Origins of the Russians

Discussion
 

Ch2 Architecture of Kiev; Vladimir returns from conquering Kherson 989 and imposed conversion. Chronicles of 822 record church of St. Nicholas built by Olma.  Vladimir’s first endeavor, St. Basil. First churches were wooden. Vladimir’s second church the Cathedral of the Dormition of the Virgin (Uspensky Sober), known as the Desyatinnaya or Church of the (Virgin of the ) Tithe 989. Cathedral of St. Sophia, wooden,fire in 1045, ‘ tops;’ silhouette pyramid appearance, predecessor Novgorod, Russian departure from Byzantine;Vladimir built Desyatinnaya, palace church, ( Saw basilicas in Kherson) Greek artisans accompanied Princess Anna. Yaroslav ‘ the wise’ overthrew his brother, Svyatopolk ‘ the cruel’ ( r. 1019-’54), Church of St. Sophia, greatest monumental religious  structure in Russia, (1017? or 1037) stands, in honor; Nine-isle plan (originally 1 nave, 4 isles), Reached definitive form in 1100, polychromatic fabric, symbolic expression of Russian architecture. Dutch artist, Abraham van Westerveldt, meticulous drawings. With Desy., St. Sophia., destroyed St. George & St. Irene formed an important group of multi-isled churches in southern Russia. Hilarion first metropolitan.

Ch4 Architecture of Vladimir-Suzdal:1100-1240; Slavs, early settlements,  forest lands between Oka & Volga rivers. Its cities commanded the headwaters of the Volga, control of trade routs in that region. Vladimir, Suzdal, Rostov the seat of the bishopric  - therefore, important,  increased in size. nomadic contact in the south – trade possibilities,Pioneers from Kievan Russia; Ruling Princes Vladimir Monomakh (d. 1125) – Yury II defeated by Tartars 1238. Before Mongols, Suzdalia rivaled Kiev in masonry structures. Constantine founded school, monks, Latin & Greek, a library, 1000 Greek texts; before Monomakh most buildings wood; Novgorod, Kiev brick cement, Suzdalia white limestone; Galician builders were present in Suzdal. Yury founded at least five churches. Most important SS Boris and Gleb. With Andrey’s succession he began to build the Vladimir, Cathedral of the Dormitian, 1158-61, about ten miles away from Vladimir in the village of Bogoliubovo. At that time the church was known as Andrey Bogoliubsky.  Original- Six piers, three apses, and a single dome. Rebuilt in 1185-9

Andre assassinated in 1174, jealousy of aristocracy. Vesvolod III, Audrey’s younger brother continued building. First important endeavor was rebuilding the Dormition of Vladimir. In the new plan was similar to the multiple-celled, many piered style of St. Sophia in Kiev and Novgorod; resurrected Ivan III by the Moscow architect V.D. Ermolin. The end of architecture projects began around 1228 when the Mongols inflicted their first defeat on the Russians at the battle of Kalka. Nine years later, in the winter of 1237, they attacked Suzdalia.

Chapter 3 ‘Novgorod school,’ attribution of an artistic style.

1103-1207, no fewer than 68 churches built, indicating great wealth of the city.

This is in contrast to Kiev where on ten churches were built in a century. In Kiev on princes built churches, whereas, in Novgorod, private citizens, groups and merchants built churches, indicating more economic freedom. Most small parish churches took three years to finish, whereas larger Sophias could take 20 years. Also, one can only produce the amount of churches when things become standardized. The six pier, five domed plan of Kiev and Vladimir were abandoned in favor of four pier supporting a single central dome (p39). Climate problems can possibly explain the onion or bulbous domes, where the snow needed to fall off the roofs or drainage from heavy rainfall. Kiev used masonry domes, whereas. West-to-east ( not n/s) Commercial quarters (Torgovaya Storona). Novgorod merchant family Stroganovs were instrumental in discovery and exploring the Siberia in 16 to early 17^th centuries. Important factor in trade was being in good graces with the Posadnik ( Mayor). Alexander Nevsky received the title “of the river Neva” after he defeated the Swedes in 1236. In 1238, German Knights, Lake Peipus in 1242 with skillful bargaining with the Tartars, to whom the court of Batu he visited no less than four times. (p37). 1475 Ivan III conquered Novgorod and its territory for control of Muscovy. Ivan IV.Cathedral of Saint George’s -  architect ‘the Lithuanians to the west.” (47)

Ch71169 Suzdalians attacked Novgorod;1237 Mongols devastated Suzdalia.

Nogvgorod maintained the artistic endeavors after the Kievan state fell;1045-’57, Novgorod Cathederal of St. Sophia was decorated in 1108-1144 with frescos and not expensive mosaics. It was damaged by fire during WWII, so hardly anything survived. (p80).Greek artisans part of Kievan movement of prestige; refined Greek features…most delicate balance between supernatural and the human attributes. (p81). Nereditsa (until WWII) ;Novgorod, Yaroslav Vladimirovich, in 1198 and painted the following year. Local Novgorod dialects; Frescos more complicated scenes; Theophanes impressionism – chiaroscuro, shades of light.

Ch8 Russian art, far more personal icons, then Greek art- eastern art. (p97)

Westerners have a negative view on Russian/Byzantine art because they don’t understand the regions’ history. Until the 17^th century icons were used as religious communications. When people became widely literate, the need for them dwindled.

Mind/emotions| nature/supernatural;Apocrypha;books the Virgin Mary is a key player in Christ’s life, or a more active member lets say. Russians added local saints;Virgin Mary: Byzantine Hodegetria (She who shows the way), the greatest popularity in Russia. Legend, Virgin Blacherniotissa (p101), apse of the church of the Blachemae in Constantinople. Virgin Platytera, Earlier Iconsgold and silver;not understanding that such things darkened them. (104)

Ch 9 First icons were brought from Kherson to Kiev by Vladimir. 1155 Andrey Bogoliubsky took from the Kievan suburb of Vishgorod to Suzdalia, where he subsequently placed it in the Cathedral of The Dormition of Vladimir. This is regarded as the most venerated, and is called “Virgin of Vladimir”. (107).second group Greek artists 1073. Pechersky Dormition. (1131-1136); two icons of the Virgin Mary. In 1395 transferred to Moscow to the right of the Royal Doors in the late 15^th century of the Cathedral of the Dormition in the Kremlin. SS. Paraskeva, Gergory the theologian, John Chrysostom, and Basil the Great earlier 11-12^th century where modeling…curve of the plane – inseparable.

Ch.12 Moscow school, Rublev’s Trinity; Novgorod school, St. Elais c. 1400.

Theophanes prophets, superhuman manifestations; Novgorod, Four-Part Icon system;line of communication, battle Novgorod and Suzdal 1169, Novgorod painters achieved almost a monopoly in the production of large icons for iconostasis…” In the Moscow fire of 1547, Novgorodian artists were called up to repair the damaged icons and other works of art;” mixed styles”, meaning two schools or two styles, this meant that a new national style particularly just for Russian was developing. Finally, Novgorod style was basically practical matters.

White Cowl, (Symbol, resurrection of the Orthodox Church by Russia in General, or the heads of Archbishops of Novgorod). the cornerstone of Russian medieval ideology, conceived with the purpose of defending the sovereignty of the Novgorodian Church, in particular, and the Russian Church, in general, from encroachment by the Grand Duke of Muscovy,  Concept, Book of Danial (Old Testament 7:27) , formulated by Monk Philotheus (circa 1510—1540) when he wrote: “All Christian realms will come to an end and will unite into the one single realm of our sovereign, that is, into the Russian realm, according to the prophetic books, Both Rome’s fell, the third endures, and a fourth there will never be.”’ (Three parts, analogues to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit “third Rome”) First Constantine, Rome, and then Constantinople, taken over by Ottomans 1453, then passed on to Archbishop of Novgorod. Therefore, Russia becomes the keeper of the true Christian flame. The tale states that a century before the fall of Constantinople, God, who had predestined the last Orthodox nation, after the fall of Byzantium, to be Russia, commanded that the White Cowl be taken to the Archbishop of Novgorod, Vasily.

Alexander Nevsky: (Object to keep the faith)  courage, piety,  heroism, lasting fame, Russian pride, three front war n/w/east ( Mongols) & Western Country: the Livonian Order of German Knights; Battle against the Roman Catholics; Battles of adversary from the Western Country; Pelgusius was the head of a local Finno-Ugric tribe and was converted to Christianity by the Russians. Prince Alexander (1220—1263) was the son of Great Prince Yaroslav of Vladimir. and grandson of Great Prince Vsevolod the Great Nest (1154—1212), who was instrumental in transferring the balance of power from declining Kiev in southern Russia to the city of Vladimir in the north, where a new capital of the Russian land developed. Most Vitae described Russian monks, or bishops. Metaphors to biblical figures off-set the text comparison to Alexander. He liberated Pskov (1242). Uniter of Orthodox people.  Batu saw him, he marveled; Alexander refused to participate…Alexander succeeded this time in convincing the Great Khan of the Golden Horde not to use Russian troops in his campaign. In later years, however, Russian armies were forced to lend a hand in the Mongol’s conquest of China.

Reinterpreting Russian History: Readings, 860-1869s, Women in Medieval Novgorod.

Church Statute of Iaroslav; ecclesiastical jurisdiction. modest role in society; two groups: “good” and “evil” women. Didactic literature; socially independent; Privileged women; Russkaia Pravda; slaves living under free women; Lower strata women; very limiting. bleaching, brewing and weaving. Property rights; Aristocratic women

Birchbark documents also showed women lent money. In early Novgorod history women could only hold movable property.  Only in the 14 – 15^th , acquisition of extensive rights to land by aristocratic Novgorod women. “A women is ruled by her husband, her husband is ruled by the prince and the prince is ruled by God.”

State-Building in Post-Kevian Rus’, In 1136 Novgorodians’ overthrew their prince, and established a system that required a new prince to agree to limitations of the exercise of his power. The mayor, archbishop, and other officials subject to election-assembly. Russian historians play down the fact of a democracy, and more than reasonable the elite dominated the upper echelons of power in the assembly. Moscow grand prince Ivan III extinguished Novgorod’s independence and carted off the assembly bell with for centuries summoned Novgordians to assemble. Charles Halprin; First Treaty of Novgorod with Tver’ Grand Prince Iaroslav Iaroslavich [ c. 1264-65]“Merchant Republic,” jurisdiction: Volok; Torzhok, one overseer; Gorodets’ cannot be taken back by the prince; Bezhiche [Bezhesk], M[ele]chia,Shipino,Egna, Vologda, Zavolots [ district beyond Volok], Koloperem, Tre, Perem’ [Perm], Iugra, Pechera. And you are to rule these districts with Novgorodian men; and take a gift from those lands.” Some tax laws.

Novgorod’s Judicial Charter ( dispute resolution) ( survived only in fragments, but wealth of information), stressed land ownership policies, archbishop’s authority (over all classes of people) ; also legal standing of women, economy and society. Monday, Wednesday, and Friday; Distant laws, 100 versts, Expedient cases: one month.

The decline of Novgorod’ Fur Trade Network; Lively trade in squirrel, whose outpost stretched to London and Paris; animosity between the Russians/Germans. 13-14^th / uncooperative; rise of Muscovy; Livonian Knights in the 1440s. The Hansa; Ivan III fur trade diminished. 

Culture and Everyday Life in post –Kievan Rus’

Detecting cultural change. A.M. Sakharov argues, Mongol occupation ,elite culture was affected. Andrei Rublev, The minstrels who brought music, acting, and animal acts to village squares.

Evidence for Literacy: Novgorod Birchbark Charters (ca. 1220-30s)

Literacy, Excavated at Novgorod are Birchbark ( 700 found), some have alphabet and other mixed with pictographs. There is possibility evidence for schools or, at least, instruction for youngsters to learn to write; found dating from the late fourteenth to early fifteenth century.

Raisanovsky: A History of Russia: Pskov, democratic-like –political evolution, principality 75 miles, Novgorod fought Swedes 26 times, German knights 11 times, Lithuanians 14 times, Norwegians 5 times. Livonian/Teutonic merged 1237 ( objective Catholicism). Mongols didn’t reach Novgorod ( f. 8^th century/prominence 12-14 [15-16 still added territorial influence]) – St. Sophia side/ Commercial side, PC Riurik came 862. urban democracy (veche[met in marketplace]), pop, 30,000; popular revolution 1136, posadnik, elected official; veche assembly – shared with prince, charge of army in prince’s absence, ( quarters/kontsy; sotnia/hundred (streets); bell –people, veche, prince can use, self-reliant, Council of Nobles rose in prominence, archbishops mediators in times of discord or vacillation; The Muscovy [temp] Catholicism vs. Novgorodian Orthodoxy. The Chronically of Novgorod; Literature, so-called Ostrommirovo Gospel 1056-57, previously the oldest manuscript of Novgorod origin, now Psalms 67,75 and 76 c. 1025. Pskov’s relations differed toward Moscow than Novgorod- not a rival, Pskov lost its institutions in 1551 when Moscow took over, after suffering deportations. Moscow beat out Novgorod, although wealthy, competitive prince, but linked to Catholicism and Poland, a Muscovy’s strife management of divide and conquer, bloodlessly. Why did they prefer Ivan III to their own oligarchy? Muscovy’s incorporation of the North brought them added wealth to bargain with subsidies to buy-off allegiances’, and general consent. Poles and Swedes were archrivals and in close proximity to Novgorod. It was a boarder town, implying it met with a variety of contacts that possibly led to open-minded thinking, at least in theory. Posadnik and the tysaiskii, elected by the veche, shared executive duties with the prince and if need be, especially the posadnik served as the prince’s main associate and assistant, who tool charge of the administration and the army in the prince’s absence. (77).  Direct democracy of the free householders, the council, had its problems in delaying decisive decisions due to bickering. Thus, the Council of Notable arose, to make up the slack of important decisions. The Notable was overseen by the archbishop. It effectively represented the wealthy and led to the Oligarchial problematics later wrestled in social division. Still, as a  main trading post, the wealth of the city off-set many problems to social inequalities. Novgorodians only developed one element of Kievan political synthesis, the democratic. (81) The importance of the middle class, the urban life and culture of Novgorod exemplified its close contacts to the outside world, as well as its evolution of the one element of Kievan synthesis.

White Cowl, (Symbol, resurrection of the Orthodox Church by Russia in General, or the heads of Archbishops of Novgorod).

 the cornerstone of Russian medieval ideology, conceived with the purpose of defending the sovereignty of the Novgorodian Church, in particular, and the Russian Church, in general, from encroachment by the Grand Duke of Muscovy,

Concept, Book of Danial (Old Testament 7:27) , formulated by Monk Philotheus (circa 1510—1540) when he wrote: “All Christian realms will come to an end and will unite into the one single realm of our sovereign, that is, into the Russian realm, according to the prophetic books, Both Rome’s fell, the third endures, and a fourth there will never be.”’ (Three parts, analogues to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit “third Rome”) First Constantine, Rome, and then Constantinople, taken over by Ottomans 1453, then passed on to Archbishop of Novgorod. Therefore, Russia becomes the keeper of the true Christian flame. The tale states that a century before the fall of Constantinople, God, who had predestined the last Orthodox nation, after the fall of Byzantium, to be Russia, commanded that the White Cowl be taken to the Archbishop of Novgorod, Vasily.

Alexander Nevsky: (Object to keep the faith)  courage, piety,  heroism, lasting fame, Russian pride, three front war n/w/east ( Mongols) & Western Country: the Livonian Order of German Knights; Battle against the Roman Catholics; Battles of adversary from the Western Country; Pelgusius was the head of a local Finno-Ugric tribe and was converted to Christianity by the Russians. Prince Alexander (1220—1263) was the son of Great Prince Yaroslav of Vladimir. and grandson of Great Prince Vsevolod the Great Nest (1154—1212), who was instrumental in transferring the balance of power from declining Kiev in southern Russia to the city of Vladimir in the north, where a new capital of the Russian land developed. Most Vitae described Russian monks, or bishops. Metaphors to biblical figures off-set the text comparison to Alexander. He liberated Pskov (1242). Uniter of Orthodox people.  

Vita (brief biographical résumé of one's career) , the Alexander protagonist version

On Saturday [April 5th, 1242] when the sun rose, the two armies clashed

But [in 1246] Prince Alexander decided to go to the Khan’s Horde and the Metropolitan Archbishop Cyril blessed him to do it. When Than Batu saw him, he marveled at him and said to his dignitaries: “I was told the truth--that there is no other prince like Alexander’ Pope Alexander IV (1258—1281) or Urban IV (1261—1264) who tried to involve Russia in an all-European coalition to fight the Mongols. Alexander refused to participate…Alexander succeeded this time in convincing the Great Khan of the Golden Horde not to use Russian troops in his campaign. In later years, however, Russian armies were forced to lend a hand in the Mongol’s conquest of China.

God had smiled on both Moscow and the Church.

Demise of Kievan Rus'

1. demise of Kievan Rus'
   1. Was not the Mongols, they only depopulated it.
   2. Most of the Slavs were forest dwellers in Russia region. The nomads were steppe dwellers, and both traded with each other.
   3. Mongol raids  peasants needed to seek protection of lords
   4. What factors protected Novgorod from Mongol devastation? First luck, spring thaw-out forced Mongols to stop 60 miles short and refrain. among other things, distance, forest, shrewd princes.
   5. Mongols cannot make war in the thick-forest, they rid horses, and cannot maneuver, they are not as well as infantry.
   6. Must focus on trade restructuring, what changed?
   7. What was Novgorod's political relationship with the Kievan
   8. State after 1136: Princely over lordship up until the rebellion of 1136.
   9. Russians to switch from trade to agriculture.  Well, we learned that trade declined around Kiev, the center of population shifted NE, where small settlements with modest (subsistence) farming and little long distance trade were the norm. 
   10. what degree was its democratic reputation exaggerated.
   11. Navigating the steppe was too hard for the Slavs, its like being lost in an ocean, they could not keep a bearing so-to-speak, so communication for expedition and conquest of the steppe was too difficult. Monads knew where they were at all times, and the farther they were away from Kiev the scarier it was for troops.
   12. Constantinople cut off 1453, and long ally of Kievan Rus’.
   13. 1212 AD east slavs no longer in communication with Byzantiim they were cut-off – no communication, no longer trade Dnieper, and so in 1300 pushed back and north, Mongols,
   14. Byzantium is the relevance to understanding of Russia in the Christian context. The sea of Marmara, or the marble sea, and Constantinople is a key place for the eastern Roman Empire as the silk rout terminates there. The control is the key to the spices and commodities of the east. Things that could not produced in the west for various reasons. The importance of the trade created a great need to control the straits of the Bosporus and Constantinople.
   15.  
2. Was Kievan Rus' a monarchy?  A democracy?
   1. Novgorod had a pluralistic, representative government. The idea of democracy, according to Karl Marx, would be a mute point. Why wealth was only distributed into a few hands, he would ask?
   2. Who are the princes, the ones that can afford horses, weapons, and buy friends, and they learn cavalrymen, and that is the background the Muscovy elite, in time of war they are Generals and in time of peace they are politicians.
   3. veche is the best evidence of a democratic process. It was a urban democracy. The vehce had a town bell, a symbol of democracy, and anyone could ring it and summoned the town’s electives for a special meeting to address concerns.
   4. Why kingship? Progenitor: Prince Line: Riurik, 9^th  century, princely line., residence Novgorod, Important is the tradition, it is important to them; Lateral succession over time created 100 of princely lies. During the Mongol Yoke period, new high-clans were adopted, despite lineage.
   5. Where is the prince? Outside the city’s boarders, by agreement of the citizens?
   6. Where there that many people? No not a large populations which helped to continue as a pluralistic representative body.
   7. Law codes, fist indication of a civil formality. Yaroslav’s Law Code, 2 versions of it, it was a compendium, and short production late 11^th, and princely power is unknown, face to face litigation, mono-momo, didactic relations, the economy is mostly agrarians, forest dweller, not much business in trade, and slavie code of customary law. Lots of recompense of theft, important in agriculture, no stealing, interferes with fighting and hunting rights, one sees in the Rus the growth in towns.
   8. Kieven and Rus’ economy, the polity  - kinship prince and boyars and is mostly minimalist, patrimonial theory, stress personal loyalty, symbolic strategies of claiming legitimacy, privileges, and mix of agrarian economy and there is still international trade that brought the Vikings.
   9.  
   10. 11^th century, markets and towns developed, for the first time, more settled manner of governing, a tax system, and in second version of the Law Code, it the Prince taxation, most of the populous is free, a few slaves, not many. The second reduction, more economic activity, bankrupsies, loans, and temporary slavery, indentured servants, more money moving, towns grew up organically in concentric circles around the princes court. and, more social mobility and production in trade, and more landholding, donation to monasteries, more slaves and indentured servants. Urban aristocracy now living off their land all in the second edition. The third party, meaning the prince gets involved in dispute and pay a service for the time of his arbitrary.
   11. In Kiev, Political sponsorship of princes in churches gave them more weight in influence in the city. They had the money and so they buit the symbols that represented their importance in legacy.
   12.  

How do veches in

Novgorod and Pskov differ? -- I don't think we have enough in our readings

to answer; briefly, the one in Novgorod was more active.

Russian  population was sparse, widely dispersed in northern forest, poor soil and

short growing season, few cities of any size (likewise no farms of great size).

In Novgorod:  relationship of prince vis-a-vis town council,  city elders, etc.  Good question:  take another look at our readings and  see if you can define the prince's role and how it changed over time.

LECTURE 8:  THE EMERGENCE

OF MUSCOVY AND THE MONGOL "YOKE"

I. Demonization of Mongols, the "Mongol yoke"

II.  The first vacuum of power: early 1200s, the Mongol invasion

            economic devastation and recovery

            invasion and exploitation: l3th century direct fiscal administration and military recruiting  (baskak)

            l4th century:  intermediary Rus' princes -- those who won the "iarlyk," or Khan's charter to collect and deliver taxes

III.  The second vacuum of power: 1360s+

            Novgorod and Pskov

            The Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Ukraine, Belarus' 1260s+

            Northeast Rus' = "Grand Principality of Vladimir" = Vladimir-Suzdalia

            1300s: Struggle for grand-princely title: Moscow vs. Tver', Suzdal', Riazan'

IV. Moscow's rise: V. O. Kliuchevskii's "litany"

            geography

            primogeniture and dynastic war (1433-56)

            the iarlyk: tax collecting for the Khan

            metropolitan's favor

            territorial expansion to North and Baltic (not Kiev)

V. Cultural influence: patterns and structural barriers

            Steppe nomads vs. forest dwelling farmers

            Turkic speakers vs. Slavic speakers

            Islamic high culture in Arabic or Persian vs. Orthodox Christian culture in Old Church Slavonic

VI. Mongol influence:

            Devastation and resource depletion

           Cultural isolation from the West and Byzantium?

            Barbarity in law codes and social mores? Autocracy?

            Military, trade and administration

VI. The utility of the "yoke" for argument for Kiev-Moscow continuity

Tatar/Turkic words entering Russian

terms of military, trade, administration (Tatar words taken into Russian)

den'ga -- a monetary unit; later den'gi = money

altyn -- a coin = 6 den'gi

tamga -- brand, seal, stamp

surguch -- sealing wax

kniga -- book

iarlyk -- charter of privileges or immunities

tolmach -- interpreter, translator

karandash -- pencil

bumaga -- paper

zhikovina -- signet ring

defter' -- license, document authorizing tax collection

kazna -- treasury

kaznachei -- treasurer

kagan -- khan, king

kaganets -- oil lamp

bakcha -- kitchen garden

bakshish -- tip, bribe

stakan -- drinking glass; from Persian through Turkic

lavka -- a bench or shelf; a shop, a small store

korchma -- tavern, inn

tovar -- commercial goods

klobuk -- headgear, cowl

lal -- ruby

biriuza -- turquoise

almaz -- diamond

zhemchug -- mother of pearl

tafta -- taffeta

kamka -- damask

barkhat -- velvet

voilok -- felt

tvarog -- cottage cheese; fermented cheese

psheno -- millet, wheat

pirog -- pie

kover -- carpet

also -- numerous terms for horses, horse breeding, colors of horses, types of horses, equestrian skills, etc. -- e.g.:

loshad' -- horse

kobyla -- brood mare

kobylka -- filly

khomut -- horse collar

telega -- cart

kolymaga -- 2-wheeled cart

bugai -- bull, ox

other misc. words:

ukha -- fish soup

barsukov -- badger

kuga -- bulrush

kovyl' -- feather grass (one of the steppe grasses)

moroz -- frost, freezing

pugat' -- to frighten, scare

Mongolian:

Pony-size horses, the blood sweating horses,  the grassy steppe,

Naturally horsy culture of the steppe, where boys grow-up on the horseback, and the

1240 Swedes defeated then in 1242 Teutonic Knights threaten Russia, and Alexander and Novgorod, and Alexander other principalities are paying tribute so that they will not get conquered.  Russians vast lands are coveted by the Germans and the Mongols.

Battle of the Neve River, the Teutonic Knights, there we fought a vast army, cruel adversary the Swedish host, we broke their ship into matchsticks, and for the sake of our Motherland. (Russian movie 1938, a year later the movie taken off the showing because of the signing of a Russian/Nazi pact and this movie makes the Germans look bad, throwing babies into the rivers).

Alexander at Novgorod, had a hard time to getting the Free Novgorodians to fight in a war, pacifists. So impassioned speeches. “ For the great people.”

“ we have a saying, it is better to die than to leave your country”

Two different worlds meeting Alexander and the Tartars, and he refuses to become a general in their Golden Horde.

Lecture section:

Mongolians,

2000 years, literally the nomadic culture of the steppe rout, and span from China to Europe. Silk and Spice rout involved on the steppe rout.

Spears of the Russians using them on horseback, and

The general empire, the whole rout capture, and Mongols get a adjective to describe Turkish, and Tartars, and a whole list of tribes, and peoples, and Turkish word was Tartar, so it was an interchangeable reference that Chinngis Khan established. Last about 250 years refered too as the Mongol ‘Yoke’ The Scythians also becomes a generic word for the various steppe cultures and warriors of the steppe. The Russian consciousness about this period is sever in many historians, because they were slaves, captured, and the subjugation, etc… These Soviet books also created historiography. Children lead-off  to captivity, land the property of foreigners, by bearing the weight of full Tartar , saved Europe form the scourge, so it was this reason, the tale says, that Russia remained 200 years behind Europe. This was historiaograghy. The Scythians in the 20^th century then got a positive look in history, and westerners got a negative pussy perception.

So anathema, so Tartars is to blame for cutting off Democracies of the west, so what we have in this mythology, Mongols are the blow that cuts-off the Russian that caused the Russia to the backwardness for over 250 years.

1227 Chinngis Khan died, from Germany To China, to India to China, then Ugaday, Chinngis’ third son, then Kublai Khan served as the third great leader. Headquarters was established at Surai, next to the Volga, right in Russian lands. Mongols were the last of the great dynasty of the steppe, it was widely successful. The Mongols were their for a reason, a profit was to be had, and the vacuum of power before the Mongols, in Kiev and Novgorod, and so when the Mongols came it was easy for them to conquer the Rus’ people.

Today, a Afghanistan horse tournament, even today, has no rules, and it is rough, the game is timeless, and even some American troops have tried to take part in the game. It is a no-rules game, emphasis added.

Stirrups and the High-Saddle allowed them to get up and swivel with their multi-boned bows, with could pierce armor which is why they were so dangerous. Traveled with gigantic caravan of supplies.

Houses can be set up in about one hour, and mobility was awesome in this day. When a Mongol army is approaching, puts up a lot of dust because each man takes 3-4 horses with them, they eat horse but the sight can look awesome from a distance. Fermented mare’s milk, is brought, so they can have it for a long time. A horse is not wasted on any parts. Dried cheeseballs, pack in their saddlebags, and take with them. Appanage the term when Kiev and Novgorod declines, and splintering of principalities, and ruling families drift apart each getting different lands, and trade-routs were drying up, no more Viking, and Rus’ and Bysantium was cut off by the steppe warriors. At its height, 1220s-1320s it established a unity in the steppe, and the Rus; lands in the 1220s conquered Rus’ but left to Chinngis death, and returned in 1230s-1240s to Rus’.

1294: From Ukraine to China empire, and subdivides with sons and borthers with the great Khan ( Chinngis) and subdivide into near Russia the Golden Horde, so we have subdivided. The Pax Mongolia ( Tartaria some places) was now in this period.

15ht century is the rise of Muscovy because it was protected from the forest, and people had moved north. So Pax Mongolia (Tartica) was keeping the trade rolling, historians says; so in the initial attack cities and town destroyed, but after pay tribute then let people live. Severe economic stress after the attacks in about 50 years later, do Suzdalia and Novgorod get enough funds to pay form stone structures.

Novgorod trade had changed from far-trade to local trade, and the Mongols didn’t want to kill everyone because they wanted to exact tribute from living people, so historians are mixed. To be accurate, there was to be a negative respect, humiliating tribute, personal visits by the grand price , a humiliating factor, the collection of funds to pay the bastards. 13^th century, the Muslim head-tax, is installed. Local populations had to also provide services, feed and house the enemies, keep the roads the waste and horses, and later on in history, the people’s of the steppe do not want to be in the forest, so they get Russian Princes to collect the taxes, the princes skim off the top and gather wealth, so they have power later on.

1) So first, direct and direct collection of taxes

2) Later they rule by threat of attack and collection by Rus’ people.

No grave site was ever found in the Russian forest, so the Mongols didn’t like the forest, so the Russian move up to Moscow and wagged their tongues at them, and later schemed.

Princes squabbles, subdividing from collateral succession, and everyone didn’t get along, and it comes increasingly an agrarians economy, where as Kiev and Novgorod had a increasing hunting and gathering culture, but now a settling and sedentary mentality and more urban society, people settle so this laster 1360s, a new vacuum resulted, the Mongoloid Empire was severely splintereing because of dynastic conflicts there, so the subdivisions were great. So the Mongolians weaken and buy the mid 1400s, the splintering off turns to autonomous splinter states, and the

1360, we have princes, skipping taxes, taking risks and it was a post-Mongoloid of power.

3 emerging powers:  Novgorod, Poland Lithuania, and Northeast Rus’ had been called a Mesopotamia for all the rivers, and two major waterfares, were great portages to the Baltic and  

Various princes especially Moscow and Kiev vow to call the grand prince of Lagima, so travel to Tartar capital and vie to be the king, hostage at Surai for  - brother, and at the same time Moscow, doing everything to become a state. Why did Moscow win out the succeeded over rival, first, Moscow is advantageous geography, the various river routs, and in a  50 mile river you can go all directions, a central point to river connections to all of the directions of the world.  Soon Moscow controlled the river trade routs which eventually meant big-money and this meant expansion, and to capture the heads at these rivers, all the towns on the banks of these rivers the Muscovites considered this as the plan to consolidate power over all of Russia. So water was the key.

Kiev and Rus’ was gone, and since the Mongol Tartars. So Rus’ gone. To Moscow rose as the new spirit of the Russian people, and this was a major factor, and most notably was a string of luck the royal hours began to practice primogeniture and this was key for the powerbase. As lateral base succession is an actual weakening of power, but Primogeniture is also dangerous, but usually builds a strong center base. So notice that circles of power meant people were blinded not killed, because it will start a blood feud, and that was a bid deal. The boyars are practicing the lateral success meaning their possession become more fragmented.

Third factor, the rise of Muscvite princes was the won the support of the Golden Horde, that is to collecte taxes and they pocked a good amount, they were the authorize tax collector of Surai.

Possible Mid-Term Question/themes:

1. demise of Kievan Rus'
   1. Was not the Mongols, they only depopulated it.
   2. Most of the Slavs were forest dwellers in Russia region. The nomads were steppe dwellers, and both traded with each other.
   3. Mongol raids,  peasants needed to seek protection of lords
   4. What factors protected Novgorod from Mongol devastation? First luck, spring thaw-out forced Mongols to stop 60 miles short and refrain. among other things, distance, forest, shrewd princes.
   5. Mongols cannot make war in the thick-forest, they rid horses, and cannot maneuver, they are not as well as infantry.
   6. Must focus on trade restructuring, what changed?
   7. What was Novgorod's political relationship with the Kievan Rus
   8. State after 1136: Princely over lordship up until the rebellion of 1136.
   9. Russians to switch from trade to agriculture.  Well, we learned that trade declined around Kiev, the center of population shifted NE, where small settlements with modest (subsistence) farming and little long distance trade were the norm. 
   10. what degree was its democratic reputation exaggerated.
   11. Navigating the steppe was too hard for the Slavs, its like being lost in an ocean, they could not keep a bearing so-to-speak, so communication for expedition and conquest of the steppe was too difficult. Monads knew where they were at all times, and the farther they were away from Kiev the scarier it was for troops.
   12. Constantinople cut off 1453, and long ally of Kievan Rus’.
   13. 1212 AD east slavs no longer in communication with Byzantiim they were cut-off – no communication, no longer trade Dnieper, and so in 1300 pushed back and north, Mongols,
   14. Byzantium is the relevance to understanding of Russia in the Christian context. The sea of Marmara, or the marble sea, and Constantinople is a key place for the eastern Roman Empire as the silk rout terminates there. The control is the key to the spices and commodities of the east. Things that could not produced in the west for various reasons. The importance of the trade created a great need to control the straits of the Bosporus and Constantinople.
   15.  
2. Was Kievan Rus' a monarchy?  A democracy?
   1. Novgorod had a pluralistic, representative government. The idea of democracy, according to Karl Marx, would be a mute point. Why wealth was only distributed into a few hands, he would ask?
   2. Who are the princes, the ones that can afford horses, weapons, and buy friends, and they learn cavalrymen, and that is the background the Muscovy elite, in time of war they are Generals and in time of peace they are politicians.
   3. veche is the best evidence of a democratic process. It was a urban democracy. The vehce had a town bell, a symbol of democracy, and anyone could ring it and summoned the town’s electives for a special meeting to address concerns.
   4. Why kingship? Progenitor: Prince Line: Riurik, 9^th  century, princely line., residence Novgorod, Important is the tradition, it is important to them; Lateral succession over time created 100 of princely lies. During the Mongol Yoke period, new high-clans were adopted, despite lineage.
   5. Where is the prince? Outside the city’s boarders, by agreement of the citizens?
   6. Where there that many people? No not a large populations which helped to continue as a pluralistic representative body.
   7. Law codes, fist indication of a civil formality. Yaroslav’s Law Code, 2 versions of it, it was a compendium, and short production late 11^th, and princely power is unknown, face to face litigation, mono-momo, didactic relations, the economy is mostly agrarians, forest dweller, not much business in trade, and slavie code of customary law. Lots of recompense of theft, important in agriculture, no stealing, interferes with fighting and hunting rights, one sees in the Rus the growth in towns.
   8. Kieven and Rus’ economy, the polity  - kinship prince and boyars and is mostly minimalist, patrimonial theory, stress personal loyalty, symbolic strategies of claiming legitimacy, privileges, and mix of agrarian economy and there is still international trade that brought the Vikings.
   9.  
   10. 11^th century, markets and towns developed, for the first time, more settled manner of governing, a tax system, and in second version of the Law Code, it the Prince taxation, most of the populous is free, a few slaves, not many. The second reduction, more economic activity, bankrupsies, loans, and temporary slavery, indentured servants, more money moving, towns grew up organically in concentric circles around the princes court. and, more social mobility and production in trade, and more landholding, donation to monasteries, more slaves and indentured servants. Urban aristocracy now living off their land all in the second edition. The third party, meaning the prince gets involved in dispute and pay a service for the time of his arbitrary.
   11. In Kiev, Political sponsorship of princes in churches gave them more weight in influence in the city. They had the money and so they buit the symbols that represented their importance in legacy.
   12.  

How do veches in

Novgorod and Pskov differ? -- I don't think we have enough in our readings

to answer; briefly, the one in Novgorod was more active.

Russian  population was sparse, widely dispersed in northern forest, poor soil and

short growing season, few cities of any size (likewise no farms of great size).

In Novgorod:  relationship of prince vis-a-vis town council,  city elders, etc.  Good question:  take another look at our readings and  see if you can define the prince's role and how it changed over time.

(((Sort))

ALWAYS BE CAREFUL OF RUSSIAN CHRONICALS> 1350s Russians and Tartars on both sides of the battlefield. So, much more complex picture, but looms large in the Muscovy imagery of history. Monkish-scribe gather up the regions that they conquered, how to write history, and they re-write, or copy pieces of them, that they want, and shove in a Moscow oriented story to show the importance of Moscow in history, then they teach it to the kids, a nd the kids tell their kids until it’s a legend and a myth duly admitted as a truism in history. So if mix a little truth with made up story telling, then one gets a hard to break historigraghy of one’ people’s history.

1560s the Nikon Chronicle, owned by patriarch Nikon, and it was the end-all of Chronicles, and illustrated collection, in 10 volumes and 20 thousand pages hand written and 16 thousands illustrations Too big.

Moscow grand princes descended from Roman kings, a classic renaissance motif, a way to make one legitimate was to make a myth of oneself.

The White Emperor the Made up Cap of Roman.

Uzbec cross, and tremendously ironic, is a 14^th century Usbec cap, and its ironic they think it came from Roman dress of kings, so it was so ironic they thought this way.

Myth of Autocrat

Myth is Tsar is absolute and 16^th century quoted, and Tsar referred to the Mongol King, and Constantinople, the city of the tsar God, and God himself, so has a multiple reference.

“I’m you slave,” as the boyars bow down to the tsar, head on the ground, this is absolute power, this was customary, a way to make obeisance. But in reality, he was the God Father, the who needed his boyars to make recommendations and the boyars did rule, and the tsar never said do this or do that, it was always they say do this or do that. Oprinchina is a different story.

Tsar is just a man, and walks instead of carried like goddesses, and he is just like a common man,

Christ on a donkey motif is referred to grand princes, the autocratic tsar was not what it appered when foreigner visited Russia and saw for themselves.

Comradeship, patrimonial politics seen in Kiev, and humble of the all powerful image. The precessions, in paintings and frescos, that of a hierarchy being benevolent to the one’s below.

Boyars acted as Christian love with G Prince, and at same time present an autocratic reverence to the G Prince himself with prostrations.

1488, Chronicles refer to do business until his boyars are present at the meetings, the Emphasis on comradely rule, a close relations with the boyars, they are his cousins, relatives and family members,

So does this come from Constantinople, Kiev or Rus’?

This was the nature of politics with lots of consultations between boyar and tsar and Church, and the right of the citizen the common to petition the tsar. But when population increases this became impossible.

Sothe tsar is God’s representative, and so when someone approaches the tsar one approaches God’s chosen one. This is crap. This is the imagery presented in ceremonial, ritual just like conveyance of lefty thought through television, the symbolism of how to act live and breath. The political correctness is as old and humans. Kremlin the symbolic center of the Russia.

Moscow Architecture.

Mostly wooden structures of Moscow then to stone.

Brick Novgorod, Pskov and Italy art heritage in Moscow, and boasting it now owns these places by using their stuff.

Holiest icons assembles other Mary and child, the famous one, 1125 brought to Kiev, 1155 legimar, and 1395 brought to Moscow, then installed in Dormission Cathedral in Moscow.

Architectural trend in Muscovy: Moscow incorporates regional styles and then exports them back out to the regional localities.

God had smiled on both Moscow and the Church.

(/sort)))

4 MAJOR POINT TO KNOW RISE OF MOSCOW

Recap: factors: Water, Succession, Rise of tax collectors of GH, and finally Metropolitan Peter happens 1325 visiting Moscow, he died, and the Moscow persuades the next in line to move the see to Moscow, and the guy that dies was just visiting. So ecclesiastical legitimacy was passed to Moscow. Now the central authority of the Slavs. A cult of St. Peter builds up as the visitor, and his is the important persona a cult of personality. So it becomes dominant by these things so they became

• 1480 standing off the Golden Horse actually see collapsing, and they Moscow, tax collectors said I do not want to pay taxes, in reality thGH was already in deep decline.

• Emblematic of wars were tartars on both sides and Russians – so not as neat.

• What was the Mongol yoke, that history is written by white man in their forties, so the Mongol experience did not mean fundamental changes in Russian culture, there was not much contract and when there was we see a cultural borrowing.

• Russians were people who trapped and hunted, the Nomads were herders and travelers.

• Turkish language, used by the Mongols,Russian on the Russian sides. SO THEY COULD NOT CONVERSE

• They couldn’t intermarry because the Mongol became Islamic, the Tartars, and the cutlrue interchange was limited. SO the level of culture, Persian in literacy in Culture, the arts of Persona and Islamic religious development, but the Russians were illiterate mostly, and art of Greek.

• Mongols took to Aristotle, but didn’t happen in Muscovy, and if it is often said, corporal punishment in Muscovy law codes, but in reality were less harsh that their predecessors, and only in the 17^th century that they get harder. Also, the barbarian’s views.

• The Mongols didn’t leave political theory, the an election in Mongolia town clan elections. Muscovy more autocracy than Mongoloid power so no influence.

• What are the culture impact of the Mongols, Practical skills in military organization and government administration and bureaucracy ( not kingship). Look at the handout list, coming from Mongol.

• Only barrow what they see can make them better in all aspects of life.

When did Russian History Began, what is the continuity debate really about?

How did Moscow Rise to Power?

The first vacuum of power: early 1200s, the Mongol invasion can be said to be a piece of the puzzle, but we must be careful not to conclude that the Mongols have brought an end to the Kievan Rus’. Economic devastation were created problems from the west, where traditional trade routs were exchanged with new and growing western powers that severely hampered the economics of the trade towns such as Novgorod and Pskov. The decline of Kiev had taken place before the Mongols arrived. The city had not enough resources due to previous economic devastation to field an army to ward off the powerful steppe incursions to the west. Kiev close to the boarder of the steppe began a shift in migration toward the northern forest-zones, as the steppe nomads made their homes and bases along the grassy planes. 

Moscow arose from four basic principles: geograghy, political (includes military), luck and ecclesiastical.

First, geography, the causeways became a set of ideals to establish satellite towns. Moscow is centered on rivers that spread out in all directions. Controlling these river towns and cities created dominance in trade privileges. Second, Muscovy was protected from the forest, and people had moved north, where the steppe nomads preferred not to travel or inhabit.

Ecclesiastical:

Ecclesiastical dominion produces an added principle for power in Muscovy legitimacy. Vladimir had procured Keivan legitimacy by moving the see to Kiev (PLACE DATE), and building churches, which helped legitimize Orthodox Christianity for all of Rus’. Ecclesiastical expansion and church construction became a continuing policy of legitimacy later for all Kievan Rus’. In similar fashion, but without continuity to Rus’ history, the metropolitan was moved from Kiev to Vladimir and then to Moscow. This came about in Northeast Rus' as one aspect of the second vacuum of power in 1300s which saw a struggle for grand-princely title. The Grand Principality of Vladimir consisted of Vladimir-Suzdalia and saw a struggle between two powerful princes and succession privileges controlled by the head of the Golden Horde.

Mikhail Yaroslavich, second son of Yaroslav III, fashioned himself as the first Grand Prince of of all Rus’.  Subsequently, Uzbeg Khan had given Yuri Danilovich, Prince of Moscow, the title of Grand Prince of Vladimir. Mikhail Yaroslavich, also held the title of Grand Prince of Vladimir and Tver. Both men wanted to legitimize their rule the way Vladimir had in Kiev in the 10^th Century by promoting their own metropolitan. Mikhail promoted his own metropolitan and Peter (d. December 20, 1326)  was promoted by ( Other person).  Consequently, Mikhail battled Yuri at Bortenevo on December 22, 1317 and defeated him in which upset Uzbeg who summoned Mikhail and had him killed at Sarai. With the fall of the competition, ecclesiastical legitimacy was passed-on to Moscow and now the central authority of the Slavs. Peter became the first metropolitan to reside in Moscow.  In continuing fashion, “the Cathedral of the Dormition and several other stone churches were built by Ivan Kalita, Yury's successor, in the Moscow Kremlin” to symbolize this new Muscovite ecclesiastical dominion, just as Vladimir had once envisioned legitimacy by use of the ecclesiastical symbolism. (wiki). Ecclesiastical dominion was one principle in Muscovy’s rise to power. (THAT IS THE TIE BACK)

As regards Russian politics, Öz-Beg supported the earliest princes of Muscovy - his brother-in-law Yury of Moscow and Yury's successor Ivan Kalita - against the westward-leaning Princes of Tver. Three of these - Mikhail of Tver, his son Alexander and grandson Theodor - were killed in Sarai at Öz-Beg's behest. Tver's uprising against the Horde was bloodily suppressed by Muscovite and Tatar forces in 1327.

Ivan I Danilovich Kalita (Ива́н I Дани́лович Калита́ in Russian) (1288 – March 31, 1340, Moscow), Prince of Moscow (from 1325), Grand Prince of Vladimir (from 1328), son of Daniil Aleksandrovich (Prince of Moscow).

After the defection of Tver to Lithuania, khan Muhammad Ozbeg of the Golden Horde was forced to rely on Ivan as his preeminent Russian vassal. Ivan was the Mongols' leading tax collector and made himself and Moscow very wealthy by maintaining his loyalty to the Horde (hence, the nickname Kalita, or moneybag). He used this wealth to give loans to neighbouring Russian principalities. These cities gradually fell deeper and deeper into debt, a condition that would allow Ivan's successors to annex them. Ivan's greatest success, however, was convincing the Khan in Saray that his son should succeed him as Grand Prince of Vladimir, from then on the important position almost always belonged to the ruling house of Moscow.

Political: Taxes” Luck/taxes: Mongols lose power, infighting, and tax collection.

The Golden Horde in13th century ran direct fiscal administration by sending in their own people to cities to collect taxes. Geography of Northern Rus’ played some role in changing fiscal administration.  The forest-zone of the north did not fit the lifestyle of the steppe nomadic people. To offset this preference, some of the intermediary Rus' princes won the right to the iarlyk in the 14^th century. This led to indirect tax collections. The Mongols continued to control by a threat-policy of war. In addition, this could be seen as a result of the second vacuum in the 1360s; the Mongoloid Empire was severely splintering because of dynastic conflicts which made it harder for them to regulate their fiscal authority. These indirect polices allowed the iarlyk to skim-off, not report, and sometimes steal revenue. Without direct Mongol oversight the iarlyk did not report the exact amount to them, thus they were able to keep some of the money for themselves. The result was a rise in princely wealth.

•  While Peter was visiting Moscow he died, and this was seen as luck as his successor was asked to stay in Mocow, and move the Holy See to there.

This can be seen as luck when the Golden Horde broke up into four major groups, and division created a certain freedom in the North in which Muscovy took advantage. In the 1360s, a new vacuum resulted; the Mongoloid Empire was severely splintering because of dynastic conflicts. By the mid-14^th century autonomous splinter states can be seen as a result of luck or more autonomous power in the north.

Kiev and Novgorod declines, and splintering of principalities, and ruling families drift apart each getting different lands, and trade-routs were drying up, no more Viking, and Rus’ and Byzantium was cut off by the steppe warriors.

Peter's alliance with Moscow helped assert his own authority and contributed to the rise of the House of Moscow. (Wiki)

In order to procure legitimacy, Peter was promoted as a Metropolitan of Moscow (?By Yuri) Vladimir had procured Keivan legitimacy by moving the see to Kiev, building churches, and establishing Orthodox Christianity for all of Rus’. In similar fashion, but without continuity, the  metropolitan was moved from Kiev to Vladimir and then to Moscow.

Saint Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow and all Russia (Пётр in Russian) (? — December 20, 1326) was the Russian metropolitan who moved his see from from Kiev to Vladimir and then to Moscow. Later he was proclaimed a patron saint of Moscow. (wiki)

the Cathedral of the Dormition and several other stone churches were built by Ivan Kalita in the Moscow Kremlin.

ecclesiastical legitimacy was passed to Moscow. Now the central authority of the Slavs.

(wiki)

Mikhail Yaroslavich (Russian: Михаил Ярославич) (1271 – November 22, 1318), also known as Michael of Tver, was a Prince of Tver (from 1285) who ruled as Grand Prince of Vladimir from 1304 until 1318.

 

Mikhail Yaroslavich, Grand Prince of Vladimir and Tver, wanted to advance his own candidate for this position. Peter's nomination caused prolonged animosity between Mikhail and Peter to the point that the latter had to ask for protection from the Muscovite princes.

 

Mikhail Yaroslavich was the second son of Yaroslav III and succeeded him in 1285. As a result of a long struggle, he became the Grand Prince of Vladimir in 1305 and the first among Russian rulers started to style himself Grand Prince of All Rus.

 

In 1317, Uzbeg Khan of the Golden Horde gave the title of the Grand Prince of Vladimir to Yuri Danilovich, Prince of Moscow, and sent his army to help Yuri in his struggle with Mikhail Yaroslavich. On December 22, 1317 Mikhail defeated Yuri at a village called Bortenevo (40 km from Tver). Later on, Mikhail was summoned by the Khan and had to go to the Horde to "explain" himself. He was eventually killed in the Horde by Yuri's servants. Later, the Russian Orthodox Church declared Mikhail the holy patron of Tver. (/wiki)

Recap: factors: Water, Succession, Rise of tax collectors of GH, and finally Metropolitan Peter happens 1325 visiting Moscow, he died, and the Moscow persuades the next in line to move the see to Moscow, and the guy that dies was just visiting. So ecclesiastical legitimacy was passed to Moscow. Now the central authority of the Slavs. A cult of St. Peter builds up as the visitor, and his is the important persona a cult of personality. So it becomes dominant by these things so they became

 IDEOLOGY AND AUTOCRACY IN MUSCOVY

I. Amber Room, Catherine Palace, Tsarskoe Selo (Pushkin), outside St. Petersburg
II. Finish discussion of Mongol “yoke”
III. Adopting an image in Ivan III’s time

“White Emperor” (albus imperator)

Orthodox “translatio imperii” model
“Zadonshchina” -- tale of victory by Or. Pr. Dmitrii Donskoi over Mamai and Golden Horde in 1380 at Kulikovo Field
Kremlin churches:
Annunciation Cathedral (palace church, gr. pr. baptized and married here)
Dormition Cathedral (Uspenskii sobor); Tsarskoe mesto (Monomakh Throne), mid- 16th c. (Vladimir Monomakh, 12th-c. Kievan gr. pr.)
chronicle writing: Nikon Chronicle (1520s), Book of Degrees (1560s)
“Tale of Princes of Vladimir”
The Cap (shapka; crown) of Monomakh
IV. Claims about the power of the tsar: two interdependent strains
the most powerful tsar: Agapetus
the most pious and most comradely tsar: Agapetus
grand prince rules TOGETHER WITH HIS BOYARS
Herberstein: 16th-c. visitor
Olearius: 17th-c. visitor
V. Integrating the empire through symbol, ritual and ceremony
coronation ceremonies
Cap (Crown) of Kazan’, l550s
Palm Sunday Procession
architecture and icons as visible claims of integration: Kremlin as center of empire Archangel Michael Cathedral: necropolis of Moscow dynasty
Dormition Cathedral: necropolis of metropolitans/patriarchs of the Church spread of Muscovite architecture to provinces: Kazan’, Pereslalv’-Zalesskii
cults of saints: the three “Moscow miracle-workers” -- Metropolitans Peter, Aleksii, and Iona
cults of regional saints and regional icons
attempt to link Muscovy with Kievan Rus’
using ritual to establish a “symbolic center” and to demonstrate tsar’s power AND piety ritual as catharsis and community building
grand prince rules together with his boyars
Coronation of Michael Romanov, 1613

Moscow the “Third Rome,” or “New Jerusalem”
Muscovite expansion:
1478 Novgorod, 1510 Pskov, 1514 Smolensk
1551 Kazan’, 1556 Astrakhan and Volga River route
Key rulers:
Ivan III (1462-1505)
his son, Vasilii III (1 505-33)
his son and grandson of Ivan III, Ivan IV (1533-84)

THE EMERGENCE OF MUSCOVY AND THE MONGOL “YOKE”

 

I. Demonization of Mongols, the “Mongol yoke”

II. The first vacuum of power: early 1200s, the Mongol invasion
economic devastation and recovery
invasion and exploitation: 13th century direct fiscal administration and military recruiting (baskak)

14th century: intermediary Rus’ princes -- those who won the “iarlyk.” or Khan’s charter to collect and deliver taxes
III. The second vacuum of power: 1360s+
Novgorod and Pskov
The Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Ukraine, Belarus’ 1 260s+
Northeast Rus’ = “Grand Principality of Vladimir” = Vladimir-Suzdalia
1 300s: Struggle for grand-princely title: Moscow vs. Tver’, Suzdal’, Riazan’

IV. Moscow’s rise: V. 0. KIiuchevskii’s “litany”
geography
primogeniture and dynastic war (1433-565
the iarlyk: tax collecting, for the Khan
metropolitan’s favor
territorial expansion to North and Baltic (not Kiev)
V. Cultural influence: patterns and structural barriers
Steppe nomads vs. forest dwelling farmers
Turkic speakers vs. Slavic speakers
Islamic high culture in Arabic or Persian vs. Orthodox Christian culture in Old Church Slavonic
VI. Mongol influence:
Devastation and resource depletion
Cultural isolation from the West and Byzantium?
Barbarity in law codes and social mores? Autocracy?
Military, trade and administration
VI. The utility of the “yoke” for argument for Kiev-Moscow continuity

Both Sophias in Nov. and Keiv are dedicated to Yaroslav.

Italian style in St. Petersburg,

Amber panels were a gift from Russia from the Prussia Emperor.

Moscow, and Amber thin slivers, arranged in a mosaic,

One British visitor thought one of the most gaudy things in bad taste.

By Aksherkan, and below Sarai, is the try steppe, and dramatically didn’t environment than the slavs who lived in the north. On the Volga, American Indians Run through the forest, on foot, the Last Mohican reference, without making any noise runs through the forest, but the steppe warriors were not forest dwellers, and could not being horse culture, was helpless in the forest against the Muscovites. So compare the forest zone with the dry steppe, so horses not so quite useful thorough the forest. In Novgorod, a wet boggy season in the spring is not the enviorment that steppe nomads wanted to live or inhabit.

Lagimar- Suzdala principality, so each principality is ruled by a prince, form Rurik heritage, and Mongols live on steppe. What was it like living under Mongol power, so there is a logical assumption there had to be a lot of contact, they come over the mountains, and each year collect taxes; but cultures have their own set of ideals and only barrow what is useful. So when we examine the Scandinavian Vikings, there were relatively few in number and they melded into Slavs; they also conquered Sicily, and they were adsorbed in to the culture, but the Tartars were not a small group of peoples, they were a massive group of peoples.

Surely it was not benign relationship. But I do not think it is appropriate to blame the ills of Russia on Mongols ‘ yoke’ period, and Russian historiography has invented that the Mongols are to blame for all the RUussian’s current and historic problems.

So why was Kiev and Rus’ so important? Seminal movement politically and ecclesiastical, - Rurik, and Vladimir Christianity, but Kiev falls victim to the Mongols, but cultural heritage begins where one chose, and there was a cultural legacy, but not a culture a cultural continuity, and Kiev and Rus’ declined, and when Moscow rose, we can start Russian history here – there was no continuity. The argument was Kiev, trade to east, political contact with western Europe, Kiev direct infusions of Greek high culture, Kiev was politically more pluralistic, more lively and among the princes, the Rurik veche, had cooperation, but in Moscow emphasis on a single autocratic ruler, a nature on this concept. Muscovy is more agrarian and depended less on trade, then Kive and Rus’, no veche in Moscow, so how can one show continuity, so if one blames the Mongols you can finesse this contradiction. Continuity exist if you blame the

Greeks called foreigners barbarians because they couldn’t understand their speaking and it sounded like bar, bar, bar, bar…. But this happen in Classical Greek, even when refereeing to the Macedonians. So barbarian practices were not a creating of the tartars, but already in culture.

So if there is discontinuity you cannot blame it on the Mongols, Different periods, direrento locations and different experiences, so Keiv Rus never can be assumed as the precursors for Muscovite politics and culture.

Tartar words into Russian language, is mainly trade products, and not political or culture.

Viking was Slavic trade languages, and very few came form Scandinavians.

Viking legacy to Keiv and Rus’ was the idea of the Prince, but the Prince was not a Viking idea.

Muscovy

When did Russian History Began, what is the continuity debate really about?

1. Ivan Kalita (r. 1328-41) won the right to the iarlyk.

2. Ivan II, the Meek (r. 1353-59)

3. Dmitrii Donskoi (r. 1359-89)

4. Basil I (1389-1425)

5. Basil II, the blind (1425-62)

6. Ivan III, the Great m. Zoe Paleologue ( patrimony, coercive, state building ( takes Novgorod)

7. Basil III (Vasilli) m. Helen Glinskaia, Regent 1533-38

8. Ivan IV, the Terrible m. Anastasia Romanova (coercive, state building ( takes Mongol Lands)

1474 Ivan sent for specialists from Venice, repeatedly asks for volunteers and Italian architects, mathematicians and artists to help create Moscow as the cultural center of Russia. Prominent builder Marco Ruffo, Pietro Solario, Alevisio, and Fieravanti. Fieravanti built (lived in Russia 1475-1479) Cathedral of Assumption.

Cathedrals of Annunciation, the Assumption, and the Archangel Michael became the centerpieces of the Kremlin. Coronations, weddings, and  tombs of the rulers of Russia

Appanage period education was in an eclipse.

Grand. Duke Ivan Danilovich of Moscow (1301-1341), called Kalita ("Moneybag"), was the actual founder of the Muscovite state. He spread his reign over a considerable part of the land between the Oka and Volga rivers. Rostov was an important city of the Volga

1354 Moscow becomes the seat of the metropolitan. Peter dies on a visit to Moscow, and this is luck, as his successor is asked to stay the see.  

Appanage landlord acted as rulers. So how to have a state when everyone is the boss? Apaanage is connected to commerce of the tilling of the soil, international trade  during this period is hard to reconcile.

Sergius starts out as monk in forest, then becomes recognized spiritual leader. Blessing added strength to Dimitrii.  St. Sergius inspired Russian people and introduce a more disciplined and strictly enforced communal life in the monastery(281).

The building of the Kremlin, incorporation of local saints of the various traditional cities into the Muscovy pantheon.

The façade of autocracy,

Church council and new legal codes the Subenik of 1550(134 HOR)

1556, the establishment of general regulations and military service. People either joined the army or were there jobs were considered to support it through various programs including taxes.

The tightening of the Church’s power of land ownership.

1550, Ivan IV engaged in army reform, such as developments of a southern defense line, The creation of new military squads, such as the streltsy, the incorporation of Mongolian military tactics. 1550 a new struggle against people of the step. Ivan incorporated commoners into his army and personal or court official he met on campaigns, such as Alexis Adashev.

Appendage period under Ivan was ended.

Ivan crowned tsar, now in ideology a titular leader of foreign affairs and Muscovy government. However, the boyars still ruled along with Ivan.

How did Moscow Rise to Power?

The first vacuum of power: early 1200s, the Mongol invasion can be said to be a piece of the puzzle, but we must be careful not to conclude that the Mongols have brought an end to the Kievan Rus’.

Economic devastation were created problems from the west, where traditional trade routs were exchanged with new and growing western powers that severely hampered the economics of the trade towns such as Novgorod and Pskov. The decline of Kiev had taken place before the Mongols arrived. The city had not enough resources due to previous economic devastation to field an army to ward off the powerful steppe incursions to the west. Kiev close to the boarder of the steppe began a shift in migration toward the northern forest-zones, as the steppe nomads made their homes and bases along the grassy planes. 

Moscow arose from four basic principles: geography, political (includes military), luck and ecclesiastical ( include church building, incorporating each cities aesthetics, saints localized, see in Moscow).

First, geography, the causeways became a set of ideals to establish satellite towns. Moscow is centered on rivers that spread out in all directions. Controlling these river towns and cities created dominance in trade privileges. Second, Muscovy was protected from the forest, and people had moved north, where the steppe nomads preferred not to travel or inhabit.

Ecclesiastical:

Ecclesiastical dominion produces an added principle for power in Muscovy legitimacy. Vladimir had procured Keivan legitimacy by moving the see to Kiev (PLACE DATE), and building churches, which helped legitimize Orthodox Christianity for all of Rus’. Ecclesiastical expansion and church construction became a continuing policy of legitimacy later for all Kievan Rus’. In similar fashion, but without continuity to Rus’ history, the metropolitan was moved from Kiev to Vladimir and then to Moscow. This came about in Northeast Rus' as one aspect of the second vacuum of power in 1300s which saw a struggle for grand-princely title. The Grand Principality of Vladimir consisted of Vladimir-Suzdalia and saw a struggle between two powerful princes and succession privileges controlled by the head of the Golden Horde.

Mikhail Yaroslavich, second son of Yaroslav III, fashioned himself as the first Grand Prince of of all Rus’.  Subsequently, Uzbeg Khan had given Yuri Danilovich, Prince of Moscow, the title of Grand Prince of Vladimir. Mikhail Yaroslavich, also held the title of Grand Prince of Vladimir and Tver. Both men wanted to legitimize their rule the way Vladimir had in Kiev in the 10^th Century by promoting their own metropolitan. Mikhail promoted his own metropolitan and Peter (d. December 20, 1326)  was promoted by ( Other person).  Consequently, Mikhail battled Yuri at Bortenevo on December 22, 1317 and defeated him in which upset Uzbeg who summoned Mikhail and had him killed at Sarai. With the fall of the competition, ecclesiastical legitimacy was passed-on to Moscow and now the central authority of the Slavs. Peter became the first metropolitan to reside in Moscow.  In continuing fashion, “the Cathedral of the Dormition and several other stone churches were built by Ivan Kalita, Yury's successor, in the Moscow Kremlin” to symbolize this new Muscovite ecclesiastical dominion, just as Vladimir had once envisioned legitimacy by use of the ecclesiastical symbolism. (wiki). Ecclesiastical dominion was one principle in Muscovy’s rise to power. (THAT IS THE TIE BACK)

Political: Taxes” Luck/taxes: Mongols lose power, infighting, and tax collection.

The Golden Horde in13th century ran direct fiscal administration by sending in their own people to cities to collect taxes. Geography of Northern Rus’ played some role in changing fiscal administration.  The forest-zone of the north did not fit the lifestyle of the steppe nomadic people. To offset this preference, some of the intermediary Rus' princes won the right to the iarlyk in the 14^th century. This led to indirect tax collections. The Mongols continued to control by a threat-policy of war. In addition, this could be seen as a result of the second vacuum in the 1360s; the Mongoloid Empire was severely splintering because of dynastic conflicts which made it harder for them to regulate their fiscal authority. These indirect polices allowed the iarlyk to skim-off, not report, and sometimes steal revenue. Without direct Mongol oversight the iarlyk did not report the exact amount to them, thus they were able to keep some of the money for themselves. The result was a rise in princely wealth.

This can be seen as luck when the Golden Horde broke up into four major groups, and division created a certain freedom in the North in which Muscovy took advantage. In the 1360s, a new vacuum resulted; the Mongoloid Empire was severely splintering because of dynastic conflicts. By the mid-14^th century autonomous splinter states can be seen as a result of luck or more autonomous power in the north.

Kiev and Novgorod declines, and splintering of principalities, and ruling families drift apart each getting different lands, and trade-routs were drying up, no more Viking, and Rus’ and Byzantium was cut off by the steppe warriors.

Peter's alliance with Moscow helped assert his own authority and contributed to the rise of the House of Moscow. (Wiki)

In order to procure legitimacy, Peter was promoted as a Metropolitan of Moscow (?By Yuri) Vladimir had procured Keivan legitimacy by moving the see to Kiev, building churches, and establishing Orthodox Christianity for all of Rus’. In similar fashion, but without continuity, the  metropolitan was moved from Kiev to Vladimir and then to Moscow.

Saint Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow and all Russia (Пётр in Russian) (? — December 20, 1326) was the Russian metropolitan who moved his see from from Kiev to Vladimir and then to Moscow. Later he was proclaimed a patron saint of Moscow. (wiki)

the Cathedral of the Dormition and several other stone churches were built by Ivan Kalita in the Moscow Kremlin.

ecclesiastical legitimacy was passed to Moscow. Now the central authority of the Slavs.

(wiki)

Mikhail Yaroslavich (Russian: Михаил Ярославич) (1271 – November 22, 1318), also known as Michael of Tver, was a Prince of Tver (from 1285) who ruled as Grand Prince of Vladimir from 1304 until 1318.

Mikhail Yaroslavich, Grand Prince of Vladimir and Tver, wanted to advance his own candidate for this position. Peter's nomination caused prolonged animosity between Mikhail and Peter to the point that the latter had to ask for protection from the Muscovite princes.

Mikhail Yaroslavich was the second son of Yaroslav III and succeeded him in 1285. As a result of a long struggle, he became the Grand Prince of Vladimir in 1305 and the first among Russian rulers started to style himself Grand Prince of All Rus.

In 1317, Uzbeg Khan of the Golden Horde gave the title of the Grand Prince of Vladimir to Yuri Danilovich, Prince of Moscow, and sent his army to help Yuri in his struggle with Mikhail Yaroslavich. On December 22, 1317 Mikhail defeated Yuri at a village called Bortenevo (40 km from Tver). Later on, Mikhail was summoned by the Khan and had to go to the Horde to "explain" himself. He was eventually killed in the Horde by Yuri's servants. Later, the Russian Orthodox Church declared Mikhail the holy patron of Tver. (/wiki)

Recap: factors: Water, Succession, Rise of tax collectors of GH, and finally Metropolitan Peter happens 1325 visiting Moscow, he died, and the Moscow persuades the next in line to move the see to Moscow, and the guy that dies was just visiting. So ecclesiastical legitimacy was passed to Moscow. Now the central authority of the Slavs. A cult of St. Peter builds up as the visitor, and his is the important persona a cult of personality. So it becomes dominant by these things so they became

Both Sophias in Nov. and Keiv are dedicated to Yaroslav.

Italian style in St. Petersburg,

Amber panels were a gift from Russia from the Prussia Emperor.

Moscow, and Amber thin slivers, arranged in a mosaic,

One British visitor thought one of the most gaudy things in bad taste.

By Aksherkan, and below Sarai, is the try steppe, and dramatically didn’t environment than the slavs who lived in the north. On the Volga, American Indians Run through the forest, on foot, the Last Mohican reference, without making any noise runs through the forest, but the steppe warriors were not forest dwellers, and could not being horse culture, was helpless in the forest against the Muscovites. So compare the forest zone with the dry steppe, so horses not so quite useful thorough the forest. In Novgorod, a wet boggy season in the spring is not the environment that steppe nomads wanted to live or inhabit.

Lagimar- Suzdala principality, so each principality is ruled by a prince, form Rurik heritage, and Mongols live on steppe. What was it like living under Mongol power, so there is a logical assumption there had to be a lot of contact, they come over the mountains, and each year collect taxes; but cultures have their own set of ideals and only barrow what is useful. So when we examine the Scandinavian Vikings, there were relatively few in number and they melded into slavs; they also conquered Sicily, and they were adsorbed in to the culture, but the Tartars were not a small group of peoples, they were a massive group of peoples.

Surely it was not benign relationship. But I do not think it is appropriate to blame the ills of Russia on Mongols ‘ yoke’ period, and Russian historiograghy has invented that the Mongols are to blame for all the RUussian’s current and historic problems.

So why was Kiev and Rus’ so impoirtatn? Seminal movement politically and ecclesiastical, - Rurik, and Vladimir Christianity, but Kiev falls victim to the Mongols, but cultural heritage begins where one chose, and there was a cultural legacy, but not a culture a cultural continuity, and Kiev and Rus’ declined, and when Moscow rose, we can start Russian history here – there was no continuity. The arguemtn was Kiev, trade to east, political contact with western euroipe, Kiev direct infusions of Greek high culture, Kiev was politically more pluralistic, more lively and amoung the princes, the Rurik veche, had cooperation, but in Moscow emphasis on a single autocratic ruler, a nature on this concept. Muscovy is more agrarian and depended less on trade, then Kive and Rus’, no veche in Moscow, so how can one show continuity, so if one blames the Mongols you can finesse this contradiction. Continuity exist if you blame the

Greeks called foreigners barbarians because they couldn’t understand their speaking and it sounded like bar, bar, bar, bar…. But this happen in Classical Greek, even when refereeing to the Macadonians. So barbarian practices were not a creating of the tartars, but already in culture.

So if there is discontinuity you cannot blame it on the Mongols, Different periods, direrento locations and different experiences, so Keiv Rus never can be assumed as the precursors for Muscovite politics and culture.

Tartar words into Russian language, is mainly trade products, and not political or culture.

Viking was Slavic trade languages, and very few came form Scandinavians.

Viking legacy to Keiv and Rus’ was the idea of the Prince, but the Prince was not a Viking idea.

Muscovy

Tartar was used west of the Urals, and that is how the Muscovites referred to them. The principality of Moscow,

So territorial expansion to west and north note the 4 ways spoken about in the last lecture. Water,

Golden Horde, split into four powerful subdivisions, and Kasan was the capital of the most powerful, Seria was the former capital of the Golden Horde.

Successful mobilizations of the realm that is the reason Muscovy rose to power. It became wealth but showcasing its legitimacy, to show a grandeur, and resorted to methods like Kiev, to the outside world. Remember the early Rus’ princes calling themselves Khagan because they most powerful neighbor, Khagan a powerful ruler of the steppe and so Russian adopt this title to so legitimacy they had power around their world-region

Pointed gable is like a cross section of the Dome. IT is interest in the Church to advance that the Prince of Russia is the best one. Last Free Orthodox country in the world is Russia after 1453, so this was a duty and a job to keep the flame.

So what clothes do you dress in 15ht century Muscovy, so what image do you present to the west or the people

Ivan III the first negotiations in the 1480s, and interesting to see how the Russwian dlegates represented themselves as, and they represented the White Emperior of Rus’ and used various words such as Khagan and tsar and this made sense to the Russians, this made sense

The four points of the compass are represented by colors, of the steppe people ( Mongols), and white was north, and north was scared, and so in Holy Roman Emperor said what? What is white Ruler? So Russians used the powerful peoples around them to imitate their culture because they had culture that was working better then theirs. This was a methodology.

ALWAYS BE CAREFUL OF RUSSIAN CHRONICALS> 1350s Russians and Tartars on both sides of the battlefield. So, much more complex picture, but looms large in the Muscovy imagery of history. Monkish-scribe gather up the regions that they conquered, how to write history, and they re-write, or copy pieces of them, that they want, and shove in a Moscow oriented story to show the importance of Moscow in history, then they teach it to the kids, a nd the kids tell their kids until it’s a legend and a myth duly admitted as a truism in history. So if mix a little truth with made up story telling, then one gets a hard to break historigraghy of one’ people’s history.

1. 1560s the Nikon Chronicle, owned by patriarch Nikon, and it was the end-all of Chronicles, and illustrated collection, in 10 volumes and 20 thousand pages hand written and 16 thousands illustrations Too big.

2. Moscow grand princes descended from Roman kings, a classic renaissance motif, a way to make one legitimate was to make a myth of oneself.

3. The White Emperor the Made up Cap of Roman.

4. Uzbec cross, and tremendously ironic, is a 14^th century Usbec cap, and its ironic they think it came from Roman dress of kings, so it was so ironic they thought this way.

Myth of Autocrat

Myth is Tsar is absolute and 16^th century quoted, and Tsar referred to the Mongol King, and Constantinople, the city of the tsar God, and God himself, so has a multiple reference.

 

“I’m you slave,” as the boyars bow down to the tsar, head on the ground, this is absolute power, this was customary, a way to make obeisance. But in reality, he was the God Father, the who needed his boyars to make recommendations and the boyars did rule, and the tsar never said do this or do that, it was always they say do this or do that. Oprinchina is a different story.

 

Tsar is just a man, and walks instead of carried like goddesses, and he is just like a common man,

 

Christ on a donkey motif is referred to grand princes, the autocratic tsar was not what it appered when foreigner vited Russia and saw for themselves.

 

Commradship, patrimonial politics seen in Kiev, and humble of the all powerful image. The pressessions, in paintings and frescows, that of a hierarchy being benevolent to the one’s below.

Boyars acted as Christian love with G Prince, and at same time present an autocratic reverence to the G Prince himself with prostrations.

 

1488, Chronicles refer to do business until his boyars are present at the meetings, the Emphasis on comradely rule, a close relations with the boyars, they are his cousins, relatives and family members,

 

So does this come from Constantinople, Kiev or Rus’?

This was the nature of politics with lots of consultations between boyar and tsar and Church, and the right of the citizen the common to petition the tsar. But when population increases this became impossible.

 

SO the tsar is God’s representative, and so when someone approaches the tsar one approaches God’s chosen one. This is crap. This is the imagery presented in ceremonial, ritual just like conveyance of lefty thought through television, the symbolism of how to act live and breath. The political correctness is as old and humans. Kremlin the symbolic center of the Russia.

 

Moscow Architecture.

Mostly wooden structures of Moscow then to stone.

Brick Novgorod, Pskov and Italy art heritage in Moscow, and boasting it now owns these places by using their stuff.

 

Holiest icons assembles other Mary and child, the famous one, 1125 brought to Kiev, 1155 legimar, and 1395 brought to Moscow, then installed in Dormission Cathedral in Moscow.

Architectural trend in Muscovy: Moscow incorporates regional styles and then exports them back out to the regional localities.

Tartar was used west of the Urals, and that is how the Muscovites referred to them. The principality of Moscow,

So territorial expansion to west and north note the 4 ways spoken about in the last lecture. Water,

Golden Horde, split into four powerful subdivisions, and Kasan was the capital of the most powerful, Seria was the former capital of the Golden Horde.

Successful mobilizations of the realm that is the reason Muscovy rose to power. It became wealth but showcasing its legitimacy, to show a grandeur, and resorted to methods like Kiev, to the outside world. Remember the early Rus’ princes calling themselves Khagan because they most powerful neighbor, Khagan a powerful ruler of the steppe and so Russian adopt this title to so legitimacy they had power around their world-region

Pointed gable is like a cross section of the Dome. IT is interest in the Church to advance that the Prince of Russia is the best one. Last Free Orthodox country in the world is Russia after 1453, so this was a duty and a job to keep the flame.

So what clothes do you dress in 15ht century Muscovy, so what image do you present to the west or the people

Ivan III the first negotiations in the 1480s, and interesting to see how the Russwian dlegates represented themselves as, and they represented the White Emperior of Rus’ and used various words such as Khagan and tsar and this made sense to the Russians, this made sense

( This is not correct) The four points of the compass are represented by colors, of the steppe people ( Mongols), and white was north, and north was scared, and so in Holy Roman Emperor said what? What is white Ruler? So Russians used the powerful peoples around them to imitate their culture because they had culture that was working better then theirs. This was a methodology.

THE POLITICAL ELITE:  THE BOYAR MAFIA

Three miracle workers, 14^th century, iconic paintings, some overlap, these are the three saints, the house of Moscow, connected to the mythical side of the rise. Moscow also incorporates saints, imported to Moscow local venerated icons like Novgorod, put in the Kremlin Churches, and put on display, then original taken back after a copy.

The embroidery icons, late 15^th century placed (these were 14^th century saints), put in the Dormition Cathedral. Include Metropolitan Peter, also Boris and Gleb.

3) Holiday and saints in embroidery, also Metropolitan Peter.

Alter cloth, Aleksie, Peter, Sergi all become associated with the rise of Moscow.

Robe in today’s Kremlin, on display.

1613, Coronation of Mikhail Romanov, paintings, shows foreign dignitaries, a ritual and ceremony. Not many see him on a daily schedule so this is important. HE is the symbolic center of the realm, the embodiment of its institutions, this is not meaningless ceremony it has cathartic things. Things only become real when ceremonies act out these rituals.

“He is appointed by God to rule over by men” most of the sources, this was the Byzantine theme of association of the Church and State. Not a democracy. Third Rome idea in the 17^th century gained weight but not in the 16^th century, in the 16^th century, it was the new Jerusalem. Godless Turks, last Orthodox, independent country on earth, it was not a empire theme, but a preserve and protect ideology until Christ comes.

Ruler ideology in Muscovy: Command, Just, Pious, as well as fearsome, autocratic ruler.

16^th century Moscow, not many people were literate, so people couldn’t understand Roman past, but Jeruselam had greater awareness then.

Theme  1300-1700 boyar period

1547: How is power distributed in Muscovy.

etymology: boy-fight, and wealthy.

Kiev some boyar were not military leaders, but only wealthy landholding, But in Moscow different, they were cavalrymen, wealthy landowners and military leaders.

Novgorod, Prince lived outside of town, so boyars had a different relationship. In Moscow, the boyars and Prince live together.
 

Boyar clans kept close records of their genealogy, to keep their claim on wealth.

By 15gth century there were 100 of Riurik branches, so house of Moscow was only one of those decedents form Rurik.

Codes are written down for boyars, but was it written down and shown to everyone, no. In sources they are there that is how we know. A prince could defect in Kiev and Novgorod, if they had an army, but in Moscow you cannot defect, but unite, must be a team. This is the code of laws. The boyars are his slaves, and must submit.

How can we rectify the boyars and Ruler’s authority. How to rectify that the ruler rules by God’s authority, but in reality, the ruler listens and rules in joint decision-making with the boyars.

Important in the Rise in Moscow

Primogeniture:   FIRST BY ACCIDENT THEN BY DESIGN.

1. Rise of Muscovy, first by accident then by design, Primogeniture,

2. Daniovhich line begins Moscow?????.

3. Prince dies, this is the accident, and it happens a few times, then the boyar and prices decide to make primogeniture the law for the grand prince.

4. ( Show strengths and weakness)

5. (ANSWER)Creates a predictability in succession, in the marriage crises everyone knows who the marriage target is. The women want to marry their daughters to the first in line, the eldest son of the Grand Prince.

6. Does one person rule alone? Do people share his ideals or does he execute his ideals alone? In Moscow,

7. RURIK CLANS WERE THE PRINCES, AND BY 16^TH CENTURY THERE WERE 1000S OF THEM.

8. Lateral succession, or primogeniture: 16^th problems.

9. Three instances, THREE INSTANCES.

#1) 1450: mid15th Vasilli, Basil I, leaves behind 10 year-old son, younger brother Yuri, was a robust adult, he could have been GP if lateral succession was revived. If Yuri comes in he would have booted the old boyars out, so the boyars in say we keep the ten-year old son and the power. The blinded, Vasilli young prince get blind, and so bindings to destroys harmony.

One gut ruled while blind, showing how the boyars ruled the government.

 

Taboo, do people get second chances. The guy rewarded for blinding the grand prince with lands.

 

Divorced, must become a nun, once a nun the marriage is nullified. This was ecclesiastical law.

 

Glinski clan, 14^th century trace back their origins to the Tartar Khan, and has tartar roots, and one of the new princely clans in Russia. So this is news.

#2) 1515. Women

 

#3 1530 – Ivan IV divorced, has many unvles who wanted to take the throne.

I.  Review of ideology:  all-powerful tsar, but also comradely

            use of ritual and symbolism for political message

            note:  3rd Rome idea was not significant at the time

            Illuminated Chronicle of 1560s (Litsevoi svod):  10 vols., 20,000 pages, 16,000 ills.

II.  The boyars and the Muscovite political system

            "boyar" = warrior (boi, fight) and probably wealthy (bogatyi)

            Moscow boyars:  fourteenth‑century origins, reign of Gr. Pr. Dmitrii Donskoi

            warrior origins and ethos: a "face to face" elite

            primogeniture and the opportunity for boyar power

            hereditary succession

            grand-princely "marriage politics" and the hierarchy of boyars

            rewards

            examples that show how the political elite formulated and maintained its role

            #1  the dynastic war of the mid-15th century -- victory of primogeniture in the royal  family

                        Gr. Pr. Vasilii I dies 1425; 10-year-old son, Vasilii II succeeds

                        Pr. Iurii, brother of Vasilii I, contests succession

                        Vasilii II's mother = daughter of Vytautas, Gr. Pr. of Lithuania

                        Iurii dies 1435, but opposition continues by his two sons, Vasilii the Squint-Eyed

                                    and Dmitrii Shemiaka (the Unjust)

                        1436, Vasilii the Squint-Eyed blinded

                        1445, Dmitrii Shemiaka captures Gr. Pr. Vasilii II and blinds him

                        1447, Vasilii II re-takes the kremlin

            #2  the divorce of Gr. Pr. Vasilii III -- there must be a male heir

                        1505-1525, Vasilii III married to Solomoniia Saburova, who is forced to take  tonsure in 1525

                        1526, Vasilii III marries Princess Elena Glinskaia of Lithuania ( Princess, a political marriage.)

                        1530, son and heir born, Ivan (IV, the Terrible)

            #3  Ivan IV's minority, 1530s-40s

                        1533, Vasilii III, Ivan's father, dies; mother, Elena Glinskaia, regent

                        1538, Elena Glinskaia dies

                        boyar clans struggle for position -- esp. the Shuskie and Bel'skie clans

                        1547, Ivan crowned Tsar, married to Anastasiia Romanova ( She is not from a prominent clan, but a boyar clan, so this is why to stop the bloodshed,

                        reconciliation:  # of boyar clans increased, even losers rewarded

1. Collaborating with Lithuania, was Ivan’s mother, so 1538 Ivan’s mother dies, and all hell brakes loose, and before 1548 all factions in honorific posts in equality. Problem who is closest to the ruler, of the clan. The game of political hardball and the bodies fall in the Kremlin, so blind before, now killing – but never the grand prince is killed.

2. One family seems to gain power, metropolitan intercedes, gets some men out of jail, and annual shits each 1538-47, back and forth, and in 1547 back-room arm twisting come to and end of the blood killing, and Ivan IV is 17 years old and ready to marry.

3. Marry him to one of the warring factions, Anastasiia Romanova. Not marrid to one of the two big clans, so this is seen as a blow. But everyone plays honorable roles in the marriage ceremony. Ivan rewards boyar rank from 25 to 50 increasing the number.

4. Marriage to cement power – like B Movie plot #1. The Boyar lost some heads and killed. Stopped when Ivan is marriage age, and it was a political act.

5. No longer allowed to leave the service of the grand prince, see Novgorod reference, and thus then now they are given land for their service. It is cohesive and small conscious elite. A club of power brokers, they were the cavalry warrior leaders, and over time came political administrators, not the warring types ( much later – still under Ivan  IV boyars had to go  to war, under the service obligation, you can enjoy the land because they go to war, “I’m servivng so I get land”). Over time this is blurred, some do not go to war, they were political elites.

6. In general, Ruler pick a boyar clan  Based upon friendship chosen.

7. If Tartars convert, they are welcome into the Muscovite system. Many examples.

8. Who comes in from the outside? Tartars, people with international connections that were some how conquered;  must refresh the political elite, it small, many die off possibly in war, so must adopt new ones.

9. Inner court, 5-8 in the inner circles, and some clans get jobs to do outside the inner circles. But being close to the eyes of the ruler was the number one cause of a boyar.

10. Glinskiaia Princess of Lithuania, a political marriage.

11. In 17^th century, 100 of boyar clans and this lead to weakness, to many decision makers. This led to the policy of Peter the Great.

12. Until Peter I the Great, no precedence for women holding the Russian throne, until his wife.

A System Behind the Bureaucracy

Who are the Boyars.

1. So Boyars, make foreign policy, the collective, they fight the wars so it’s a collective government, and the Ruler is symbolic, a contradiction in power.  

2. Boyars continue to practice collateral inheritance.

3. Izgoi: principle, you are tossed out of the Boyars if your father was not a boyar. It helped with simplicity in a complex system.

4. Conflict with boyar elite, the outsiders coming in

5. The conflicts of the marriages

6. Then with Glinskaia they finally reach out of themselves to the outside to include ‘others’

7. Concentric circles, the #1 boyar clan has a wedge inside the inner circles, 3 clans in inner probably 4-5 five on the second circle.

8. Do your darndest to get power by marriages. Have good looking babies.

9. No way to move up by being a military person in the boyars, so not like the western middle age system.

10. Never becamne a boyar on merit, but by the accident of your birth. But the timing you becoming the boyar may be by how powerful you were in military  - only when being picked, but cannot be eligible unless in heritable line of Riurik.

11. Boyars were the ones that wanted autocratic rule, a façade of autocracy, not a false , but a collective autocracy, Where sometimes a boyar is the one that makes life-changing foreign policy.

12. To be within the bright eyes of the tsar, ( you are in power baby)

13. Political culture had written rules for behavior , but also unwritten rules of behavior, so they could  reserve by not letting everyone know.

14. They were the Rock-n-Roll Stars. They were the stars of their age.

15. Unwritten rule, no killing because it becomes an endless chain of feuding. ( feudal) So avoid capital punishment, like blind, tonsure, and exile. Another way mercy, forgiveness. Victors not punishing rivals, only to have hostilities break-out in a few weeks.

16. Limited violence by a complicated system was the military field position, by position in the army was by your families role in historic battles.

17. Muscovy Judicalship – How to Deal with Criminals – Public Humiliation like the Puritans

18. Elaborate riturals to humiliate the losers the criminals, then reintegrate them into the sytem. Do not abandon them.

III. The "system" of court politics

            basis of boyar power:  military background, landed wealth, traditional clan positions

            closed elite? -- no

            small elite:  10-15 families in 15th c.; in 1547 # of boyar clans increased from 24 to 46

            not hierarchical or pyramidal structure with tsar at top:  rather, circles of power

                        around the tsar, who is the focal point of power

            little bureaucratic structure; personal politics

            mechanisms for continuity include primogeniture in the royal family (Daniilovichi,  descendants of Moscow Pr. Daniil, early 14th-c. ruler; Moscow Daniilovichi =

                        one branch of the princely Riurikovichi, descendants of 9th-c. Riurik)

Sociological, how did government get powerful? Pre-modern, face-to-face government, so this is a buddy-buddy government. These were pre-modern rulers need to cultivate supporters, they cannot rule alone by law. ( I think this applies today as well) Basis of Muscovite boyar power, they were not English nobility, they were a fairly young elite, a 14^th century prince origins. There power was not regional with land like the European nobles, they were hereditary and clans that had histories saying that they were in this war or that war, or histories. Claimed to power was charismatic – this is important. Each boyar is wealthy, he enjoys gifts from the peasants.

     means of avoiding conflict: unwritten rules of boyar behavior

            reciprocal and limited violence:  thou shalt not kill (usually)

            reconciliation

            mestnichestvo (lit., "place system")

            "facade of autocracy":  boyars unite behind the power of the tsar

            taboos as sources of stability -- e.g., avoid conflict, do not interfere with primogeniture

                        in the royal family

            ideological justifications:  Dmitrii Donskoi's Testament, other testaments, law codes

IV.  Concluding observations

            was this a "good" political system?  (good or bad, like the Soviet system, it worked)

            did the boyars constitute an "aristocracy" or a "nobility"? -- nobility no, aristocracy yes

 Recommended bibliography:

            Anthony Giddens. A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. 1. Power, Property and the State (Berkeley, 1981) and The Nation-State and Violence. Volume Two  (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1987).

            Edward L. Keenan, "Royal Russian Behavior, Style and Self‑Image," in Edward Allworth, ed., Ethnic Russia in the USSR. The Dilemma of Dominance (l980), pp. 3‑16. 

            Edward L. Keenan, "Muscovite Political Folkways," Russian Review 45, no. 3

            Nancy S. Kollmann, "Ritual and Social Drama at the Muscovite Court," Slavic Review 45, no. 3 (Fall, l986).

            Nancy S. Kollmann, Kinship and Politics: The Making of the Muscovite  Political System, 1345‑1547 (l987).

            Nancy S. Kollmann, "Pilgrimage, Procession, and Symbolic Space in Sixteenth-Century Russian Politics." In Flier and Rowland, eds., Medieval Russian Culture (Los Angeles, 1994), 163-81.

            Michael Mann, The Sources of Social Power. Vol. 1: A History of Power from the Beginning to AD 1760 (Cambridge, 1986).

            Daniel Rowland, "The Problem of Advice in Muscovite Tales of the Time of Troubles," Russian History 6, pt. 2 (1979): 259-83.

            Daniel Rowland, "Did Muscovite Literary Ideology Place Limits on the Power of the Tsar? (1540s-1660s)," Russian Review 49, no. 2 (1990): 125-55.

Oprich ( paritble inheritance to one section to wife)

Nature of the Tartar rule in Russia.

1. impact on Mongol Russia, Kollman doesn’t argue there was no impact, but it was relatively small. When does a Russia Bishop, ever meet a Mongol Tartar, but Halperin says the Church bookman knew sooo much about Mongols, this is argument, the argument of “silence of the Bookman” is hard to solve, it is hard to prove. So first, need to understand, did the two come into contact. Halprin argues that Bookmen knew the most about the Tartars – how so? Halperin, the Church’s influence in the request was tainted by the bookmen.

2. Borrowing their prestige by naming your son with a Mongol name, but this was not wildly. To paint a picture you were descended from this powerful was a fad in Russia up until the 17^th century.

3. Careful to say about Russian being influenced by the Russians the or the Russians influence on the Tartar and Mongols.

4. Russia and the Golden Horde , relationship with Rus’.

5. Trubetzkov ( A romanticized view, not liked by Kollman, tries to eat and have his cake), prince in imperial Russia ( after the Revolution), he wrote in exile, part of the Eurasian school of thought as Raisnaovsky. He is our leading representative in our readings. What is the Russian heritage. It is Eurasia, not typical Europe, so this represents traditional Russia in a broad sense.

6. National revival” there was no nations – so he used this as a Russian national pride, as his terminology.

7. Raisnaovsky; Tartar Toke exaggerated, Kulikov battle, Raisnaovsky doesn’t mention that Tartars were on both sides. 

8. Trubetzkov: Ghenggiss a spirit of unity, a romantic, it was a irresistible model, and Russian national thought (13-14) too immature to argue.

9. Was not the Mongol barbarity that introduced it into Russia, it was part of the times. Rise of Moscow is from the Tartar Yoke a direct opinion of Trubetzkov, not a reality – because we do not know.

10. Golden Horde, Serai was an exception, it was a settled ‘state’, but Mongols didn’t have a state.  

11. Mongol Tartar ‘Yoke’

12. Halperin: Bookman, the writers of that time, were mostly churchman, wanted ‘ to keep silence’ which made the ignore the benefits of the Mongols. Book on purpose mis-represented on purpose, are deliberately held information  - this is hard to prove. It was hard to believe.

13. Poruka was in Kievan times, so Halperin wrong that it was increases with the influence of Mongols.  

14. Isolating elite women, never came from Mongols, the Greeks isolated women in commoners, and so why do the people do this? Seclusion of Muscovite women, intermarriage in the political elite is key increasing a man’s power; women are pawns in a chess game.

15. Khan may have a harem, of political wives, and Islam says 4 wives.

Rise of Muscovy

1) Shrewd grand princes, the luck, the giving of patrimonial estates, and intermarriages, the gathering land, proving Ivan “Money bags”

2) Also practiced primogeniture, first by accident of coincident ( princely families) then by design. Title passes and all of the property goes to the eldest son. This was shrewd business tactics. The blinding, the fights, all protest for this.

3) Location: geography.

4) Ecclesiastical center

5) Do not forget the political elite.

6) shift of trade, fur up north, Moscow up north/central, more into the forest.

7) shift of population is a bit difficult to quantify and pin-down.

8) Shift of political power central from Kiev to Moscow area, but doesn’t mean that people took that rout. Moscow is quick to claim it was the cultural inheritor of Kiev.

9) 1238 Kiev was temporary wiped out but doesn’t mean migration.

10) Slash-burn, there is always some deserted land in Russia at any given time. Populations moved.

1. Peter Metropolitan fortunately died in Moscow, and so they kept the Metropolitan there.

2. Peasants were never paid anything; they were the ones that paid, the grand princes. Right after Peter dies, an immediate claim to have the see represent Moscow. Church was a landlord, many peasants living on church land. Increasingly the Church is wealthy landowner. Church has some amount of power and in Moscow, and….

3. Conquests of Novgorod: Issue, Patrimony; Ivan III I have always owned Novgorod, it was my ancestors, which was never the case.

4. Rather frustrating in 15^th is chronicles of court cases over land, and that many documents are refereed too as having been destroyed, so that we know that a lot of material about history has been lost.

5. Traditional patrimony of service of estates for a part of land to go to the widow allowed by the princes. Oprich (Partible Inheritance), comes from a ‘widow’s mite.’

6. Why was Kiev totally destroyed and not saved as the Mongols needed a people to have as a tax base. When they first came in they didn’t know how powerful the peoples of Kievan Rus’ were so they killed as many as they could, not knowing the populations.

Discussion

Reinterpreting Russian History: Readings, 860-1860s. ed. Daniel H. Kiaser  Gary Marker (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).

87-90) Northeast Rus’: The Second Testament of Moscow Grand Prince Dmitrii Donskoi (1389) Last will, came to throne as boy, 1359, Metropolitan Aleksie (1354-78) protected him, grew into a able and wily prince, most famous for 1380 headed Moscow force at Kulikovo Field near the river Don ( here he derived his name Donskoi) fighting the Mongols to a draw, and promising the eventual overthrow of the hated conquerors. He “conceive idea of Patrimony’ (87)(see Ivan III Novgorod conquest): Idea of Patrimony changed Russian history, no?  Partible Inheritance (Common to slavs): Lateral succession practice, seen as negative for splitting lands, eventually no land to an heir: so what did they do?  Dmitrii tried to bequeath a larger portion to one of his eldest son; disputes often, and a legacy awarded The Grand Prince’s  widow as a means to appreciate  the role of gender in Moscow. 90-99)Annexation of Novgorod, according to Moscow Chronicle (1477-8), Hist. Novgorod placed limitations of Princes, when Ivan III calls for incorporation of his patrimony, Novgorodians instantly ask for traditional Novg. Privileges: Did they believe it was their ‘right’ to ask?  N. Opposition, war II’men (march), accusations by Moscow of ‘some’-  alliances with Kasimir, K. of  Poland & G.P. of Lithuania: How much meddling in Novgorodian politics did the G.P. of Lithuania do?  Stipulations of Moscow, no veche, negotiations, ½ down to10 monasteries, hereditary land Novotorzho: Where was this land? GP Ivan, gives little, finally boyars, Jr. Boyars, Burghers petition GP for inclusion, granted, Muscovite gov installed: Did they see no way out of Moscow’s persistence?  Veche Bell to Moscow: Was this for an ornament of conquest, or a tribute to heritage? 99-101)Novgorod Chronicle, Christian God employed tartar to punish Rus’. Infighting, cause, Novgorod princes’ not following advice of G.P Iaroslav, created dis-unity: Did this Chronicle also leave out the Poland-Lithuanian influence  in Novgorod discord?  Kazan, De. 21, 1238, taken Pereiaslavl, Iurer, Dmitrov, Volok, Volodmir, Rizan, Torzhok, on road Seregeri - stopped 66 miles east of Novgorod: was this because the spring snow thaw-out ( i.e. marshes) , the Mongols called it off?  101-2) Immunity Charter for Catholic Church, reason Mongol needed pop: Did Mongols so this for toleration of other religions? Or for economic and judicial so can collect taxes ( Mongol theme, don’t destroy all the people)? 102-3) Birth of Autocracy, Sergei Patonov: argued apologists of the G.P. imbued him with divine authority which gave the Muscovite tsars almost messianic right to absolute rule; G.P. begin to believe all Russian land is his personal property: This is tied into the concept of Patrimony?; Rise of Ottomans, thusly, Russia last Orthodox state in the world. 104-07)Charles Halperin, argues much positive Mongols brought, look at history another way than the Chronicles that demonize the Mongols. Halperin, religious intolerance generated an  ideal of silence’ which refuses the genuine achievements of the conquerors: Does Halperin blame Orthodoxy?; Tartars are the Mongols in Russian sources: Were Tartars originally just one of many nomadic tribes of the steppe? ; Turkish speaking nomads called Kipchaks, 14^th cent. Shamanist Mongols convert to Islam: Riasnaovsky says no Mongol empire ever in Russia (History of Russia 70-1) Mongols left infrastructure alone because it was economy and polity: Why didn’t Mongols operate as civic officials? Chinngis decreed not to interfere with other religions: How much does religion play in all of this? Were they not living separately?  Halperin: Russian princes married Tartar princesses; other theme, Russians barrowed heavily from Mongols, political, military, administrative and fiscal institutions: Were they really institutions or policy? Articulated only Mongol system, not adopted Islamic (Persian diwan) Russians learned Turkish dialects to communicate. “Muscovite may even have molded their dynastic concept upon that of Chinggissids” (106): How so? Where is the evidence?  Koran kept in Kremlin: Was this symbolic or authoritative?; Mongols didn’t influence High-Culture (Christianity/Orthodox) Russians couldn’t borrow from Sarai because Islamic: Could Christianity and Islam really get along?  Thesis: Russian Chronicle had nothing positive to say about the Mongols: Should Russian have just ignored that Mongols wiped out much of their population in the initial incursion?  114-17)Muscovite law on values not judicial: Was this adopted from Islamic/Mongol tradition?  Dueling rare, but popular talk: So dueling was rare?  Ivan IV heard trial records read allowed: more proof that possibly he was illiterate? Witness testimony most widely used, usually starozhil’tsy, longtime resident of the area; dobrye liudi, good men of the area, reputable: This appears Muslim-like laws used in Ottoman law, no? They ran a similar witness system of justice.   Pagan swearing on the earth, customary until the 19^th century: So how many peasants were not Christians?; Elite, ‘God Justice’,’ kiss the cross used for judicial, political-administration, religious, an oath\honesty pledge, a character judgment: this was for judgment of character?  Muscovite courts 15-16^th cent. Supervised verbal contests: 117-22) Judge passive role, active role litigants: When paperwork burned in many fires due to fires, it was hard for a judge to litigate property rights, no?  Illiterate people usual believed what was read to them: Most of the population was illiterate?  Written records took second place (but sometimes taken at face-value), title-confirming charters destroyed during ‘Mongol Yoke,’ so many verbal-witness litigations. 124-26) A. M. Sakharov, presents a Marxist interpretation of economic development ( feudal is Mongol’s fault, (see Halperin for diff. analysis.)). Sakharov,’ Mongols continuous ruination created mass migration, created forest devastation, undermined peasant farming, created exploitation by feudal lords, lead to serfdom(see Halperin for diff. analysis.)). 130-1)Testament of Patriki Stroev (late15th) one of the oldest extant will to have originated form a secular hand in Moscow ( This illustrated literacy was possibly for some, probably rich who could afford books); 1470 Minstrels in Rus’ An Immunity Charter: (gusli)  a stringed instrument, accompanied minstrels: When and where did these performances take place? 137-40) A. M. Sakharov: Mongols and Cultural Change. Argues “Mongols failed to introduce any cultural innovations in their place.” However, “…cultural revival in the 14^th cent. which coincided with the gradual rise of Moscow principality.” Loosely-thesis: Old culture destroyed, new culture needed to be invented: Was Moscow reinvented without remembrance of Kiev’s past?   Many books only reached us through survival form Novgorod: Was this because Mongols didn’t burn buildings full of books?  Discovery at end of 18^th cent.  The Lay of the hose of Igor . D.S. Likhachev, the writing of Chronicles declined. Argues, nothing borrowed from the Mongols; ‘including social thought, literature, painting’(138). First stage, decline, impoverished culture, but Culture of Novgorod, Pskov were different, they remained connected to the west. Second stage, 1350s -1450s economic rise of Rus’, the strengthening of local government structures, upsurge of Moscow, Tver, Novgorod, Nizhnii Novgorod and Risan, large powerful economies….(139) Rise of Russian culture: Words of Praise of the Monk Foma, chronicle tale about Prince Mikhail Iaroshavich, and contrasting chronicling done in Moscow, advanced idea Moscow had been divinely chosen and that the descendants of Katila had the right to political direction of the Russian lands. (139) This period, Mongols disintegrating, now contact with Bulgarian, Serbian cultures….anticlerical “heretic” currents arose, and bold rationalist thinking… made embryonic form” D.S. Likhachev thusly called this period “Pre-Renaissance.” (1450s-1500s): Did Mongols create circumstances that Russian couldn’t join in the renaissance, or was geography always the reason they could not interact with the west? Furthermore, he argues a rise in building, ceremonies, contact to west (until Latinism), Moscow focal. Argues, Russian didn’t proceed to full renaissance status because of the detour to feudalism.

Halperin, Charles J., Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985)

General Thesis: PC. Demonized Mongols, reinterpretation, Mongols/Islam positive culture force. VIII Mongol and the Muscovite Autocracy:  1380 Allied forces/Both sides mixed, Donskoi’s victory over Mamai at Kulikovo Field; Moscow shrewder politicians. N. Karmazin, thesis: Moscow’s ascendance was the direct result of its alliance with the Horde and political and military support came with it. (88). Richard Pipes, Muscovite autocracy of the 16^th cent. relied on numerous political, military, and social institutions borrowed from the now defunct Golden Horde:’ taxes, census, treasury, postal, army organization bureaucrats, language, diplomatic forms, and some aspects of criminal punishment and liability ( i.e. communal responsibility). Russians didn’t learn wickedness form Tartars. (97).  “Muscovy power was based on internal strengths, but these strengths arose from Tartar Influences.” Vernadsky ‘ The Mongols and Russia ‘ - Halperin agrees(89). Roublev argued: Mongol contributions to the rise of Moscow was administrative: What did he mean?  (89) The Mongols facilitated rather than caused the appearance of the Muscovite Autocracy which endured in one form or another , until modern time (88).  The Golden Horde fostered the resurgence of the Russian economy and subsequent growth of Russian power (86) Halperin Ch. Economy Thesis: ‘We see they [ Mongols] brought both wow and wealth and that both were inequitably distributed.’(85). Cherniavsky: coin-mint 1480+ legitimacy, dynasty succeeding another; Ivan’s name in Arabic, tsar/khan/ remain sensitive to steppe traditions of rule (100). VII Economic and demographic Consequences: Mongols shattered economy [ I thought econ. declined before they arrived?] (75) Yarliki, or patents, R.O. Church, except form taxation. Historians have almost invariably assumed that the grand princes grew rich through embezzling the tribute. This was dangerous, however, since the Tartars treated it as a capital offence. Michael Roublev, demonstrated that G.Ps  enriched themselves in a safer mode, by increasing local taxes above the Mongol 10% level, and therefore kept the proceeds for themselves. Mongols didn’t care as long as they received their 10%. This tax system, was argued, remained in affect after ‘Mongol Yoke’ disappeared (78). XI Mongol impact on different social levels, peasants did not understand Christianity, only jobs as slaves, or forced labor? Contra. The increase in wealth and influence on RO Church under Tartar aegis and accompany spread of Christianity in rural Russia must also have affected peasant life (60) Peasants 13^th century, still largely pagans. “Russian Orthodoxy screened out Mongol Influences from Russian society, so that the forced social accommodation of the upper classes left no permanent effects” (107) another school of thought, Russians never lost sight of eventual liberation, Russian folk-epics (byliny), Halperin, problem with this, bookmen knew the names of the Mongols, aristocrats more familiar with higher-levels of Mongol presence-bookmen misinterpreted them (Demonized them)  (105-6) “friendly cooperative interactions”, Halperin (118) Halperin quoting Horace W. Dewey ,”Kingship and Poruka before Peter the Great” “ The practice of Poruka, collective responsibility for the behavior of members of a sworn group, became more common in Russia during the Mongol period, perhaps because the Mongols used the idea of collective responsibility widely”. (93) veche. Continued under Mongols, didn’t seem to be a  threat. (contra.) Tartars punished the veche uprisings in Rostov in 1289 and Nizhii Novgorod in 1305 and the 1327 Tver’ rebellion (96). When veche in general fell it was not the  deliberate policies of the Tartars (See Karamzin opp. interp.  95). Cherniasvsky, veche declined because princely administration made the boyar duma more efficient. (foot 17 p. 96) Mongol economy: “ Perhaps the most difficult question is whether the Russian recovery took place in spite of the Mongols or because of them?” Tartar sponsorship trade had a positive effect.(85) Kabala [Arabic language] (Bondage/debt-slavery) (Kabal’noe kholopstvo) People sold themselves into bond-service to pay-off debts. Absolute rule didn’t come from the Mongols (95). Russian compelled to learn Turkish/Mongol (117) Ulozhenie (law code) of 1649 imposed serfdom after Russian foreign policy had refocused upon the west, Halperin[Not Mongols fault] (117) Quote: Roublev, Ch. 5  The New Order Subverted: The Muscovite Baskaki, in “The Scourge of God” : Mongols influenced Russian administration, “Muscovite power was based on internal strengths, but these strengths arose form Tartar influence.” (89)

'Moscow – Second Constantinople, Third Rome or Second Kiev? trans., ed., J.A.V. Haney (Canadian Slavic Studies, III no.2., Fall 1968) General Thesis: “Thus both external and internal forces compelled the Muscovite rulers to justify their claims to rule all of Russia” : Can we use external influences in our writings on the reasons for the rise of Moscow or do we just focus on internal changes within Russian ideology? Metropolitan Zosima, Exposition of Paskhalia not adopted but reviewed. New theory in 1510 by monk Filofei appealed to the secular interests of the G.Ps. This new arrangement was chosen and the Third-Rome was not. It appealed to the secular interests of the Grand Princes. The tale … Valdimir Monomakh …provided irrefutable … crowning of the grand princes (357) The evidence of the Tsar title was now at hand. Skazanie can be divided into three parts: the genealogy of Muscovite grand princes, the story of the transfer of the imperial insignia from Constantinople to Kiev, and the excommunication of the Latin Church ( The fourth part of Lithuanian Princes left-out). Spirirdon’s Poslanie and the Skazanie were placed into the public realm: How much weight in the princely circles did these texts have an influence? Did the peasants realize the significance of these writings or did they even know about them?

The Legend of Genghis Khan, N.S. Trubetzkov, from Major Problems in the History of Imperial Russia, Russia and Europe. Thesis: The political unification of Russia under the power of Moscow was a direct result of Tartar Yoke: Was this because of the policies of “ Gatherers of the Russian Land” by the prices’ or was it solely on Religious context? (26) Trubetzkov argues “They became genuine rulers of a state only when they abandoned the "gathering of Russian land" for the "gathering of Tatar land:" During the gathering of lands were the Russian co-rulers with the Mongols, or were they still subjugated or a mix? (T28) Sergius of Radonezh, founder of the [Trinity St. Sergius] Monastery, the principle center of the religious revival during the Tartar rule (26) “The assimilation of the techniques of the Mongolian state system and of the Tartar life style proceeded at an especially rapid pace in Moscow:” (26) What was the Mongol state system? Was there even an Empire, or just overlordship? Riasnaovsky sees only overlordship, not Mongol empire. Trubetzkov sees a Chinggis Khan vision of Empire that only with the later conversion of Tartars to Christianity this vision came about through Russian autocracy. Tartars converted to Orthodoxy. Was this a vision of Chinggis Khan’s vision of reputable nobles: did they contribute the formation of the Muscovy state? (T29)

Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. & Mark D. Steinberg, History of Russia, vol. I. ed. 7^th, (Oxford: Oxford Unity Press, 2005).Mongols were not an Empire, no dynasty in Russia, relatively unstable and short-lived. (R70) He references “Kubli Khan built Peking and in 1280 he completed the of southern China, but in 1368 the Mongol dynasty was driven out of China; the Mongol dynasty in Persia lasted only from 1256 to 1344; and the Mongol Central Asiatic State with its capital in Bukhara existed from 1232 until its destruction by Tamerlane in 1370.” (70): Riasnaovsky fails to cite the Mūghals (Mongols) who dominated South Asia (most of India and Bangladesh) well into the 17^th century as subsisted as a legitimate Empire & dynasty. Riasnaovsky argues that the Eurasian school, all numerous and varied, believe that Muscovy was a direct result of the Mongols transforming a weak and divided appanage Russia into a powerful, disciplined, and monolithic autocracy (R69): Did Mongol internal schisms indicate a need for funds which they traded for certain privileges with Russian princes, leading to ‘a gathering of lands’ by economic conquest, instead of war?  Church with its tremendous landholdings played a key economic role in appanage system: How did wooden architecture and icon painting reflect high achievements when former artistry declined in many activities? How did this symbolize the celebrated dispute that pitted the “possessors” against the “non-possessors”.  How did the Church rectify its position, when the secular position of the grand prince whose aim was economic and the church at times stressed some adherents to live poor? Ivan Kalita, ransomed prisoners from the Mongols, purchase appanages from bankrupted princes, made political alliances, and won the right for tax collection from the khan of other princes:  Was Kalita spurred on by his religious convictions, or a pre-patriot sentiment? (91) Kalita also took measures to move the religious center to Moscow: How did this affect trade? Was the role of trade in appanage Russia difficult to determine?  Simeon began to reference himself as grand prince of “all of Russia.” (R91) Scholar judgments of appanage (R104): Did Muscovite princes by skillful aggression ‘gather lands’ from Russians and various non-Russians?  Or was it only against outside aggressors? Pavlov-Silvansky’s three traits feudalism argument is too controversial, because feudalism has never been clearly defined in a general world context. Not all feudal systems had variables like the pomestie, because if so they were linked to a concept of a votchina already, granted inherited land, not separate concepts. Riasnaovsky, vassals of vassals: rudimentary stage of feudalism.  Pavlov-Silvansky’s opponents: Russian landlords acquired their estates through inheritance: contra. other sources.  Was this before Ivan IV changed land to compensation for services in the Oprichnina? Was this policy intact at anytime prior? (R106-8) Klet or srub: processes for church, followed Byzantine cannon outlines, and peasant buildings. Stone structures in decline during appanage period (R118). Tent churches, Literature, Wanderings beyond the three sees: Tver Merchant’s journey to the east, including India 1446-1472, before da Gama; other literature of journeymen. (R116) 1474,Ivan III sent agents to Venice to ascertain Italian architects:  How did he lure them? 16^th century stone structures begin to appear again. Suzdal, first icon school, c. 1290s, flourished in the 14^th merged into the Moscow school in the 15^th century: icons were of vital importance in Russia. Kievan was urban, no longer after Mongol, therefore, education was in eclipse (122): Were basic literary skills such as deed composition or trade notes, a skill that survived even during the Mongol period?  Mindovg (r. 1240-63), accepted Christianity, Pope Innocent recognized him, later Roman Church severed relationship. Gediminas, son brother of Viten, united tribes in Lithuania: founder of state.(125) Russian became official language, adopted Kievan culture: Was this really a Russian-Lithuanian state? Moscow: Later rivalry between Lithuania who believed it was the inheritor of the Kievan state. Lithuania rises,  (late 14^th- early 15^th)  and consolidates with incorporation of Moldavia, Wallachia, and Bessarabia: How did Roman Catholicism payout in the Moscow/Lithuania drama when it came to Lithuania from Poland? Jagiello’s marriage (r. 1377-1434, married Queen Jadwiga): marked the beginning of Polanizaton of Lithuania.(126): How did the united force create problems for Moscow princes?  Did Poland-Lithuania try to make an effort to incorporate Novgorod, which became a concerted policy of Ivan III to frame it as his patrimony, in essence understanding the nature of political and economic circumstances if it fell into their hands? Or was this not a concern and Novgorod was safe from foreign economic entanglement? Did the dynastic agreement of Krewo concern Vasillii I at that time? Over time the principality of Lithuania moved away from Kievan successorship into the realm of its own princedom (1569 Union of Lubin): Did this create a dual monarchy of Poland — Lithuania into a unitary kingdom? (127).

QUESTIONS:

1       1) Cherniavsky:  points out that coin-minting from 1480 onwards represented legitimacy, dynasty succeeding another; Ivan’s name is in Arabic (on one side), tsar/khan/ - was this to remain sensitive to steppe traditions of rule?

2) How was a dobrye liudi chosen? Could he be a prince, or a peasant? Did it matter? What qualified them?

3) Spirirdon’s Poslanie and the Skazanie were placed into the public realm: How much weight in the princely circles did these texts have an influence? (J.A.V. Haney)

Boyars 250 Years of Russian Power

Raisanovsky, see index on Feudalism, and how he addresses it.

Women: broad anthropological look across cultures and society. “ The seclusion of Elite Muscovite Women” hand out.

Proposed essay topics: Any favorite suggestions e-mail.

Stovglov (1551) “ Means, ‘ one hundred chapters’ is attributed to Ivan IV himself, but he had a speech writer.

 Deti Boiarskie “ kids of the boyars, but it came to mean lesser rank or “middle level servicemen” – they were frequently the children of boyar clans.

Marriage is politics and politics is marriage in this period of Russian history. Concept of the elite of the inner circles of power with the tsar or grand prince in the middle with wedges of inner boyar circles, then the next circles, all literally interrelated, linking marriage patterns, everyone trying to marry into the inner circles. Everyone is trying to jocking for position into the positions of power, i.e. the inner circle.

First Rule: Ceremonial positions.

Many unwritten rules, this was a political system where these political families were on top. The boyars were the highest political positions in the land, and in times of war they were the generals.

The position of women as marriage pawns, because marriage is so important in this male dominated society, so you want to guarantee your pureness in a line of heritage, where ‘clan purity’ has to be preserved, like pedigree for pure breed dogs.

Ceremonies, where people sit, all the little things in a ceremony – all the clans have little things to do – a role to play, so they all come together in harmony, to show they had the power in the land. After the women has passed the child bearing years, she can venture out and be free, she is not in harms way of having bastard children, she can much power and freedom.

Second Rule: Do not kill. Only in Ivan IV, is the exception to Russian hist. Mercy, the losers are recompensed with another marriage or land. Compensation of losers was a rule, and Ivan IV it happens. So everyone gets rewards even when they killed during Ivan’s rule, after they killed each other, this was mercy rule and a forgiveness.

Next, court lawsuits were very strong problem, where they took place all the time, usually in positions on the field. This led to clans in the 16^th century keep extensive genealogy books, some going back far and being fictional, then everyone’s books become part of the evidence in the litigations; if the litigants refuse to listen to the court’s rule, they do not except the game, they are publicly humiliated in public, or they can leave Russia.  Publicly a man or person can shout out he forgiveness for his wrong claims, then  so he can also curse the man and not get in trouble, and is very interesting, so some amount of right is recognized for both sides.

Grand Prince, is feared and respected and so his representatives are feared and respected. Is a mafia like system, the grand prince is a godfather, but its not like they are a bunch of crooks, but centralizing around the locus of power. So the representatives have power invested by the grand prince. Boyars serve an idea that the grand prince has a ‘right’ a duty’ to be there, this way they kept power but only have to revere the grand prince. The grand prince is the locus of power that the boyars rally around, that is why baby Ivan IV was not killed but bodies dropped all around the Kremlin. Ivan could have been killed at any time, but the power of the central figure is where the boyars get all their power from. So cannot destroy the very mechanism that gives one power.

There were murders of the leaders, but we are speaking in the 15^th - 16^th century. The tsar autocratic power gives the boyars strength, and protected the boyars own ambitions, and the primogenitor problems the weak minded son dies in 1598 and there is no male left, no dynasty and political system was not prepared to handled, and they elected a tsar then the time of troubles, and then all hell breaks-out. 1616, the boyars had to come back together, a strong conservative restoration of the 16^th century system in the 17^th century. But later the foreign armies came in with modernized forces made the Russian realize they needed to modernize, and so reform, innovations and technical borrowing form the west.  

Donskoi’s will in our readings is the ideal of a grand prince, and how does this contrast with Ivan’s last will and testament. What do the contrasts predict or say.

1515 law code, that the boyar should be involved in new laws with the grand prince, but consensus politics, but in reality they boyars are there to advise the tsar, not to make a consensus on policy. They are sometimes criticized for not giving good advise to the tsar. Harshly criticize a boyar that was not hanging arund the Kremlin, but is off taking vacations, because the boyar is not there to give the advice to the tsar, and small rooms, the anti-room is small room fit into one room and they did so almost daily unless they were out on campaign. Its called the inner circle of policy making where in the name of the tsar is the law published, but it was the council of the boyars that went into making the consensus on the decision with the boyars in the little room where Russia was governed. 25x12 foot room or so about was the room where Russia was governed from on a daily basis.

It was a fairly stable system, except when the grand prince is just a kid, because who ever is in the inner circle has to control things and this where problems come in to this system. When the tsar gets to the age of ruling, usually around 17 years-old things ran rather smoothly.

Official boyars, the eldest of the clan of boyars, but doesn’t’  mean you get selected into the system of the circles.

No meritocracy or social upward mobility. But a systematic way that worked for over 2 and ½ centuries.

Pre-Modern Government.

Aristocracy: No such things as Nobles ruling Russia, but there were nobles,

More an aristocracy, then a noble. Because nobility was a particular class in Europe with rights and privileges, that westerners guaranteed rights too, an institutional forms such as House of Parliament, not House of Lords, no Magna Carta, no corporate identification, not a corporate estate and privileges, but identified with clans, families and friends, and are content with this personal face-to-face , to be ‘ within the bright-eyes of the grand prince’ then they were happy, this was power the locus of power.

INVENTED IZBRANNAIA RADA – polish term, invented word by Kurbsky.

Chosen Council, of the Boyars, this is an invention, invented by Andrei Kurbsky. Histories made a big deal, ‘ heah, look this is evidence of a politburo, this was not, it was made up. This was like Charlemagne’s government.

Boyars had great wealth, and had to bow-down and prostrate head on the ground, but they didn’t care they had the power, and if you are serving the godfather, and no civil war and you are getting your income you do not ask the godfather to put it into writing. So there really was no needed for record keeping. However, after the printer, secretaries did show up in the history, but this didn’t mean a institution of record keeping.

To be in the presence of the grand prince was usually only the boyars, and only on occasion did monks and others get to have close proximity with the tsar. So power was to be close to the tsar. This doesn’t mean the tsar didn’t make public outings to show the pubic he was alive and concerned with them, this just meant a private audience with the tsar was rare to a commoner. But anyone could in theory could petition the tsar if anyone had a grievance.

Why didn’t a wealthy independent middle class didn’t arise? The boyars didn’t let it happen, so only a few families were middle classmen that the boyars let be wealthy, some more in the 17^th century. This political elite was not a nobility, this tells us why Russia and Europe develop on a different lines in history. This is not complaint to why it worked out this way, it was the way it was, it should not be a lament, that beats the past, but this elite gave Russia cohesiveness, all of this added great power and stability to the end of the 17^th century. Only a few bumps along the way.

General Façade:  He could act like a severing if he chose too. Impenetrable façade of autocracy, it was very real, the guy on the throne had the real power, but we must remember that friendship was a key factor in this government, not the faceless, bureaucratic corporate notion of the western ways that developed in the west with intellectual thoughts and philosophies.

Why problems: it was the government wasn’t it? The Times of Troubles, comes from peasants, and suppressed nationalities or foreign armies, the Poles and Swedes easily defeat the Muscovite army.

Summery it was a consensus politics, personal face-to-face politics with intermarriage as the key to retaining power, and under outside influence under Poland and Lithuania will eventually change the power in Russia  - how they think about it and how they rationalize it.

Historiography: Marxist theory screwed up how people see the world. Everyone from Marx’s perspective is class struggle, and not personal relationships. It is the perspective on how one looks at the system. So historians made up bad interpretations by placing Marx’s universal theory onto a very personal thing of one region, therefore, they had to make things up to make Marx relative to the Russian historical argument. They forced into history instead of what was seen and observed from the sources.

1462-1584 ( Three unique powerful figures, grand princes): How was rule administered? Coercion, reward, ideology

1. Standing army, more taxes, patrimony, …..

2. Foreign visitors say a lot of violence, but they are writing for their hometowns. But the west has a lot of war and barbarianism too. So there was no difference. There were times of radical times of barbarianism, be it government, of tribes or foreign powers.

3. Death penalty, for repeat offenders in 16^th century, but in 17^th it was more used and applied to foreigners. More punishments of whips

4. Women who were convicted of killing their husbands were buried alive; this was on radical death penalty. But not for men who killed their wives. This was a radical example. But usually capital punishment was not administered, usually many outlets were considered before the ultimate conviction. So again usually repeat offenders of serious crimes.

5. Laws of punishments: what did they do to help government, especially the small government? This helped the courts and helped people enforce themselves and,

6. Communism: So the communes, was ruled by male elder members and lets appoint tax officials and lets make them be the court-represented. Some said this was a weakening of central authority, this was not the punishments were ordered as a system by the central government, so this was not decentralization, by having the communes rule themselves, it was how it was done.

7. 1930s, the memory of the terror kept people in line, like the do not talk to foreigners they are spies, memories of having family members disappear, so the fear kept them in line.

8. The cadastral surveys begin to help pin-down the population to begin later on to serfdom later on in eastern places, as the west were coming out of serfdom, up till 1861 emancipation.

9. Middle-16^th pre-institutions did arrive onto the scene, scribes, secretaries, different chancelleries, but these were premature when looking from a western view point.

10. All peasants are made liable for taxes, except for the free peasants living on crown land. Purceedure, court books, and had versions of texts for reference.

11. Boyars have jurisdiction over high crimes. What are HIGH CRIMES? : murder, brigandage, material theft with evidence, verbal insult , false accusation , dispute over loans and making disparaging comments about the grand prince.

12. 1/3 of arable land in mid-16^th century were owned by the church. They had courts too.

13. So have a widely dispersed population, so placing responsibility on the peasants was one way of controlling such a vast land. Without it, it could not.

14. Middle level servitors:  A new 16^th century concept: The change for service elite, a little bit of productive land with peasants in returned for service to the government.

15. So boyars, middle level servitors, and peasants.

Boyars 250 Years of Russian Power

Topics: Muscovite: Strategies of Governance: Church

Service Elite: may be rich or not so rich, why given land with servants, because they give service to government, most lands pomeste “place system” are around Moscow.

1478: Ivan III the primary role increasing the use of service estates and decreasing hereditary estates. Moscow region 1300 new service estates.

When he conquers Novg. He assigns Moscow people to Novg. And Novg. People to service estates to Moscow to weaken local roots.

 

Some was church land, some was newly conquered lands, and any land available. Who were the recipients, new middle level servitors, meritocracy, paralleled the Guba reforms, changed it system to rule peasants in the vast hinterlands. So how do we make the system to make it better. Some thought a democratization, by giving local populace more control over their region, but this was not democracy but a better way to be autocratic, the gov. went every year to the lands and forced collected taxes. So this decentralization authority was infact an increase of authority – a dispersal of authority only to get more people involved in the autocracy.

 

Kremlin: Who served where, and when in wars and this was so important. So they begin to use folio pages, but before they used pages that needed scroll-gluing. Now using pages in books bound together. S

 

Stovglov 1551: emphasizes harmony and unity. We will all benefit by a lack of violence, less vengeance.

 

The right in principle to petition the tsar, and even boyar turned to petitions the tsars.

Church address him as beseechers, and pilgrims.

Ivan III informally used title Tsar, only Ivan IV used it officially for the first time.

 

Ulozhenie.1649: Right to petition goes to the typewriters and law code is humongous. 

 

Zemski sabor, are difficult to explain, foreigners notice these: May have 300-600 members, many different types of people. JKollmann, met to decide only one issue, ‘ shall we go to war, shall we increase the tax’ Not really a formal institution, and met only  sporadically, maybe 45 times, No records of meetings, only passing reference in the chronicles. Only historians seen as proto-democ., they were not representative. It was burdensome to travel to Moscow, and some were paid a little to travel to the council. Agenda of meeting was typically set in advanced and no institutional permanence or defined authority. Never hint of descending opinions, no records of fights, it was like a rubber stamp where the addenda was decided upon before the people met. Unanimity was always the goal either perceived or forced as an ideology. A theoretical union of Church/tsar/people all coming in union – the coming together of the forces of Rus to make this wise decision. The political elite had already decided upon. Some cases exist where some venues for redress, and this get noted in the 17^th century when more groups such as merchants get represented, but this was not the going thing. 

 

What does this mean for Russian autocracy? This is not a totalitarian system, a façade of an autocracy, intertwine between political elite, marriages, blood ties, mafia. Pre-Modern system, so law is not uniform and that is what people note when reading the sources.

 

Church: Next week: Honor, rise of towns, the

 

Church

Historiography  of the church, the closeness of Church, state and people, all in harmony.

Stoglov

Harmony  = church/state

Unanimity=people/boyars/state

• 1326 Metropolitican (petr?) takes up residence of Moscow. These are the hierarchs.

• Sabor=gathering zemski= land

• Sabor a notion, a church is a gathering of people.

• Ukraine and Bellerose was created a metropolitan ( not created yet).

• Black clergy are the monastic, only a monastic can become a bishop. Only a celibate monk can become hierarchy. But white clergy had to be married.

Church is only a spectator in politics, not a hardball player, not like the Latin Church who believed it was supposed to be the power above the state in universal law, as Patriarch Nikon had pointed out in the 17^th century.

Church court and church land peasants are to go to the church courts. Kissing the cross, allegations a church matter, witchcraft if one kissed the cross and lied.

Moscow monastic figures inspiration, and wilderness adventurers.  They found new communities, may start our hermits, but over time things always evolve, especially a community, when deciles, and synabidic?, and live all aspects together.

• 1600s 200-240 monasteries, 1/3 of the arable land not owned  by the tsar.

• 16-17^th about 15 monasteries owned nearly all the church land.

• Churches in a city: Two churches: Summer church is larger, and winter church small no windows.

• Breathing techniques, austere monasticism.  See Jesus prayer

• Acquisition of land was in the story of monasticism.  The question: what the purpose of the monastery:

Two sides ( Roles of the Monastery, both legitimate) , Both trends are legitimate of monastic movement.

1) one get land to serve the poor, help the commoner, inquzitive, we need to have wealth to serve God’s people

2) Be apart from the world, be by one’s self:

In towns

16^th  OFFICAL SAINTS

17^TH  more local saints and pagan elements.

 

All Religions have elements of earlier religions, such as the case with Christianity. Such as Easter eggs.   Prayer to Jesus and Mart coincide with prayers to the Oak, and the Bear. Do not view as warring between pagan and Christian elements, but a co- existence. Reform efforts like the Stovglov 1551 to standardize practices. Talked about poor houses, and bishops complaining about corruption of tax collection, low moral standards, but hard to measure.

 

1620 printing. Ivan IV reign, he didn’t like what they were printing so he destroyed the machines. Printing, correcting text, education was not liked by Ivan. Pre-modern system.

 

Little literacy:

 

Holy Fool in the eastern Orthodox religion. Village simpleton, village idiot, some were possibly mentally ill, looked like un-kept homeless. Holy Fools. Autistic son, inner body thermostat ( Takes close-off in snow and winter, inhuman) , repetitive behavior like rocking, social misunderstanding so they become misfits and outcasts. So possibly autistic these fools; there were respected the ‘otherness’ the counterforce to the official church person.  A Human being, suffering like us, an appetence of a protection by God. They often rebuked people for not following Christ. Social release valve for social stress of official structures. He could be critical of tsar and boyars, and sometimes could be together talking being separate form the people, all separate form the norm people, so they befriend them and take their suggestions.

1598 Boris Gudonov is elected first tsar outside of Riurik dynasty as it died-off with Fedor’s death ( Theodore )

When Fedor dies it was truly a crisis, the people asked who will rule us, and even thought about having a metropolitan rule, but there were no consent and no precedent, but it was thought about. Truly a troubled time. Was this like the story when the people supposedly of Kiev asked for the Vikings to become their ruler?

Social People in the Medieval Russia

Obscure window on gender relations, and social life, Modernism is fragmented social, these people were tight-knit social – so there is a difference.

Domestroi, Life Model of St. Sergi

Try to imitate the saint.

1. Live soberly

2. Politically correct laws, no insults, so there are hate words.

3. Freedom and individuality is frowned upon

4. Men were masculine, One’s masculinity is shown by your obedience in place,

5. You are born into a fix and set position called a ‘chin’ = rank, both in society and in iconostasis.

6. Protestant do good deeds to get salvation.

7. Ivan, “ I’m the new servant of the state” what does this mean and how do we fit this into history?

8. Orthodox tradition, healthy respect for the body, where ( Professor) Latin church has a problem, Issue honoring the body.

9. Trope of evil women crop up in the sources, formally disapproved in sex in marriage, only for baby, but over time Orthodoxy moved away from this.

10. Women honor fee is usually twice the free, Women honor cases the most. Women’s modesty, must respect a women’s headdress, and a women’s dress. Vieled women out in seclusion, cannot have their veiled lifted, out in closed carriages.

11. Why in a male dominated society is the women’s role in honor more important in regards to laws and fines than men? Food-maker the family was the basis of the social order. Men needed a home to go to after work, and having a civil social environment meant a stable family unit in society.

12. However, an elite women is like a princes, and had social status and respect, so a male dominated society serves their own roles by having elite women’s high-status. MJM – I think it was a farce, women are seen in politics and importance, they are the marriage=politics.

LOVE MEANT HONOR, DEFENSE OF YOUR WIFE

Marry for security and stability: that is what is said, but what was in reality?

Economic power of women, and in 16^th century less as the GP began to take away the land for the state. So partible inheritance was now leaving to GP ownership. So the service landholding system is a deliberate attack on private property, meaning women couldn’t hold on to the land.

1. In practice we see women getting and giving land, and widows.

2. Court, women could sue on behalf of their husbands.

3. Not much economic social climbing. Born into rank, that is your job.

4. Muscovite Society, conservative ( What conservative? Religion?) , traditional, pre-modern.

5. Norm, people are embedded into a clan or rank and that is your job.

6. Orthodox serves the born into rank. The religion is geared for that structure. Therefore, Orthodox doesn’t promote social mobility.

7. Inside the church fine penalties are much higher. Closer in physical presence to the palace in the Kremlin, in Moscow, the greater the fine. Don’t insult the tsar, during Boris Goudenov’s time, he wasn’t sure how long he be on the throne.

8. Unity of public and private spears, the honor role. Political church and state is acted out in the honor court cases. The community of true believers, all united in seeking salvation, after the life. Theses are the ideal values of Muscovite society. Doesn’t mean people lived this religious life. There was ethnicity, regional and geographical things to take in mind. The Church bureaucracy was small, no literacy, Ivan IV put his own men in positions in the church.

9. Pain staking interviews when over land, so the community comes together and participates in a solution, but solves long standing feuds. ( really so if one is lied to and taken advantage of they are happy?) An element of dynamism in a conservative society? ( What is this?).

10. Middle Age Law on Women, and approved by Orthodox Church.

11. Russian Law on Beating Women: Domestroi, beat a disobedient life when you are alone, but do not do it in hatred, use no iron or wood, do not injure her bad.

Rape cases: Two aspect, the seriousness was addressed by ecclesiastical and gov, and social diversity of litigants. Records of numerous rape cases survive in the sources, but not all were resolved.  What about false charges?

One of the escapes for a women in this society was to become a nun, in this male dominated society. Even men could get out of government duty or war by asking the GP to be tonsured, that is go to a monastery. In 17^th cent. Women took on strong leadership roles in churches, and were powerful.

 

Marriage: 12-16 years-old, most women married, because this was survival.

Elite women, imprisoned-like, kept separate, they are pawns in a political chess game.

Common women were treated different, they had to get outside and work.

 

Slaves: Could sue if they were beaten to crippling: Muscovite slave population: 5-10%, 1/3 were women. But masters could beat slaves like they could beat their women.

 

Elite women in Poland, were better-off.

Elite women in Russia, obeyed their husbands and the tsar.

 

Peter the Great follows the well oiled police state, don’t follow me, follow the state.

 

He orders the women to leave the “ chari” and the houses have large rooms, women must organize them, women must wear gowns, low neck-lines, women learn to play cards, learn foreign language, and do a party, These were government decrease.

Oprichnina

Oprichnina was a seven year period in which Ivan IV divided up the land (1565-72) into two main parts, formed a personal court, separate administration, a personal army, and conducted a notorious “reign of terror” designed to purge his enemies – but ended up affecting everyone in Muscovy. This represented something dramatically different and was not a reform. Ivan’s psychological and physical wellbeing might have been part of the cause. It was more likely a dramatic need of the tsar to escape from rulership where there was no precedence. The social, political, and economic results were a genuine disaster. Ivan may have killed his son Ivan Ivanovich, leaving a feeble minded son Feodor on the throne that died childless -- leading to a dynastic crisis which ultimately led to the unfortunate events of the Time of Troubles.  - Michael J. McDonald.

There was no rational for the Oprichnina, everyone was affected and targeted.

1. Oprichnina  to separate ‘oprich’ and  in usage, “widow’s mite”

2. Was Ivan really Terrible?

3. Ivan during his own life time all types of rumors flew about, and later.

4. It is such a challenge to figure this man’s reign out?

5. Vasilii III who divorced wife in 15? Because she didn’t have an hair, male, because of agree upon primogeniture.

6. Ivan born to a Lithuania women Elena Glinskaia (d. 1538), and in 1533 father dies, and his .

7. Boyar unrest in 1530s, 1547 he comes of age, marries Anastasiia Romanovna Zakharina, who becomes the progenitor of the Romanov dynasty.

8. 1530s-1550s positive government reforms.

9. New measures of weights and measures, a single tax standard, by the plow, if you have a plow you are taxed.

10. 1530-40s, take back fiscal immunities from the church lands.

11. Indenture servitude,

12. Taxes and payed in time are converted to cash payments.

13. Zemski reforms are made responsible to law, taxes and reforms in their own communities. This was not a decentralization, it was a power central moving, a cheap way in making administration of justice and taxes to make the local people responsible.

14. 50s-60s, that glorify the “Book of degrees;” Nikon, illustrated chronicles, 16 thousand illustrations, never finished,  to glorify Moscow, Metropolitan Malarkii plan ( revered leader, icon painter, a positive influence on Ivan, collector of bible stuff and saint stories). Gather saints lives and Muscovize regional and local saints to a Muscovy principle.

15. 1553, allegedly falls ill,  the boyars hesitate to swear allegiance, and Dimirti the little baby dies, and Ivan Ivanich 1554 is born, (it may have happen but not how it is described professor). On the other hand, Ivan brother Urii, feeble minded, - so there is a certain amount of tension. If genuine, would there be more killings of boayrs,

16. Chronicle: “The History of the Reign”, is where 10 years later in the margins the note to this episode took place.

 

Ivan IV

 

 

 Ivan the Terrible

 

1.               Quite spare, the sources of his life when he lived? But many after who wrote on what he felt, and put their own aspirations.

2.               Understanding the sixteenth century for next few weeks.

3.               Significant Read crummy

4.               Look in Pavlov and Perrie, look for what Crummy – these are the arguments that we will focus on.

5.               Bias view.

6.               There are bits and pieces, what did people perceive it to be, such as foreigners, and they report back to their home audiences, in a sensational way – exotica. They think they find English Parliament and such, but were not there.

7.               Prime documents can not tell the whole or real story behind the official statements.

8.               Focus on open system to a closed system.

9.               The historians build on one another. Will pick an historian that has a strong point of view, like a Marxist. Social classwarfare, the essence of polity is the prime mover, like who owns the factors and who are the workers in it – sees class struggles.

10.            Look at the 16^th and see was there classes, or not.

11.            In readings it was an autocracy, Grand Prince, 17^th crown Tzar, Caesar work translation.

12.            No single transliteration of the cyliteriac alphabet, so Tsar’ ( soft ‘r’). so French men looked at Latin letters that made the sound and gave it a Czar spelling.

13.            Tchaikovsky, for example, was a result of French translation and in its Russian form is Chaikovskii, but French hear the ‘t’ in the name.

14.            In Russian it is Ioann, in the sources sometimes refererd. Last, Vasil/evich, son of basil.

15.            Who was his father, Vasilii III, dies in 1533.

16.            Ioann born in 1530, note the grand prince was only three years old when he inherits the throne.

17.            Muscovite political system.

18.            No biographies, or autobiographies, at this time in Ivan’s reign.

19.            Nature of the political elite.

20.            Autocratic and all powerful ruler, but same time comradely, pious and just. At the time there were iconic symbolism, icons, architecture, Saints, and paint a picture of a godly vision,

21.            Moscow, referred to the third room, this has been exaggerated, so first room is Rome, then second Byzantine, Constantine transferes the capital to Constantinople, becomes a rival to western Rome’s capital for allegiance. Then 1453 Ottomans’ conquer Constantinople. Moscow had acquired their religion from Constantinople, so they were eastern orthodox, referred to the Turks as Godless Turks, first Rome fell to barbarians, second fell to the Turks, so the third is Moscow was the last God favored civilization on Earth, so we have a special mission ot hold God’s word in tact until the second coming, so last surviving Orthodox capital that was independent was Russia.

22.            Many historians later blew it out of proportion, in the 1930s, people in Moscow didn’t know about this, but later myth building about stories  - like Czar goes back to the Augusta was put forth in the 15th century.

23.            Chronicals do not have a narrative cohesion.

24.            Topic: How is power distributed, who is allowed to rule and or govern over others and who was decided to

25.            Nobles: Boyars, 1300-1700s, the nobles ( Some time Bioyar, etymological : fight or boy),

26.            DruzhÍna, comrade or friend, in Kiev – these were wealthy, the two functions came together , the chief servitors to the prince and the nobles came together, and wealthy landowners, were military then nobles, and known as boyars.

27.            Moscovite ( North Boyar were independent) but in Moscow were aristocracy were boyar status, Boyar clans, date their origins to the 14^th century, sons and heirs to the prince Denial, and Demitri …..last name…

28.            Consolidated, and built a legacy, some boyars were princes from 9^th century legendary Rouick, so it was a branch house, so there were other house branch houses.

29.            Admissions ot the boyars in sources, individually and as a group you are to advise the grand prince, unwritten rule, do not oppose the grand prince.

30.            Must not refuse to serve, no longer could they defect to the opposing forces. The prince should listen to the bayars, and the the boyars should listen to eachothers – to foster harmony.

31.            Domestic white males in the Kremlin, to prostate their forehead on the ground to the grand prince, to ‘ beat their forehead on the ground’ in his presence.

32.            Lateral succession the boyars traditionally were lateral practices, but in Moscow first by accident then by design, to practice primogenitor  - the eldest son inherits all the power to the throne. Over time the political elite saw it gave them some stability so they started to enforce this practice.

33.            plot of a movie: #1)Problems: Kremlin, trouble, when 10 year-old kid get throne, so one an uncle and boy on the throne in a contest and both get blinded. Note nobody is killed Vasili II is blind and the uncle is called the squint-eye. Note nobody gets killed in this civil war. Just easily could have been blinded. Are their political principles at work here. Why no murder of the prince,

34.            Plot #2 Movie) Solomoniia Suburova, was infertile, and in an absence of a male heir, who would ascend to  the throne, so they were divorced, the Church Orthodox had provisions, but she was forced to take the viel, so the marriage was nullified.

35.            Forcing a man to become a monk, so he could not become a prince.

36.            Contracts are by swearing on the cross, so becoming de tonsured it too hard.

37.            So he remarries: princess Elena Glinskaia ( A boyar clan) of Lithuania. Not the first time this was done, a political marriage, they were fighting with the Lithuanians. Their son would become Ivan the IV  ( the terrible).

38.            Bindings were done to preserve primogenitor, does the uncle or young boy inherit the throne.

39.            All hell breaks loose in 15^th century.

40.            1598 royal dynasty of Moscow died out, Theodore IV died and there was no make heir. But no good enough clan to establish a new dynasty so Poles and Swedes invade to take throne, a civil war erupts, and pick a 16 year old kid, a picking on purpose a kid, a politically assassinated is when they force one to become a monk in which they did so they can control the son, but father gets out of prison to become a patriarc of the Church, they thought, they were rid of him, but only the chief Bishop the powerful behind the thrown is what he becomes.

41.            1525, the divorce and political crisis, to preserve the progenitor, but not one mention of divorce in major Soviet historical Encyclopedia, this was left out, but more important piece of history.

42.            Plot #3) 1533 Price Vasili III dies and three-year-old inherits the thrown, and many relatives want to inherit the  throne, but the 80 years ago a huge civil war, and everyone loses, so lets stick together and we will continue to enjoy the fruits of power, and there was no standing army only a spring army.

43.            Days after Vasili III death the boyars arrest his brother, so when that brother dies, they arrest the next brother.

44.            Boyars were understanding stiff competition, and 1538, the Regent, Ivan mother dies, and 8 year-old is now on the throne. Two noble families split apart, and all the clans become ambassadors and repositions, 1538, they have disagreement, murder, imprisonment, and happen, and this blindness didn’t hold now, murder happened now so we see a change.

45.            Lines of kinship and marriage, changed to position for important roles. 1538-47 the period of Boyar unrest is called in history. No one tries to kill Ivan or even blinds him, he may have been passive, or had been chosen by Boyars. They probably needed him to have a son, the continuance of the line.

46.            Why settled down, Boyars settles in the back room, the 17 year-old kid was marriage, and a new official title of Tsar, of all the Rus’ lands. Gave him the many titles of the likes most were doing in this period.

47.            They had him marry a Romanoff warring clan for a wife, 1547 the wedding, honorific roles, and Ivan started to avoided Boyar ranks, from 45 to 50 ranks of Boyars were raised to commemorate.

48.            After this were intermarriage, attempting to reach consolidation and balance of power. Was this made up B- movie history?

49.            Ivan himself may have thought about this, was he a significant actor, we do not know. Several historians think they know. I doubt love had to do with it, it was a political marriage. Historians take liberties into placing their own thoughts into others.

50.            He didn’t like Stalin, the opera Izantine, so Stalin though I didn’t like this image.

51.            How did the boyars get powerful? If the government have a policy, they operate the policy and have a job to rule over the populations.

52.            Rulers need to cultivate an elite, pre-modern means there are not a lot of bureaucrats, secretaries, and so its an old-boy buddy-elite, who control things.  The job, pass along wealth, land and daughters and make everyone happy, and make people gratified. So the Muscovite were fairly young elite, so their claim to power was not necessarily regional by hereditary – because you were a descendant of a boyar. Top-down order of rulers, no one came from below, no one comes up by merit, their claim to power was charismatic, they had a special rite to retain and maintain power. Traditional respect for their hereditary clan,  and institutional memory by oral. But were they owners of vast lands or… warrior, cavalry and elite, made their backbone claim to importance, to provide the army. They Boyars that supported Ivan reap the rewards after he becomes official; the others are left out, like in Togugawa, after Shingahara battle spoils.

53.            Was this a closed elite, that no knew families could join the elite, this is no and this is  a reasons for Moscow’s success, and the rise of new noble families provided a reaching network of peoples who now identified themselves as Russians. Hereditary elites in European history observance is that families die off in 200 years so they need to bring new people in so keep it inclusive but provide new ones to keep the numbers up. 14-15 families eligible, and at court about only 7-8 families werer present.

54.            So power structure was not grand prince, boyars, and peasants, it presents it image, but it was more in concentric circles, the agreed upon locus of power, two or three boyars in inner circles then 5-6 in next concentric circles and so on.

55.            So why only 7-8 families in power during a period, so concentric circles was a key,

56.            Ivan raised to 24 eligible, in ’55 about 40 eligible families, and they all knew each other, the boyars, were supposed to live in harmony but not always as in the civil war.

57.            17^th century, the number of boyar clans, into the 100s, meaning it was deluding itself. Mechanisms for continuity, was the primogenitor and boyar system – both supply stability for both, a support system.

58.            Made it known who was the known prince so no need for civil war and wars of succession. But who do you want to marry your daughter too? The oldest son. A grand price would remain prince unless certain factors of mental and physical health, it didn’t matter, just the eldest son of the last grand prince.

59.            Princes died on  three occasions, leaving only children to the throne. Ivan IV was one of the three.

60.            Theodore , Ivan’s sons in 1598 when he dies out the period of Times of Troubles.

61.            He was not qualified to command.

62.            So 14-16^th century period, ruler ship, arguably half the time the princes were too old, too young or too incompetent, so who was running the show,

63.            Prime Sources: grand prince of this writes well at four years old, so we know people were doing government policy, fought the wars, and helped arrange the grand prince’s power, so they could pass on power and wealth to their sons, so before Ivan there was no standing army ( meaning year around), but collateral or lateral heritage rule of the boyar, so it diluted the clan. That was weakness in a clan.

64.            Tossed out, you could not become a boyar if your family was cast out even if you had bloodline, as patrimonial clans, each of these clans had a boyar represent them at court. To maintain small workable clans in working and living conditions, a representation to the whole of the regions.

65.            Conflict and outsiders coming in: political crisis was not based upon ideological lines, but rather who was going to marry their daughter to the throne, and most marriages, in general, Boyar clans were the heart of marriage order, and the inner circles of boyars, 2-5 clans, and this is part of the 1545-57 only 4-5 identifiable cliques, consistently in the inner circles, part of concentric circles.

66.            Tension of political was marriage; this was the only rout because one could not vote, so marriage equals politics. No ideology. Kinship and marriage the making of the Muscovite Political system.

67.            Certain rules of un written culture, so the tensions would not arise in the future by writing down the fights and struggles to get power by marriage.

68.            Ivan IV ‘40s minority, had been worked out to everyone’s agreement not everyone’s satisfaction. Rules of court poltics no written was no killing themselves, no chain of violence, no long standing feuds, so the next result would be this top-of-the-pile elite would not kill eachother, but only stuff like exile, punishment, and also used mercy and not killing. And Sometime rewards and compensating losers so we all can preserve the status quo, so the 1530-40s struggles were resolved. So big clan winners won, but the loser clan got compensation, a marriage deal and got a place, a seat of authority. So compensation, a public form of litigation at the court, whose grandfather was more important do who got the better seat at the celebrations and events were public’s eyes matter. The vanity of rule.

69.            A litigant rejected the courts rule, he was subject to humiliation in the public, sounds like the Puritans, then the goal of harmony by giving him awards later on to provide harmony. Not a meritocracy.

Each Week, reading assignments, fragments.

Rough notes, sentence fragments3-4 questions, some about facts, and some opening up discussion questions, that open up.

Ivan IV, 1561 takes a second wife, near the caucuses, a Circassian Princess wife,

Livonian not good, costly (prof.)

(pronounced Oprich ni na  | Oh pree sch nee ya).

6000 army is Ivan own body guard,

Lands covered 1/3 of Muscovy is Oprichnina, lucrative trading grounds, hereditary estates get confiscated given out to servitors, everyone suffers, boyars, land holderns, gentry, ordinary folk, peasants, everyone suffers, huge fines and taxes, anyone spoke up dies,

All of Legimars clan killed and land taken away to destroy their heritage and memory.

Crimea takes Moscow because it was planned because of weakness.

Like Stalin, turned on his leaders of the Oprichnina, and are executed, and old Boyars, most went back to the Kremlin, in essence

Ivan refuses the word Oprichnina to by used after 1572, but never really ended.

Pseudo monks, Oprichniki, severed dogs heads on their horses to sniff out, vigilante justice, pillaging, no control,

Appointed two boyars, one to kill the other and Ivan participated in torture and killing.

The role of carnival, to turn the world upside down to, like iki, let the commoners take controls, a mocking of the establishment, like the liberals that want the commoner to take over, or like the Marxist.

It is hard to find a rational explanation of this, and our enlightenment to try to serch out the rational.

Man acts in his best own interest,

You cannot pick out a particular victim and point it out why it happened, because everyone sufferered.

Another Baktinian, carnavalesque move, appoints a Tartar prince on the Moscow throne.

Executed after 4 th marriage, Ivan marries at least 7 time.

Ivan allegedly kills his son and heir Tsarevich Ivan Ivanovich.

Common myth, as fact, the Italian visitor makes this account, it is the most common.

Letter from Ivan suggests his son was ill, and the mystery was this went on in the Kremlin, and no one saw what transpired. The Inner palace, the private rooms and we can say little about what happens. In 1581 dies.

What to do about and heri, and marries a Tartar princes, #7 Mariia Nogaia bears son Dimirti 1582 (d.1591)

Gerome Horsey, a scalowaty, reports he knew Ivan in his last years, and (balls) swollen in the cods in which he had deflowered the maidens. Big genitals.

What is the Tsar’s two bodies? He is a human being and he is an official: The Tsars two bodies.

From father and mother sources talks about Ivan, and talks about growth. Chronicles are poor source because his name is own them, but were they really him speaking, high-flown formalistic language, could he been such a scholar? Chronicles are formulaic, and things are always done in the name of the grand prince.

ILL: Early in his life he rides on horseback to monasteries, but later he rides only in carriages and sleds.

Carried in chair from room to room, the foreigners recorded later in Ivan’s life, but was this an honorific ceremonial, or was he sick?

Many foreigner accounts were 3-4 hand accounts and were written to sell back in in their lands. And Grozny, was not used at the time, his power was described as Grozny, as with Ivan III and Vasilli to mean powerful, but later an epitaph was applied Gorzny, meaning terrible. It was not a thing he was called at the time.

Kurbski correspondence: argues Ivan is for absolute authority,

Ivan. Evil in youth, but redeemed with good people around him.

Then Ivan turns evil when Anastasiia dies.

Forgeries of the 17^th centuries, Keenan, (prof. I cannot argue that charge, or know if it is false or ) In Lithuania, Kurbskii signs an ‘X’ in a court, meaning he was possibly not literate. Were these forgeries? But how do we know all the inside information? If Ivan is education, capable of writing that correspondence, how do you explain the oprichnina? He went mad? If he was smart, why go insane?

During Boyar unrest, no one harmed the kid, and no one blinded him, and they could have, because they didn’t that would have incited further chaos.  This was not boyars verses tsar, where one implies the boyars verses the central authority, this was not about tearing down the establishment.

Was Ivan in charge in the coronation with Anastassiia? We do not know. “ A royal He” meaning the office of the tsar, marriage was not for love in 1547.

Good Period of Ivan’s reign: 1574-1560 she dies is romanticized. Originates in historiography in 17^th century, because grand nephew brings back legend of Ivan and says he ruled good when with Anastassiia and after she dies everything went bad – “ we will resurrect everything that was good before Anastasiia died”

Political elite, the tsar facilitates retribution, and it is political elite trying to show how to achieve a balance of power. Not madmen, but for some of the lured accounts, not all.

What happen after Ivan, 1963 a chance for new evidence. Effort to renovate the Cathedral Archangel Michael, where the tsars and leaders are entombed. Autopsy. Everyone agreed this was Ivan, his favorite drinking cup, and artifacts dating to his period, and the monk cloth that he wore, evidence of the practice of the tsars to be buried in monastic habit when they died, to appeal to the Lord for their souls. 

We read of pots of mercury bubbling in his room when he was sleeping. Rumors of hard drinking. Spine fused rigid in a stooping position. Given to Harvard, unnamed, the diagnosis was severe, his life was in pain. Heavy drinking to off-set the pain. Foreigners never saw him walk into the throne, room, he already there, was he in fact unable to walk, and ride horseback in his remaining years.

Bizarre and irrational behavior.

But you didn’t ask for the job, you got it because of primogeniture. No provision for a tsar to resign.

What was he doing marrying a tartar wife after Anastassiia dies? What was that about?

Oprichnina, a separate kingdom.

Ivan wanted to abdicate, and no rational observation for Oprichnina, no one group focuses on he hated everyone. The system was absolute stupid system would not allow him to step down. Why didn’t he commit suicide? That would have been a valid get out of his position and his pain, and people commit suicide for less.

Professor: new interpretation, rather than dismiss his actions, it was a record of dramatic attempts to abdicate and not a bizarre set of circumstance, he was making war on the system, especially the opirchnina period, was he really terrible, he may have been Ivan the stooped, hardly the terrible awesome person his epithet created in 17-18 cent, and maybe we need to separate Ivan’s two bodies, we do not know his personal life.

After the Orpich, all previous power boyars return to control, so Ivan didn’t change anything, but only added on territory.

1598 a turning point, dynasty dies and this is a huge turning point for Russia, no heir and

Historiography, Ivan squished feudalism, and ……..

Cast as a national hero in Stalin’s period , especially in WWII, and took stern measures because he had too.  And Livonian order, Ivan had squashed. So he was a hero.

In reality there were a system that the tsar didn’t need to control and it took a care of itself and that was imperialism, and notion of the gathering of lands had continued par the course, not attributed to Ivan’s actions of Imperialism but a general consensus of Russia forward momentum after fighting back at the Tartar domination.

 Ivan IV

1. Why did Ivan IV expand the number of boyars, and dilute the power of the c. 1547 when Ivan was crowned tsar? Was this Ivan, or the boyars were expanding themselves.

2. Keenan’s two bodies, something is done in the name of the tsar, like Ivan ordering the cupolas to be gilded in Gold in the Dormition in Kremlin. Was it really him? When he is 17 years old, the expansion of the boyars, it is the political elite.

3. Byzantine formula Ivan IV marriage, what was the message of this, increasing the boyars, what did this mean, expanding the unity and harmony, and getting people to buy into the system then secluding them. Getting support of the people.

4. Character of this elite can tolerate an expansion, but later in 17^th century, Peter’s half sister Sofia, the number of boyars expand to 150 – it is a sing of weakness, the political elite are becoming diluted, at least from autocracy, no longer face-to-face government. This is when Peter the Great steps in.

5. 4 ranks of Duma status, and boyars are tops. State secretaries do not become military, but Boyars are elite military leaders or must send representatives to the field.

6. 1550 reforms: before namestniki, and voevody, regional military officer – state appointed, no salary, lived by kormlemie, lived off the local people. Popular dissatisfaction ended this.

7. 1550 reforms turned to a local officer, no pay, no state appointed.

8. Onus on a local person, local community choices, the community if forced to chose somebody. Coerced representative of the central authority, a thankless job.  

9. Was zemskie sabor a powerbase or not, it was held possibly twice to seven times in the 16^th century.

10. Replace voveody state elected officials, by salary free local representatives.

11. 1613 zemskie sabor, what decision does it ratify, Michael Romanov, 16 years-old, father is prisoner in Poland, forced to tonsure. It is a boyar clan so the kid doesn’t pose a political threat. No strong tradition of people having a voice, this was a meeting to tell the provinces what is happening what it taking place.  Michael was living in a monastery palace in remote location and modest well-off family.

12. Keen Ivan struggling against the new upstart state secretaries, who were fighting over and over who going to control.

13. EACH  BOYAR CLAN FAMILY HAVE AN ARMY – tsar cannot say get out of my life and Russia.

14. Difficult to build new powerbase with new families.

15. Russia: In contact, but not in open contact with Europe.

16. 1551 Stovglav, do not associate with foreingers, do not get too close to them. – IMPORTANT ( DOOR TO THE WEST)

17. DOORS TO THE WEST- Balloons in the 17^th century. We need the skills of the foreigners.

18. 1470s – 1530s Italian architects come to Russia a window that closes, and affects architecture dramatically.

19. 1613: Finally open new contacts with Europe. ( dichotomy: conserve back to Ivan III, and on the other hand, Times of Troubles that Muscovy is vulnerably, Poland and Livonia just march around like they want.   

20. Want the foreign skills, but we need to lock you up and the district, Peter discovers the tools of the scientific revolution.

21. Gathering the lands is also seen as gathering of the architecture, the building of the Kremlin. Expressing of the conquered lands we know own.

22. Why does it sort of end, 7 years later Oprichnina, but Ivan still has his private own court. He just ran out of bodies, and the out of control oprichniki should be stopped and he could look as a hero, so if rabble control army raping and pillaging, but now you are out of hand, no stop , but this is still speculating. To what extent is someone influencing him, his wife, is he also ill and deranged, and all the above, no simple explanation why it started or why things happened the way it did or why it ended.

Why No Records on Peasant Life?

NOT SELF REFLECTIVE SELF or SERVING SOCIETY: so no peasant life can be taught in Russia until the 19^th century, this was a illiterate society. No parish records until 18^th cent. So what we have?

Prescriptive diadacic script, was the Domostrio! A prescriptive on how people should run their life, but we do not know.  

 Discussion

Edward L. Keenan The Tsar’s Two Bodies: Thesis: need to separate a leader’s two bodies, we do not know his personal Ivan’s life, he is presented in his public persona – How to present a real picture to the public? d' iaki and members of the dvorianstvo were in a epochmaking struggle between the king's two bodies (25) . Adashev intended conquest of Kazan: does this mean it could not have been Ivan's idea as Soviet historians believed? (20) the Shuiskiis and Belskiis and Glinskiis: Zemin argues there motives for control over mechanism of nobility, not feudal rights, now become control of their own power under the king (tsar). (17): there are just fighting for their own self preservation? d' iaki out of loop, excluded from intermarriage with G.P. family, excluded from nobility by low birth: Could the d' iaki created the historiography of the body of Ivan the public and forgone the personal? This is Keenan’s fiction-to-reality argument (18): Does this mean Tatars and Lithuanians sources indicate Adashev made the decisions for Ivan’s gov. in 1550s? If so how does this reflect on Ivan as an autocrat? Do we know the truth if Keenan’s argument is d’ iaki were out of the loop so they created some fiction, possibly to please of gain influence? Oprichnina most fateful for Muscovy was the systematic destruction of the d' iacheskii apparat – the King's body politic (see summary 25). (23): this meant in personal, Ivan’s body was not fit to be a king. He was in pain. Kurbskii' s History (Forgeries of the 17^th  cent.) written about 1675 by author interested in Russian shliakhetstvo.(1): If Ivan is educated, capable of writing that correspondence, how does one explain the oprichnina? Since this was the first source looking specifically at Ivan, many historians have used it, quoted from it: how does that affect historiography? non-Muscovite boiarstvo, recently emigrated Lithuania aristocracy , including some of Ivan's relatives on his mother's side, Glinskiis -had no love for the generally centralizinng and modernizing policies of the Adashev-Zakhar’: What is the argument on Ivan’s side to imperialize the east instead of the west ‘ initially’?(21) Ivan presented in Eizenshtein’s film (& Kozintsev) with a Freudian superego. Also Karamzin too got information from Correspondence – Kurbskii.(3): No significant and reliable eye-witness accounts of his personal behavior or character: (4) Keenan doesn’t trust Horsey’s account? Grosna (25) summery: Ivan destroyed the developing prikaz bureaucracy which damaged his body politic: He is speaking specifically in the case to the Oprichnina period? Ultimately he did not change institution development?  Death Bed Scene of Vasilii III:  for you are not called my boyars, but the princes of my land…With you [ boyars] I ruled: The Tsar doesn’t act alone on gov. decisions, he seeks council from his boyars? serve my sons, he said to the boyar/princes: clear line of authority expressed to keep the tradition of the GP in primogeniture keeping the peace? Fletcher, Giles Of the Russe Commonwealth, Lloyd E. Berry & Robert O. Crummy eds. “Rude and Barbarous Kingdom: Russia in the Accounts of the Sixteenth-Century English Voyagers” (Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1994). (133- 146) Fletcher sees oligarchy - boyars and tsar together control (133). No hereditary gov. positions (134), accept for primo. GP? : Tsar Boris controls d’aiki: controlled historical records? Parliament: boyar, Clergy, tsar, no merchant or commoner representatives. (ch.8 135). Stolovaia palata, a reception room in the Kremlin palaces, tsar sometimes received duma, clergy, foreign emissaries of relatively low rank. (136): seating by order/degree? Tsar takes clergy opinions | approve propositions (137) Clergy give consent without pausing: this is rubber stamping? Yet, 1580, rejected tsar’s asking for war funds to recruit western tech| officers.  Fletcher’s break down of classes/estates: Udel’nye Knaiz’ia: 1^st. degree, chief houses, Glinskii, etc: Boyars: 2^nd. degree,  Volevody: 3^d. Degree, Nobles, The volevody did not constitute a separate rank of the nobility but were simply military commanders appointed for a particular campaign or provincial governors?  Knias’ia: 4^th. Degree, Dukes, lowest degree of nobility, younger brothers of those chief houses (1^st. degree), may not have served in the military. There were no estates? (pages 205-229) Orthodox and gov. one ideological body - Greek. ecclesiastical issue: Russia never acknowledge the Latin Church|or Pope (205): Possibly geographic? Constantinople’s (Eastern Rome) proximity closer than Italy and Europe in general?  Or During the 10^th century (The adoption), the Latin Church had fell on hard times, and the Eastern Roman Church, Orthodox was going strong? Began. Marriage EO daughter Vladimi-Fletcher confused: He knew Horsey who claimed to read the chronicles?| Doctrine: opus operatum philosophy (227): not by faith, but also by works;  Psalms part of litany, the prophet books not used, Fletcher see this as errors, “Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, which they say are all made disauthentic and put out of use by the coming of Christ”(226): Why? zautrenia, that is, matins: What about rural areas, were there services? (221) 9:00 am obednia etc… similar information in The Domostroi. Fletcher’s analysis of services based mainly on hearsay (foot 1 p. 221); baptism very important; Fletcher from perspective of pope’s importance: To Fletcher, the Church had considerable daily & life influence of Russians? Popy/preists. 1533 printing press, intod. Federov Flethcer sees no inquisition, a reference to the Catholic Monarchs of Spain’s institution (229). Errors -redemption but not of intercession | preference to Virgin Mary and other saints|Fl calls this idolitry (226-7) Medieval Russia’s Epics, Chronicles, and Tales, Serge A. Zenkovsky, ed., trans., 2^nd. ed. (New York: Dutton, 1974). (Epiphanius The Wise: Panegyric to St. Stephen of Perm) (260-290)Thesis: The names of Epiphanius the Wise, St. Stephen of Perm, St. Sergius of Radonezh, and the great painter Andrey Rublev ( both became saints) signify the Russian spiritual and cultural revival of the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries (259). Sergius starts out as monk in forest, then becomes recognized spiritual leader. Blessing added strength to Dimitrii.  St. Sergius inspired Russian people and introduce a more disciplined and strictly enforced communal life in the monastery(281). St. Sergius (1314-1392), patron saint of Russia: born near Moscow at period of civil unrest; Supported Dimitrii Donskoi against the Tartars. Also, extent St. Stephen;  Both men gave a new impetus to Russian monasticism.; icons and frescoes by Andrey Rublev became finest achievement of Russia art, exhibited Russian Spiritualism: Did Sergius rally the Russians under Dimitrii to give the Tartars their first major defeat in 1378?; Did this symbolize God was on the Russian’s side?  “The literary style that Epiphanius the Wise perfected was termed "weaving of words" (pletenie sloves, in Russian). In this style sentences are nearly deprived of verbs, consisting almost entirely of the adjectives and nouns that characterize the deeds and humility of' the saints.”(259) Another feature of Epiphanius  "word-weaving" is the abundance of neologisms formed by nouns or combinations of nouns and adjectives, such as "songbeautifier," rather than "beautifier of songs. (259): vitae, these tw obios  were for ideal type of sanctified life model.   Were these panegyrics for memorization, were they apart of the liturgy? Sergius, passion for learning to read: The theme linked to knowledge, so reading and writing - important? Monks in society were key to literary education? His father, Cyril, a renounced/wealthy boyar, after the Tartar invasion became poor: Did this happen to most boyars? (265). Grand. Duke Ivan Danilovich of Moscow (1301-1341), called Kalita ("Moneybag"), was the actual founder of the Muscovite state. He spread his reign over a considerable part of the land between the Oka and Volga rivers. Rostov was an important city of the Volga (foot 2 p. 265). Danilovich took over control of Rostov, not fortunate for Stephen’ family? Father moved family to Radonezh, where the city became known for him. Medieval lit. Peter and Fevronia Folklore; Stephan, Permian written tradition, 14^th cent. Missionary, converts Finnic tribe Permians to Chirs. Period, abbot, built monastery (1of 4 main central R M. 279), influential (274): Christians arrived from all parts? Austere living (276) Metropolitans Peter and Theognost support. Moscow, center for political/religious (280).  Theodore was the son of Sergius' brother, Stephen. He later became the bishop of Rostov (283): Supports of Russian defense? If victory on field GP Dimitrii will build Mon: (285) Prayers used for victory on the field against enemies?  (285) Sergius honored by Dimitrii for succ. Prayer: Church important symbol in rising statecraft?   Translated by Diahanna Lynch for Valerie Kievlson. Aleksandro-Nevskaia Letopis', Po1noe Sobranie Russskikh Letopisei, vo1.29, (Moscow: Nauka, 1965) 211-214;  Tak Nazyvaemaia Tsarstvennaia  Kniga, Polnoe Sobranie Russskikh  Letopisei, vo1.13, (St. Petersburg: Imperatorskaia Arkheograficheskaia Kommissiia, 1906) 525-526. Ivan’s IV Illness. (1552, vo1.29): Theme, young child verses older capable prince and primogeniture custom. Ivan close to death, suggested review of will, order that Prince Vladimir Andreevich and the boyars be brought to swear [ loyalty] Tsarevich Prince's Dmitrii's name. Most Boyars swear. Would not swear:  Prince Dmitrii Ivanovich Kurliatev, treasurer Nikita Funikov, why? Princess Ofrosinia and with her son, Prince Vladimir Ondreevich, and they wanted him to rule, and did not want Tsarevich Prince Dmitrii to rule because he was in his minority: Did they believe that a child would bring boyar unrest, so they wanted someone older that could begin to make G.P. decisions? Tsra's favorite, Novgorodian, Silvestr, much influence at court, he became acting interim-ruler as Ivan lay sick, his advisors ruled everything (3). Silvestr, great favor with Prince Vladimir Andreevich and his mother Princess Efrosinia, released them from prison, schism at court because he supported their possible rule of Prince Vladimir. "Why do you not' allow Prince Vladimir ( he was an older prince) to go to the sovereign? - Silvestr (3). Now enmity of boyars against Silvestr ( Priest). Ivan predicts Zakhariny death will be first by the boyars. Ivan makes a case about serving his son, if not know then will they ever? (5) Good point?: the system was primogeniture so why change it? Wife brought in the argument to honor. This scares some boyars to swear: Did many boyars truly believe Ivan could pull through? This would have affected their decision, if they supported breaking custom? Finally Prince Vladimir still doesn’t want to swear an oath, spoken too, then coerced: Did Vladimir actually think about his future, what if Ivan recovered? How would he be seen then? (7) record of allegiances, placed with a seal called a ‘bond’ done by The Princess: this was for authoritative records? (1564, vo1.13) 1564 December 21: Ivan’s departure from Moscow for Aleksandrova Sloboda, takes wife, children, entourage, furniture, possession, courtiers, treasurer and men.  1565  January 3, the Tsar and Grand Prince sent a list from Sloboda with Konstantin Dmitreev's son, Polivanov, [check this] and his friends, to his spiritual father, Afanasii Metropolitan of all Russia, and in the list were written the treacheries of the boyars, of the military commanders, and of all the chancellery staff which had committed treason and damages to his rule during his minority after [the death of] his father, of blessed memory, the great" Sovereign, Tsar, and Grand Prince Vasilii Ivanovich of all Russia. Military commanders held great estates, and votchiny, and they were taking the sovereign’s income away, collecting great riches. Accusations by Ivan that they didn’t care for Christianity, or cared to fight the Crimeans, Lithuanians or Germans: Issues Muslims, Latins against Orthodoxy: How serious were these threats then?  Some d’iaki read a decree that Ivan supposedly left because of their sins, and didn’t want to rule any longer ― this was read to all the people. Ivan upset at boyars in childhood. People lamented, “who will save us from the foreigners?” This was Ivan’s plan to garner sentiment from the common people? “When wolves see a sheep without a shepherd, and the wolves seize the sheep, who 'will defend us from them?” . The people asked Ivan back: Was this a ploy from Ivan to get the people to understand the future ‘reign of terror?’: Could Ivan be so smart to have calculated this entire plan methodically? Even the merchants sided with Ivan’s sentiments. Atanasii, Metropolitan of all Russia is asked to petition Ivan, by the people, to come back: Is this when Ivan formulates demands for his return to power, part of his grand scheme? Final outcome as worded, “a Sovereign: and for those who are traitors and evildoers to him, the Sovereign, and to his rule, let his Sovereign will be their life and punishment.” (4): Does this guarantee some sort of Autocracy?  1565 January 5^th, Commoners, merchants, boyars, clergy arrive in Sloboda to have an audience with the former tsar Ivan IV. Ivan takes some boyars and sends others back to rule Moscow, he thus splits up Russia in what is called Oprichnina ( from Oprich generic word ‘separate’ contemp. ‘widows mite’). Ivan makes his own court and possessions. The Domostroi: Rules for Russian Households in the Time of Ivan the Terrible, Carolyn Johnston Pouncy, ed., trans. ( Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1994). (page 85- Prescriptive Rigorous religious rituals. If a man can read then sing vespers to wife and children, bow head three times to ground before sleep, wake up at midnight, compunction & prayer. Pray for absolution, pray & sing in the morning; on Sundays hold service, men attend church services everyday, women and servants should go when they can, or can be spared [ from duty]. prime (around sunrise), terce, sext, none! vespers, compline, and the midnight service (sometimes called nocturns) (foot 1). a pregnant woman should not try to prostrate herself on the ground.(foot3); Edinoglasno' changed at the 1551 Stoglov Church Council (foot 2): this was for not breaking the rites in part? Church Service decorum: stand in service, pray silently, women must have consent to go to church: by the husband? No talking in church; stand still, no looking around; do not distract; form cross on chest with arms, then pray; do not leave church until end of service; during Wed.,& Fri., Lent/ Feast of the Virgin, live in chastity. General formalities: No association with un/sinning-Christians; always carry rosary; Important Orthodox Spirituality, the Jesus Prayer: Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Say this prayer six hundred times. For the seventh hundred, pray to the Immaculate Virgin: My Lady, Most Holy Mother of God, intercede for me, a sinner. Intercession is, however, Mary's primary role: How long did this take? Two-finger sign of the cross, replaced with three-finger. 17th cent. Old Ritualists fought to prohibit changes introduced from Greece by Patriarch Nikon of Moscow: Was the two-finger part of early Russian tradition? This was to shew away bad spirits? (from SS. Athanasius and Peter the Damascene; Athanasius (298-373), bishop of Alexandria and opponent of Arianism. His works [...] the source of this particular quotation remains unidentified.] (foot 14 p. 91). On Children: obeisance to parents: this was importance for the structure of family? (99) Before work/crafts/duty bow to saints to ground/ three times/+ sign of cross. At work keep mind on ‘pure thoughts’: Was this really socially enforced? Women’s sacred roles in society (102); husband must teach family morality. The domestic servants discussed in the Domostroiare full, hereditary slaves (foot 1b p.104) there is a difference between indentured servants and hereditary slaves? General slaves/servants: “Teach them by imposing limits on them, using terror” (105): groza in this case has a more specified meaning?  A slave could have property, including some land given to them by their masters, but only as a grant? Litany of slave codes, slaves must also go to church when allowed, or at least participate in some type of religious functionality on Sunday/or days; arrange marriages for slaves; slaves should not fornicate out of wedlock: did this dishonor the master’s house?  This was intended that everyone should observe clerical prohibitions against intercourse, including slaves? Old Women: must think about them:  where old women a problem in Russian society? How so? Was this because she had more free time? She was too old to toil? Gossip is a problem, can incite division/problems. Finally, masters and mistresses should bestow good toward their slaves (110): Did this off-set problems cited above, i.e. treat them well for a more harmonious relationship? The Nikonian Chronicle, Serge A. Zenkovsky, ed., trans., vol. 3 ( Princeton, New jersey: The Kingston Press, 1988). (Readings pages 60-61) Nikonian Chronicle blesses the Annexation of Novgorod, the princes unifications of Muscovy, adopts a saintly metaphor for Muscovite unification, depicts Vasillii and Boyars ruled, not just autocracy, loyalty by kissing of cross (deathbed: Dmitrii’s way to halt discord?), St. Michael Archangel Cathedral, royalty tomb representing Moscow as center for Russia.  Khan Tokhtamysh | Timur Aksak (Tamerlane) struggle, Vasilii Dmitrievich, allowed GP of Vladimir: Why did Timur not take Moscow? Forest issue? Grand Prince Gleb Vasil'kovich of Rostov sent his son Mikhail, to aid the Tatars. (60): relations were complex during this time, prince fighting prince with both sides using Tartars? (61) Often, Princes served the Tartars to protect the Christians?  Lauding Prince Prince Gleb Vasil'kovich, This vita is a eulogistic work embellished with repetitious rhetorical praises of the Grand Prince. Motive:  not historical or biographical but to praise him and depict him as an exemplary, almost saintly, ruler and Christian man. (foot 55, p.61): Were Chronicles for national mythmaking? Did Bulgarian Patriarch Calliste (1363) have an influence on later chronicle writing, stressing the immaterial life and salvation of the soul, instead of the details of a G.P. life? The Nikonian Chronicle, Serge A. Zenkovsky, ed., trans., vol. 4 ( Princeton, New jersey: The Kingston Press, 1988). (Readings pages 34-41) The Passing of Grand Prince Dmitrii Ivanovich (d. 1389), promoted as tireless church advocate and activist, saintly attributions; He ruled twenty-seven years and six months, He lived forty-years. He lived with his Princess Evdokia and her mother Grand Princes Anna. He had sons and daughters: Addressing the children,  key Chronicle sentences attributed to him: 'Trespassing the father's will will destroy the children's home and put an end to the mother's life.' […] Love your boyars, render them the honor they deserve according to the deeds of each, and do nothing without their counsel: A major theme in Russian chronicles is for potential G.Ps, when they are in the minority is to listen to the advice of the boyars? ( Also similar passage: See Two Sixteenth-Century Chronicle Accounts of Deathbed Scenes of Grand Princes, trans. by Allison Katsev “Obey your kinsmen, keep peace & love among you, love your boyars. , do nothing without their [boyars] advice.” Refer,  G.P  Dmitrii Donskoi’s deathbed scene): Is this a different wording/translation of the same text? Then he summoned, first of all, his eldest son, Prince Vasilii, to whom he gave the Grand Principality, his patrimony: This is primogeniture? “with the latter's settlement, which Princess Feodosia gave me out of her estate, will become my Princess's property after [Feodosia's] passing. All these income estates will become the properties of my wife-Princess with my blessing, and my wife-Princess may do whatsoever she wishes with all these income estates” (page 40): This is Oprich? Nancy Kollmann, Dishonor (Honor) Cases. Theme: Honor cases involved lawsuits over insults, heritage disputes, physical fights, theft & respect issues, some time people just recorded incidents for the record. 7118-1609-10-26 Plaintiff: record 19)  plaintiff, slave; Defendant: scribe Vasilii Semenov who allegedly allies with accused Baim Kalzakov.  Issue, alleged, Two coats stolen by, Baim’s unit/ countersuit by Baim, scribe: alleged conversations – Insults: ‘son of a whore, this field worker.’: hearsay, Vasilii insults in cathedral: Insults in cathedral carry an extra penalty?  Baim’s alleged physical threats to Indrinko’s people. Judgment: no resolution, just a record incase of future physical action stressed by plaintiff’s fear of future action. Record:141) Description: March 29 1640 boyar Fedor Ivanovich Sheremetev sued Mikahil Eropkin for dishonor and recompense (p3). Issue of validation in official genealogy books cited: Issue of a  different noble of ranks, insult led supposedly to imprisonment, word usage of “exceptionally noble” is different that rodoslovnye (3): Insults below said class- station is a ground for suits? Arguments over politeness or threats:  Result, Sheremetev wins, tsar claims all boyars cast judgment in other Eropkin, not just Sheremetev; Mikahil Eropkin is sent to prison: How long were insult sentences? What about falsely accused? How wide spread were these? Note that case record 19, the said scribe had judicial authority and sided with one party, allegedly, out of friendship, does friendship matter more than justice?   Record 253) 1656-08-07, insults, "s urna soshol": What does this mean?  Fight between a (supposedly impoverished) prince and peasant. No outcome, too many different stories.  P. M. Saltykov sues Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich: This year 1656 August 7: Mother Oath was a popular device for insults?: What did this entail?  “Tsar ordered a high-ranking scribe to investigate.” (5): These scribes were trusted, or because they could record interviews of witnesses? Many people were witness, but none tell the same story. No- resolution. This showed honor was important and how many witnesses are called in to testify. alleged Insults, “impoverished prince”, ‘drunkard,” field worker,” “testified on the Gospel,”  Record 313) 179-1671-05-09, suit over family name, prestige and consequences to surname:  plaintiff, Otrep’ev clan, high ranking attend at court; defendant, Otrep’ev, Grishka, defrocked monk,  a slightly less high rank in court attendant.  Members of the otrep'ev clan/and others sue Aleksei Mikhailovich; Otrep’ev, Grishka accused of theft and imposter; falsely claimed son of Ivan IV…‘First false Dimitrii’, he exhaled many Otrep’ev clan, did much harm – caused great shame to name. Tsar Vasilli Shuiskii ordered their return: Were imposters a problem in the Medieval Ages? Verdict of heritage, to be re-introduced in official military records: Military records were important for family prestige and mestnichestvo (precedence ranking).  Record 322)  Plaintiff: Mashkin, Merkul Stepanov syn; Defendant: Boiarintsov, Levontii Ivanov syn; case: hearing to see if case can go to court.  plaintiff states Boiarintsov stole his horse from his brother on a road to Moscow. Boiarintsov said it was his horse.  This was seen also as a dishonor, because of name calling. Boiarintsov suid, said Mashkin called him a thief, criminal and highwayman, Mashkin admits this in court: witness brought forth and both agree to abide by their testimony: So witnesses were often the only key to proof?  Witnesses are important factor in Russian legal sense? ”Nancy Shields Kollmann, The seclusion of Muscovite Women (Stanford, Calif., U.S.A.) Thesis: Nancy Kollmann argues origins of seclusion came from elite women’s position in Muscovy which had several characteristics: men and women lived separately in different rooms with children, marriage within the social strata, considered ‘valued’ property (marriage pawns), because highest echelons of women were  to be  considered as marriage prospects with the tsar or boyar, issues of ‘clan purity,’: protect women form shame in public?  Women equaled politics? this seen as properly functioning system, pertains to Muscovy period only (begun, c. 14^th-15^th), they were sheltered/separated from men in quarters called pokoi; in Muscovite sources, 19^th cent. Sources called it terem: N.K argues that a strict regime was a native response to the development of elite society (177).  Comparative: French society lived in different quarters, as do some Middle Eastern Women today (173). Note,  Classical Greeks also isolated their women, they believed women could be shamed out in public unsupervised, this supposedly brought dishonor in the community or ranking (See politics of the symposium): Was this no different in concept? Analysis, comparative of later development on social: Medieval Europe had a different situation, a broader female social opportunity; Later dev. on Russia: Peter the Great fundamentally changed the role of Women in Russian society, gave the elite new relationship and attitudes toward women’s role: Did women hesitate knowing tradition? Did Russian women understand Europe’s a broader female social opportunity happening at that time? Peter’s reforms: ideas about love, marriage, and individuality – new values (187).   General Muscovy exceptions: Keenan, widows roles could be political, enjoy particular respect in Muscovite politics: Widows could be the only one’s holding the clan together indicating their importance? Misogynistic: Kotoshikhin’s dictum ‘women secluded because they were stupid;’ Other historians blame Muscovy’s barbarous social mores, i.e. women’s seclusion is linked to the degradation of Russian morals. Historiography, women seen too broadly from pagan time to Muscovy: This means painting with a broad brush? Different with peasant and town women: moved freely, (174); elite women rarely appeared in public, only to visit kinsman, if so some veiled, or in sealed carriage. Elite could hold property, freedom of activity if in convent: however the state could place her in there for economic or political reasons? Contemporary observers: strict control was limited to the elite: this is a sober view? Peasant women had to work, no? That meant visibility, therefore different controls on free movement?  Strictness increased during Muscovy (176) N. Kollmann uses sources to verify this? No way to know if Muscovy barrowed theses attitudes and strictness (177), if so it was only the elite model? Mongol women no seclusion (177, see foot 31). 1724 crowning of wife, Russian public-acknowledgement of women’s political role (187). Summary: Seclusion of Muscovite women, intermarriage in the political elite is key increasing a man’s power; women are pawns in a chess game. Stoglov Council in 1551, Jack Kollmann, trans., ch 3 [ unpublished]. Stovglov (1551): Issues of reforming chiny. One Hundred Chapters’ Did Ivan have a speech writer? Were words placed in his mouth?  Ivan’s thesis for calling the meeting other than (topics addressed) was for everyone’s help in unanimity and harmony. How does this reflect on the argument that Muscovy was an autocracy? ( See N. Kollmann’s MPITHOIR) Previous council 1503: does this mean these are not often held? This was a rubber stamp council, where the people came to hear the decision of them?  Reinterpreting Russian History: Readings, 860-1860s. ed. Daniel H. Kiaser  Gary Marker (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). (Minstrels 131-137) Skomorokhi, minstrels secular entertainment, not approved by many clergy, After Kiev, moved to Novgorod and Vladimir-Suzdal, banned by Aleksei in 1648: Was the reason political or religious? Clergy stated it was loud and boisterous: did it take people away from going to church? Tolerant of minstrels more in the northwest than northeast; gulsi changed over time, in 15^th cent. It was a four-stringed harp, played by hand , accompanied by singer. (Readings 147-163) Historians view the dismantling of the Muscovite state by the foreigners and natives alike (148): What was the result of the line of Riurik dying out on heritage issues? Ivan plan was to gain access ‘directly’ to European trade: What did Mikhail Romanov (r. started 1613) do to see this plan through, if any? Argument, Russia rebounded quickly from the troubled time: by 1660s, Russia was already modernizing army?(149) Nancy Kollmann highlighted, lone view (151). Heinrich von Staden used.(151-54):We do not know if German Emperor Rudolf II saw the manuscript? Façade of Autocracy is discussed (154-158)(See other notes) various issues including collateral and primogeniture. Robert. O Crummy: Oprichnina, no rational end; a dismal failure (158| 163) Sack of Novgorod by Ivan led to its decline.(162) Crummy Doesn’t like Ivan much? Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. & Mark D. Steinberg, History of Russia, vol. I. 7^th ed. (Oxford: Oxford Unity Press, 2005). (readings pages 131-143;161-180) pages131-143) Riasanovsky, Ivan learned to read, and read often (133): How does he know? 1547, 16 y-old, ‘started effective reign’: is 1565 seen as the not-effective period? 1553, Riasanovsky begins to link n.e. period to Ivan’s illness (137). Riasanovsky claims to know a lot of intimate things about young Ivan, where did he get this? War 1563 first phase success (135): How did this affect future decisions of war? The commandeering of scientists  by Ivan stopped by Hanseatic League is seen as a major impasse in peaceful relations to the west. Detour: Northern rout to west achieved, but hampering: How did this affect the economy? Riasanovsky  too general on role between boyars, rise of autocracy(137). Does show increase in boyar representation over the 16^th century. Cites that Sylvester and Adashev were in plot to poison wife: Platonov (See gave up on rational for Oprichnina), reform of 1564, state has only one set of institutions, but two sets of officials (138) Oprichnina created Tartar opportunity? (139): Muscovy was fighting a two front war? Livonian and Crimean? Two front wars are difficult? Ivan’s eldest son, Theodore, or Fedor, gave Russia a measure of peace: what boyar clans controlled or had major influence besides Goudenov?  Did Boris Goudenov come from a Mongol gentry?(143) 1591 Prince Dimitrii of Uglich famous detective story: This sounds interesting. Platonov argues against Goudenov tsar aspirations theory. (161-180)Alexis’ son, Theodore, schooled with some Latin Church background, got  rid of the Mestnichestvo (168); Patriarch Nikon, extreme domineering character, from peasant background, rose to Metropolitan of Novgorod, in 1652, became patriarch, expressed Latin Church’s claim that the Church is stronger than the state: this was never a theme in the Orthodox world? Alexis gave Nikon the title of Great Sovereign: this was a lot of influential power?  Accusations of Papism; 1666-7, Eastern patriarchs participated, deposed and defrocked Nikon: Significance, people that deposed him, held up his reforms: Did this mean he personally had too much power but his ideas were good? Key to some measures that eventually allowed Peter the Great to reform government. (168). Feudalism: Liashchenko/ Marxist school ,sees everything as class struggle, French Annual school of look from the bottom to see how the top functions. Riasanovsky Mid-16^th cent. Rural economy changed, transition form appanage to centralized state, based on gentry service and exploitation of peasants and to Ivan the Terrible’s Oprichnina (171):  N. Kollmann, how do we see a connection with the increase in women’s seclusion, and Riasanovsky’s argument that serfdom evolved from loans, servitude, in the 14.15^th centuries to 16,17^th peasant bondage? Predominate serfdom in southern, southeastern and west, not north. No law ever established serfdom. Barshchina, corvée labor, the quitrent, or obrak: did the landlords make it harder over time for peasants to pay off debts? How did this affect measures in the 17^th century to limit servitude times? Vlozhenie 1649, serfdom could be fully established in Muscovite state: was this a hereditary serfdom law?  Serfs described as tillers of the soil. Riasanovsky see three separate lower classes: Slave, state peasant, and serf: Was this also Liashchenko model? Was a state peasant the commoner on church land, or lands given to military servitors? Moscow, Khan Davlet-Geray ,100,000 Russians as slaves| enormous booty 1571: How did this affect the people to stop once and for all this from happening? Can imperialism be a matter of self-preservation? ’72 Molodi. Major Problems in the History of Imperial Russia, Nancy Shields Kollmann, Muscovite Patrimonialism” in Carcraft. Nancy Kollmann, Muscovite Heritage, Ch.2. thesis: Muscovite autocracy, contrary to the traditional view, was in fact a "façade," the creation of religious-political ("theocratic") ideology and court ceremonial that vaunted the grand prince or tsar of Moscow as the sovereign head of God's family on earth: Support of thesis, Chronicles refer to tsar as sole decision maker (38): wasn’t it the boyars and the tsar that came to decisions? Sovereign the center of a theocratic vision of government: was this what Patriarch Nikon implied as the difference between Latin and Orthodoxy?  Unanimity (reference to Stovglov: this was a desire of harmony), Ivan even forgave past grievances to show good intentions, to implement this desire.(40). What could interrupt harmony? Wars, economy, hostile environment (41). How do we know tsars were not absolute monarchs? Examples, boyars criticizes for bad advice: If the tsar was sole decision maker, how can one blame a boyar?(40)  Good point. Prosopography, a good way to study characters within a historical, literary, or social context? “Such as patrimonial means of forming relationships” (42) Social classes existed in Muscovy but not politically potent(42). Things do change, patrimonial relationships formed outside of inner boyar influence: modifications in 17^th century: marriage with “obscure families for their brides” (44): this reflected circumstances large Muscovite bureaucracy? “ NK argues, “A government must establish effective links”: this was a way to connect to the masses that contained different ethnicities, no? Other social Inputs on government: zemskie sober (45) social networking, servitor classes and urban estates cam communicate their desires to the government (45): this appears more of a collective ‘ideas’ input than one person at the top calling all the shots? How this of could happened? NK argues “no intermediary institutions between central gov. and society.” (45) So how did this work? Council of Lands, petitions often were used for family honor which expressed itself as a connecting point between the broader community and the court.(45) Muscovy was not “ a well ordered police state,” a bureaucracy organized commonwealth whose ruler and officials served  the public good. (46) Final word, Muscovy was a minimally governed society – everything relied on the charismatic leader to symbolically unify the Muscovy state.

GLOSSARY OF FREQUENTLY ENCOUNTERED WORDS IN THE TEXTS

alodial estate = votchina. A landed estate held in absolute ownership, and thus heritable within a family, as opposed to the lands given to cavalrymen in exchange for service. Those service— tenure lands were technically not owned by the cavalrymen they were granted to, but by the state; they were given in usufruct, or use. 

appanage = udel. Separate principality within the grand principality given by the sovereign to his collateral kinsmen—— uncles, cousins, nephews or brothers——to provide them income through their lives. These princes were sovereign in these areas locally (collected taxes, administered justice, had their own boyars and political administration), but they had no right to conduct independent foreign policy or to aspire to the grand- princely throne.

boyar = boiarin. The highest political rank at the Kremlin court; an advisor to the grand prince.

cavalryman = syn boiarskii, deti boiarskie. Members of the grand- prince’s cavalry army, generally given lands by the grand prince for their support, in return for which they had to serve in the army in each year’s annual campaign. They also could own alodial land.

equerry = koniushjj. Literally, keeper of the horses. In the sixteenth century an honorific office at the Kremlin court, based

on the historical importance of the cavalry in the state’s power. Said to have been the most powerful of the boyars.

Great Novgorod. A city that had as its official name “Lord Novgorod the Great.” A major trading center linked by river to the Baltic; conquered by  Muscovy in 1478.

kiss the cross. A ritual of oath—taking used in Orthodox Muscovy whereby the person taking the oath swore a religious vow and kissed the cross in witness of his loyalty.

majordomo = dvoretskii. Steward of the grand prince’s estate, or some regional division of it; a chief administrator of the  grand prince’s entire financial and territorial apparatus. A reflection of how much the administration of the state was  regarded as a private possession of the grand prince and his family. A post, generally honorific by the sixteenth century, for  an important boyar.

metropolitan = mitropolitan. The chief religious official of the Russian Orthodox church, based in Moscow; he had authority over the hierarchy beneath  him of archbishops, bishops and the parish network. In the sixteenth century he was elected by  bishops and archbishops with some oversight by the grand  prince; his palace was in the Kremlin.

okol’nichii. The second level (below boyar) of political counselor at the Kremlin court; often but not always a stepping stone  for men before boyar rank. = a unit of weight ca. 36 pounds. verst = a unit of linear measure of about .66 miles or 1.067  kilometers. vicegerent = namestnik. Governor general appointed to a particular city and its region, to collect taxes, keep the  peace and administer justice on behalf of the grand prince.

DATES: The Muscovites used a calendar calculated from the creation of the world, rather  than the birth of Christ as is our  custom. They considered that the earth was created  about 5509 years before the birth of Christ. They used the same months we do, which we and they derived from Roman practice. But in sixteenth—century accounts the Muscovites began their year  in September, rather than in January as we do. Thus, these chronicles are dated according to a year which is 5508 or 5509 years off from our reckoning depending upon which month you are talking about. For example, the year 7042 went from  September 1, 1533 to August 31, 1534.

 Questions:

1) 1547 Ivan sends for teachers, doctors and artists from Germany, he sends Saxon Slitte to gather them, they are stopped by the Livonians and Hanseatic League,  and only  a few make it. What were Ivan’s social motives? Was this Ivan’s idea only or also the boyars and Clergy? How does the lack of teachers help us to understand literacy rates in Russia at this time?

2) What is the rough estimate of the Russian Population during the 16^th century? 1571, Davlet-Geray takes 100,000 Russians as slaves – even in today’s standards, this is considered a lot of people. Where these people all from Moscow?

3) Edinoglasno' changed at the 1551 Stoglov Church Council. Prior to this were people in rush to get back to work and that is why they sang all the hymns and songs together at the same time claiming God could sort it out?  (foot 2) (The Domostroi)

1) Nancy Kollmann’s theme of Muscovy ideology put out into the public to fashion a façade of autocracy is brilliant. Muscovy was a minimally governed society? How does a minimally governed society hold its self together, or does this mean it didn’t and the Times of Troubles will reveal the answers?

2) Mother Oath was a popular device for insults? What was this? (see: Nancy Kollmann, Honor Cases)

3) Edinoglasno' changed at the 1551 Stoglov Church Council. Prior to this were people in rush to get back to work and that is why they sang all the hymns and songs together at the same time claiming God could sort it out?  (foot 2) (The Domostroi)

4) Can we see Astrakhan, Kazan, Siberia, and other Russian expansions not as imperialism, but as self – preservation from fear of regrouping of nomadic conquerors for the future?  Why were Russian fortresses later built along a line of Siberia –the same concept of the Chinese Great Wall which acted as a safety boundary, and alert station, for possible future threats from the northeast Mongolia region?

Notes: panegyrics:  A formal eulogistic composition intended as a public compliment.

Prosopography: a study of a collection of persons or characters, esp. their appearances, careers, personalities, etc., within a historical, literary, or social context.

Copyright © 1999 - 2007 MichaelReport.com, Michael Johnathan McDonald Bookoflife.com All Rights reserved.

Direct corrections and technical inquiries to
Please direct news submissions to Here