. Ivan III and his son Vasily III - the Grand Dukes of Moscow - began to call themselves “sovereigns of all Russia”.

As the unified state took shape, its character also changed. Determined in the second half of the 15th century. - early 16th century the processes of change in the political system were not completed, however, simultaneously with the unification of the lands of the Russian state. Political apparatus A centralized state fully developed only in the second half of the 16th century. At the end of the 15th century. The first code of law was adopted in 1497.

1. Prerequisites, progress and features of the formation of a centralized state in Rus'

Tendencies towards the unification of Russian lands into a single state began to take shape at the beginning of the 13th century. However, in the 30s of the 13th century. The unification process was interrupted by the Tatar-Mongol invasion and it took many decades for the conditions to resume the unification process to begin to emerge, the need for which increases even more so in the context of the Tatar-Mongol yoke.

From the beginning of the 4th century. The fragmentation of Russian lands stops, giving way to their unification. One of the first reasons for the formation of the Russian centralized state is the strengthening of economic ties between Russian lands. This process was caused by the general economic development of the country. At this time, intensive development of agriculture began. Agricultural production in this period is characterized by everything widespread arable system, which requires constant cultivation of the land. Since the peasant always deals with land, he requires perfect instruments of production.

But the rise of agriculture was due not so much to the development of labor tools as to the expansion of cultivated areas through the development of new and previously abandoned lands. Increasing the surplus product in agriculture makes it possible to develop livestock farming, as well as sell bread externally.

As a result, the process of separating crafts from agriculture is going deeper and deeper. It entails the need for exchange between peasant and artisan, that is, between city and countryside. This exchange takes place in the form of trade, which intensifies accordingly during this period. Local markets are created on the basis of exchange. The natural division of labor between individual regions of the country, due to their natural features, forms economic ties throughout Rus'. The establishment of these connections also contributed to the development of foreign trade. All of the above required the political unification of Russian lands, that is, the creation of a centralized state. Nobles, merchants, and artisans were interested in this.

Another prerequisite that determined the unification of the Russian lands was the intensification of the class struggle, the strengthening of the class resistance of the peasantry. The rise of the economy and the opportunity to obtain an ever-increasing surplus product encourage the feudal lords to intensify the exploitation of the peasants. Moreover, the feudal lords strive not only economically, but also legally to secure the peasants in their estates and estates, to enslave them. Such a policy caused natural resistance among the peasantry, which took on various forms.

Peasants kill feudal lords, seize their property, and set fire to their estates. Such a fate often befalls not only secular, but also spiritual feudal lords - monasteries. Robbery directed against the masters was sometimes a form of class struggle. The flight of peasants, especially to the south, to lands free from landowners, is taking on certain proportions.

In such conditions, the feudal lords are faced with the task of keeping the peasantry in check and completing enslavement. This problem could only be solved by a powerfully centralized state, capable of performing the main function of the exploitative state - suppressing the resistance of the exploited masses.

There was another important political force - the church. She was a major feudal lord, retained immunity privileges and was free from public service and taxes. The church also actively advocated for strengthening the state.

A factor that accelerated the centralization of the Russian state was also the threat of an external attack, which forced the Russian lands to rally in the face of a common enemy with the Postolithic Rech.

These reasons played a leading role in the unification of Rus'. Without them, the centralization process could not have achieved any significant success.

The broad masses of the people were interested in the formation of a single centralized state, because only it could cope with the external enemy. The formation of a single state is natural in the history of the country. It was prepared by the long-term socio-economic and political development of Rus'.

The formation of a centralized state can be divided into 3 stages:

Stage I (end of the 13th century – 1382)

At the first stage, the main question was decided: around which center the Russian lands would unite. First of all, Tver and Moscow laid claim to leadership, between which a fierce struggle unfolded.

Objective and subjective prerequisites predetermined Moscow's victory in this rivalry. The emergence of Moscow as the largest political center of Rus' should be considered as one of the most important events of the first stage.

Using their own means, the Moscow princes gradually removed their principality from its original narrow limits. Using an example, we can consider the Moscow prince Daniil Alexandrovich (1282-1303), son of Alexander Nevsky. The Principality of Moscow under Daniil is about 40 km around Moscow. Initially, the Moscow territory did not include Dmitrov, Klin, Volokolamsk, Mozhaisk, Serpukhov, Kolomna, and Vere. Before the capture of Mozhaisk and Kolomna, the inheritance of Prince Daniil occupied the middle space of this province along the middle course of the Moscow River with continuation to the east along the upper Klyazma. In the possession of Prince Daniel were the districts: Moscow, Zvenigorod, Ruz and Bogorodsky with part of Dmitrovsky.

After Prince Daniel, the Moscow princes continued to unite the lands under Moscow. An important event of the first stage is the Battle of Kulikovo (8.09.1380). Having become the main national center of unification, Moscow was actively preparing its forces for the decisive battle with the Tatar-Mongols. The historical victory on the Kulikovo field can least of all be regarded as accidental. Historical meaning This victory is that it became the first serious defeat of the main forces of the Golden Horde and marked the beginning of the liberation of Russian lands from the Horde yoke.

Stage II (second half of 1382 – 1462)

From the second half of the 14th century. The second stage of the unification process begins, the main content of which was the defeat of Moscow in the 60-70s. their main political rivals and the transition from Moscow’s assertion of its political supremacy in Rus' to the state unification of Russian lands around it and its organization of a nationwide struggle to overthrow the Horde yoke.

At this stage there is a struggle between the Tver and Moscow principalities. The role of the Vladimir principality is strengthening

With the unification into a single whole of the “Great Reign of Vladimir” with the Principality of Moscow, Moscow asserted for itself the role and significance of the territorial and national center of the emerging Russian state. The territorial growth of the Moscow principality took on the meaning and character of a state unification of Russian lands. Under Dmitry Donskoy, Dmitrov, Starodub, Uglich and Kostroma, vast territories in the Volga region in the region of Beloozero and Galich Mersky and a number of Upper Oka small principalities were annexed to Moscow.

At the end of the 14th century. Moscow is taking the first steps to limit the independence of the Novgorod Boyar Republic and include its lands in the Moscow Principality. An attempt to annex the Dvina land, the richest Novgorod colony, to Moscow ended in failure

At the end of the 14th century. The lands in the Vychegda River basin, inhabited by the Komi people (Great Perm), were annexed to Moscow.

III (final) stage of formation of a unified state (1462-1533). By the end of the fifteenth century. conditions have arisen for the transition of the unification process to the final stage - the formation of a unified Russian state.

The victory of the grand ducal power in the feudal war led to the liquidation of a number of small principalities and made it possible to take the first step in subordinating the Novgorod boyar republic.

The final stage of the unification process took approximately 50 years - the time of the great reign of Ivan III Vasilyevich (1462-1505) and the first years of the reign of his successor, Vasily III Ivanovich(1505-1533). The exceptionally significant event of this stage was the overthrow of the Horde yoke in 1480. The liberation of Rus' contributed to the fact that the trends of unification with Moscow became decisive.

The biggest obstacle to this process was the existence of an independent Novgorod feudal republic. During the struggle, the Moscow grand ducal authorities gained the upper hand over Novgorod.

In 1485 Tver, after a short (two-day) resistance, surrendered to the Moscow army. The Vyatka land, important for fishing, was annexed in 1489. With the entry of the northern possessions of Novgorod and Vyatka land, the non-Russian peoples of the North and North-East also became part of the Russian state. This phenomenon was not new in the state development of Russian lands because from ancient times Russian principalities included non-Russian peoples living in the area between the Oka and Volga rivers

In 1483-1485. There were major popular unrest in Pskov. The Moscow grand-ducal power used this to win over the mass of the Pskov population to its side and weaken the position of the nobility. In 1510, the Pskov Republic, which was independent after separation from Novgorod in 1348, ceased to exist..

In 1514, as a result of the war with Lithuania, the ancient Russian city of Smolensk became part of the Grand Duchy of Moscow. Finally, in 1521, the Ryazan principality, which had long been under the virtual subordination of Moscow, ceased to exist.

The final point in the long process of unifying the northwestern and northeastern Russian lands into a single Russian state was set Vasily III. The unification of Russian lands was basically completed. A huge power was formed, the largest in Europe. Within the framework of this state, the Russian (Great Russian) people were united.

From the three stages of the formation of a centralized state, we can conclude that the centralization of lands occurred during wars. Not a single unification took place peacefully. The Russian people fought against their own people.

2 Changes in economic, political, social life Russian society at the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries.

a) Formation of local land ownership .

With the decomposition of the feudal-patrimonial system from the second half of the 15th century. There were noticeably two types of private holdings. On the one hand, a hereditary, predominantly large and privileged estate as a remnant of the former feudal-boyar and princely landownership and, on the other hand, an estate that developed, especially from the 16th century, as a temporary and often less privileged, small and medium-sized landownership of the nobles and service people.

Already the policies of Ivan III, especially, for example, in Novgorod, greatly undermined the share of large boyar patrimonial possessions here, replacing them with smaller, local ones. The oprichnina of Ivan the Terrible was the final triumph of local land ownership. It completely destroyed the feudal advantages of boyar patrimonial land ownership. In the 17th century The dominant form of land relations is the estate.

The social composition of the local class was very diverse. Historically, its main core were those serving people of the prince who carried his personal and military service, receiving from him as “feeding” and in the form of remuneration for this service and for the duration of the service, plots of princely land for temporary use, on the estate. But a particularly rapid replenishment and formation of a new local class begins to occur in the 16th century, when Moscow, liquidating appanages and boyar estates, attracted into its service not only the former princes and boyars, but also citizens, merchants, fellow countrymen, courtyard servants, even slaves , with all the differences in their class status, personal and political influence, they were equal on one basis - an award of land for temporary use for the sovereign's service.

As a result, at the beginning of the 16th century, for example in the Shelonskaya Pyatina, more than half of the Novgorod lands confiscated by Moscow were distributed to Moscow service people on the estate. In other parts of the Novgorod region, by the same time, more than half and even up to two-thirds of the land belonged to owners under local law. More higher value the estate was acquired in the south, where, due to the need to protect the border from the attack of southern nomads, land was allocated almost exclusively to military servicemen and where almost all land ownership was on local rights (Ryazan, Epifansky, Tula, Kashira, Oryol districts, where from 80 to 89% of all land belonged to the owners under local law). Patrimonial ownership remains somewhat longer and in greater numbers in the older, northern and central parts of the state (Zvenigorodsky, Kolomna districts), but even here the estate is gradually replacing the votchina. Only in the Far North does not a large patrimony or an estate gain predominance due to the preservation of a significant amount of “black lands” here. In other areas, the feudal patrimony gives way to a new dominant type of land ownership, the estate. This last circumstance - the temporary nature of local land ownership - gave reason to emphasize the conditionality and inconstancy of ownership, its transferable nature as the main features of the legal form of local ownership, which at the same time have important economic consequences and explain the nature of the economic decline that was revealed in the Russian state in the second century. half of the 16th century

b) Political system

In terms of its social system, the Russian centralized state can be characterized as feudal, and in terms of its form of government - an early feudal monarchy. In the society of the feudal period, the class difference of the population was fixed by establishing the legal place of each category of the population or dividing it into classes.

If during the period of fragmentation the hierarchy of the feudal class was relatively stable, then in the 15th century the appanage princes became the serving princes of the great Moscow prince, “princesses.” The economic and political importance of the boyar nobility, suppressed as a result of resistance to centralization, significantly weakened. They no longer had the “right of departure” to another overlord, for they were deprived of their patrimony and accused of treason. The issuance of immunity certificates is stopped, judicial functions are withdrawn. At the same time, the importance of medium and small feudal lords increases and the emerging nobility rises. A centralized state needed a strong army and bureaucracy. This task could be performed by nobles who owned estates and were dependent on the Grand Duke.

Service in the state apparatus in the Moscow Principality is considered a privilege. The palace-patrimonial system of government is gradually dying out. The butler is no longer involved in the princely household, but together with the treasurer and, relying on clerks, controls the local administration and carries out judicial functions in the most important cases. The equestrian becomes the head of the Boyar Duma. Kravchiy deals with issues of food and supplies. Hunters, falconers, and bedkeepers are involved in government affairs and can influence the resolution of important issues.

During this period, changes also occurred in the legal status of peasants (peasant - a derivative of the word Christian, arose in the 14th century).

During the period of centralization, its political system also changed significantly. First of all, it should be noted the strengthening of the power of the Grand Duke (the Horde Khan was also called the Tsar). This was facilitated by the limitation of the immunity rights of feudal lords, especially appanage princes. The political isolation of the principalities is being eliminated. The role of the Boyar Duma is increasing. The Boyar Duma resolved the main issues of foreign and domestic policy, exercised supreme control of the country, supervised orders and local government bodies, established taxes, resolved issues regarding the armed forces, and carried out judicial functions.

There was no division of competence between the tsar and the Duma. Therefore, many decrees began with the words “the king indicated, and the boyars (that is, the Duma) sentenced.”

Feudal congresses met to resolve issues of exceptional importance that required great effort and sacrifice. They gathered extremely rarely.

At the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries. Along with the process of limiting the functions of governors and volosts, new central government bodies (orders) arose. Each order was headed by a boyar, who had a whole staff of officials at his disposal. The official hut had its own representatives or authorized representatives locally. The order system was closely connected with the nobility and was appointed from among its members.

The orders carried out judicial functions in cases related to the areas of their activity. The orders contained a fairly streamlined recordkeeping process. During this period, there was no clear delineation of the functions of orders; they could carry out both sectoral and territorial activities, sometimes replacing each other. The order system received its greatest development during the period of the estate-representative monarchy.

Local government was carried out by governors in counties and volostels in volosts. They ruled the entire territory of counties or volosts, with the exception of boyar estates. Local government was built on a “feeding” system, in which the local population provided the governors and volosts with everything they needed. All local administration was provided at the expense of the local population. required streamlining of judging, etc. The bodies of provincial self-government, the so-called provincial hut, consisting of a provincial elder and tselovalniks, were elected bodies and were formed mainly from the nobility. The functions of labial huts were detection of crimes, interrogation, etc. Later, they began to concentrate judicial functions in their hands and even carried out judicial sentences.

c) Beginning of legal registration of serfdom. Code of Law of Ivan III.

In modern historiography there is no single point of view on exactly what time serfdom originated in Russia. Some historians take the Code of Laws of 1497 and the Code of Laws of 1550, which appeared half a century later, as a kind of starting point in its development, noting the innovations established in these legislative acts (the St. George’s Day rule and the introduction of payment for the “elderly”). Others associate the origins of serfdom with the Tatar-Mongol invasion. In this paragraph, I consider the Code of Laws of Ivan III, and in it I will emphasize the features of the enslavement of the peasants. Article 57 of this document, for the first time on a national scale, limited the right of a peasant to move from one feudal lord to another to a certain period - a week before and a week after St. George’s Day (November 26) after the end of field work: “And a Christian to refuse from the volost, from village to village, for one term in the year, a week before Yuryev, autumn days and a week after Yuryev, autumn days...”

As for the timing of the transition, the following statement seems quite justified: given the extreme compression of the cycle of agricultural work, their intensity, the time of transition was determined by practical considerations very strictly - the end of autumn - the beginning of winter. Leaving at another time would have resulted in irreparable shortfalls in housekeeping. In addition, it was during this period that the main payments were made to the treasury and to the owner of the land. So, apparently, the judge did not introduce any innovations here. But the fixation by law of a certain short transition period testified, on the one hand, to the desire of the feudal lords and the state to limit the rights of the peasants, and on the other, to their weakness and inability to assign the peasants to the person of a certain feudal lord.

The only new thing was that for leaving the peasant had to pay the owner “elderly” - money for the loss of workers, for the “yard”, for the years lived in the old place. The code of law of 1497 sets the size of an elderly person - in the steppe zone 1 ruble (the royal code of laws will add two more altyns), and in the forest zone - half a ruble. The code of law also stipulates the dependence of the amount of the elderly on the period of residence of the peasant on the land, so living for 4 years was considered tantamount to the destruction of the building, therefore the full cost of the yard had to be paid, in other words, the amount of the elderly for the year was equal to ¼ of the cost of the peasant's yard (Article 57 of the book, Art. 88). Thus, the main provisions that influenced the restriction of freedom and liberty of peasants are the legal establishment of the St. George’s Day rule and the introduction of payment for the “elderly”.

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

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