The Tatar-Mongol yoke in Rus' began in 1237. Great Rus' disintegrated, and the formation of the Moscow state began.

The Tatar-Mongol yoke refers to the brutal period of rule in which Rus' was subordinate to the Golden Horde. The Mongol-Tatar yoke in Rus' was able to last for almost two and a half millennia. To the question of how long the Horde’s arbitrariness lasted in Rus', history answers 240 years.

The events that took place during this period greatly affected the formation of Russia. Therefore, this topic has been and remains relevant to this day. The Mongol-Tatar yoke is associated with the most severe events of the 13th century. These were wild extortions of the population, the destruction of entire cities and thousands and thousands of dead.

The rule of the Tatar-Mongol yoke was formed by two peoples: the Mongol dynasty and the nomadic tribes of the Tartars. The overwhelming majority were still Tatars. In 1206, a meeting of the higher Mongol classes took place, at which the leader of the Mongol tribe, Temujin, was elected. It was decided to begin the era of the Tatar-Mongol yoke. The leader was named Genghis Khan (Great Khan). The abilities of Genghis Khan's reign turned out to be magnificent. He managed to unite all nomadic peoples and create the prerequisites for the development of the cultural and economic development of the country.

Military distributions of the Tatar-Mongols

Genghis Khan created a very strong, warlike and rich state. His warriors had surprisingly very hardy qualities; they could spend the winter in their yurt, in the midst of snow and winds. They had a thin build and a thin beard. They shot straight and were excellent riders. During attacks on states, he had punishments for cowards. If one soldier escaped from the battlefield, the entire ten were shot. If a dozen leaves the battle, then the hundred to which they belonged is shot.

The Mongol feudal lords closed a tight ring around the Great Khan. By elevating him to chieftainship, they planned to receive a lot of wealth and jewelry. Only an unleashed war and uncontrolled plunder of the conquered countries could lead them to the desired goal. Soon, after the creation of the Mongolian state, the campaigns of conquest began to bring the expected results. The robbery continued for approximately two centuries. The Mongol-Tatars longed to rule the whole world and own all the riches.

Conquests of the Tatar-Mongol yoke

• In 1207, the Mongols enriched themselves with large volumes of metal and valuable rocks. Attacking the tribes located to the north of the Selenga and in the Yenisei valley. This fact helps explain the emergence and expansion of weapons property.
• Also in 1207, the Tangut state from Central Asia was attacked. The Tanguts began to pay tribute to the Mongols.
• 1209 They were involved in the seizure and robbery of the land of Khigurov (Turkestan).
• 1211 A grandiose defeat of China took place. The emperors' troops were crushed and collapsed. The state was plundered and left in ruins.
• Date 1219-1221 The states of Central Asia were defeated. The result of this three-year war was no different from the previous campaigns of the Tatars. The states were defeated and plundered, the Mongols took away talented artisans with them. Leaving behind only burnt houses and poor people.
• By 1227, vast territories in the east of the Pacific Ocean to the west of the Caspian Sea passed into the possession of the Mongol feudal lords.

The consequences of the Tatar-Mongol invasion are the same. Thousands of killed and the same number of enslaved people. Destroyed and plundered countries that take a very, very long time to recover. By the time the Tatar-Mongol yoke approached the borders of Rus', its army was extremely numerous, having gained experience in combat, endurance and the necessary weapons.

Conquests of the Mongols

Mongol invasion of Rus'

The beginning of the Tatar-Mongol yoke in Rus' has long been considered 1223. Then the experienced army of the Great Khan came very close to the borders of the Dnieper. At that time, the Polovtsians provided assistance, since the principality in Rus' was in disputes and disagreements, and its defensive capabilities were significantly reduced.

• Battle of the Kalka River. May 31, 1223 A Mongol army of 30 thousand broke through the Cumans and faced the Russian army. The first and only ones to take the blow were the princely troops of Mstislav the Udal, who had every chance of breaking through the dense chain of Mongol-Tatars. But he did not receive support from other princes. As a result, Mstislav died, surrendering to the enemy. The Mongols received a lot of valuable military information from Russian prisoners. There were very large losses. But the enemy’s onslaught was still held back for a long time.
• Invasion begins on December 16, 1237. Ryazan was the first on the way. At that time, Genghis Khan passed away, and his place was taken by his grandson, Batu. The army under the command of Batu was no less fierce. They swept away and robbed everything and everyone they met along the way. The invasion was targeted and carefully planned, so the Mongols quickly penetrated deep into the country. The city of Ryazan lasted five days under siege. Despite the fact that the city was surrounded by strong, high walls, under the pressure of enemy weapons, the walls of the city fell. The Tatar-Mongol yoke robbed and killed the people for ten days.
• Battle near Kolomna. Then Batu’s army began to move towards Kolomna. On the way, they met an army of 1,700 people, subordinate to Evpatiy Kolovrat. And despite the fact that the Mongols outnumbered Evpatiy’s army many times over, he did not chicken out and fought back the enemy with all his might. As a result, causing significant damage to him. The army of the Tatar-Mongol yoke continued to move and went along the Moscow River, to the city of Moscow, which lasted five days under siege. At the end of the battle, the city was burned and most of the people were killed. You should know that before reaching the city of Vladimir, the Tatar-Mongols carried out defensive actions all the way against the hidden Russian squad. They had to be very careful and always be ready for a new battle. There were many battles and skirmishes with the Russians on the road.
• Grand Duke of Vladimir Yuri Vsevolodovich did not respond to requests for help from the Ryazan prince. But then he himself found himself under threat of attack. The prince wisely managed the time that was between the Ryazan battle and the Vladimir battle. He recruited a large army and armed it. It was decided to select the city of Kolomna as the site of the battle. On February 4, 1238, the plan of Prince Yuri Vsevolodovich began its implementation.
• This was the most ambitious battle in terms of the number of troops and the heated battle of the Tatar-Mongols and Russians. But he too was lost. The number of Mongols was still significantly higher. The Tatar-Mongol invasion of this city lasted exactly a month. Ended on March 4, 1238, the year the Russians were defeated and also plundered. The prince fell in a heavy battle, causing a great loss to the Mongols. Vladimir became the last of fourteen cities conquered by the Mongols in Northeastern Rus'.
• In 1239 the cities of Chernigov and Pereslavl were defeated. A trip to Kyiv is planned.
• December 6, 1240. Kyiv captured. This further undermined the already shaky structure of the country. Powerfully fortified Kyiv was defeated by huge battering guns and rapids. The path to Southern Rus' and Eastern Europe opened.
• 1241 The Principality of Galicia-Volyn fell. After which the Mongols' actions stopped for a while.

In the spring of 1247, the Mongol-Tatars reached the opposite border of Rus' and entered Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary. Batu placed the created “Golden Horde” on the borders of Rus'. In 1243, they began to accept and approve the princes of the regions into the horde. There were also large cities that survived against the Horde, such as Smolensk, Pskov and Novgorod. These cities tried to express their disagreement and resist Batu's rule. The first attempt was made by the great Andrei Yaroslavovich. But his efforts were not supported by the majority of ecclesiastical and secular feudal lords, who, after so many battles and attacks, finally established relations with the Mongol khans.

In short, after the established order, the princes and church feudal lords did not want to leave their places and agreed to recognize the power of the Mongol khans and the established tribute exactions from the population. The theft of Russian lands will continue.

The country suffered more and more attacks from the Tatar-Mongol yoke. And it became increasingly difficult to give a worthy rebuff to the robbers. In addition to the fact that the country was already pretty tired, the people were impoverished and downtrodden, the princely squabbles also made it impossible to get up from their knees.

In 1257, the Horde started a population census in order to reliably establish the yoke and impose an unbearable tribute on the people. Become the unshakable and undisputed ruler of Russian lands. Rus' managed to defend its political system and reserved for itself the right to create a social and political stratum.

The Russian land was subjected to endless painful invasions of the Mongols, which would last until 1279.

Overthrow of the Tatar-Mongol yoke

The end of the Tatar-Mongol yoke in Rus' came in 1480. The Golden Horde began to gradually disintegrate. Many large principalities were divided and lived in constant conflict with each other. The liberation of Rus' from the Tatar-Mongol yoke is the service of Prince Ivan III. Reigned from 1426 to 1505. The prince united the two large cities of Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod and moved towards the goal of overthrowing the Mongol-Tatar yoke.

In 1478, Ivan III refused to pay tribute to the Horde. In November 1480, the famous “standing on the Ugra River” took place. The name is characterized by the fact that neither side decided to start a battle. After staying on the river for a month, the overthrown Khan Akhmat closed his camp and went to the Horde. How many years the Tatar-Mongol rule lasted, which ravaged and destroyed the Russian people and Russian lands, can now be answered with confidence. Mongol yoke in Rus'

We all know from the school history course that Rus' at the beginning of the 13th century was captured by the foreign army of Batu Khan. These invaders came from the steppes of modern Mongolia. Huge hordes fell upon Rus', merciless horsemen, armed with bent sabers, knew no mercy and acted equally well both in the steppes and in Russian forests, and used frozen rivers to quickly move along the Russian impassability. They spoke an incomprehensible language, were pagans and had a Mongoloid appearance.

Our fortresses could not resist skilled warriors armed with battering machines. Terrible dark times came for Rus', when not a single prince could rule without the khan’s “label,” to obtain which he had to humiliatingly crawl on his knees the last kilometers to the headquarters of the main khan of the Golden Horde. The “Mongol-Tatar” yoke lasted in Rus' for about 300 years. And only after the yoke was thrown off, Rus', thrown back centuries, was able to continue its development.

However, there is a lot of information that makes you look at the version familiar from school differently. Moreover, we are not talking about some secret or new sources that historians simply did not take into account. We are talking about the same chronicles and other sources of the Middle Ages, on which supporters of the version of the “Mongol-Tatar” yoke relied. Often inconvenient facts are justified as the chronicler's “mistake” or his “ignorance” or “interest.”

1. There were no Mongols in the “Mongol-Tatar” horde

It turns out that there is no mention of Mongoloid-type warriors in the “Tatar-Mongol” troops. From the very first battle of the “invaders” with the Russian troops on Kalka, there were wanderers in the troops of the “Mongol-Tatars”. Brodniks are free Russian warriors who lived in those places (predecessors of the Cossacks). And at the head of the wanderers in that battle was Voivode Ploskinia, a Russian.

Official historians believe that Russian participation in the Tatar forces was forced. But they have to admit that, “probably, the forced participation of Russian soldiers in the Tatar army later ceased. There were mercenaries left who had already voluntarily joined the Tatar troops” (M. D. Poluboyarinova).

Ibn-Batuta wrote: “There were many Russians in Sarai Berke.” Moreover: “The bulk of the armed service and labor forces of the Golden Horde were Russian people” (A. A. Gordeev)

“Let us imagine the absurdity of the situation: for some reason the victorious Mongols transfer weapons to the “Russian slaves” they conquered, and they (being armed to the teeth) calmly serve in the troops of the conquerors, making up the “main mass” in them! Let us remind you once again that the Russians were supposedly just defeated in open and armed struggle! Even in traditional history, Ancient Rome never armed the slaves it had just conquered. Throughout history, the victors took away the weapons of the vanquished, and if they later accepted them into service, they constituted an insignificant minority and were, of course, considered unreliable.”

“What can we say about the composition of Batu’s troops? The Hungarian king wrote to the Pope:

“When the state of Hungary, from the Mongol invasion, as if from a plague, for the most part, was turned into a desert, and like a sheepfold was surrounded by various tribes of infidels, namely: Russians, Brodniks from the east, Bulgarians and other heretics from the south...”

“Let’s ask a simple question: where are the Mongols here? Mention is made of Russians, Brodniks, and Bulgarians—that is, Slavic tribes. Translating the word “Mongol” from the king’s letter, we simply get that “great (= megalion) peoples invaded,” namely: Russians, Brodniks from the east, Bulgarians, etc. Therefore, our recommendation: it is useful to replace the Greek word “Mongol” every time = megalion” its translation = “great”. The result will be a completely meaningful text, for the understanding of which there is no need to involve some distant immigrants from the borders of China (by the way, there is not a word about China in all these reports).” (With)

2. It is unclear how many “Mongol-Tatars” there were

How many Mongols were there at the beginning of Batu’s campaign? Opinions on this matter vary. There are no exact data, so there are only historians' estimates. Early historical works suggested that the Mongol army consisted of about 500 thousand horsemen. But the more modern the historical work, the smaller Genghis Khan’s army becomes. The problem is that each rider needs 3 horses, and a herd of 1.5 million horses cannot move, since the front horses will eat all the pasture and the rear ones will simply die of hunger. Gradually, historians agreed that the “Tatar-Mongol” army did not exceed 30 thousand, which, in turn, was not enough to capture all of Russia and enslave it (not to mention the other conquests in Asia and Europe).

By the way, the population of modern Mongolia is a little more than 1 million, while 1000 years before the conquest of China by the Mongols, there were already more than 50 million. And the population of Rus' already in the 10th century was approximately 1 million. However, nothing is known about targeted genocide in Mongolia. That is, it is not clear whether such a small state could conquer such large ones?

3. There were no Mongol horses in the Mongol troops

It is believed that the secret of the Mongolian cavalry was a special breed of Mongolian horses - hardy and unpretentious, capable of independently obtaining food even in winter. But in their steppe they can break the crust with their hoofs and profit from the grass when they graze, but what can they get in the Russian winter, when everything is covered with a meter-long layer of snow, and they also need to carry a rider. It is known that in the Middle Ages there was a Little Ice Age (that is, the climate was harsher than now). In addition, horse breeding experts, based on miniatures and other sources, almost unanimously claim that the Mongol cavalry fought on Turkmen horses - horses of a completely different breed, which in winter cannot feed themselves without human help.

4. The Mongols were engaged in the unification of Russian lands

It is known that Batu invaded Rus' at a time of permanent internecine struggle. In addition, the issue of succession to the throne was acute. All these civil strifes were accompanied by pogroms, destruction, murders and violence. For example, Roman Galitsky buried his rebellious boyars alive in the ground and burned them at the stake, chopped them “at the joints,” and flayed the skin from the living. A gang of Prince Vladimir, expelled from the Galician table for drunkenness and debauchery, was walking around Rus'. As the chronicles testify, this daring free spirit “dragged girls and married women to fornication,” killed priests during worship, and staked horses in the church. That is, there was the usual civil strife with a normal medieval level of atrocity, the same as in the West at that time.

And, suddenly, “Mongol-Tatars” appear, who quickly begin to restore order: a strict mechanism of succession to the throne appears with a label, a clear vertical of power is built. Separatist inclinations are now nipped in the bud. It is interesting that nowhere except Rus' do the Mongols show such concern about establishing order. But according to the classical version, the Mongol Empire contained half of the then civilized world. For example, during its western campaign, the horde burns, kills, robs, but does not impose tribute, does not try to build a vertical power structure, as in Rus'.

5. Thanks to the “Mongol-Tatar” yoke, Rus' experienced a cultural upsurge

With the advent of the “Mongol-Tatar invaders” in Rus', the Orthodox Church began to flourish: many churches were erected, including in the horde itself, church ranks were elevated, and the church received many benefits.

It’s interesting that the written Russian language during the “yoke” takes it to a new level. Here is what Karamzin writes:

“Our language,” writes Karamzin, “from the 13th to the 15th centuries acquired more purity and correctness.” Further, according to Karamzin, under the Tatar-Mongols, instead of the former “Russian, uneducated dialect, writers more carefully adhered to the grammar of church books or ancient Serbian, which they followed not only in declensions and conjugations, but also in pronunciation.”

So, in the West, classical Latin arises, and in our country, the Church Slavonic language appears in its correct classical forms. Applying the same standards as for the West, we must recognize that the Mongol conquest marked the flowering of Russian culture. The Mongols were strange conquerors!

It is interesting that the “invaders” were not so lenient towards the church everywhere. Polish chronicles contain information about the massacre committed by the Tatars among Catholic priests and monks. Moreover, they were killed after the capture of the city (that is, not in the heat of battle, but intentionally). This is strange, since the classical version tells us about the exceptional religious tolerance of the Mongols. But in the Russian lands, the Mongols tried to rely on the clergy, providing the church with significant concessions, up to complete exemption from taxes. It is interesting that the Russian church itself showed amazing loyalty to the “foreign invaders.”

6. After the great empire there was nothing left

Classical history tells us that the “Mongol-Tatars” managed to build a huge centralized state. However, this state disappeared and left no traces behind. In 1480, Rus' finally threw off the yoke, but already in the second half of the 16th century, the Russians began advancing eastward - beyond the Urals, into Siberia. And they did not find any traces of the former empire, although only 200 years had passed. There are no large cities and villages, there is no Yamsky tract thousands of kilometers long. The names of Genghis Khan and Batu are not familiar to anyone. There is only a rare nomadic population engaged in cattle breeding, fishing, and primitive agriculture. And no legends about great conquests. By the way, the great Karakorum was never found by archaeologists. But it was a huge city, where thousands and tens of thousands of artisans and gardeners were taken (by the way, it’s interesting how they were driven across the steppes 4-5 thousand km).

There were also no written sources left after the Mongols. No “Mongol” labels for the reign were found in Russian archives, of which there should have been many, but there are many documents of that time in Russian. Several labels were found, but already in the 19th century:

Two or three labels found in the 19th century And not in state archives, but in the papers of historians. For example, the famous label of Tokhtamysh, according to Prince MA Obolensky, was discovered only in 1834 “among the papers that were once in the Krakow crown archive and which were in the hands of the Polish historian Narushevich” Regarding this label, Obolensky wrote: “It (Tokhtamysh’s label - Author) positively resolves the question in what language and in what letters were the ancient khan’s labels to the Russian great princes written? Of the acts hitherto known to us, this is the second diploma.” It turns out , further, that this label “is written in various Mongolian scripts, infinitely different, not at all similar to the Timur-Kutlui label of 1397 already printed by Mr. Hammer”

7. Russian and Tatar names are difficult to distinguish

Old Russian names and nicknames did not always resemble our modern ones. These old Russian names and nicknames can easily be mistaken for Tatar ones: Murza, Saltanko, Tatarinko, Sutorma, Eyancha, Vandysh, Smoga, Sugonay, Saltyr, Suleysha, Sumgur, Sunbul, Suryan, Tashlyk, Temir, Tenbyak, Tursulok, Shaban, Kudiyar , Murad, Nevryuy. Russian people bore these names. But, for example, the Tatar prince Oleks Nevryuy has a Slavic name.

8. Mongol khans fraternized with the Russian nobility

It is often mentioned that Russian princes and “Mongol khans” became brothers-in-law, relatives, sons-in-law and fathers-in-law, and went on joint military campaigns. It is interesting that in no other country that they defeated or captured did the Tatars behave this way.

Here is another example of the amazing closeness between our and the Mongolian nobility. The capital of the great nomadic empire was in Karakorum. After the death of the Great Khan, the time comes for the election of a new ruler, in which Batu must also take part. But Batu himself does not go to Karakorum, but sends Yaroslav Vsevolodovich there to represent himself. It would seem that a more important reason to go to the capital of the empire could not be imagined. Instead, Batu sends a prince from the occupied lands. Marvelous.

9. Super-Mongol-Tatars

Now let's talk about the capabilities of the “Mongol-Tatars”, about their uniqueness in history.

The stumbling block for all nomads was the capture of cities and fortresses. There is only one exception - the army of Genghis Khan. The answer of historians is simple: after the capture of the Chinese Empire, Batu’s army mastered the machines themselves and the technology for using them (or captured specialists).

It is surprising that the nomads managed to create a strong centralized state. The fact is that, unlike farmers, nomads are not tied to the land. Therefore, with any dissatisfaction, they can simply up and leave. For example, when in 1916, tsarist officials bothered the Kazakh nomads with something, they took it and migrated to neighboring China. But we are told that the Mongols succeeded at the end of the 12th century.

It is not clear how Genghis Khan could persuade his fellow tribesmen to go on a trip “to the last sea”, without knowing maps and generally nothing about those with whom he would have to fight along the way. This is not a raid on neighbors you know well.

All adult and healthy men among the Mongols were considered warriors. In peacetime they ran their own household, and in wartime they took up arms. But who did the “Mongol-Tatars” leave at home after they went on campaigns for decades? Who tended their flocks? Old people and children? It turns out that this army did not have a strong economy in the rear. Then it is not clear who ensured an uninterrupted supply of food and weapons to the Mongol army. This is a difficult task even for large centralized states, let alone a nomadic state with a weak economy. In addition, the scope of the Mongol conquests is comparable to the theater of military operations of World War II (and taking into account the battles with Japan, and not just Germany). The supply of weapons and supplies seems simply impossible.

In the 16th century, the “conquest” of Siberia by the Cossacks began and was not an easy task: it took about 50 years to fight several thousand kilometers to Lake Baikal, leaving behind a chain of fortified forts. However, the Cossacks had a strong state in the rear, from where they could draw resources. And the military training of the peoples who lived in those places could not be compared with the Cossacks. However, the “Mongol-Tatars” managed to cover twice the distance in the opposite direction in a couple of decades, conquering states with developed economies. Sounds fantastic. There were other examples. For example, in the 19th century, it took Americans about 50 years to cover a distance of 3-4 thousand km: Indian wars were fierce and the losses of the US Army were significant despite their gigantic technical superiority. European colonialists in Africa faced similar problems in the 19th century. Only the “Mongol-Tatars” succeeded easily and quickly.

It is interesting that all the major campaigns of the Mongols in Rus' were in winter. This is not typical for nomadic peoples. Historians tell us that this allowed them to move quickly across frozen rivers, but this, in turn, required a good knowledge of the area, which the alien conquerors could not boast of. They fought equally successfully in the forests, which is also strange for the steppe inhabitants.

There is information that the Horde distributed forged letters on behalf of the Hungarian king Bela IV, which brought great confusion to the enemy’s camp. Not bad for steppe dwellers?

10. The Tatars looked like Europeans

A contemporary of the Mongol wars, the Persian historian Rashid ad-Din writes that in the family of Genghis Khan, children “were mostly born with gray eyes and blond hair.” Chroniclers describe Batu's appearance in similar terms: fair hair, light beard, light eyes. By the way, the title “Chinggis” is translated, according to some sources, as “sea” or “ocean”. Perhaps this is due to the color of his eyes (in general, it is strange that the Mongolian language of the 13th century has the word “ocean”).

In the battle of Liegnitz, in the midst of the battle, the Polish troops panicked and they fled. According to some sources, this panic was provoked by the cunning Mongols, who wormed their way into the battle formations of the Polish squads. It turns out that the “Mongols” looked like Europeans.

And here is what Rubrikus, a contemporary of those events, writes:

“In 1252-1253, from Constantinople through the Crimea to Batu’s headquarters and further to Mongolia, the ambassador of King Louis IX, William Rubricus, traveled with his retinue, who, driving along the lower reaches of the Don, wrote: “Russian settlements are scattered everywhere among the Tatars; The Russes mixed with the Tatars... adopted their customs, as well as their clothes and way of life. Women decorate their heads with headdresses similar to the headdresses of French women, the bottom of their dresses is lined with furs, otters, squirrels and ermine. Men wear short clothes; kaftans, checkminis and lambskin hats... All routes of movement in the vast country are served by the Rus; at river crossings there are Russians everywhere”

Rubricus travels through Rus' just 15 years after its conquest by the Mongols. Didn't the Russians mix too quickly with the wild Mongols, adopted their clothes, preserving them until the beginning of the 20th century, as well as their customs and way of life?

In the image in the tomb of Henry II the Pious with the comment: “The figure of a Tatar under the feet of Henry II, Duke of Silesia, Cracow and Poland, placed on the grave in Breslau of this prince, killed in battle with the Tatars at Lingnitsa on April 9, 1241,” we see Tatar, no different from Russian:

Here's another example. In the miniatures from the Litsevoy Vault of the 16th century, it is impossible to distinguish a Tatar from a Russian:

Other interesting information

There are a few more interesting points that are worth noting, but which I couldn’t figure out what section to include.

At that time, not all of Russia was called “Rus”, but only the Kiev, Pereyaslav and Chernigov principalities. There were often references to trips from Novgorod or Vladimir to “Rus”. For example, the Smolensk cities were no longer considered “Rus”.

The word “horde” is often mentioned not in relation to the “Mongol-Tatars”, but simply to the troops: “Swedish Horde”, “German Horde”, “Zalessky Horde”, “Land of the Cossack Horde”. That is, it simply means an army and there is no “Mongolian” flavor in it. By the way, in modern Kazakh “Kzyl-Orda” is translated as “Red Army”.

In 1376, Russian troops entered Volga Bulgaria, besieged one of its cities and forced the inhabitants to swear allegiance. Russian officials were placed in the city. According to traditional history, it turned out that Rus', being a vassal and tributary of the “Golden Horde,” organizes a military campaign on the territory of a state that is part of this “Golden Horde” and forces it to take a vassal oath. As for written sources from China. For example, in the period 1774-1782 in China, seizures were carried out 34 times. A collection of all printed books ever published in China was undertaken. This was connected with the political vision of the history of the ruling dynasty. By the way, we also had a change from the Rurik dynasty to the Romanovs, so a historical order is quite likely. It is interesting that the theory of the “Mongol-Tatar” enslavement of Rus' was not born in Russia, but among German historians much later than the alleged “yoke” itself.

Conclusion

Historical science has a huge number of contradictory sources. Therefore, one way or another, historians have to discard some of the information in order to get a complete version of events. What was presented to us in the school history course was only one version, of which there are many. And, as we see, it has many contradictions.

50 famous riddles of the Middle Ages Zgurskaya Maria Pavlovna

So was there a Tatar-Mongol yoke in Rus'?

A passing Tatar. Hell will truly consume these.

(Pass.)

From Ivan Maslov’s parody theatrical play “Elder Paphnutius”, 1867.

The traditional version of the Tatar-Mongol invasion of Rus', the “Tatar-Mongol yoke,” and liberation from it is known to the reader from school. As presented by most historians, the events looked something like this. At the beginning of the 13th century, in the steppes of the Far East, the energetic and brave tribal leader Genghis Khan gathered a huge army of nomads, welded together by iron discipline, and rushed to conquer the world - “to the last sea.” Having conquered their closest neighbors, and then China, the mighty Tatar-Mongol horde rolled west. Having traveled about 5 thousand kilometers, the Mongols defeated Khorezm, then Georgia, and in 1223 they reached the southern outskirts of Rus', where they defeated the army of Russian princes in the battle on the Kalka River. In the winter of 1237, the Tatar-Mongols invaded Rus' with all their countless troops, burned and destroyed many Russian cities, and in 1241 they tried to conquer Western Europe, invading Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary, reached the shores of the Adriatic Sea, but turned back because that they were afraid to leave Rus' in their rear, devastated, but still dangerous for them. The Tatar-Mongol yoke began.

The great poet A.S. Pushkin left heartfelt lines: “Russia was destined for a high destiny... its vast plains absorbed the power of the Mongols and stopped their invasion at the very edge of Europe; The barbarians did not dare to leave enslaved Russia in their rear and returned to the steppes of their East. The resulting enlightenment was saved by a torn and dying Russia...”

The huge Mongol power, stretching from China to the Volga, hung like an ominous shadow over Russia. The Mongol khans gave the Russian princes labels to reign, attacked Rus' many times to plunder and plunder, and repeatedly killed Russian princes in their Golden Horde.

Having strengthened over time, Rus' began to resist. In 1380, the Grand Duke of Moscow Dmitry Donskoy defeated the Horde Khan Mamai, and a century later in the so-called “stand on the Ugra” the troops of the Grand Duke Ivan III and the Horde Khan Akhmat met. The opponents camped for a long time on opposite sides of the Ugra River, after which Khan Akhmat, finally realizing that the Russians had become strong and he had little chance of winning the battle, gave the order to retreat and led his horde to the Volga. These events are considered the “end of the Tatar-Mongol yoke.”

But in recent decades this classic version has been called into question. Geographer, ethnographer and historian Lev Gumilev convincingly showed that relations between Russia and the Mongols were much more complex than the usual confrontation between cruel conquerors and their unfortunate victims. Deep knowledge in the field of history and ethnography allowed the scientist to conclude that there was a certain “complementarity” between the Mongols and Russians, that is, compatibility, the ability for symbiosis and mutual support at the cultural and ethnic level. The writer and publicist Alexander Bushkov went even further, “twisting” Gumilyov’s theory to its logical conclusion and expressing a completely original version: what is commonly called the Tatar-Mongol invasion was in fact a struggle of the descendants of Prince Vsevolod the Big Nest (son of Yaroslav and grandson of Alexander Nevsky ) with their rival princes for sole power over Russia. Khans Mamai and Akhmat were not alien raiders, but noble nobles who, according to the dynastic ties of the Russian-Tatar families, had legally valid rights to the great reign. Thus, the Battle of Kulikovo and the “stand on the Ugra” are not episodes of the struggle against foreign aggressors, but pages of the civil war in Rus'. Moreover, this author promulgated a completely “revolutionary” idea: under the names “Genghis Khan” and “Batu” the Russian princes Yaroslav and Alexander Nevsky appear in history, and Dmitry Donskoy is Khan Mamai himself (!).

Of course, the publicist’s conclusions are full of irony and border on postmodern “banter,” but it should be noted that many facts of the history of the Tatar-Mongol invasion and “yoke” really look too mysterious and need closer attention and unbiased research. Let's try to look at some of these mysteries.

Let's start with a general note. Western Europe in the 13th century presented a disappointing picture. The Christian world was experiencing a certain depression. The activity of Europeans shifted to the borders of their range. German feudal lords began to seize the border Slavic lands and turn their population into powerless serfs. The Western Slavs who lived along the Elbe resisted German pressure with all their might, but the forces were unequal.

Who were the Mongols who approached the borders of the Christian world from the east? How did the powerful Mongol state appear? Let's take an excursion into its history.

At the beginning of the 13th century, in 1202–1203, the Mongols defeated first the Merkits and then the Keraits. The fact is that the Keraits were divided into supporters of Genghis Khan and his opponents. The opponents of Genghis Khan were led by the son of Van Khan, the legal heir to the throne - Nilha. He had reasons to hate Genghis Khan: even at the time when Van Khan was an ally of Genghis, he (the leader of the Keraits), seeing the undeniable talents of the latter, wanted to transfer the Kerait throne to him, bypassing his own son. Thus, the clash between some of the Keraits and the Mongols occurred during Wang Khan’s lifetime. And although the Keraits had a numerical superiority, the Mongols defeated them, as they showed exceptional mobility and took the enemy by surprise.

In the clash with the Keraits, the character of Genghis Khan was fully revealed. When Wang Khan and his son Nilha fled from the battlefield, one of their noyons (military leaders) with a small detachment detained the Mongols, saving their leaders from captivity. This noyon was seized, brought before the eyes of Genghis, and he asked: “Why, noyon, seeing the position of your troops, did not you leave? You had both time and opportunity.” He replied: “I served my khan and gave him the opportunity to escape, and my head is for you, O conqueror.” Genghis Khan said: “Everyone must imitate this man.

Look how brave, faithful, valiant he is. I can’t kill you, noyon, I’m offering you a place in my army.” Noyon became a thousand-man and, of course, served Genghis Khan faithfully, because the Kerait horde disintegrated. Van Khan himself died while trying to escape to the Naiman. Their guards at the border, seeing Kerait, killed him, and presented the old man’s severed head to their khan.

In 1204, there was a clash between the Mongols of Genghis Khan and the powerful Naiman Khanate. And again the Mongols won. The vanquished were included in the horde of Genghis. In the eastern steppe there were no longer any tribes capable of actively resisting the new order, and in 1206, at the great kurultai, Chinggis was again elected khan, but of all Mongolia. This is how the pan-Mongolian state was born. The only tribe hostile to him remained the ancient enemies of the Borjigins - the Merkits, but by 1208 they were forced out into the valley of the Irgiz River.

The growing power of Genghis Khan allowed his horde to assimilate different tribes and peoples quite easily. Because, in accordance with Mongolian stereotypes of behavior, the khan could and should have demanded humility, obedience to orders, and fulfillment of duties, but forcing a person to renounce his faith or customs was considered immoral - the individual had the right to his own choice. This state of affairs was attractive to many. In 1209, the Uighur state sent envoys to Genghis Khan with a request to accept them into his ulus. The request was naturally granted, and Genghis Khan gave the Uyghurs enormous trading privileges. A caravan route passed through Uyghuria, and the Uyghurs, once part of the Mongol state, became rich by selling water, fruit, meat and “pleasures” to hungry caravan riders at high prices. The voluntary union of Uighuria with Mongolia turned out to be useful for the Mongols. With the annexation of Uyghuria, the Mongols went beyond the boundaries of their ethnic area and came into contact with other peoples of the ecumene.

In 1216, on the Irgiz River, the Mongols were attacked by the Khorezmians. Khorezm by that time was the most powerful of the states that arose after the weakening of the power of the Seljuk Turks. The rulers of Khorezm turned from governors of the ruler of Urgench into independent sovereigns and adopted the title of “Khorezmshahs”. They turned out to be energetic, enterprising and militant. This allowed them to conquer most of Central Asia and southern Afghanistan. The Khorezmshahs created a huge state in which the main military force were Turks from the adjacent steppes.

But the state turned out to be fragile, despite the wealth, brave warriors and experienced diplomats. The regime of the military dictatorship relied on tribes alien to the local population, who had a different language, different morals and customs. The cruelty of the mercenaries caused discontent among the residents of Samarkand, Bukhara, Merv and other Central Asian cities. The uprising in Samarkand led to the destruction of the Turkic garrison. Naturally, this was followed by a punitive operation of the Khorezmians, who brutally dealt with the population of Samarkand. Other large and wealthy cities in Central Asia were also affected.

In this situation, Khorezmshah Muhammad decided to confirm his title of “ghazi” - “victor of the infidels” - and become famous for another victory over them. The opportunity presented itself to him in the same year 1216, when the Mongols, fighting with the Merkits, reached Irgiz. Having learned about the arrival of the Mongols, Muhammad sent an army against them on the grounds that the steppe inhabitants needed to be converted to Islam.

The Khorezmian army attacked the Mongols, but in a rearguard battle they themselves went on the offensive and severely battered the Khorezmians. Only the attack of the left wing, commanded by the son of the Khorezmshah, the talented commander Jalal ad-Din, straightened the situation. After this, the Khorezmians retreated, and the Mongols returned home: they did not intend to fight with Khorezm; on the contrary, Genghis Khan wanted to establish ties with the Khorezmshah. After all, the Great Caravan Route went through Central Asia and all the owners of the lands along which it ran grew rich due to the duties paid by merchants. Merchants willingly paid duties because they passed on their costs to consumers without losing anything. Wanting to preserve all the advantages associated with the existence of caravan routes, the Mongols strove for peace and quiet on their borders. The difference of faith, in their opinion, did not give a reason for war and could not justify bloodshed. Probably, the Khorezmshah himself understood the episodic nature of the clash on the Irshza. In 1218, Muhammad sent a trade caravan to Mongolia. Peace was restored, especially since the Mongols had no time for Khorezm: shortly before this, the Naiman prince Kuchluk began a new war with the Mongols.

Once again, Mongol-Khorezm relations were disrupted by the Khorezm Shah himself and his officials. In 1219, a rich caravan from the lands of Genghis Khan approached the Khorezm city of Otrar. The merchants went to the city to replenish food supplies and wash themselves in the bathhouse. There the merchants met two acquaintances, one of whom reported to the ruler of the city that these merchants were spies. He immediately realized that there was an excellent reason to rob travelers. The merchants were killed and their property was confiscated. The ruler of Otrar sent half of the loot to Khorezm, and Muhammad accepted the loot, which means he shared responsibility for what he had done.

Genghis Khan sent envoys to find out what caused the incident. Muhammad became angry when he saw the infidels, and ordered some of the ambassadors to be killed, and some, stripped naked, to be driven out to certain death in the steppe. Two or three Mongols finally made it home and told about what had happened. Genghis Khan's anger knew no bounds. From the Mongolian point of view, two of the most terrible crimes occurred: the deception of those who trusted and the murder of guests. According to custom, Genghis Khan could not leave unavenged either the merchants who were killed in Otrar, or the ambassadors whom the Khorezmshah insulted and killed. Khan had to fight, otherwise his fellow tribesmen would simply refuse to trust him.

In Central Asia, the Khorezmshah had at his disposal a regular army of four hundred thousand. And the Mongols, as the famous Russian orientalist V.V. Bartold believed, had no more than 200 thousand. Genghis Khan demanded military assistance from all allies. Warriors came from the Turks and Kara-Kitai, the Uyghurs sent a detachment of 5 thousand people, only the Tangut ambassador boldly replied: “If you don’t have enough troops, don’t fight.” Genghis Khan considered the answer an insult and said: “Only the dead could I bear such an insult.”

Genghis Khan sent assembled Mongolian, Uighur, Turkic and Kara-Chinese troops to Khorezm. Khorezmshah, having quarreled with his mother Turkan Khatun, did not trust the military leaders related to her. He was afraid to gather them into a fist in order to repel the onslaught of the Mongols, and scattered the army into garrisons. The best commanders of the Shah were his own unloved son Jalal ad-Din and the commandant of the Khojent fortress Timur-Melik. The Mongols took the fortresses one after another, but in Khojent, even after taking the fortress, they were unable to capture the garrison. Timur-Melik put his soldiers on rafts and escaped pursuit along the wide Syr Darya. The scattered garrisons could not hold back the advance of Genghis Khan's troops. Soon all the major cities of the sultanate - Samarkand, Bukhara, Merv, Herat - were captured by the Mongols.

Regarding the capture of Central Asian cities by the Mongols, there is an established version: “Wild nomads destroyed the cultural oases of agricultural peoples.” Is it so? This version, as L.N. Gumilev showed, is based on the legends of court Muslim historians. For example, the fall of Herat was reported by Islamic historians as a disaster in which the entire population of the city was exterminated, except for a few men who managed to escape in the mosque. They hid there, afraid to go out into the streets littered with corpses. Only wild animals roamed the city and tormented the dead. After sitting for some time and coming to their senses, these “heroes” went to distant lands to rob caravans in order to regain their lost wealth.

But is this possible? If the entire population of a large city was exterminated and lay on the streets, then inside the city, in particular in the mosque, the air would be full of corpse miasma, and those hiding there would simply die. No predators, except jackals, live near the city, and they very rarely penetrate into the city. It was simply impossible for exhausted people to move to rob caravans several hundred kilometers from Herat, because they would have to walk, carrying heavy loads - water and provisions. Such a “robber”, having met a caravan, would no longer be able to rob it...

Even more surprising is the information reported by historians about Merv. The Mongols took it in 1219 and also allegedly exterminated all the inhabitants there. But already in 1229 Merv rebelled, and the Mongols had to take the city again. And finally, two years later, Merv sent a detachment of 10 thousand people to fight the Mongols.

We see that the fruits of fantasy and religious hatred gave rise to legends of Mongol atrocities. If you take into account the degree of reliability of sources and ask simple but inevitable questions, it is easy to separate historical truth from literary fiction.

The Mongols occupied Persia almost without fighting, pushing the Khorezmshah's son Jalal ad-Din into northern India. Muhammad II Ghazi himself, broken by the struggle and constant defeats, died in a leper colony on an island in the Caspian Sea (1221). The Mongols made peace with the Shiite population of Iran, which was constantly offended by the Sunnis in power, in particular the Baghdad Caliph and Jalal ad-Din himself. As a result, the Shia population of Persia suffered significantly less than the Sunnis of Central Asia. Be that as it may, in 1221 the state of the Khorezmshahs was ended. Under one ruler - Muhammad II Ghazi - this state achieved both its greatest power and its destruction. As a result, Khorezm, Northern Iran, and Khorasan were annexed to the Mongol Empire.

In 1226, the hour struck for the Tangut state, which, at the decisive moment of the war with Khorezm, refused to help Genghis Khan. The Mongols rightly viewed this move as a betrayal that, according to Yasa, required vengeance. The capital of Tangut was the city of Zhongxing. It was besieged by Genghis Khan in 1227, having defeated the Tangut troops in previous battles.

During the siege of Zhongxing, Genghis Khan died, but the Mongol noyons, by order of their leader, hid his death. The fortress was taken, and the population of the “evil” city, which suffered the collective guilt of betrayal, was executed. The Tangut state disappeared, leaving behind only written evidence of its former culture, but the city survived and lived until 1405, when it was destroyed by the Chinese of the Ming Dynasty.

From the capital of the Tanguts, the Mongols took the body of their great ruler to their native steppes. The funeral rite was as follows: the remains of Genghis Khan were lowered into a dug grave, along with many valuable things, and all the slaves who performed funeral work were killed. According to custom, exactly one year later it was necessary to celebrate the wake. In order to later find the burial place, the Mongols did the following. At the grave they sacrificed a little camel that had just been taken from its mother. And a year later, the camel herself found in the vast steppe the place where her cub was killed. Having slaughtered this camel, the Mongols performed the required funeral ritual and then left the grave forever. Since then, no one knows where Genghis Khan is buried.

In the last years of his life, he was extremely concerned about the fate of his state. The khan had four sons from his beloved wife Borte and many children from other wives, who, although they were considered legitimate children, had no rights to their father’s throne. The sons from Borte differed in inclinations and character. The eldest son, Jochi, was born shortly after the Merkit captivity of Borte, and therefore not only evil tongues, but also his younger brother Chagatai called him a “Merkit degenerate.” Although Borte invariably defended Jochi, and Genghis Khan himself always recognized him as his son, the shadow of his mother’s Merkit captivity fell on Jochi with the burden of suspicion of illegitimacy. Once, in the presence of his father, Chagatai openly called Jochi illegitimate, and the matter almost ended in a fight between the brothers.

It is curious, but according to the testimony of contemporaries, Jochi’s behavior contained some stable stereotypes that greatly distinguished him from Chinggis. If for Genghis Khan there was no concept of “mercy” in relation to enemies (he left life only for small children adopted by his mother Hoelun, and valiant warriors who went into Mongol service), then Jochi was distinguished by his humanity and kindness. So, during the siege of Gurganj, the Khorezmians, completely exhausted by the war, asked to accept surrender, that is, in other words, to spare them. Jochi spoke out in favor of showing mercy, but Genghis Khan categorically rejected the request for mercy, and as a result, the garrison of Gurganj was partially slaughtered, and the city itself was flooded by the waters of the Amu Darya. The misunderstanding between the father and the eldest son, constantly fueled by the intrigues and slander of relatives, deepened over time and turned into the sovereign's mistrust of his heir. Genghis Khan suspected that Jochi wanted to gain popularity among the conquered peoples and secede from Mongolia. It is unlikely that this was the case, but the fact remains: at the beginning of 1227, Jochi, who was hunting in the steppe, was found dead - his spine was broken. The details of what happened were kept secret, but, without a doubt, Genghis Khan was a person interested in the death of Jochi and was quite capable of ending his son’s life.

In contrast to Jochi, Genghis Khan's second son, Chaga-tai, was a strict, efficient and even cruel man. Therefore, he received the position of "guardian of the Yasa" (something like an attorney general or chief judge). Chagatai strictly observed the law and treated its violators without any mercy.

The third son of the Great Khan, Ogedei, like Jochi, was distinguished by his kindness and tolerance towards people. The character of Ogedei is best illustrated by this incident: one day, on a joint trip, the brothers saw a Muslim washing himself by the water. According to Muslim custom, every believer is obliged to perform prayer and ritual ablution several times a day. Mongolian tradition, on the contrary, forbade a person to wash throughout the summer. The Mongols believed that washing in a river or lake causes a thunderstorm, and a thunderstorm in the steppe is very dangerous for travelers, and therefore “calling a thunderstorm” was considered an attempt on people’s lives. Nuker vigilantes of the ruthless zealot of the law Chagatai captured the Muslim. Anticipating a bloody outcome - the unfortunate man was in danger of having his head cut off - Ogedei sent his man to tell the Muslim to answer that he had dropped a gold piece into the water and was just looking for it there. The Muslim said so to Chagatay. He ordered to look for the coin, and during this time Ogedei’s warrior threw the gold into the water. The found coin was returned to the “rightful owner.” In parting, Ogedei, taking a handful of coins from his pocket, handed them to the rescued person and said: “The next time you drop gold into the water, don’t go after it, don’t break the law.”

The youngest of Genghis' sons, Tului, was born in 1193. Since Genghis Khan was in captivity at that time, this time Borte’s infidelity was quite obvious, but Genghis Khan recognized Tuluya as his legitimate son, although he did not outwardly resemble his father.

Of Genghis Khan's four sons, the youngest had the greatest talents and showed the greatest moral dignity. A good commander and an outstanding administrator, Tuluy was also a loving husband and distinguished by his nobility. He married the daughter of the deceased head of the Keraits, Van Khan, who was a devout Christian. Tuluy himself did not have the right to accept the Christian faith: like Genghisid, he had to profess the Bon religion (paganism). But the khan’s son allowed his wife not only to perform all Christian rituals in a luxurious “church” yurt, but also to have priests with her and receive monks. The death of Tuluy can be called heroic without any exaggeration. When Ogedei fell ill, Tuluy voluntarily took a powerful shamanic potion in an effort to “attract” the disease to himself, and died saving his brother.

All four sons had the right to succeed Genghis Khan. After Jochi was eliminated, there were three heirs left, and when Genghis died and a new khan had not yet been elected, Tului ruled the ulus. But at the kurultai of 1229, the gentle and tolerant Ogedei was chosen as the Great Khan, in accordance with the will of Genghis. Ogedei, as we have already mentioned, had a kind soul, but the kindness of a sovereign is often not to the benefit of the state and his subjects. The management of the ulus under him was carried out mainly thanks to the severity of Chagatai and the diplomatic and administrative skills of Tuluy. The Great Khan himself preferred wanderings with hunts and feasts in Western Mongolia to state concerns.

The grandchildren of Genghis Khan were allocated various areas of the ulus or high positions. Jochi's eldest son, Orda-Ichen, received the White Horde, located between the Irtysh and the Tarbagatai ridge (the area of ​​​​present-day Semipalatinsk). The second son, Batu, began to own the Golden (Great) Horde on the Volga. The third son, Sheibani, received the Blue Horde, which roamed from Tyumen to the Aral Sea. At the same time, the three brothers - the rulers of the uluses - were allocated only one or two thousand Mongol soldiers, while the total number of the Mongol army reached 130 thousand people.

The children of Chagatai also received a thousand soldiers, and the descendants of Tului, being at court, owned the entire grandfather’s and father’s ulus. So the Mongols established a system of inheritance called minorat, in which the youngest son received all the rights of his father as an inheritance, and older brothers received only a share in the common inheritance.

The Great Khan Ogedei also had a son, Guyuk, who claimed the inheritance. The expansion of the clan during the lifetime of Chingis’s children caused the division of the inheritance and enormous difficulties in managing the ulus, which stretched across the territory from the Black to the Yellow Sea. In these difficulties and family scores were hidden the seeds of future strife that destroyed the state created by Genghis Khan and his comrades.

How many Tatar-Mongols came to Rus'? Let's try to sort this issue out.

Russian pre-revolutionary historians mention a “half-million-strong Mongol army.” V. Yang, author of the famous trilogy “Genghis Khan”, “Batu” and “To the Last Sea”, names the number four hundred thousand. However, it is known that a warrior of a nomadic tribe goes on a campaign with three horses (minimum two). One carries luggage (packed rations, horseshoes, spare harness, arrows, armor), and the third needs to be changed from time to time so that one horse can rest if it suddenly has to go into battle.

Simple calculations show that for an army of half a million or four hundred thousand soldiers, at least one and a half million horses are needed. Such a herd is unlikely to be able to effectively move a long distance, since the leading horses will instantly destroy the grass over a vast area, and the rear ones will die from lack of food.

All the main invasions of the Tatar-Mongols into Rus' took place in winter, when the remaining grass was hidden under the snow, and you couldn’t take much fodder with you... The Mongolian horse really knows how to get food from under the snow, but ancient sources do not mention the horses of the Mongolian breed that existed “in service” with the horde. Horse breeding experts prove that the Tatar-Mongol horde rode Turkmens, and this is a completely different breed, looks different, and is not capable of feeding itself in the winter without human help...

In addition, the difference between a horse allowed to wander in winter without any work and a horse forced to make long journeys under a rider and also participate in battles is not taken into account. But in addition to the horsemen, they also had to carry heavy booty! The convoys followed the troops. The cattle that pull the carts also need to be fed... The picture of a huge mass of people moving in the rearguard of an army of half a million with convoys, wives and children seems quite fantastic.

The temptation for a historian to explain the Mongol campaigns of the 13th century by “migrations” is great. But modern researchers show that the Mongol campaigns were not directly related to the movements of huge masses of the population. Victories were won not by hordes of nomads, but by small, well-organized mobile detachments returning to their native steppes after campaigns. And the khans of the Jochi branch - Batu, Horde and Sheybani - received, according to the will of Genghis, only 4 thousand horsemen, i.e. about 12 thousand people settled in the territory from the Carpathians to Altai.

In the end, historians settled on thirty thousand warriors. But here, too, unanswered questions arise. And the first among them will be this: isn’t it enough? Despite the disunity of the Russian principalities, thirty thousand cavalry is too small a figure to cause “fire and ruin” throughout Rus'! After all, they (even supporters of the “classical” version admit this) did not move in a compact mass. Several detachments scattered in different directions, and this reduces the number of “innumerable Tatar hordes” to the limit beyond which elementary mistrust begins: could such a number of aggressors conquer Rus'?

It turns out to be a vicious circle: a huge Tatar-Mongol army, for purely physical reasons, would hardly be able to maintain combat capability in order to move quickly and deliver the notorious “indestructible blows.” A small army would hardly have been able to establish control over most of the territory of Rus'. To get out of this vicious circle, we have to admit: the Tatar-Mongol invasion was in fact only an episode of the bloody civil war that was going on in Rus'. The enemy forces were relatively small; they relied on their own forage reserves accumulated in the cities. And the Tatar-Mongols became an additional external factor, used in the internal struggle in the same way as the troops of the Pechenegs and Polovtsians had previously been used.

The chronicle information that has reached us about the military campaigns of 1237–1238 depicts the classically Russian style of these battles - the battles take place in winter, and the Mongols - the steppe inhabitants - act with amazing skill in the forests (for example, the encirclement and subsequent complete destruction on the City River of a Russian detachment under the command of the great Prince of Vladimir Yuri Vsevolodovich).

Having taken a general look at the history of the creation of the huge Mongol power, we must return to Rus'. Let us take a closer look at the situation with the Battle of the Kalka River, which is not fully understood by historians.

It was not the steppe people who represented the main danger to Kievan Rus at the turn of the 11th–12th centuries. Our ancestors were friends with the Polovtsian khans, married “red Polovtsian girls”, accepted baptized Polovtsians into their midst, and the descendants of the latter became Zaporozhye and Sloboda Cossacks, it is not for nothing that in their nicknames the traditional Slavic suffix of affiliation “ov” (Ivanov) was replaced by the Turkic one - “ enko" (Ivanenko).

At this time, a more formidable phenomenon emerged - a decline in morals, a rejection of traditional Russian ethics and morality. In 1097, a princely congress took place in Lyubech, marking the beginning of a new political form of existence of the country. There it was decided that “let everyone keep his fatherland.” Rus' began to turn into a confederation of independent states. The princes swore to inviolably observe what was proclaimed and kissed the cross in this. But after the death of Mstislav, the Kiev state began to quickly disintegrate. Polotsk was the first to settle down. Then the Novgorod “republic” stopped sending money to Kyiv.

A striking example of the loss of moral values ​​and patriotic feelings was the act of Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky. In 1169, having captured Kyiv, Andrei gave the city to his warriors for three days of plunder. Until that moment, in Rus' it was customary to do this only with foreign cities. During any civil strife, such a practice was never extended to Russian cities.

Igor Svyatoslavich, a descendant of Prince Oleg, the hero of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign,” who became the Prince of Chernigov in 1198, set himself the goal of dealing with Kiev, a city where the rivals of his dynasty were constantly strengthening. He agreed with the Smolensk prince Rurik Rostislavich and called on the Polovtsians for help. Prince Roman Volynsky spoke in defense of Kyiv, the “mother of Russian cities,” relying on the Torcan troops allied to him.

The plan of the Chernigov prince was implemented after his death (1202). Rurik, Prince of Smolensk, and the Olgovichi with the Polovtsy in January 1203, in a battle that was fought mainly between the Polovtsy and the Torks of Roman Volynsky, gained the upper hand. Having captured Kyiv, Rurik Rostislavich subjected the city to a terrible defeat. The Tithe Church and the Kiev Pechersk Lavra were destroyed, and the city itself was burned. “They have created a great evil that has not existed since baptism in the Russian land,” the chronicler left a message.

After the fateful year of 1203, Kyiv never recovered.

According to L.N. Gumilyov, by this time the ancient Russians had lost their passionarity, that is, their cultural and energetic “charge”. In such conditions, a clash with a strong enemy could not but become tragic for the country.

Meanwhile, the Mongol regiments were approaching the Russian borders. At that time, the main enemy of the Mongols in the west was the Cumans. Their enmity began in 1216, when the Cumans accepted the blood enemies of Genghis - the Merkits. The Polovtsians actively pursued their anti-Mongol policy, constantly supporting the Finno-Ugric tribes hostile to the Mongols. At the same time, the Cumans of the steppe were as mobile as the Mongols themselves. Seeing the futility of cavalry clashes with the Cumans, the Mongols sent an expeditionary force behind enemy lines.

Talented commanders Subetei and Jebe led a corps of three tumens across the Caucasus. The Georgian king George Lasha tried to attack them, but was destroyed along with his army. The Mongols managed to capture the guides who showed the way through the Daryal Gorge. So they went to the upper reaches of the Kuban, to the rear of the Polovtsians. They, having discovered the enemy in their rear, retreated to the Russian border and asked for help from the Russian princes.

It should be noted that the relations between Rus' and the Polovtsians do not fit into the scheme of irreconcilable confrontation “sedentary - nomadic”. In 1223, the Russian princes became allies of the Polovtsians. The three strongest princes of Rus' - Mstislav the Udaloy from Galich, Mstislav of Kiev and Mstislav of Chernigov - gathered troops and tried to protect them.

The clash on Kalka in 1223 is described in some detail in the chronicles; In addition, there is another source - “The Tale of the Battle of Kalka, and of the Russian Princes, and of the Seventy Heroes.” However, the abundance of information does not always bring clarity...

Historical science has long not denied the fact that the events on Kalka were not the aggression of evil aliens, but an attack by the Russians. The Mongols themselves did not seek war with Russia. The ambassadors who arrived to the Russian princes quite friendly asked the Russians not to interfere in their relations with the Polovtsians. But, true to their allied obligations, the Russian princes rejected peace proposals. In doing so, they made a fatal mistake that had bitter consequences. All the ambassadors were killed (according to some sources, they were not just killed, but “tortured”). At all times, the murder of an ambassador or envoy was considered a serious crime; According to Mongolian law, deceiving someone who trusted was an unforgivable crime.

Following this, the Russian army sets out on a long march. Having left the borders of Rus', it first attacks the Tatar camp, takes booty, steals cattle, after which it moves outside its territory for another eight days. A decisive battle takes place on the Kalka River: the eighty-thousandth Russian-Polovtsian army attacked the twenty-thousandth (!) detachment of the Mongols. This battle was lost by the Allies due to their inability to coordinate their actions. The Polovtsy left the battlefield in panic. Mstislav Udaloy and his “younger” prince Daniil fled across the Dnieper; They were the first to reach the shore and managed to jump into the boats. At the same time, the prince chopped up the rest of the boats, fearing that the Tatars would be able to cross after him, “and, filled with fear, I reached Galich on foot.” Thus, he doomed his comrades, whose horses were worse than princely ones, to death. The enemies killed everyone they overtook.

The other princes are left alone with the enemy, fight off his attacks for three days, after which, believing the assurances of the Tatars, they surrender. Here lies another mystery. It turns out that the princes surrendered after a certain Russian named Ploskinya, who was in the enemy’s battle formations, solemnly kissed the pectoral cross that the Russians would be spared and their blood would not be shed. The Mongols, according to their custom, kept their word: having tied up the captives, they laid them on the ground, covered them with planks and sat down to feast on the bodies. Not a drop of blood was actually shed! And the latter, according to Mongolian views, was considered extremely important. (By the way, only the “Tale of the Battle of Kalka” reports that the captured princes were put under planks. Other sources write that the princes were simply killed without mockery, and still others that they were “captured.” So the story with a feast on the bodies is just one version.)

Different peoples perceive the rule of law and the concept of honesty differently. The Russians believed that the Mongols, by killing the captives, broke their oath. But from the point of view of the Mongols, they kept their oath, and the execution was the highest justice, because the princes committed the terrible sin of killing someone who trusted them. Therefore, the point is not in deceit (history provides a lot of evidence of how the Russian princes themselves violated the “kiss of the cross”), but in the personality of Ploskini himself - a Russian, a Christian, who somehow mysteriously found himself among the warriors of the “unknown people”.

Why did the Russian princes surrender after listening to Ploskini’s entreaties? “The Tale of the Battle of Kalka” writes: “There were also wanderers along with the Tatars, and their commander was Ploskinya.” Brodniks are Russian free warriors who lived in those places, the predecessors of the Cossacks. However, establishing Ploschini's social status only confuses the matter. It turns out that the wanderers in a short time managed to come to an agreement with the “unknown peoples” and became so close to them that they jointly struck at their brothers in blood and faith? One thing can be stated with certainty: part of the army with which the Russian princes fought on Kalka was Slavic, Christian.

The Russian princes do not look their best in this whole story. But let's return to our riddles. For some reason, the “Tale of the Battle of Kalka” that we mentioned is not able to definitely name the enemy of the Russians! Here is the quote: “...Because of our sins, unknown peoples came, the godless Moabites [symbolic name from the Bible], about whom no one knows exactly who they are and where they came from, and what their language is, and what tribe they are, and what faith. And they call them Tatars, while others say Taurmen, and others say Pechenegs.”

Amazing lines! They were written much later than the events described, when it was supposed to be known exactly who the Russian princes fought on Kalka. After all, part of the army (albeit small) nevertheless returned from Kalka. Moreover, the victors, pursuing the defeated Russian regiments, chased them to Novgorod-Svyatopolch (on the Dnieper), where they attacked the civilian population, so that among the townspeople there should have been witnesses who saw the enemy with their own eyes. And yet he remains “unknown”! This statement further confuses the matter. After all, by the time described, the Polovtsians were well known in Rus' - they lived nearby for many years, then fought, then became related... The Taurmen - a nomadic Turkic tribe that lived in the Northern Black Sea region - were again well known to the Russians. It is curious that in the “Tale of Igor’s Campaign” certain “Tatars” are mentioned among the nomadic Turks who served the Chernigov prince.

One gets the impression that the chronicler is hiding something. For some reason unknown to us, he does not want to directly name the Russian enemy in that battle. Maybe the battle on Kalka is not a clash with unknown peoples at all, but one of the episodes of the internecine war waged among themselves by Russian Christians, Polovtsian Christians and the Tatars who got involved in the matter?

After the Battle of Kalka, some of the Mongols turned their horses to the east, trying to report on the completion of the assigned task - the victory over the Cumans. But on the banks of the Volga, the army was ambushed by the Volga Bulgars. The Muslims, who hated the Mongols as pagans, unexpectedly attacked them during the crossing. Here the victors at Kalka were defeated and lost many people. Those who managed to cross the Volga left the steppes to the east and united with the main forces of Genghis Khan. Thus ended the first meeting of the Mongols and Russians.

L.N. Gumilyov collected a huge amount of material, clearly demonstrating that the relationship between Russia and the Horde CAN be described by the word “symbiosis”. After Gumilev, they write especially a lot and often about how Russian princes and “Mongol khans” became brothers-in-law, relatives, sons-in-law and fathers-in-law, how they went on joint military campaigns, how (let’s call a spade a spade) they were friends. Relations of this kind are unique in their own way - the Tatars did not behave this way in any country they conquered. This symbiosis, brotherhood in arms leads to such an interweaving of names and events that sometimes it is even difficult to understand where the Russians end and the Tatars begin...

Therefore, the question of whether there was a Tatar-Mongol yoke in Rus' (in the classical sense of the term) remains open. This topic awaits its researchers.

7.4. Fourth period: the Tatar-Mongol yoke from the battle of the City (1238) to the “standing on the Ugra” (1481) - the official end of the Tatar-Mongol yoke in Rus' BATY KHAN from 1238 YAROSLAV VSEVOLODOVICH, 1238–1248, ruled for 10 years, capital - Vladimir Came from Novgorod, village. 70. According to,