How Rostislavich kept their principality

How Rostislavich kept their principality

Alas, no better cards were found. All maps of Southwest Russia found on the network are given mainly from the time of the Romanovichs, something that was not bearable in the XI-XII century could not be found


Rostislav Vladimirovich, who was killed in Tmutarakan, had three sons left: Rurik, Volodar and Vasilko. After the death of their father, they grew up at the court of their cousin uncle, Yaropolk Izyaslavich, who from 1078 became prince in Vladimir-Volynsky. The brothers, like their father, were outcasts, did not have real power, did not have their own squads, and if they did, then in quantities clearly insufficient for independent politics. They did not expect anything outstanding under the existing order of things, because they were actively looking for ways to improve their social status, or rather, to get their inheritance in the board and cease to depend on relatives who either rose or fell in the turbulent cauldron of political life in Russia at that time. It was difficult to do this by legal means, because the search was conducted for illegal ways, i.e. just ways to drive out local princes from somewhere and sit down to rule by ourselves.

Just at that time, on the territory of the principality, especially in its southern part, which was called Subcarpathia, later became Przemysl principality, and then Galicia, dissatisfaction began to ripen. Local communities were dissatisfied with the rule of Yaropolk, civil wars, Polish garrisons in large cities, and many others. The factor of weakening the power of the Grand Duke of Kiev also affected, because of which there appeared tendencies for separation or at least isolation of individual principalities. Nevertheless, the legacy of the times of Vladimir the Great and Yaroslav the Wise still affected - the local communities associated their future only with the Rurikovichs and therefore they needed some representative of the ruling dynasty in order to achieve legitimacy and, possibly, strengthen their capabilities in the future struggle for a place under the sun. In the person of the Rostislavichs, the local population acquired three princes at once. Without the support of the communities, Rurik, Volodar, and Cornflower had little chance of success; in addition, there is no information that they would have any other support from outside. The union of three brothers and sub-Carpathian communities became natural and even inevitable.

In 1084, taking advantage of the departure of Yaropolk Izyaslavich from Vladimir, the Rostislavichs went to the Cherven cities and rebelled there against the prince. Przemysl also supported them, as a result of which the backbone of the troops of the three brothers made up the city regiments (otherwise it is almost impossible to explain the appearance of their army). The Polish garrisons were driven out in the face of superior forces, and soon after that Vladimir-Volynsky was taken without much bloodshed, who probably simply opened the gates to the rebels. Yaropolk requested help from the Kiev prince, and he sent his son, Vladimir Monomakh, with the aim of returning the principality to the control of his rightful ruler. It was possible to recapture the capital of the principality, but its southern territories, including the major cities of Przemysl, Zvenigorod and Terebovlyu, showed serious resistance. In the end, Monomakh was forced to go back to Kiev, and Yaropolk continued to struggle with the Rostislavichs, during which he died - in 1086 he was killed by his own warrior Neradts. Since Neradec then found refuge in Przemysl, the Rostislavichs were accused of the murder, but they didn’t care: acting together with the communities of the three large cities of South-Western Russia, the outcast princes gained vast and rich lands in their own possession, establishing their authority there .

Principality of Rostislavich



F. A. Bruni. Blinding Vasilka Terebovlskogo

Since 1086, the Volyn principality, before that one, was divided into two parts. Severnaya, with its capital in Vladimir-Volynsky, was controlled by “legitimate” rulers according to logging law, with the exception of the city of Dorogobuzh, which in 1084 was transferred to Davyd Igorevich by decision of the Kiev prince. In the south, having divided the possessions among themselves, the Rostislavichs began to rule, having founded a separate branch of the Rurikovich, later called the First Galician Dynasty. Rurik as the elder brother became the supreme ruler of the newly formed principality, settling in Przemysl. His younger brothers, Volodar and Vasilko, sat down to rule in Zvenigorod and Terebovle respectively. Inheritance in the principality took place within the framework of this branch of the Rurikovich, in exchange for this the princes received significant support from local communities who regularly put their troops under the command of the Rostislavichs - otherwise it is difficult to explain how they managed to repel the numerous encroachments of neighbors on the lands of Przemysl.

Rurik died in 1092, leaving no children behind. Volodar became the prince in Przemysl, who turned out to be a long-lived prince and ruled there until 1124. His reign turned out to be quite eventful. In 1097, he attended the Lyubech Congress of Princes, where he became close friends with Vladimir Monomakh and achieved recognition of his rights to Przemysl. This did not please Prince Davyd Igorevich, who at that time began to rule Volyn: he considered that the Rostislavichi threatened his position and could challenge him with power over the principality. It is possible that Davyda was supported by the community of Vladimir-Volynsky, which lost part of its power and profits with the loss of Subcarpathia. On the side of Davyd Igorevich stood the Grand Duke of Kiev, Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, who in the same year kidnapped Volodar's younger brother, Vasilka, and blinded him, which provoked the beginning of a new strife.

However, the effect of blinding Vasilk turned out to be completely opposite to what could help the cause of Davyd and Svyatopolk. Volodar Rostislavich news about this abuse of his younger brother caused a storm of indignation. The community also joined the prince - the Rostislavichs were “their own” for her, and therefore the blinding of Vasilka was an insult to all the communes of the principality. In addition, the youngest of Rostislavichi was a fairly popular ruler; in the early 1090s, in alliance with the Polovtsy, he went on long trips, including Poland, had great ambitions and sought to establish himself in Bulgaria. People considered such a prince “their own” and therefore were ready to fit in for him in full.

Davyd, taking with him the blinded Vasilk, invaded the territory of Przemysl principality and besieged Terebovlya, a former border town. However, he soon encountered troubles - Volodar managed to quickly assemble a considerable army and drove the Volyn prince to the city of Buzhsk, where he was forced to sit under siege. The situation of Davyd became hopeless, and in exchange for the release of Vasilk he was allowed to leave the city. Nevertheless, Volodar did not let up and besieged the Volyn prince in his capital, the city of Vladimir. In the end, Davyd was forced to flee to Poland and seek support there, and the Rostislavichs began to catch everyone who somehow participated in the blindness of Vasilka. They didn’t execute them personally, handing over the guilty to the hands of community residents, who themselves punished the criminals by hanging on trees and shooting from bows. The unity of Rostislavich and Subcarpathian communities at that time was absolute.

War again


Russian princes were outraged history with the blinding of Vasilka, and therefore in 1098 they gathered a large army, which approached Kiev and forced Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, a participant in the blinding, to punish the main culprit of the incident, Davyd Igorevich. He did not lose time, having managed to return to his principality with the support of the Poles. Svyatopolk had to negotiate neutrality with them, and then besiege Vladimir-Volynsky in order to punish the Volyn prince. However, when it came to real punishments, no special measures were taken - Davyd Igorevich, in fact, voluntarily left the city, going to rule in Cherven, and the son of Svyatopolk, Mstislav, sat down to rule in Vladimir.

After the assertion of his authority in Volhynia, Svyatopolk did not find a better idea how to ... go on a campaign against the Rostislavichs! Meanwhile, Davyd Igorevich was not going to abandon his claims to Volyn, actively looking for allies. As a result of this, a situation arose in South-Western Russia when military operations were conducted between three separate parties, which could either fight with each other or enter into short-term alliances. The first side was the Rostislavichs, who defended their possessions in the Przemysl principality, the second - Prince Chervensky, Davyd Igorevich, who claimed Vladimir-Volynsky, and the third - the Grand Prince of Kiev Svyatopolk. The latter theoretically had the greatest opportunities, but he put his son Mstislav to reign in Vladimir without taking into account the views of the local community, as a result of which she did not have great love for him. This could not play a role in the future ...

The campaign of Svyatopolk with his sons against the Rostislavichs in 1099 ended with the battle on the Rozhny field. Volodar and Vasilko, accustomed to fighting for their interests together with the community, won the battle. This victory of its kind was the first, for the troops of the Prince of Kiev were defeated for the first time in a battle not for Kiev itself. One of the sons of Svyatopolk, Yaroslav, still did not stop, and therefore soon invaded the territory of the principality from the west, with the support of the Hungarian king Coloman I, his relative. This was the first time in a long series of interventions by Hungarian kings in the affairs of Southwest Russia. The brothers were besieged because they could not resist the large Hungarian army in the field.

The position was saved by the Polovtsian Khan Bonyak, who simultaneously acted as an ally of Rostislavich and Davyd Igorevich. Hungarian troops were ambushed on the Vagra River and suffered a heavy defeat, because of which they were forced to leave the territory of Przemysl principality. After that, Davyd Igorevich and the Polovtsy moved to the capital of Volyn. The city was defended mainly by visiting warriors, which emphasizes the chronicle - the Vladimirites themselves refused to support Mstislav Svyatopolchich, who died during the siege while on the wall. An attempt by supporters of the Kiev prince led by Davyd Svyatoslavich (not to be confused with his namesake!) To unlock the city failed, as a result of which Davyd Igorevich’s control over Volyn was restored.

In 1100, Russian princes gathered in Uvetichi to agree on peace conditions. Davyd Igorevich, despite his achievements, was still deprived of the Volyn principality, which was transferred to Yaroslav Svyatopolchich (the very one who brought the Hungarians to Russia a year ago). However, Davydu still left a number of cities in the possession, the main of which was Buzhsk. The Grand Duke of Kiev himself, Svyatopolk, was still trying to return Subcarpathia to his possession and therefore, together with his allies and supporters, put forward an ultimatum to the Rostislavichs - to give him Terebovlya and remain to rule only Przemysl, which he was ready to hand over to the volost with his lordly hand. How exactly the brothers answered this is unknown, but the fact remains: they did not give anything to the Kiev prince. The separate existence of the Principality of Rostislavich continued.

Volodar, Prince Peremyshlsky


After 1100, Volodar could be considered the prince of Przemysl and all the lands of Subcarpathia with even greater right, and even the prince of Kiev could not somehow weaken the power of the Rostislavichs, who acted in close cooperation with local communities. The prince himself turned out to be a pretty good ruler, a skilled diplomat, able to plan ahead and see the benefits of relations with certain of his relatives. In addition, he perfectly understood both his precarious situation and the importance of developing the lands entrusted to him, due to which his policy regarding strife in Russia could be called successful. Rostislavichi took part in them, but rarely enough, without attracting large forces. Everything was done to ensure the rapid development of the principality, its security and independence. Communities of the cities of Subcarpathia highly appreciated this policy and remained selflessly loyal to Volodar throughout his reign.

The prince conducted the "foreign" policy quite flexibly. Sworn enemies or eternal friends did not exist for him. In 1101, Volodar, together with Prince Chernigov, Davyd Svyatoslavich, went on a campaign against the Poles, although only a couple of years ago they were, if not enemies, then certainly fought on opposite sides of the barricades. Relations with Vladimir Monomakh, who were given support during his conflict in 1117 with the Volyn prince, Yaroslav Svyatopolchich, were kept warm enough. This did not prevent Volodar in 1123 from supporting the same Yaroslav Svyatopolchich in the war against the son of Monomakh, Andrei, since the Rostislavichs were seriously afraid of Vladimir Monomakh’s gaining power in Volhynia. In 1119, along with the Polovtsy, Prince Peremyshl went to Byzantium, collecting rich booty, and in 1122, during a raid on the Poles, he was captured due to the betrayal of his governor, as a result of which Vasilk had to redeem his older brother for a large sum of money. Of the two daughters of Volodar, one was married to the son of Vladimir Monomakh, and the second to the son of the Byzantine emperor Alexei I Komnin.

Volodar died in 1124, showing himself, though not a great ruler, but certainly outstanding among many others. The fact that he acted in the interests of his principality, and also ruled for more than 30 years, allowed Przemysl principality to grow stronger and stronger to a large extent. Moreover, the laws of an ordinary ladder did not apply to the principality of Rostislavich. Three large destinies, Przemysl, Terebovlya and Zvenigorod, from now on could only be in the possession of Rostislavichi. It is from the reign of Prince Volodar that you can count the beginning of the future Galician principality as a separate from the rest of Russia, strong and developed, with great potential.

One cannot but mention the activity of the younger Rostislavich. Vasilko continued to rule Terebovlem until his death in the same 1124. During this time, he managed to significantly strengthen the border with the steppe, settling them with settlers and founding a number of settlements. At the same time, relations with the Polovtsy gradually improved, which even their periodic raids on the Terebovl land could not prevent. In his expansion to the south, he even made claims to the Bulgarian territories and actively used the nomads who wanted to settle as new settlers. Probably, Vasilk belongs to merit in the rapid development of one of the cities of his land, which in the future will become the capital of the whole principality - Galich, in which one of his sons sat down to rule immediately after the death of Vasilk. However, this is already a slightly different time ...

Vladimirko Volodarevich



After the death of Volodar Rostislavich, the ruler in Przemysl became his eldest son, Rostislav. He had not the simplest relations with the Poles - in 1122 he managed to be held hostage, captured after an unsuccessful trip to Poland, while his father was collecting a ransom, and already in 1124 he managed to defend Przemysl from them. He soon also had a chance to fight with his younger brother, Vladimir Volodarevich, who, with the help of the Hungarians, tried to become the supreme ruler of the whole principality. The war did not lead to anything, since the cousins ​​and Mstislav of Kiev supported the prince. However, in 1128, for an unknown reason, Rostislav died without leaving any heirs, and the very Vladimir became the prince in Przemysl.

Vladimir Volodarevich was an energetic, purposeful and domineering man, not counting natural duplicity, cynicism and unprincipledness. He wanted to create a centralized and strong principality, capable of not only defending itself against external enemies, but also going on the offensive. He inherited a good inheritance from his father, and in 1128 he combined under himself two of the four inheritances of the principality - Przemysl and Zvenigorod. In his actions, Vladimir relied on the support of the communities, but he made a special emphasis on the boyars, which at that time had almost become a separate aristocracy and began to emerge as a new political force. Together with the boyars, Vladimir possessed sufficient power, resources and troops to realize his main aspirations.

In 1140, Vladimir took part in another feud in Russia, speaking in support of Vsevolod Olgovich of Kiev against Izyaslav Mstislavich Volynsky. Here again, the factor of Rostislavich’s fear of strengthening someone in Volhynia played its role, but there was another reason: Prince Peremyshlsky sought to expand his own possessions, primarily at the expense of Volhynia. Nothing came of this venture, since Izyaslav Mstislavich turned out to be a more skilled commander and politician, which he will demonstrate in the future, having earned one of the first tsar’s title in Russia, so far only in correspondence. Despite the insignificant scope of this conflict, it will prove to be a prologue to a rather serious confrontation between these two Rurikovich in the future.

Prince Vasilko Rostislavich left behind his two sons - Ivan and Rostislav, who ruled in Galich and Terebovl respectively. The latter died before the 1140s, and his brother inherited his possessions, Ivan. Ivan himself died in 1141, leaving no heirs, as a result of which all lands, with the exception of Zvenigorod, were inherited by Vladimir Volodarevich. This was a great success, as it allowed for the first time in all time to unite almost all of Subcarpathia in one hand. Immediately after that, Vladimir thought about moving the capital: constant conflicts with the Poles over the border Przemysl caused a lot of problems. It required a capital, quite remote from the borders, but at the same time developed and rich. At that moment only Galich could become such a capital. The move there was made in the same year, and from that moment the history of the Principality of Galician principality begins with the capital in the city of the same name.

To be continued ...
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 30 May 2020 07: 12 New
    • 11
    • 1
    +10
    Bold plus !!!
    The article is read in one go !!!
    Oh, and yet, where is the ideal system of inheritance of power. When in all realities, falling into a schism of conjecture, after all, united under a single scepter of Russia, perhaps there was a chance to beat off the hordes of Batu!
    But alas, history has no syllable. Natural and regular processes of fragmentation, as the pinnacle of the feudal era of development. On the other hand, the factor of constant external threat mobilizes parts into a single whole !!! Indeed, in the end the party was played by the weakest - the Principality of Moscow !!!
    Sincerely, good day to all, Vlad!
    1. bober1982 30 May 2020 08: 46 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
      history has no syllable

      Conjunctive mood.
      No offense, not because I want to show my literacy, it immediately catches my eye, and I even had to think about what it meant. Regards.
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 30 May 2020 09: 45 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        No problem, thanks a lot for editing!
        Regards, Vlad!
        1. rich 30 May 2020 14: 59 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Rostislav Vladimirovich, who was killed in Tmutarakan, has three sons left: Rurik, Volodar and Vasilko

          Rostislav Vladimir (baptized by Michael; c. 1038 - February 3, 1067) - Prince of Rostov (before 1057), Vladimir-Volyn (1057-1064) and Tmutarakan (1064-1067). The only known son of Prince Vladimir Yaroslavich of Novgorod, the eldest son and heir to Yaroslav the Wise. The first prince outcast in Russia.
          After the death of his father (1052), Rostislav was expelled from the list of applicants for a great reign (becoming a rogue prince). The first principality, where Rostislav ruled, was Rostov. In 1057, after the death of Vyacheslav Yaroslavich and the transfer of Igor Yaroslavich to Smolensk, he received the Principality of Vladimir-Volyn principality from Uncles. Unsatisfied with his position, Rostislav left Volyn in 1064 and captured Tmutarakan, having expelled his cousin Gleb Svyatoslavich from there. In this he was helped by Vyshat and Porey, Novgorod close associates of the deceased father. However, the success of Rostislav was short-lived, and when the troops of Father Gleb, the Chernigov prince Svyatoslav, approached, he left Tmutarakan. But as soon as Svyatoslav’s troops left, Rostislav Vladimirovich again drove Gleb out of the city and began to rule in it, collecting tribute from neighboring peoples.
          The strengthening of Rostislav bothered the Chersonese Greeks, and soon Rostislav was poisoned by the Kepane sent by the Chersonesos (commander). Buried in the Church of the Virgin in Tmutarakan.
      2. ee2100 30 May 2020 10: 54 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        "it catches the eye right away," as my Russian teacher said, "cat's eye or your beloved woman catches your eye, and everything else is noteworthy"
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 30 May 2020 13: 37 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: ee2100
          "it catches the eye right away," as my Russian teacher said, "cat's eye or your beloved woman catches your eye, and everything else is noteworthy"

          Well, given my Nick, I think Bobru1982 - it must be forgiven !!! laughing
    2. lucul 30 May 2020 08: 46 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Oh, and yet, where is the ideal system of inheritance of power.

      Yes, certainly not our ladder system of inheritance, it has proved its inefficiency.
      When in all realities, falling into a schism of conjecture, after all, united under a single scepter of Russia, perhaps there was a chance to beat off the hordes of Batu!

      If Batu had come during the reign of Vladimir Monomakh, then I would not have bet on his victory over Russia .....
      1. Trilobite Master 30 May 2020 13: 24 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        Quote: lucul
        If Batu had come during the reign of Vladimir Monomakh, then I would not have bet on his victory over Russia .....

        And I wouldn’t put anything else. smile
        Unity under Vladimir Monomakh is actually a fiction. Yes, he was the supreme ruler, the most authoritative and powerful prince, but he was only "the first among equals." He could not order his brothers-princes, such as Oleg Chernigovsky, the same Rostislavichs, he could not exclusively force a prince to be submissive - he always needed to create a coalition of other princes, for whose help they again had to pay for lands and cities. There was not yet such a powerful Suzdal principality - Zalesskaya Russia was just beginning to rise, as Novgorod was still not at all the metropolis that it had become a hundred years later, Smolensk was also still far from its heyday. There were few people, many regions that still didn’t pay tribute, Russia, in fact, was not a single territory, but central lands with Kiev, Chernigov, Volyn and a number of enclaves in the form of cities such as Rostov and Suzdal, Novgorod, Smolensk, Polotsk, between which there was a "draw" land, inhabited by various tribes, such as Vyatichi, Radimichi, snow, etc., yet completely independent. along the rivers there was still some kind of civilization, just to the side, people of princes and their squads had not seen for decades, or even never.
        Mobilization potential was extremely low, mobility was even lower. At the right time in the right place, it was possible to gather only the prince's squads of those princes who would agree to participate in the campaign, the militia from the provisional Polotsk or Novgorod, even if they gathered, would be near Kiev no earlier than six months after the sending of the respective messengers, yes and the combat value of such formations against the steppes is highly doubtful.
        The princes fought with the Polovtsians exclusively by the forces of their own squads; against the Mongols, too, they would have to put up exclusively squads.
        Yuri Vsevolodovich near Kolomna put up against Batu, according to various estimates, from five to ten thousand professional warriors-combatants, collecting everything that he could collect. It is unlikely that Monomakh from all then Rus could have collected more or even the same amount.
        Russia had no chance of resisting the Mongol empire either under Svyatoslav Igorevich, or under Vladimir the Great, or under Yaroslav, or with other rulers, right up to Ivan the Terrible. He was the first to assemble and put on the battlefield an army of more than 20 people.
        1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 13: 52 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Quote: Trilobite Master
          He was the first to assemble and put on the battlefield an army of more than 20 people.

          Here with the number of troops in the XIII century, "not everything is so simple as I say the daughter of Batu Khan" laughing As I understand it, there was just a hypothetical ceiling - about 30 thousand, above which the logistics of European states, including Russia, could not stand the elementary. Even more severe were the restrictions on weapons and armor - they are expensive, and without a good “body kit” even a good warrior will fight so-so. In addition, many people cannot be removed from the economy for a long time, i.e. the appeal of the rural militia can only be short-term without negative consequences. Finally, some other collective preparation is required so that the militia does not constitute an ordinary somewhat armed rabble. Otherwise, what is the same with them, what is the same without them. Especially against the Mongols.

          In short, 5-10 thousand troops near Kolomna - this is most likely all those who managed to more or less arm and put at least some kind of armor. Most likely, there could have been more, but there was at least a little trained human reserve plus stocks of weapons and armor. Nothing unusual or disastrous - it was just that nobody used to set the goal of putting such large armies in the field. But when Daniil Romanovich became preoccupied with the question, and began to rivet the ersatz en masse according to the principle “just to protect himself from arrows”, then the army of one GVK had greatly increased in size. According to historians, with total mobilization - up to the very 30 thousand logistical limit. But this, I repeat, with the total mobilization, which was calculated under the new invasion of the Mongols, and should have been convened short-term, and with the purposeful preparation of the reserve for weapons and armor. Basically, Daniel acted in smaller armies, and his main army consisted of about 3 thousand horsemen - of which there were only a few hundred personal squads, the rest was a boyar militia.
          1. Trilobite Master 30 May 2020 14: 36 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: arturpraetor
            In short, 5-10 thousand troops near Kolomna - this is most likely all those who managed to more or less arm and put at least some kind of armor.

            As I understand it, we are talking about professional warriors-combatants and city militias. Vladimir land, given that for 20 years it did not know conflicts and strife in general, and before that for a hundred years it survived only two short feuds - with the invasion of Vsevolod the Big Nest and after his death - could put up such a serious military contingent. It is believed that the squad of Yuri, defeated by the Mongols near Kolomna, would demolish the army of Monomakh and all the other princes before him, like skittles - in one gate.
            1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 14: 46 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Quote: Trilobite Master
              As I understand it, we are talking about professional warriors-combatants and city militias.

              About that and speech. They took only those who were usually taken - i.e. the most efficient and better armed. If there was a need and time - would put up more. It’s just that there was no such need before, so it didn’t come out to collect the people anymore.
              Quote: Trilobite Master
              It is believed that the squad of Yuri, defeated by the Mongols near Kolomna, would demolish the army of Monomakh and all the other princes before him, like skittles - in one gate.

              Nuuuu, about Monomakh not sure. And much. This is more like the exaltation of Vladimir-Suzdal. But with those that used to be - maybe. Svyatoslav seemed to have a large army, when he waved with the Romans, but the trouble was with arming. And no matter what anyone says, but only in a movie a warrior-lancer in a shirt easily copes with a warrior in armor. But the farther - the more doubt.
              1. Trilobite Master 30 May 2020 15: 09 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: arturpraetor
                This is more like the exaltation of Vladimir-Suzdal.

                Not at all. It’s just that more than a hundred years have passed since the days of Monomakh, and a hundred almost calm years for Suzdal. It seems that Henry II Plantagenet would have just as easily dealt with the army of William the Conqueror by the forces of only English barons.
                1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 15: 16 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Quote: Trilobite Master
                  It’s just that more than a hundred years have passed since the days of Monomakh, and a hundred almost calm years for Suzdal.

                  First of all, “almost calm” - when did the Vladimir-Suzdal princes, like Andrei Bogolyubsky, actively participate in the strife? smile
                  Secondly, calm can affect the fate of the army in different ways. In the same Principality of Galicia-Volyn there was one prince who ruled the world for only a decade and a half. As a result, the army, which under the father and grandfather was the beauty and pride of the Romanovichs, merged the Lithuanians, moreover, so that Daniel, go and spin around in the coffin when this happened.

                  In general, I see no reason to consider the army of the VSK of the year 1237 to be model-strong and flexible directly, and I would not deduce from it the maximum number of anything either. 5-10 thousand well-armed and hospitable warriors - this is magnificent, but far from the limit of desires and possibilities.
                  1. Trilobite Master 30 May 2020 16: 08 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: arturpraetor
                    "almost calm" - is it when Vladimir-Suzdal princes, like Andrei Bogolyubsky, actively participated in the strife?

                    No, this is when military operations are not conducted on the territory of the principality. smile
                    War on foreign territory is a pure profit for the principality. The inflow of material assets (looted), people (full), plus voluntary immigrants - fugitives from the war. So every such war of VSK intensified, especially since it did not receive a "response". At the time of Monomakh Oleg Chernigovsky invaded there, then a small strife of Vsevolod Yurievich with his nephews after the death of his brother Andrei and the invasion of Mstislav Udatny in 1216 - that’s all.
                    1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 16: 15 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: Trilobite Master
                      War on foreign territory is a pure profit for the principality.

                      Very controversial statement smile Wars are not for free, and resources are being spent, and professional warriors are dying. Naturally, there was some kind of benefit, and ideally at that time the statement “war feeds the war” really did, but it didn’t always turn out that way. Even in the Middle Ages, it was possible to get to the devastation of their own lands, while never letting the enemy go home. Even a successful overseas war may not pay off, because more will be invested in its conduct than will bear the fruits of victory. As in the case of the VSK army, I would not be so unequivocal in the statement that all the wars on foreign territory were only profitable for the principality. In my practice, studying the social economy - this does not happen. Unless it is a question of a nomadic state, but something tells me that the Vladimir-Suzdal principality is not the case ... laughing
                2. lucul 30 May 2020 15: 47 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  It seems that Henry II Plantagenet would have just as easily dealt with the army of William the Conqueror by the forces of only English barons.

                  Good analogy.
                  Take the battle of Lipitsk in 1216 and the battle on the Kalka River in 1223 - not bad as they crippled the human reserves in Russia, before the invasion of the Mongols.
                3. 3x3zsave 30 May 2020 17: 16 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  It seems that Henry II Plantagenet would have just as easily dealt with the army of William the Conqueror by the forces of only English barons.
                  Watching at what point in the biography. After the assassination of Thomas Becket, "Old Harry" became extremely unpopular in England. Adulter with the bride of his son, did not add popularity. At the time of the outbreak of the war with their own sons, only Norman barons retained true allegiance to Henry.
        2. Engineer 30 May 2020 13: 55 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          He was the first to assemble and put on the battlefield an army of more than 20 people.

          Under Kalka, there were more of us in the place with the Polovtsians.
          1. Trilobite Master 30 May 2020 14: 28 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: Engineer
            Under Kalka, there were more of us in the place with the Polovtsians.

            Different figures exist, but all of them, one way or another, are hypothetical.
            Ivan the Terrible brought the thirty thousandth army near Polotsk and this made a splash in Europe - such armies have never been seen there. This is the XVI century. And the army is assembled from a vast territory that is quite developed and inhabited. To collect 20 from only the South Russian principalities and not in the 000th, but in the XNUMXth century, I think, was completely impossible.
            1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 14: 32 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              Quote: Trilobite Master
              Ivan the Terrible brought the thirty thousandth army near Polotsk and this made a splash in Europe - such armies have never been seen there.

              Dear colleague, I would be more skeptical of the one who voices such information - is it the source, or someone else. The siege of Polotsk - 1579, in Europe, a long time ago, 30-thousandth army - not news.

              As far as I remember, according to the lists, Ivan the Terrible could count on an army of up to 100 thousand - but this is with the full mobilization of forces and means. It goes without saying that they preferred to act only in the “flat” part of the general military capabilities, and starting from the logistics capabilities, which for a long time were limited to a mark of plus or minus 30 thousand people.
              1. Engineer 30 May 2020 14: 54 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Based on the capabilities of logistics, which for a long time were limited to a mark of plus or minus 30 thousand people.

                He himself came to the same conclusion when he read about the consular armies of republican Rome
                1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 15: 19 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  This despite the fact that Rome had a better supply system than the one used in the Middle Ages smile In fact, everything again rests on the economy and the presence of the necessary aspirations. As already indicated, Grozny could count on about 100 thousand troops - but it was rather an analogue of a modern mob. reserve. The capabilities of logistics, and, no less important, their own economy did not allow to raise all this army at once. And not only he, but also many others had similar problems - he did not have the opportunity to raise the crowd of people to war, there was no money to arm, train and supply everyone in the field.
                  1. Engineer 30 May 2020 15: 28 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    This despite the fact that Rome had a better supply system than the one used in the Middle Ages

                    Do republican up to the Second Punic inclusive? Hardly. Wearable stock and requisition. As an everywhere. This further Rome received bonuses from roads and viaducts that became a symbol.
                    The possibilities of logistics, and, no less importantly, their own economy were not allowed to raise all this army at once

                    Not only. And the reason is not always in logistics and equipment. Medieval France, according to the estimates of Kontamina, could expose 40 thousand KNIGHTS. Already trained, motivated and equipped. But in reality, not even a third was collected. The main reason is the feudal relations. Service is limited to 40 days a year. If you want more, negotiate separately.
                    1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 15: 39 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: Engineer
                      Do republican up to the Second Punic inclusive? Hardly.

                      As far as I know, it’s still better - I had to fight, including where you don’t especially live at the requisitions.
                      Quote: Engineer
                      But in reality, not even a third was collected. The main reason is the feudal relations. Service is limited to 40 days a year.

                      EMNIP, 40 days - shareware. Anything more than 40 days should already be paid by the overlord from your pocket. And again it goes into the economy, yes smile Well, in the device of society. Because such "I want to come, I do not want - I do not come" the army is unreliable, but relatively cheap. At the same time, mercenaries are reliable as long as they are paid - but they cost much more.

                      By the way, something similar happened in Russia. The same Daniil of Galitsky once encountered the fact that at his call almost no one came from the boyars to fight. And the boyar militia is about 90% of the cavalry. Here organizational conclusions directly beg laughing
                      1. Engineer 30 May 2020 15: 49 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        EMNIP, 40 days - shareware. Anything more than 40 days should already be paid by the overlord from your pocket.

                        I’m writing about this. That is, the problem is no longer in logistics, namely in feudalism. Even if there are plenty of armed people, sometimes their formation features do not allow them to be collected.
            2. Engineer 30 May 2020 14: 47 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Different figures exist, but all of them, one way or another, are hypothetical.

              Of course. But the sum of the hypotheses leads me to conclude that 20 thousand is real. Lipitskaya battle again
              I do not belong to hypercritics of the number of medieval and ancient armies.
              Ivan the Terrible brought the thirty thousandth army near Polotsk and this made a splash in Europe - such armies have never been seen there.

              Seen it. Tauton, Marignano. Offhand
              1. Trilobite Master 30 May 2020 15: 29 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: Engineer
                Lipitskaya battle again

                Yes, the battle of Lipetsk with its nearly 10 dead (according to the annals) is impressive. I can’t imagine where Yuri and Yaroslav could have recruited such an army, except to put into operation all those who were able to gather from neighboring districts, including peasants. This, by the way, can explain the low stamina of their troops and heavy losses.
                As for whether Europe saw such armies before the Polotsk campaign, yes, perhaps - perhaps! smile - here I got a little excited. Comparable armies already existed and could act. But, nevertheless, they were extremely rare and, I repeat, this is the XVI century. and densely populated Europe, and not Russia of the XIII century.
                I’m still ready to agree that in the XIII century. ten thousand of the hodgepodge can be gathered at one point for a defensive battle, but at that time twenty thousand kilometers into the steppe over several hundred kilometers (not counting the distance traveled by the squads to the gathering place) seems completely unrealistic to me.
                1. Engineer 30 May 2020 15: 36 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  Honestly, I do not think that there was a fundamental difference for Russia in the 13th and 16th centuries in terms of mobility potential. Still, the Mongol defeat threw us back for decades, or maybe a couple of centuries, as some historians believed.
                  Estimates of the population are at least quite comparable, or even in favor of the pre-Mongol period. A memory stick gives 9 million. Although this is a bust, but a momentous moment.
                  1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 15: 49 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: Engineer
                    Estimates of the population are at least quite comparable, or even in favor of the pre-Mongol period. A memory stick gives 9 million. Although this is a bust, but a momentous moment.

                    8-9 million - this is just considered a balanced assessment. Some historians give up to 15 million, and some even more, but this is already from the realm of fantasy.

                    For comparison, the population of the Russian kingdom before the Livonian War is estimated at a weight of 5-6 million people. I saw estimates of 12 million, but they are already from the category of fantasy too - this is in great conflict with the subsequent demography, which is better known to us.
                    1. Engineer 30 May 2020 15: 53 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      I am closer to an estimate of 5 million for the pre-Mongol period and 4-6 for the 16th century. This topic is a separate discussion. In any case, comparable as I wrote above
                      1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 16: 06 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Let me add that in any case we are talking about the population of territories of different sizes. Northeast, i.e. The Muscovite state, the same Russian kingdom of Ivan the Terrible, did not include many lands that were part of a united Russia. On which people also lived - both in the XNUMXth and XNUMXth centuries. Those. that after three centuries the population of the Russian kingdom could equal the population of all Russia three centuries ago - there is nothing super-fantastic.

                        You can of course start talking about the fact that the Russian kingdom also included many territories that were not part of Russia, but the vast majority of these territories were very poorly populated. EMNIP, the same Kazan Khanate pulled 450 thousand people - and that was a lot by the standards of that region.

                        However, this is a completely different story ... laughing
                  2. Edward Vashchenko 30 May 2020 22: 00 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Denis
                    welcome
                    about
                    I do not think that there was a fundamental difference for Russia in the 13th and 16th centuries in terms of mobility potential.

                    Absolutely not, mobility is a term that does not apply to the Middle Ages.
                    There is no subject to comparison, an absolutely different system of formation of troops,
                    XIII - squads and militia of the lands, XVI century. local conits, specific regiments of "vassals", "regular" regiments of a "new type": archers, mercenaries.
                    From the XNUMXth century Russia stepped far ahead from the territorial community to early feudalism, respectively, serious changes took place in the army.
                    Yes, for pre-Mongol Russia there could be no talk of a single army, all lands are separate "states" connected only by periodically emerging alliances.
                    Yours faithfully,
                    1. Engineer 30 May 2020 22: 06 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Good evening
                      You are right when you reproached me for the modernization term "mobility".
                      The total population is still not a mob potential, but an economic basis. It is comparable.
                      The troop formation system has really changed. But the fact that in the 16th century it became possible to exhibit a significantly larger number of troops compared to the 13th is completely not obvious to me.
                      For the Germans, for example, the transition to developed feudalism meant a significant DECREASE in the number of armies. From the people-troops to the elite and its servants
                      1. Edward Vashchenko 30 May 2020 22: 14 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        The total population is still not a mob potential, but an economic basis.

                        I absolutely agree, it is economically necessary to compare the North-East of Russia 13 century and the Moscow Principality, here the economic progress is obvious and serious, the colonization is substantial.
                        In the case of Germany, and indeed with Russia, if we take into account all the free ones, it has decreased, then the technologists of the war have changed significantly: the Tatars dictated a different style of war and a different scale: the Horde or Crimea lined up the entire male population and had to oppose an army of a different scale .
                      2. Engineer 30 May 2020 22: 40 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        XIII - squads and land militias

                        Plus "their filthy."
                        economically it is necessary to compare the North-East of Russia 13 in and the Principality of Moscow,

                        It still depends on the question. For example, if we compare the numbers in the battle of Kalka and the first kings, then we must already compare Southern Russia
              2. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 15: 43 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: Trilobite Master
                But, nevertheless, they were extremely rare and, I repeat, this is the XVI century. and densely populated Europe, and not Russia of the XIII century.

                Alas, no. Met, and already quite often. And sometimes one state could put up several armies of such numbers that operated separately. Less than 20 thousand people by the standards of the XNUMXth century are no longer a strong army.
                Quote: Trilobite Master
                I’m still ready to agree that in the XIII century. ten thousand of the hodgepodge can be gathered at one point for a defensive battle, but at that time twenty thousand kilometers into the steppe over several hundred kilometers (not counting the distance traveled by the squads to the gathering place) seems completely unrealistic to me.

                No, well, actions in the steppe are completely different. Firstly, the infantry was hardly taken there - it only fettered the cavalry, and they had to fight with the steppes - also cavalry. So usually they went to the Steppe only on horseback, if they took infantry, then for the protection of the camp, it was necessary to carry supplies as well, and if they took any good from the steppes, they had to be guarded and transported. In general, here it is necessary to divide the war far in the steppe, and the war in their own or close, well-developed territories.
          2. Ryazan87 30 May 2020 16: 01 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            and this made a splash in Europe - such armies were never seen there.

            participants in Italian wars look with surprise at this statement. The French a quarter century before Polotsk in Italy and 40 thousand each brought, and it was the soldiers, and not the "staff" of any. To take the same battle at Pavia - 25 thousand on each side, with the same French at least 1000 gendarmes. Ivan the Terrible could not even dream of such a thing.
      2. lucul 30 May 2020 15: 18 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Yuri Vsevolodovich near Kolomna put up against Batu, according to various estimates, from five to ten thousand professional warriors-combatants, collecting everything that he could collect. It is unlikely that Monomakh from all then Rus could have collected more or even the same amount.

        On a campaign against the Polovtsians, Monomakh gathered how many princes? )))
        Near Kolomna, one could add both the Kiev and Polotsk troops — would be enough for the Mongols (in fact, their military leader, the son of Genghis Khan, was killed in that battle, and that says a lot). Of course, the question was, as always, about the state of metallurgy in Russia - how much iron could be smelted in tons per year. The greater the number of militias you can equip with a shield and a sword, and not with ordinary pitchforks, the more success you will have in battle ....
        All the glory of the Franks of that time is directly proportional to the advanced development of metallurgy among them. Metallurgy issues, usually historians omit, and then everything depended on its development, primarily the country's security. The main thing is that there should be ore - you can’t protect the state with purchased swords ....
        All the successes of the Mongols, personally, I directly associate with the good provision of iron in the troops, were well plundered in China. As soon as the metallurgy level in neighboring countries tightened (iron began to be smelted more), the issue with the Mongols immediately became resolved ...
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 30 May 2020 15: 45 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Supplement a little!
          Tribal relations suggested that every man is a warrior! This was the epoch-making advantage of the troops of Svyatoslav Igorevich, who, with his infantry, smashed the Khazars, Bulgarians and Romeevs (Greeks). In fact, if at the turn of the XNUMXth century hordes of Batu came, then they had to face the permanent mobilization of Russia! A similar situation during the Great Patriotic War.
          I think the epochal war of attrition of the Tatar-Mongols would not have survived!
          For example, during the Battle of Kalki, they tripped over the Kiev militia.
          In addition, I agree with Mikhail and Artem, Batu Khan was hard at storming the cities! That is, it turned out well if the army was “laid down” in a field battle (Ryazan, Vladimir, Suzdal). Kozelsky was already harder! But what can not be taken away from the Mongol-Tatars is the ability to play politics. Reading the sources you are amazed how they circle the enemy "in the circle of a finger" !!!
      3. Ryazan87 30 May 2020 15: 55 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        right up to Ivan the Terrible. He was the first to assemble and put on the battlefield an army of more than 20 people.

        It seems that the first was Ivan III, which is noticeable in the Novgorod and Lithuanian campaigns.

        As for the Mongol empire, the question is what is meant and in what period. A separate ulus could well have already been from the second half of the 14th century, albeit with varying success.
  2. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 12: 09 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
    after all, united under a single scepter of Russia, perhaps there was a chance to beat off the hordes of Batu!

    But not a fact. Batu showed himself best in field battles, during the invasion of Western Europe he most likely did not have a numerical superiority over the Europeans. That is, field battles, most likely, Russians would still lose. But Batu’s fortresses were worse off. So, most likely, there would be an epic mahach with the steppes, with their losses and the deaths of princes and people, burned by cities and others, but at some point the steppes would simply be stuck, unable to move on. Even in real life, they passed through the lands of South-Western Russia as quickly as possible, ignoring too well-defended fortresses and not spreading much over possessions, acting mainly in a conditionally "narrow" corridor. Because the soldier for constant sieges and assaults was no longer enough, they were cherished for field battles.
    Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Indeed, in the end the party was played by the weakest - the Principality of Moscow !!!

    The struggle of Moscow is a separate issue, and a big one. As well as the fact that as a result it was she who turned out to be the only center of power in Russia, while the rest either did not develop so much, or quickly declined. After all, the Lithuanians did not conclude the Lublin Union from a good life - they were naturally afraid of their eastern neighbor. Which only at the time of Ivan the Terrible surpassed the ON on the population, which says a lot about the state of Lithuania at that time. Yes, and before that, too.
    1. 3x3zsave 30 May 2020 18: 18 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Even in real life, they passed through the lands of South-Western Russia as quickly as possible, ignoring too well-defended fortresses and not spreading much over possessions, acting mainly in a conditionally "narrow" corridor.
      "Blitz Krieg" is the purest!
  3. rich 30 May 2020 15: 09 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Quote from Kote Pane Kokhanka (Vladislav):
    The article is read in one go !!!

    Actually, like all the other articles by Artem. With great pleasure I always read it. It is a pity only recently he rarely began to write
    The article is naturally fat - fat plus !!! good
    1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 15: 21 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Rich
      It is a pity only recently he rarely began to write

      I actually write a lot, just not all about the real story smile
  4. Boris ⁣ Shaver 30 June 2020 23: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
    history has no syllable

    Modeling and experiment (enumeration of inputs with tracking of outcomes, in this case) are irreplaceable methods of system analysis. Neglecting them only because someone once with a fool blurted out a phrase about "subjunctive mood" is not worth it.
  • 3x3zsave 30 May 2020 07: 33 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    Thank Artyom
    Reading the cycle, I get great pleasure from a step-by-step, meticulous analysis of events, outlined in an accessible language, not burdened by excessive academicity. good
    1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 10: 44 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Thank you hi
      Quote: 3x3zsave
      unburdened by excessive academic

      Here's the trouble - while I was writing the cycle, the "light bulb" constantly worked in my head, which is too few details ... laughing
      1. Catfish 30 May 2020 14: 07 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Artyom, thank you very much! hi I read it with great interest, for me those days were always covered with almost complete darkness. Thanks to you, a "ray of light in the dark kingdom" has appeared. Thank. smile
        Prince Vasilko Rostislavich left behind his two sons - Ivan and Rostislav, who ruled in Galich and Terebovl respectively. The latter died before the 1140s, and his brother inherited his possessions, Ivan. Ivan himself died in 1141, leaving no heirs, as a result of which all lands, with the exception of Zvenigorod, were inherited by Vladimir Volodarevich.

        Interestingly, did they themselves leave this vale of sadness, or did they somehow help them do this? recourse
        1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 14: 13 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Sea Cat
          Artyom, thank you very much!

          You're welcome hi
          Quote: Sea Cat
          I read it with great interest, for me those days were always covered with almost complete darkness.

          Yes, I myself, until a certain point, was afraid to take on the history of Russia, because if I nevertheless take it, then with an in-depth study of everything. And there, in almost every principality, there was "its own atmosphere", and a bunch of princes, and constant strife, and the change of princes because of a ladder. Gradually, I overcame my fears, but now I more or less well imagine only the history of the South-West. Although I know everything else, it’s much less than I would like, and what is required for the status of “expert of all medieval Russia” laughing
          Quote: Sea Cat
          Interestingly, did they themselves leave this vale of sadness, or did they somehow help them do this?

          Yes, it’s kind of like ourselves, but it’s too friendly. However, this is not the first time this has happened in the Southwest. “Convenient” deaths in favor of ambitious rulers happened almost constantly. Maybe someone contributed - or maybe just because of the abundance of the Rurikovich it catches the eye.
          1. 3x3zsave 30 May 2020 18: 23 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Although I know everything else, it’s much less than I would like and what is required for the status of “expert of all medieval Russia” laughing
            Slightly start. There is still beloved Spain! laughing
            1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 18: 49 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Spain is easier. But not medieval. There's a more modest thrashka, but also kind of laughing
              1. 3x3zsave 30 May 2020 19: 00 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Well, FIG knows, more modest at the expense! Oh yes, I'm talking about medieval Spain ...
                As for me, the current Catholic separatism grows from the Albigensian heresy.
              2. 3x3zsave 30 May 2020 20: 11 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                It becomes terribly interesting that the Trilobite Master will object to Henry the Second? ....
  • knn54 30 May 2020 09: 03 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    The article is stronger than the previous one.
    And what is interesting: the first Galician dynasty was founded in 1097 by the outcasts Volodar and Vasilko.
    And the dynasty crossed in 1161 after the death of Rostislav Yaroslavovich, also an outcast.
    A stormy but short story.
    To the author plus.
    1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 11: 32 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: knn54
      The article is stronger than the previous one.

      Because there is bare practice, without a controversial theory. In the future, most articles will be just that.
      Quote: knn54
      And the dynasty crossed in 1161 after the death of Rostislav Yaroslavovich, also an outcast.

      In fact, the dynasty stopped in 1199, with the death of Vladimir, the son of Yaroslav Osmomysl, although there were still illegitimate children from Vladimir - but there is not enough information about them.
      1. rich 30 May 2020 15: 41 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Because there is bare practice, without a controversial theory

        What is valuable! Unfortunately, a rather rare type of articles on VO recently.
        A discussion of the topic has come out - directly “academic”, there is simply nothing to add in the comments. Thank you so much for the wonderful and informative cycle.
        Best regards
        Dmitriy
  • Operator 30 May 2020 11: 44 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    The main reason for the attraction of the Galicia-Volyn principality to Russia, and not to Poland, was religious - the population of the principality professed Orthodoxy, and the kingdom - Catholicism. Plus, the benefits for local boyars from the functioning of Russian ladder law - the princes changed like gloves, and the boyars remained in their places.

    Only after the conclusion of a union with Catholics in the 15th century, southwestern Russia began to gradually move away from the more eastern and northern Russian principalities.

    PS The map clearly shows the western territories of the Principality of Galicia-Volyn, which became part of modern Poland, from which Orthodox inhabitants were evicted to the USSR after 1945 in exchange for the eviction of Polish colonialists ("besiegers") from Poland from Western Ukraine and Belarus.
    1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 12: 58 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Oddly enough, but here you are almost entirely right. Almost, because the Union of Florence did not become generally accepted, and was forgotten after 1453, without affecting the fate of the Southwest. The influence was exerted by the Union of Brest in 1596, but by that time active assimilation of the nobility and colonization of the Russian territories of the Commonwealth had been going on for a long time. The Poles in this country, even in their own country, filled their hands, the union was only one more instrument, and for the lower strata of the population, I don’t remember that the Uniate church was popular with the Rusyna gentry. That either was faithful to Orthodoxy, or immediately converted to Catholicism.
      1. Operator 30 May 2020 14: 35 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        The Florence Union of 1439 was concluded by the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church of the Patriarchate of Constantinople (which at that time included the Kiev and Moscow Metropolises). In 1448, the Moscow Cathedral came out of the power of the Patriarch of Constantinople and independently appointed the Metropolitan of Moscow, after which the Metropolitanate became virtually autocephalous and abolished the union on its canonical territory.

        In 1589, the next Moscow Cathedral raised the status of the metropolitan to the patriarch (in agreement with the Constantinople and other Orthodox patriarchs), and the status of the metropolis to the local church, the canonical territory of which extended to all Russian lands, where the union was also abolished.

        In this connection, the Poles in 1596 organized the conclusion of a new (Brest) union in the occupied territories of the future Ukraine and Belarus between the Roman Catholic Church and the Kiev Metropolitanate of the GOC KP. As the occupied territories were liberated by the Russian Kingdom, and then by the Russian Empire and the USSR, the union was canceled. In 1991, the union was partially restored in western Ukraine.

        At the same time, the union on the territory of Volyn (which became part of the Russian Empire after the partition of Poland) was not restored. In this connection, the mentality of modern Volhynians is very different from the Galicians (who became part of Austria-Hungary).
        1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 14: 39 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          And what does Moscow have to do with Southwest Russia? Actually, there was its own metropolis - first Galitskaya, then it was united with the Lithuanian (Kiev). And until 1596, she controlled the church in the region. Not Moscow.

          According to the Union of Florence - you seem to be starting to persist now that it had no significance after 1453, which means your statement
          Only after the conclusion of a union with Catholics in the 15th century, southwestern Russia began to gradually move away from the more eastern and northern Russian principalities.

          Erroneously.
          1. Operator 30 May 2020 15: 08 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            The first autocephalous title, which was received in 1448 by the Moscow Metropolitan Jonah at the Moscow Cathedral, sounded like the Metropolitan of Kiev and all of Russia laughing

            Only in 1458 did the patriarch of Constantinople make a compromise decision and divided the Kiev autocephalous metropolis (Moscow was the seat of the city) into two - the Moscow autocephalous metropolis (the canonical territory of which included the lands of the Grand Duchy of Moscow) and the Kiev non-autocephalous metropolis (the canonical territory of which included the lands of the Great Principality of Lithuania).

            The conquest of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453 had no effect on the union, since it was canceled back in 1448 by the Kiev / Moscow Autocephalous Metropolitan Iona, which served as the basis for the conclusion in 1596 of a new Brest Union between the Roman Catholic Church and the Kiev Non-Autocephalous Metropolis in 1596 (the canonical territory of which by that time had become part of the Commonwealth).
            1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 15: 22 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              So, you have denied yourself about how significant the Florentine Union was in the XNUMXth century - that is, not at all laughing So your statement does not have any basis.

              Yes, my colleagues were right - it’s better to ignore you.
  • Trilobite Master 30 May 2020 14: 17 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Greetings, Artem.
    Thank you for the article. Indeed, meticulous and detailed.
    That paragraph, where, without any explanation, the princes David Svyatoslavich and Mstislav Svyatopolchich, were mentioned for the first and last time in the article for the first and last time, somewhat cut his eyes. The problem is well-known: attempts to lay out the family trees of princes for the reader are the surest way to make them fall asleep immediately. To systematize knowledge and better understand the issue, I will try to conduct a short genealogical excursion, who are not interested, it is better not to read.
    All parties to the conflict are grandchildren or great-grandchildren of Yaroslav the Wise, descended from his five sons:
    Vladimir - rogue princes of Rostislavich Rurik, Volodar and Vasilko, the main characters of the article.
    Izyaslav - Grand Duke Svyatopolk Izyaslavich with his brother Yaropolk (whom the combatant killed during the campaign) and his son Mstislav (who died on the walls of Vladimir-Volynsky).
    Svyatoslav - this is just Davyd Svyatoslavich, the brother of Oleg "Gorislavich" Chernigovsky and Gleb Svyatoslavich, the one who hacked the magician with an ax in Novgorod.
    Vsevolod - well, this, of course, Vladimir Monomakh
    Igor - Davyd Igorevich, also an outcast prince, like the Rostislavs - the main organizer of the blindness of Prince Vasilka.
    With the exception of the Rostislavichs and Mstislav Svyatopolchich, who were the nephews of the rest of the princes, all the characters were cousins ​​to each other.
    1. arturpraetor 30 May 2020 14: 29 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      That paragraph, where, without any explanation, the princes David Svyatoslavich and Mstislav Svyatopolchich, were mentioned for the first and last time in the article for the first and last time, somewhat cut his eyes. The problem is well-known: attempts to lay out the family trees of princes for the reader are the surest way to make them fall asleep immediately.

      The problem is also that there are already a huge number of actors. From all sorts of "-i" sometimes ripples in the eyes, and often they also have the same name. Adds problems and a mess of princes on tables - today some Mstislav of Kiev, tomorrow - Chernigov, the day after tomorrow - Pereyaslavsky. Even it is difficult for me as an author to take all of them into account at once, and if we assume that readers may not understand these nuances, then they may not even immediately see the difference between David Igorevich and David Svyatoslavich, if you do not indicate this directly. Therefore, such genealogical details have to be cut as much as possible so that the reader (and the author, why hide) in them is not lost.
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 30 May 2020 15: 55 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Therefore, such genealogical details have to be cut as much as possible so that the reader (and the author, why hide) in them is not lost.

        Passed by. I remember in exel doing a tablet over the years, so as not to get confused who when he was sitting on the Vladimir table! When he reached Ivan Danilovich Kalita, he exhaled - it became easier !!!
      2. 3x3zsave 30 May 2020 18: 30 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Maybe it’s better to give a summary table "who, where, whom, why"?
  • Diviz 6 July 2020 21: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The capture of Kiev, the capture of Rostov continued in the next article, the capture of Ryazan and Novgorod.
    Or maybe if there wasn’t such a migration, then the construction of Moscow would be postponed indefinitely. Everywhere has its pros and cons.