History [Crib] Fortunatov Vladimir Valentinovich
10. Feudalism and feudal fragmentation in Europe
Europe did not suffer from the Mongol-Tatar invasion. The Mongol armies reached the Adriatic Sea. Although they completely defeated the Polish-German army at the Battle of Legnica in 1241, vast Russian lands remained behind the Mongols' rear, in which the powerful Prince Alexander Nevsky gathered forces to fight the invaders.
In the X–XI centuries. after the collapse of the empire Charlemagne in Western Europe it is approved feudal fragmentation. Kings retained real power only within their domains. Formally, the king's vassals were obliged to perform military service, pay him a monetary contribution upon entering into inheritance, and also obey the decisions of the king as the supreme arbiter in inter-feudal disputes. In fact, the fulfillment of all these obligations already in the 9th–10th centuries. depended almost entirely on the will of the powerful feudal lords The strengthening of their power led to feudal civil strife.
In France, the Capetian dynasty (987–1328) was weak and could not resist the feudal lords, who lived freely and did not particularly take the king into account. The feudal lords waged endless wars among themselves. Serfs suffered under the burden of many duties. The Valois dynasty (1328–1589) managed to complete the process of gathering French lands and French people under its leadership.
The social system that developed in the Middle Ages (V–XV centuries) in many Western and Eastern countries is usually called feudalism. The land plot, which belonged to the landowner together with the peasant farmers who worked on the land, had different names in many countries. Feud in Western Europe, it is a hereditary land ownership granted by a lord to a vassal on the condition of performing service or paying customary fees. The fief was also called beneficiary(“good deed”). The owners of feuds, landowners in the era of feudalism constituted the first estate - class of feudal lords. Peasants and small producers were not the owners of the cultivated land.
For the use of the allotment, the peasant was obliged to cultivate the land of the feudal lord on enslaving conditions, to pay rent - labor, food or cash, that is, quitrent (chinsh). Happened comment, establishing relationships of dependence of the weak on the strong. The peasant's personal dependence often approached slavery. But the peasant had some immunity. On the land given to him to keep, the peasant led independent a small farm, owning a house, livestock and, most importantly, tools with which he cultivated the plot at his disposal, as well as plowing the feudal lord in the case of working rent. A feudal lord in Western Europe could not kill a serf, but had the right of the first wedding night in relation to the female part of the serfs. The economic autonomy of the peasant inevitably gave rise to non-economic coercion, characteristic of the feudal economic system, since peasants were forced to perform duties. Addiction serfs from feudal lords was determined by law. Feudal law sometimes called fist, since it was based on direct violence. The feudal economy was predominantly natural, since most of the products produced were consumed within the farm itself. The feudal lords, having different incomes (war trophies, money from the king, from the sale of part of the products), ordered weapons, clothing, jewelry, etc. from artisans.
Along with secular feudal lords (dukes, counts, barons, etc.) among the second estate - clergy - there were also many feudal landowners. Solid land was managed by the Pope, bishops, abbots of monasteries, etc.
From the book Medieval France author Polo de Beaulieu Marie-AnneFeudalism At the turn of the 11th century, the institutions of feudal vassalage were already established: rituals, rights and responsibilities were clearly defined. Originating from vassalage, which was originally a contract made between two free men during
From the book History of Public Administration in Russia author Shchepetev Vasily Ivanovich1. Feudal fragmentation and features of public administration The period of feudal fragmentation in Rus' covers the 12th–15th centuries. The number of independent principalities during this period was not stable due to the divisions and unification of some of them. In the middle of the 12th century.
From the book The Birth of Europe by Le Goff JacquesFeudal fragmentation and centralized monarchies At first glance, the Christian world of the 11th and 12th centuries presented a very contradictory spectacle in political terms - this state of affairs in Europe remained almost to this day and in some sense
author Skazkin Sergey DanilovichFeudal fragmentation In the Middle Ages, Italy was not a single state; three main regions historically developed here - Northern, Central and Southern Italy, which, in turn, broke up into separate feudal states. Each region retained its own
From the book History of the Middle Ages. Volume 1 [In two volumes. Under the general editorship of S. D. Skazkin] author Skazkin Sergey DanilovichFeudal fragmentation in the 11th century. With the final establishment of feudalism, the fragmentation that reigned in France acquired certain features in various parts of the country. In the north, where feudal relations of production were most fully developed,
From the book People's Monarchy author Solonevich Ivan authorCHAPTER VI. Feudal fragmentation of Rus' in the XII - early XIII
From the book HISTORY OF RUSSIA from ancient times to 1618. Textbook for universities. In two books. Book one. author Kuzmin Apollon GrigorievichTO CHAPTER VI. Feudal fragmentation of Rus' IN THE XII - EARLY XIII centuries. From an article by D.K. Zelenin “On the origin of the Northern Great Russians of Veliky Novgorod” (Institute of Linguistics. Reports and communications. 1954. No. 6. P.49 - 95) On the first pages of the initial Russian chronicle it is reported
author Skazkin Sergey DanilovichChapter 26 REFORMATION IN SWITZERLAND. FEUDAL REACTION AND COUNTER-REFORMATION IN EUROPE
From the book History of the Middle Ages. Volume 2 [In two volumes. Under the general editorship of S. D. Skazkin] author Skazkin Sergey Danilovich2. FEUDAL REACTION AND COUNTER-REFORMATION IN EUROPE Despite the fact that feudalism in Europe, feudal reaction was still a great force and the feudal system had not outlived its usefulness. After the first defeats suffered from the bourgeois reformation and peasant plebeian
From the book History of the Middle Ages. Volume 2 [In two volumes. Under the general editorship of S. D. Skazkin] author Skazkin Sergey DanilovichTo Chapter 26 Reformation in Switzerland. Feudal reaction and counter-reformation in Europe The founders of Marxism-Leninism Engels F. Civil War in Switzerland. – K. Marx and F. Engels” Works, vol. 4, p. 349-356.
From the book History of the Czech Republic author Pichet V.I.§ 2. Feudal fragmentation The Czech lands were united into one state, but their political unity was supported only by the authority of the princely authorities with the assistance of central and provincial governments. Under the dominance of natural
From the book National History. Crib author Barysheva Anna Dmitrievna6 RUSSIAN LANDS IN THE XII–XIV CENTURIES. Feudal fragmentation in the middle of the 12th century. Kievan Rus is an amorphous formation without a single, clearly defined center of gravity. Political polycentrism dictates new rules of the game. Three centers can be distinguished:
From the book Reader on the History of the USSR. Volume 1. author author unknownCHAPTER VIII FEUDAL FRONTATION IN NORTHEASTERN Rus' AND STRENGTHENING OF THE MOSCOW DUCTIMALITY IN THE XIV - FIRST HALF OF THE XV CENTURIES 64. FIRST NEWS ABOUT MOSCOW According to the Ipatiev Chronicle. In the summer of 6655, Ida Gyurgi2 fought the Novgorochka volost, and came to take Bargaining3 and taking all the revenge ; A
From the book The Formation of the Russian Centralized State in the XIV–XV centuries. Essays on the socio-economic and political history of Rus' author Cherepnin Lev Vladimirovich§ 1. Feudal fragmentation in Rus' in the XIV–XV centuries. - a brake on the development of agriculture. Feudal fragmentation was a big brake on the development of agriculture. They are found in the chronicles (and in the Novgorod and Pskov chronicles - quite
From the book Russian History. Part I author Vorobiev M NFEUDAL Fragmentation 1. The concept of feudal fragmentation. 2. - The beginning of fragmentation in Rus'. 3. - System of succession to the throne in Kievan Rus. 4. - Congresses of Russian princes. 5. - Causes of feudal fragmentation. 6. - Economic aspect. 7. - Feudalism and Russian
Multiple factors in the historical development of Rus', including princely feuds, economic changes, and a new method of land ownership, led to the beginning of feudal fragmentation. This long period left an indelible mark on the future development of the entire state and society. But it is impossible to deny some facts of the positive impact of the fragmentation of territories. The independent and uneven development of the old urban centers led to many cultural and foreign policy achievements.
Formal | Genuine |
External | Domestic |
The Polovtsian danger significantly reduced the attractiveness of the trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.” Thanks to the Crusades, the centers through which trade relations between Europe and the East were carried out gradually moved to Southern Europe and the Mediterranean, and the rapidly growing northern Italian cities established control over this trade. | Political prerequisites: endless inter-princely strife and long-term fierce internecine struggle among the Rurikovichs. |
The pressure of the steppe nomads. | Strengthening local princes. |
Boyars turn into feudal landowners, for whom income received from estates becomes the main means of subsistence. |
|
Low level of development of subsistence, subsistence farming. Land is the main value. |
Causes:
1) Decline of the Kyiv principality (loss of central position, relocation of world trade routes away from Kyiv).
It was associated with the loss of the importance of the trade route “from the Varangians to the Greeks.”
Ancient Rus' is losing its role as a participant and mediator in trade relations between the Byzantine, Western European and Eastern worlds
2) Land is the main value. Land is the main means of payment for service.
3) One of the reasons for the beginning of feudal fragmentation in Rus' was the significant growth of the country’s productive forces.
4) The most important sign of feudal fragmentation in the 12th-13th centuries. was a subsistence economy.
5) Strengthening local princes.
6) Boyars turn into feudal landowners, for whom the income received from estates becomes. main means of subsistence.
7) Weakening of defense capabilities.
8) The weakening of Kyiv and the movement of centers to the outskirts was caused by the pressure of the steppe nomads.
Consequences:
- strengthening of local princes.
- The boyars turn into feudal landowners, for whom the income received from estates becomes the main means of subsistence.
- weakening of defense capabilities.
Characteristics:
2nd half of the XII - XIV centuries. - period
- state fragmentation of Ancient Rus'
- appanage principalities
- formation of Russian feudalism
The legal formalization of the principle of feudal fragmentation was recorded: by the Lubech princely congress of 1097 “let each one keep his fatherland”
Along with Kiev, new centers of craft and trade appeared, increasingly independent of the capital of the Russian state. | The state became vulnerable, since not all of the resulting principalities were on good terms with each other, and there was no unity that later saved our country more than once. |
Old cities developed. | Constant bloody civil strife weakened the military and economic power of the country. |
Large and strong principalities were formed. | Kyiv, the former capital of the Old Russian state, lost the power glorified in legends and epics and itself became the cause of strife. |
In the large Russian principalities, strong princely dynasties were created, a tradition of transferring power from father to son was formed, cities were rapidly growing, peasant farming was steadily developing, and new arable land and forest lands were being developed. Wonderful cultural monuments were created there. The Russian Orthodox Church was gaining strength there. | Many princes sought to occupy the grand-ducal table in Kyiv. The power in the city often changed - some princes were expelled, others died in battles, others left, unable to resist the new contenders. |
The significance of the era of fragmentation
The period of feudal fragmentation is a natural stage in the development of any medieval society. In Rus', it coincided with the activation of nomadic tribes neighboring Russia and the Mongol-Tatar invasion. The internecine struggle of dozens of princes for the great reign and the factor of dependence on the Horde slowed down the process of unification of the Russian lands. Also, unlike similar processes in France, England or Spain, two centers of land unification were formed in Rus': in the northeast and in the northwest. Accordingly, already in the 15th century, two great principalities laid claim to the heritage of Kievan Rus: Moscow and Lithuania.
The combination of external and internal factors led to the fact that the era of feudal fragmentation in Rus' lasted longer than in France, Hungary or England. On the other hand, after the weakening of the Horde yoke, the consolidation of the principalities accelerated. Under Ivan III the Great, fragmentation was virtually eliminated, and another hundred years later the remnants of the appanage system in the centralized Russian state disappeared.
| causes | process | manifestation | result |
| 1.Development of private land ownership | Transformation of land grants for military service into hereditary property. | “My vassal’s vassal is not my vassal.” The king's power extended over the territory of his own possessions - the royal domain. | The dependence of the feudal nobility on the central government weakened. |
| 2.Increasing dependence of peasants on feudal lords | Instead of a foot militia of communal peasants, a heavily armed knightly cavalry was created under Charles Martel. | The decline in the role of meetings of tribal nobility and free community members. distribution of land and peasants to knights (feudal lords) for lifelong ownership. | Consolidation of the peasants. Support for the monarch's power on the part of the once free community members weakened. |
| 3. Dominance of subsistence farming | Weak economic ties between parts of the feudal state. | “On my territory I am the king.” In the structure of medieval society, townspeople were not distinguished as a separate class. | Feudal farms were economically self-sufficient. Trade was poorly developed. |
| 4.Cultural and ethnic differences | The peoples that were part of the Carolingian Empire spoke different languages and had different customs and traditions. | The desire for separation, opposition to the central government in the person of the monarch (separatism). | The Verdun partition of 843 and the emergence of the kingdoms that gave rise to modern European states: France, Italy and Germany. |
End of work -
This topic belongs to the section:
Textbook on history (primitive, antiquity, middle ages)
Institution of secondary vocational.. education of the Republic of Bashkortostan.. Bashkir Medical College..
If you need additional material on this topic, or you did not find what you were looking for, we recommend using the search in our database of works:
What will we do with the received material:
If this material was useful to you, you can save it to your page on social networks:
| Tweet |
All topics in this section:
From primitiveness to civilization
According to generally accepted estimates, the era of primitiveness began no later than 2.5 million years ago, while the first civilizations appeared no earlier than the 4th millennium BC. Thus, more than 99% of human history
Ancient East and the Ancient World
Ancient Egypt Stages of the history of Ancient Egypt 2nd half. IV millennium BC There were more than 40 states in the Nile Valley
Ancient Egypt
The largest state of the Ancient East in northeast Africa, the territory of which extended broadly along the Nile valley and its rapids to the delta.
Demanded
Creation of irrigation systems Organization of collective work of a large number of people
Society structure
A king (pharaoh) is a ruler who had supreme military, judicial and priestly power. Worshiped as the god Ra.RA
Eastern despotism
With the emergence of so-called chiefdoms during the Neolithic Revolution, which united a number of communities under the authority of a leader, a major step was taken in the movement towards the state. Leader, authority
Social structure
Despite all the regional characteristics, the social structure of Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Chinese, Indian, and Persian societies is generally the same. Social hierarchy may be
The emergence of ancient civilization
Parthenon Temple in Athens. V century BC. Ancient civilization was formed in the Mediterranean. Initially, states arose in Greece and Italy (Crete, Mick
Hellenism: State and Society
The constant struggle for primacy between the two most important city states - democratic Athens and aristocratic Sparta - ultimately weakened Greece and made it possible for it to be subjugated to the north.
Roman world of the Mediterranean
The landowning aristocracy reigned supreme in the policies of Italy. One of them - Rome, which, according to legend, arose in 753 BC. - was destined to become the master of the Mediterranean. Per
Civilization of the East. Ancient civilization
Centralized monarchy Polis - city-states Ruler - supreme owner Communal and private ownership of all land. Private ownership of land Nasele
Appropriating and producing farms
Appropriating economy Producing economy Neolithic revolution VIII-VII millennium BC
Eastern Roman Empire
(Byzantium) 395 – Formation of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium) with its capital Constantinople (Balkan Peninsula, Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt, Palestine and other lands).
Public administration
Tax departments; military; Department of State Post and External Relations; department that protected the interests of the imperial family.
The emergence of Islam
In the 7th century The third world religion (after Buddhism and Christianity)—Islam—was born in Arabia. This word means “surrender to Allah”, “submission”.
Conquest policy
In a short period the following were conquered: Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Iran, North Africa, the Army, part of Georgia, Spain, part of Central Asia. The capital of the caliphate is Mecca, Damascus, Baghdad. Important
Paths of development of feudalism
Feudalism established itself in most of Europe through the interaction of late Roman society with barbarian society - a synthesis path. Rapid development of the feud
Frankish Merovingian State
The creator is the leader of the Salic Frankish tribe Clovis from the Merovei family. 486 - victory over the Romans at the Battle of Soissons; subordination to Sev
Central administration under the Merovingians
King Mayordom – First Councilor of the Kingdom of the Palace
Charlemagne and his empire
During the reign of Charlemagne (768 - 814), the Frankish state became one of the largest states in Europe. Charles's army made more than 50 campaigns in neighboring countries.
Carolingian Renaissance - the time of Charlemagne
· 800 – the Pope proclaimed Charlemagne emperor. For the first time since the fall of the Roman Empire (476), the power of the emperor in the West was restored. Karl began to claim
France in the 11th – 14th centuries
The struggle of the kings of France to “gather” the lands of the 11th century. – France was divided into a number of large feudal possessions: duchies – Normandy, Burgundy, Brittany, Aquitaine
England in the XI-XII centuries
The Norman Conquest of England After the conquest of Britain by the Angles and Saxons, 7 kingdoms were formed there, warring among themselves. In the 9th century. they united into the kingdom of England
Features of warring armies
The English army is based on infantrymen recruited from free peasants and archers. The knightly cavalry received salaries from the royal treasury. Advantages: o High
War of the Scarlet and White Roses
(1455-1485) Reason: Rivalry between two groups of feudal lords - the old aristocracy and the new nobility, connected by economic interests with the bourgeoisie. TO
Absolute monarchy
In the XV - XVI centuries. Absolute monarchies are emerging in Western European countries. Absolutism is a form of government in a feudal state, when the monarch owns
Main features of an absolute monarchy
1. Creation of an extensive bureaucratic apparatus. 2. Creation of a professional army - the support of absolutism. 3. Strengthening punitive authorities. 4. Activities according to class
Feudal society in the Middle Ages
Concentration of the absolute majority of the population in villages (agrarian society) The largest class were peasants. City
Glossary of terms
Absolutism – unlimited monarchy; a form of government in which the executive, legislative and judicial powers are vested in one person - the monarch. Antique
Major events in world history
Foreign countries IV millennium BC I millennium BC – mid-5th century AD 527-565 Con. V – VIII centuries VII-X centuries 800-84
6th grade
Lesson topic: “Feudal fragmentation in Western Europe
V IX - XI centuries."
Developed by a teacher from Municipal Budgetary Educational Institution Secondary School No. 43 in Simferopol
Rakovich Tatyana Nikolaevna
Goals: introduce the causes of feudal fragmentation, the tasks and characteristics of the state during the period of fragmentation; show the connection between the strengthening of feudal land ownership and the transfer of state power functions to them; promote the development of the ability to establish relationships between causes and effects; give an idea of feudal morality and customs, of the historical path of peoples in the 9th-11th centuries.
Planned results:
subject:
learn to master holistic ideas about the historical path of peoples in the 9th-11th centuries; establish cause-and-effect relationships; talk about the most important events using primary and secondary sources of information; read a historical map, analyze and summarize map data; work with diagrams;
meta-subject UUD:
independently organize educational interaction in a group; determine your own attitude to the phenomena of modern life; formulate your point of view; listen and hear each other; express your thoughts with sufficient completeness and accuracy in accordance with the tasks and conditions of communication; independently discover and formulate an educational problem; choose means of achieving the goal from those proposed, and also look for them yourself; give definitions of concepts; analyze, compare, classify and summarize facts and phenomena; to develop the ability to consciously organize and regulate one’s activities - educational, social, etc.; determine the sequence of intermediate goals taking into account the final result; draw up an action plan;
personal UUD:
to form personal motivation to study new material; comprehend the social and moral experience of previous generations.
Equipment: “Feudal Staircase” diagram; textbook illustrations; multimedia presentation.
Lesson type:
discovery of new knowledge.During the classes
1.Organizational moment
Hello guys. How do you feel? Are you ready for today's lesson?
Today we are showing you a fragment of the lesson, as you can see we have a lot of guests, and we are doing this for the first time. Do you know that there is such a belief that if you are doing something for the first time, you need to make a wish. Guys, I suggest you make your deepest wish and may it come true for you...
2.Updating basic knowledge
Conversation:
In the previous lesson we studied the empire of Charlemagne.
Please remember where she was?
(slide No. 1)What territories did Charlemagne conquer?
(he annexed most of Italy, part of Spain, the Saxons)
That is, the Frankish state was made up of many small kingdoms.
3. Do you think the peoples in the conquered territories agreed to be part of the Frankish state?
4. Why?
(Indeed, these states were annexed by force. The population of the conquered territories was forced to accept the Christian faith; for refusal they were executed and resettled, but this did not help Charlemagne retain power in his hands.)
5. Why Charlemagne was proclaimed emperor,
and the Frankish state an empire?
6. In what year was Charlemagne proclaimed emperor? (800g.)
7. What measures did Charlemagne take in the last years of his reign?
(he divided the territory between his sons)
8. What were the consequences of the division of the empire between the sons?
(to wars between sons)
9. What are such events called when there is a war between sons? (internecine wars)
9. When studying which topic have we already encountered such a term?
(Old Russian state)
10. What did the internecine wars lead to in the ancient Russian state?
(fragmentation)
11. So what will the internecine wars in the Frankish state lead to then?
(to feudal fragmentation)
12. And into what territories did Charlemagne’s empire break up?
(slide No. 2)
(France, Germany, Italy)
13. In what part of Europe were these territories located?
(in Western Europe)
14. What was the name of the time when the Frankish empire was divided into separate kingdoms?
(feudal fragmentation)
15. During what period did it occur?
14. So, what are we going to talk about today?
Documentation.
Excerpt from “Complaint about the Distribution of the Empire” by Florus of Lyon.
The Frankish nation shone in the eyes of the whole world... But now, having fallen into decline, this great power immediately lost both its shine and the name of the empire; The state, until recently unified, is divided into three parts, and no one can be considered an emperor; Instead of a sovereign, there are small rulers; instead of a state, there is only one piece. The common good has ceased to exist, everyone is busy with their own interests: they think about anything, they have forgotten only God... What happened to the neighboring peoples on the Danube, on the Rhine, on the Rhone, on the Loire and on the Po? All of them, since ancient times united by bonds of agreement, now, when the union is broken, will be torn apart by sad discord... While the empire is being torn to shreds, people are having fun and calling the world such an order of things that does not provide any of the benefits of the world.
So, the topic of today's lesson
(slide No. 3)"Feudal fragmentation of Western Europe in the 9th-11th centuries."
3. Motivational-target stage
- Guess what questions we should discuss in class. For this
You have route sheets on your tables. Let's try to continue the sentences in order to determine the goals of today's lesson.
Goals:
we must know what it is... (fragmentation)
learn to find….(reasons)
learn to establish cause-and-effect relationships...
cultivate in yourself... (respect for previous generations)
(Students formulate the goals of the lesson.)
Lesson Plan
1. Causes of feudal fragmentation.
2. Consequences and results.
Formulation of problematic questions for the lesson.
(slide No. 4)Why does feudal fragmentation arise?
Was this process natural?
4. Work on the topic of the lesson
1. Causes of feudal fragmentation
Both the emergence and collapse of the early feudal state are explained by the interests of the class of feudal lords that was emerging at that time.
Guys, now let's determine the reasons for fragmentation. To do this, in your pairs, discuss the document lying on your tables and try to identify the reasons for the fragmentation of Western Europe.
Application.
(work with FISHBONE)(slide No. 5)Why were the states of Western Europe fragmented? With a subsistence economy, there were and could not be strong trade ties between individual parts of the country; there were no ties even between individual estates. In each estate, the population lived its own isolated life and had little contact with people from other places. People spent almost their entire lives in their village. And there was no need for them to go anywhere: after all, everything they needed was produced locally.
Each fief was almost an independent state. The feudal lord had a detachment of soldiers, collected taxes from the population, carried out trials and reprisals against them. He could himself declare war on other feudal lords and make peace with them. Whoever owned the land had power.
Large feudal lords - dukes and counts - had little regard for the king. They argued that the king was only “first among equals,” that is, they considered themselves no less noble than the king. Many large feudal lords themselves were not averse to seizing the royal throne.
The dominance of subsistence farming led to the fragmentation of the states of Western Europe. Royal power in the 9th - 10th centuries. was very weak.
Reasons for feudal fragmentation:
(slide No. 6)Establishment of feudal ownership of land
The need of feudal lords in their own strength to subjugate dependent peasants
Dominance of subsistence farming
Lack of economic ties between regions and peoples united by force of arms
The feudal lords did not need a strong central government and stopped supporting it
Further division of the resulting states:
France, Germany, Italy
843 - collapse of the empire
Features of this period:
(slide No. 7)Weakness of royal power
Independence of the feudal lords
Civil Wars
The disintegration of Europe into separate parts led to robberies and murders. This is how contemporaries described the civil strife:
And the count went on a campaign against his enemies,
He began to burn and plunder their fiefs,
Take their castles and compare them to the ground,
Sweep their walls and dungeons into dust.
“There is no war without fires and blood,” proclaimed the poet-knight Bertrand de Born. Such wars are called internecine.
- Who do you think suffered the most from these wars?
(Students' answers.)
Consequences of fragmentation
(slide No. 8)Positive
Neutral
Negative
rise in the economy;
successes in the development of local culture.
weakness of royal power;
independence of feudal lords;
organization of feudal lords in the form of a feudal ladder.
internecine wars, loss of life;
weakening of the country in front of external enemies.
Conversation:
What can we attribute to the positive and negative consequences of the fragmentation of Western Europe?
Guys, let's turn to our questions posed at the beginning of the lesson:
Why does feudal fragmentation arise? Was this process natural?
VI. Reflection
- What new did you learn in the lesson?
- What skills and abilities did you practice?
- What new terms did you become familiar with?
- What did you like and what didn’t you like about the lesson?
- What conclusions did you draw?
D/Z clause 4 VI, terms…. Compose a dialogue between a vassal and a lord during a period of fragmentation.
2.1.The period of feudal fragmentation in Western Europe and Rus': essence and causes
2.2. Mongol-Tatars and Rus'
The period of feudal fragmentation is a natural stage in the progressive development of feudalism. The division of the early feudal grandiose empires (Kievan Rus or the Carolingian Empire in Central Europe) into a number of factually (and sometimes legally) sovereign states was an inevitable stage in the development of feudal society.
Back in the 4th century. (395) The Roman Empire broke up into two independent parts - Western and Eastern. The capital of the Eastern part was Constantinople, founded by Emperor Constantine on the site of the former Greek colony of Byzantium. Byzantium was able to withstand the storms of the so-called “great migration of peoples” and survived after the fall of Rome (in 1410 the Visigoths took Rome after a long siege) as the “Roman Empire.” In the VI century. Byzantium occupied vast territories of the European continent (even Italy was briefly conquered). Throughout the Middle Ages, Byzantium maintained a strong centralized state.
The Mongolian state arose thanks to the military and diplomatic activities of Temujin, in the future Genghis Khan, aimed at uniting the Mongolian tribes. The latter included the Mongols themselves, to which Temujin belonged, Merkits, Keraits, Oirats, Naimans, and Tatars. The largest and most warlike of the Mongol tribes was the Tatar tribe. The Tanguts, Jurhens, and Chinese, who bordered the Mongols, often transferred the name “Tatars” to all Mongolian tribes of the 11th-12th centuries.
The future Genghis Khan was born, according to some sources, in 1162, according to others - in 1155. He received the name Temujin at birth because his father, grandson Yesugei-Bagatur, who was at enmity with the Tatars, had captured the Tatar leader the day before
In his struggle for power over other tribes, Temujin achieved significant success. Around 1180 he was elected khan of the Mongol tribal union itself. The decisive factor was the real power that Temujin gained thanks to his abilities. Representatives of the Mongolian steppe aristocracy, having elected Temujin khan, gave him the title Chiigis Khan.
In 1185 Temujin, in alliance with the head of the Kereit tribe, Van Khan, defeated the Merkit union of tribes. This victory strengthened his position.
In the spring of 1202, Genghis Khan completely defeated the Tatars. All captured Tatar men were killed, and the women and children were distributed among different tribes. The khan himself took two Tatar women as his wives.
Sooner or later, the logic of the struggle should have led Chiigis Khan to a clash with the Kereit Van Khan, from which he ultimately emerged victorious. Having crushed Tayan Khan's last strong rival, the head of the Naiman tribal union, in 1204, Genghis Khan became the only powerful leader in the Mongolian steppes.
In 1206, at a congress (kurultai) of the Mongolian nobility in the upper reaches of the Onon River, Chinggis Khan was again proclaimed khan, but this time of a unified Mongolian state.
The Mongolian state was built on a military model. The entire territory and population were divided into three parts: center, right and left wing. Each part, in turn, was divided into “thousands” (10 thousand people), “thousands”, “hundreds”, “tens”, headed by temniks, thousanders, centurions, tens. At the head of these military-administrative formations were associates Genghis Khan - his noyons and nukers.
Each military-administrative unit, starting from the lowest level, had to not only field a set number of soldiers with horses, equipment, and provisions, but also bear various feudal duties.
Having created a strong power, the structure of which contributed to the rapid deployment of military forces, Genghis Khan began to implement plans to conquer neighboring states.
The news that reached the north-east of Rus' about the defeat and capture of the largest Asian states by the Mongol-Tatars, the devastation of vast territories with flourishing cities and populous villages, served as a terrible warning.
It is quite acceptable to assume that Vladimir and the Vladimir-Suzdal principality were one of the most informed regions of Europe. The proximity and constant connection with the Volga made it possible to obtain reliable and varied information about the East, Asia, and the Tatars.
Apparently, in Rus' they also knew about the Mongol campaign of 1219-1224. to Central Asia, about its enormous destructive consequences for the agricultural regions and urban life of Central Asia. They knew what the civilian population expected in the event of an invasion by nomadic conquerors.
It should be noted that under Genghis Khan, organized robbery and division of military booty, devastation of entire regions and extermination of civilians were used. A whole system of mass organized terror emerged, which was carried out from above (and not from below, by ordinary soldiers, as before, during the invasions of nomads), aimed at destroying elements of the population capable of resistance and intimidating civilians.
During the siege of the city, residents received mercy only on condition of immediate surrender, although this rule was sometimes not observed if it seemed disadvantageous to the Mongols. If a city surrendered only after long resistance, its inhabitants were driven out into the field, where they were left for five to ten days or more under the supervision of Mongol warriors. After robbing the city and dividing the loot, they were taken for the townspeople. The military were killed, their families were enslaved. Girls and young women also became slaves and were divided between the nobility and warriors. According to a contemporary, the Arab historian Ibn al-Asir, after the capture of Bukhara, the inhabitants were driven out into the field and then were divided by order of Genghis Khan among the soldiers. According to Ibn al-Athir, the Tatars raped the women they inherited right there in front of the townspeople, who “looked and cried,” unable to do anything.
Artisans and skilled craftsmen were distributed as slaves among the Mongol princes and nobility, but their fate was somewhat better, since they were often not separated from their families. Healthy male youth climbed into the “crowd”, i.e. it was used for heavy siege work and convoy service, and during battles the “people of the crowd” were in front of the troops, serving as a target for shots from their own compatriots. The remaining residents were allowed to return to their ruined homes.
If a city was taken only by storm after stubborn resistance, or if an uprising began in an already conquered city, the Mongols carried out a general massacre. The surviving residents, who had previously been driven out into the field, were distributed among the soldiers, who were to kill those still alive. Sometimes, along with the cities, their rural districts were cut out. After the massacre, the captured scribes were forced to count the number of those killed.
After the defeat on the Kalka River in 1223, Rus' began to closely monitor the actions of the Mongol-Tatars. Let us pay attention to the fact that the chronicle of the Vladimir principality contains records of the victory of the Mongols over the Saxons and Eastern Cumans in 1229, and of the wintering of the Mongol-Tatars near the borders of Volga Bulgaria in 1232. Under 1236, the chronicle contains a message about the conquest of Volga Bulgaria by the Mongols . The chronicler describes the defeat of the capital of Bulgaria - the Great City. This message from the Vladimir chronicler carried a frank warning about the impending catastrophe. A year later it broke out.
Let us note that in 1235, at the kurultai, a decision was made on an all-Mongol campaign to the West. As the Persian author Juvaini (died in 1283) reports, at the kurultai of 1235 “a decision was made to take possession of the countries of the Bulgars, Ases and Rus, which were located in the neighborhood of the Batu camp, but were not yet completely conquered and were proud of their numbers.”
Having defeated the Volga Bulgaria in 1236 and launched a broad offensive against the Polovtsians in the Caspian steppes and North Caucasus in 1237, by the fall of 1237 the Mongol-Tatars concentrated their forces near the borders of North-Eastern Rus'. The Ryazan principality was the first to experience the power of the Mongol-Tatar army. Having taken Ryazan in December 1237, Batu headed across the ice of the Oka to Kolomna. Near Kolomna, the Vladimir-Suzdal regiments, led by the son of the Grand Duke of Vladimir Vsevolod, were waiting for the Mongol-Tatars. The battle at Kolomna, which took place in January 1238, was distinguished by its tenacity and bitterness. It is known that Prince Kulkan (the only prince who died during the western campaign of the Mongols) was mortally wounded in the battle. This gives reason to conclude that the battle was extremely intense (like all Genghisids, the youngest son of Genghis Khan Kulkan, in accordance with the Mongol rules of war, was located in the rear of the troops). Despite the fact that, according to the chronicler, the Vladimir-Suzdal and Ryazan warriors were “fighting hard” near Kolomna, it was not possible to stop the Mongol-Tatars. Having defeated Moscow in January 1238, the Mongols approached Vladimir in early February. Due to significant losses suffered by the Vladimir-Suzdal army near Kolomna, Grand Duke Yuri Vsevolodovich went north to gather forces, leaving his sons Vsevolod and Mstislav in Vladimir. Despite the fact that the city had quite powerful fortifications, the defenders of Vladimir, with all their heroism and courage, were able to resist the Mongols, who used siege and battering weapons, only for several days, until February 8. And then followed the horrific defeat of the capital of the Grand Duchy of Vladimir. On March 4, 1238, the Mongol commander Burundai took Grand Duke Yuri Vsevolodovich, who was camped on the City River, by surprise. Together with Grand Duke Yuri Vsevolodovich, many Russian waves died. Mongol troops captured Tver and appeared within the Novgorod land. Not reaching 100 versts from Novgorod, the Mongol-Tatars turned south and, having conducted a “round-up” through the Russian lands (including the outskirts of the Smolensk and Chernigov principalities), returned to the steppe.
After spending the summer of 1238 in the Don steppes, Batu again invaded the Ryazan land in the fall. In 1239, the main attack of the Mongol-Tatars fell on the southern Russian lands. In the spring of 1239, the Pereyaslavl principality was defeated; in the fall, it was the turn of Chernigov, which was besieged on October 18, 1239. The city defended itself to the last opportunity. Many of its defenders died on the walls. At the end of 1240, Kyiv fell. In 1241, Batu invaded the Galicia-Volyn principality.
Reporting about the Mongol invasion, the chronicler noted that countless numbers of Tatars appeared, “like pruses, eating grass.” The question of the number of Batu’s troops has been attracting the attention of historians for about 200 years. Starting with N.M. Karamzin, most pre-revolutionary researchers (D.I. Ilovaisky and others) arbitrarily estimated the size of the Mongol army at 300 thousand people or, uncritically using the data of chroniclers, wrote about an army of 400, 500, and even 600 thousand.
Such figures are, of course, a clear exaggeration, for this is significantly more than there were men in Mongolia in the 13th century.
Historian V.V. Kargalov, as a result of studying the problem, came to the conclusion that the size of Batu’s army was 120-140 thousand people. However, this figure should also be considered overestimated.
After all, every Mongol warrior needed to have at least three horses: riding, pack and fighting, which were not loaded, so that it would retain strength for the decisive moment of the battle. Providing food for half a million horses concentrated in one place is an extremely difficult task. The horses died and were used as food for the soldiers. It is no coincidence that the Mongols demanded fresh horses from all cities that entered into negotiations with them.
The famous researcher N. Veselovsky estimated the number of Mongol troops at 30 thousand people. L.N. adhered to the same assessment. Gumilev. A similar position (the size of Batu’s army is 30-40 thousand people) is characteristic of historians
According to the most recent calculations, which can be considered quite convincing, the number of actual Mongol troops at Batu’s disposal was 50-60 thousand people.
The widespread belief that every Mongol was a warrior cannot be considered reliable. How was the Mongol army recruited? A certain number of tents provided one or two warriors and supplied them with everything necessary for the campaign.
It is believed that in addition to the Mongolian troops themselves, 50-60 thousand people, Batu’s army included auxiliary corps from conquered peoples. However, in reality, Batu did not have such corps. This is what the Mongols usually did. Prisoners captured in battle and civilians were herded into an assault crowd, which was driven into battle in front of the Mongol units. Units of allies and vassals were also used. Behind this “assault crowd”, doomed to death in the vanguard battle, Mongol barrage detachments were placed.
By the way, approaching the real figure of the number of Mongol troops helps to understand the nature of military operations in 1237-1238. Having suffered significant losses in battles with the Ryazan and Vladimir people, the Mongols then with difficulty took the small cities of Torzhok and Kozelsk and were forced to abandon the campaign against the populous (about 30 thousand inhabitants) Novgorod.
When determining the real size of Batu's army, the following must be taken into account. The military equipment of the Mongol-Tatars was superior to that of Europe. They did not wear heavy armor, but robes with several layers of felt protected them from arrows better than iron. The arrow range of the English archers, the best in Europe, was 450 m, and for the Mongols - up to 700 m. This advantage was achieved due to the complex design of their bow, and the fact that the Mongol archers trained certain muscle groups from childhood. Mongolian boys, from the age of six, mounted a horse and picked up a weapon, growing up, became a kind of perfect military machines.
As a rule, Russian cities withstood no more than one or two weeks of siege, since the Mongols carried out continuous exhausting attacks, changing detachments. For example, Ryazan was subjected to a similar continuous assault from December 16 to 21, 1237, after which the city was plundered and burned, and the inhabitants were killed.
What military forces did Rus' have? Russian and Soviet historians since the time of S.M. Solovyov, following the chronicler’s report, believed that Vladimir-Suzdal Rus', together with Novgorod and Ryazan, could field 50 thousand people and Southern Rus' the same number. There are reasons to doubt the reality of such figures.
It would be unjustified to reduce the essence of the problem to consideration of this specific figure. It can be assumed that all the Russian principalities could potentially field together an army of similar size. But the whole point is that the Russian princes were unable to unite efforts even in the hour of terrible danger.
Unsuccessfully, the Ryazan prince Yuri Igorevich turned to Vladimir and Chernigov for help. Why didn’t the Grand Duke of Vladimir and the supreme overlord of the Ryazan princes Yuri Vsevolodovich send help? It is difficult to even imagine that Yuri Vsevolodovich wanted the defeat of the vassals, which deprived him of a buffer between the steppe and the borders of his own principality. The defeat of the Volga Bulgaria, the death of the population, of which the Grand Duke was aware, left no doubt that a life-and-death struggle was ahead.
Of course, the explanation can be sought in the fact that help did not have time to reach. However, this is what the chronicler writes: “Prince Yurya himself did not go, not listening to the prayers of the Ryazan princes, but wanted to start a fight himself...” That is, essentially the same situation arose as in the Battle of Kalka in 1223. Each prince wanted to fight alone, without allies.
Is it just a matter of a simple desire for individual action? It seems that we are faced with a manifestation of one of the features of social psychology characteristic of chivalry during the period of feudal fragmentation, when every knight, every commander, every feudal army pursued the goal of their own personal participation in the battle, often completely disregarding the general actions, which predetermined the unfavorable outcome of the battle . This was the case in the West, and this was also the case in Rus'.
The strife continued. The chronicler, next to the story of the defeat of Pereyaslavl and Chernigov by the Mongols, calmly tells about the campaign of Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, during which he took the city of Kamenets, in which the family of his rival Mikhail Vsevolodovich Chernigovsky was located, and captured many prisoners.
Discord over the Kyiv table did not stop. Occupying the reign of Kiev, Mikhail Vsevolodovich, not hoping to protect the city, fled to Hungary. The vacant Kiev throne was hurried to take the Smolensk prince Rostislav Mstislavich, but he was soon expelled by Daniil of Galitsky, who had not prepared the city for defense. Having left Kyiv, Daniil left a thousand for himself
According to the Mongolian rules of war, those cities that submitted voluntarily were called “gobalyk” - good city. Such cities received a moderate contribution of horses for the cavalry and food supplies. But it is quite natural that the Russian people, in the face of ruthless conquerors, tried with all their might to defend their native land and discarded the thought of capitulation. Evidence of this, for example, is the long defense of Kyiv (according to the Pskov Third Chronicle, for 10 weeks and four days, from September 5 to November 19! 1240). Excavations of other cities of the Kyiv land (Vyshgorod, Belgorod, etc.) also indicate the heroic defense of these centers. Archaeologists have discovered thick layers of fires, hundreds of human skeletons were found under burnt houses, fortress walls, in streets and squares.
Yes, you can cite facts of open cooperation with the Tatars. Thus, the small princes of the Bolokhov land (Upper Bug region), who supported the Galician boyars in the fight against Daniil Romanovich, quickly came to an agreement with the Mongol-Tatars. The latter freed them from recruitment into their army on the condition that they would be supplied with wheat and millet.
The Mongol army needed replenishment, so the Mongols offered those captured to buy freedom at the cost of joining their army. The chronicle of Matthew of Paris contains a letter from two monks, in which it was reported that in the Mongol army there were “many Cumans and pseudo-Christians” (i.e. Orthodox). The first recruitment among Russians was made in 1238-1241. Note that in this case we are again talking, apparently, about an “assault crowd.”
This happened in real life, but the emphasis should be placed differently.
The consequences of the Mongol invasion were extremely severe. In the cultural deposits of cities that suffered the blow of the Mongol-Tatars, layers of continuous fires and hundreds of skeletons with traces of wounds were discovered. There was no one to collect and bury the bodies of the dead. When Daniil Romanovich returned to Vladimir-Volynsky, a terrible sight met his eyes. In the deserted city, as N.I. noted. Kostomarov, the churches were filled with piles of corpses. Residents sought refuge in church buildings and died there.
The Italian monk Plano Carpini, who visited Rus' in 1246, wrote that “as we rode through their land, we found countless heads and bones of dead people lying on the field.” In Kyiv, according to Plano Carpini, only 200 houses remain.
The border of agriculture moved to the north, the southern fertile lands were called “Wild Field”. Russian people who were driven into the Horde, partly remained there as servants and slaves, and partly were sold to other countries. In the slave trade of the Golden Horde with Egypt, Syria, France, and Italy, the main commodity was women. On the Western European market, the most significant amount (15 times the normal price) was paid for a seventeen-year-old Russian girl.
Despite the dire consequences of the Mongol-Tatar campaign on Russian lands, life went on. The Mongols did not leave garrisons anywhere, and after the departure of the Mongol army, the inhabitants returned to their devastated homes and cities. Such large centers as Novgorod, Pskov, Polotsk, and Smolensk survived. Often the population fled into the forest when the Tatars approached. Forests, ravines, rivers, and swamps protected both villages and people from the Tatar cavalry. Ukrainian archaeologist