Military Review

Dmitry Ivanovich, prince-warrior. War between Moscow and Tver

48
Dmitry Ivanovich, prince-warrior. War between Moscow and Tver

Blessing of Sergius. Pavel Ryzhenko


670 years ago, the Grand Duke of Moscow and Vladimir Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoy was born. The collector of the Russian lands, the pacifier of Tver, the winner of the Mamai Horde and the creator of the white-stone Moscow Kremlin.

Muscovite Rus in the era of Dmitry Ivanovich waged difficult wars with the Horde and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia (a pretender to the unification of Russian lands). The Russian lands were subjected to constant invasions, destruction, suffered from internal strife, pestilence and hunger. However, Russia survived and became even stronger. The foundations were laid for the creation of a unified Russian state.

Early years. Struggle for a label to a great reign


Prince Dmitry was born on October 12, 1350 in the family of the Zvenigorod appanage prince Ivan Ivanovich Krasny and his wife Alexandra Ivanovna. The Zvenigorod prince was the son of Ivan Kalita. The supreme power in Muscovite Rus belonged to Kalita's eldest son, Semyon (Simeon) Proud, he had two sons-heirs. According to the then dynastic tradition, they were heirs. Dmitry Ivanovich was to receive only Zvenigorod. However, during these years the "black death" (plague) came to Russia from the East. First, she devastated the lands of Novgorod and Pskov, then came to Moscow. The epidemic spared neither the strong and noble, nor the poor and weak. In March 1353, Metropolitan Theognost died, followed by the sons of the Moscow prince Semyon. In April, the Grand Duke himself died, then the Serpukhov appanage prince Andrei Ivanovich (son of Ivan Kalita).

Ivan Zvenigorodsky remained the only adult man in the dynasty. Ivan Krasny took over the Moscow table (ruled until 1359). He received from the Horde king Janibek a label for the great reign of Vladimir. Moscow at this time had to wage a hard struggle with Lithuania, to resist Ryazan and Nizhny Novgorod. The Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal prince Dmitry Konstantinovich claimed the grand-ducal title.

Knyazhich Dmitry was brought up traditional for that time: Orthodox education was accompanied by military training. His father Ivan Ivanovich did not rule for long, he died on November 13, 1359. Dmitry was only 9 years old. Ivan Krasny bequeathed his possessions to his two sons, Dmitry and Ivan. Ivan Small received Zvenigorod, but soon died during another pestilence (1364). All possessions were united under the rule of Dmitry. He was lucky with the closest circle: the educator, the Moscow thousand Vasily Velyaminov and the Metropolitan Alexy. They did everything to keep the possession of Moscow.

In 1360, the Moscow embassy, ​​headed by Dmitry himself, went to the capital of the Horde, Saray, to get a shortcut for the Vladimir grand-ducal table (Vladimir was then considered the capital of Russia). In the Horde at this time the so-called. great blush. Tsar Janibek in 1357 was killed by supporters of his son Berdibek. The new khan also massacred all his brothers. Two and a half years later, Berdibek was killed in a new coup. The Horde troubles began. Some khans "ruled" for no more than a month. During this period, the Horde fell apart into several independent states (uluses-appanages). Khan Nouruz gave the label for the great reign to Prince Andrey Dmitrievich of Nizhny Novgorod. He passed it on to his brother Dmitry (Thomas) Suzdal. So the Vladimir table floated out of the hands of the clan of Ivan Kalita. In 1361, a Moscow delegation with Prince Dmitry tried to return the rights to Vladimir, but without success. All this was accompanied by large spending, expensive gifts, bribery of the right people.

In 1362, Moscow was still able to return the grand ducal table. The Moscow army drove out of Pereyaslavl and Vladimir the squad of Dmitry Suzdalsky. Subsequently, he became an ally of Dmitry. Moscow helped the Suzdal prince get the rights to the rich Nizhny Novgorod. After the death in 1365 of the eldest of the Konstantinovichs, the Grand Duke of Nizhny Novgorod-Suzdal Andrei Konstantinovich, the princely table was occupied not by "seniority" by the warlike prince Gorodetsky Boris, the younger brother of Dmitry Suzdal. Moscow gave Dmitry an army and he returned Nizhny Novgorod. The military-political union of Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod was sealed by marriage. In 1366, Dmitry Nizhegorodsky gave his daughter Evdokia to his wife Dmitry Ivanovich. After that, the Grand Duke of Suzdal-Nizhny Novgorod became a loyal ally of Moscow, then fought against Bulgaria and the Mamayev Horde.

Stone Kremlin


The young Grand Duke had to rein in Novgorod. Taking advantage of the turmoil in the Horde, the Novgorod merchants who walked along the Volga and Kama, overnight became river robbers-ushkuiniks. In 1366, they organized a whole campaign, the Novgorod ship army marched in the Volga and Kama. Even Nizhniy was robbed. Moscow immediately replied: cut the path from Novgorod to the Dvina land under its control. In this conflict, Tver, Moscow's longtime rival for the primacy in Russia, took the side of Novgorod. In 1367 Veliky Novgorod yielded, made an apology and gifts. The Novgorodians received the governors of the Grand Duke.

In 1365, a large fire destroyed a significant part of Moscow. The oak Kremlin built by Ivan Kalita was also damaged. Dmitry Ivanovich makes a strategic decision: to build a new wall, not wood, but stone. The construction was completed in record time: 1366-1367. The Russian historian Ivan Zabelin assumed that the material for the construction came from the quarries of the village of Myachkova at the confluence of the Pakhra into the Moscow River. The stone was delivered to the city by the Moscow River. In the summer he was taken by boat, and in the winter by sleigh along the frozen river. The new Kremlin in terms of territory and size was slightly inferior to the modern one. The construction required huge funds. Helped by his cousin Vladimir Andreevich Serpukhovsky (he became Dmitry's closest associate) and the capital's boyars. Some towers and gates were named after them: Sviblova, Sobakina, Cheshkovy, Timofeevskaya.

The significance of the new Kremlin was enormous. It was the only stone fortress in the north-east of Russia. The Grand Duke received a powerful base to fight rivals, to repel enemies. Soon the walls of the new Kremlin helped Dmitry Ivanovich to withstand the army of the Grand Duke of Lithuania Olgerd. He was then able to challenge the Horde. The white-stone Kremlin becomes a symbol of the power of the Moscow princes.


Moscow Kremlin. A. Vasnetsov

Fight against Tver and Lithuania


During the same period, Moscow was concerned about the rise of Mikhail Alexandrovich Tverskoy. This was a strong and stubborn opponent. In 1366, he was able to get his hands on most of the lands of the Tver Grand Duchy. He was supported by the Grand Duke of Lithuania Olgerd, who was married to the sister of the Tver prince. Grand Duke Dmitry supported his opponents, in particular, Prince Vasily of Kashin. In the Tver land, strife began because of the inheritance of the Klin prince, Dmitry of Moscow sided with Mikhail's opponents. The case ended with the capture of Tver and its plundering. Mikhail fled to Lithuania.

Thus, a long and bloody conflict began. In October 1367, the Tver prince returned from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania with an army and restored his power. Dmitry and his boyars in 1368 invited Mikhail to Moscow for negotiations, promised immunity and arrested the guest. But, fearing the Horde and under the influence of Metropolitan Alexy Mikhail, they let him go, concluding a peace beneficial to Moscow. Vasily Kashinsky died in the same year. Under the pretext of protecting the rights of his heir Mikhail, Dmitry again went to war against Tver. Once again Mikhail Tverskoy flees to Lithuania. Olgerd, not wanting to strengthen Moscow, decides to help the ruler of Tver. In the fall of 1368, the united army of Lithuania, Tver and Smolensk marched against Moscow. In November 1368, on the Trosna River, the allies defeated the hastily assembled Moscow army. Dmitry did not have more troops at hand, and the enemy went to Moscow. Dmitry was saved by the stone Kremlin. Olgerd stood at the Kremlin for three days, but did not dare to siege. After capturing a large full and booty, he left for Lithuania. Dmitry Ivanovich was forced to return the Klin principality to Mikhail Tverskoy. Mikhail is building a new fortress in Tver.

Taking advantage of the fact that Olgerd was at war with the Teutonic Order in 1369, Dmitry moved his regiments to Smolensk. His governors attacked Bryansk, captured Kaluga and Mtsensk. Mikhail Tverskoy tried to negotiate with Dmitry, but without success. The prince of Tver again flees to Lithuania. The Moscow army took the city of Zubtsov by storm, the patrimony of Prince Mikhail Alexandrovich. Moscow troops fought the Tver volosts, ravaged and burned villages, took people to the full. The withdrawal of people at that time was a common occurrence during the war. They were settled in their own lands. Populated and economically developed land (agriculture, crafts in cities) had an advantage over competitors.

In December 1370, Olgerd with his brother Keistut, Mikhail Tverskoy and Svyatoslav Smolensky again went to Moscow. The Grand Duke of Lithuania again besieged Moscow and again could not take it. The Lithuanians retreated, learning that enemy regiments were gathering around them. In 1371, Mikhail Tverskoy went to the Horde, where the powerful nobleman Mamai and his tame khan Mohammed-Bulak already ruled. For great gifts and promises of great tribute, Mamai gave the label for the great reign of Vladimir to the prince of Tver. Mikhail went to occupy the Vladimir table with the tsarist ambassador Sary-Khadzha. However, the Moscow prince simply did not allow Mikhail and the khan's envoy to Vladimir. Mikhail had to flee to Lithuania again. And the khan's envoy was bribed and released into the Horde.

Dmitry of Moscow was not yet ready to quarrel with the Horde. In the summer of 1371, the Grand Duke of Moscow and Vladimir went to Sarai. For ten years the Moscow princes did not visit Sarai and, apparently, did not pay the established tribute. There was great confusion in the Horde. Dmitry brought rich gifts to Mamai, and the powerful ruler gave his dear guest a label for the great reign of Vladimir. Dmitry also entered into an agreement with Mamai, according to which the tribute was set lower than under the kings of Uzbek and Dzhanibek, and bought out the Tver prince Ivan Mikhailovich who was in the Horde for 10 thousand rubles (he lived in Moscow until his father bought him out).

The struggle between Moscow and Tver continued. Cities and villages were burning, blood was pouring. Mikhail Tverskoy again convinces Olgerd to move troops to Moscow Russia. In 1372, Mikhail, together with Keistut and Andrei Olgerdovich, unsuccessfully went to Pereslavl-Zalessky, took Dmitrov and Torzhok. Olgerd moved his regiments to Moscow for the third time. But this time the Moscow army met him on the western border. The matter did not come to a battle, the parties made peace. Vladimir Serpukhovskoy married Elena Olgerdovna.


Olgerd's retreat from Moscow. Miniature of the obverse vault of the XNUMXth century

Storming Tver


In the summer of 1363, Mamai's troops made a campaign against Ryazan. The Ryazan people fought bravely, but could not repel the blow. The Ryazan region was devastated. Perhaps the Horde were going to go further, but Dmitry Moskovsky and Vladimir Serpukhovsky gathered their regiments and settled on the left bank of the Oka. The Horde people were not allowed into the Vladimir and Moscow lands, but they did not help the beaten Ryazan people. Mamaev's temniks did not dare to go further and returned to the steppe.

At the beginning of 1374, Moscow and Tver signed an armistice. Mikhail Tverskoy bought out his son and ceded some lands to Moscow. Then Mikhail received the son of the last thousand-strong Moscow Vasily Velyaminov Ivan, who had fled from Moscow, and sought to inherit the post of a thousand. Dmitry, however, strengthening the grand ducal power, abolished this position. The Tver prince received a label on the Vladimir table from Mamai (who had quarreled with Moscow). The Tver prince sent his troops to Torzhok and Uglich in order to plant his governors there. Dmitry Ivanovich acted quickly: he gathered in Volokolamsk regiments from all of North-Eastern Russia, including troops from Veliky Novgorod, Smolensk and Bryansk (previously they depended on the Grand Duchy of Lithuania). In August 1375, the united Russian army took Mikhail's family nest, Mikulin, and laid siege to Tver.

The siege lasted a month. Tver was protected by a wooden wall, outside it was coated with clay so that it was difficult to set fire to it. The Moscow prince ordered to build two bridges across the Volga and ferried some of the regiments to the other side. Having built a wooden sign (filling up and breaking the ditches) and rounds (siege towers), the regiments of the Grand Duke went on an attack on August 8. Tverichi fought furiously. They made a desperate sortie led by their prince. They were able to destroy the tours, hacked the siege engines. Obviously, the Moscow army was not ready for such a strong attack and suffered heavy losses. Then the city was fenced off with a tynom. It was impossible to break through this palisade either to or from the hail. Hunger began in Tver. At the same time, the troops of the Grand Duke ravaged the Tver land, took Zubtsov and Bely Gorodok.

Olgerd's troops moved east, but did not reach Tver. The Lithuanians limited themselves to the ruin of the Smolensk region, punishing the Smolensk prince for going over to the side of Moscow. When the hope for Lithuania's help collapsed, Mikhail asked for peace. Peace was signed in early September 1375. Mikhail Tverskoy renounced his rights to Kashin, recognized himself as the younger brother of Dmitry of Moscow (vassal). Allied against the Horde:

but the Tatars ali will go against us, you and I will oppose them; If we go to the Tatars, then as one with us I will go against them.



Mikhail Alexandrovich leaves for the Horde. Facial annalistic set

To be continued ...
Author:
Photos used:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Deniska999
    Deniska999 13 October 2020 06: 32
    12
    Samsonov, decide whether Tartary was or was Russia and the Horde absolutely different state formations. You definitely have a split personality)
    1. Dzungar
      Dzungar 15 October 2020 07: 14
      0
      RZHU .... !!!! Sorry, I laugh, and very hard
  2. Far B
    Far B 13 October 2020 06: 34
    +4
    the governors attacked Bryansk, captured Kaluga and Mtsensk. Mikhail Tverskoy tried to negotiate with Dmitry, but without success. The Prince of Tver again flees to Lithuania. The Moscow army took the city of Zubtsov by storm, the patrimony of Prince Mikhail Alexandrovich. Moscow troops fought the Tver volosts, ravaged and burned villages, took people to the full
    It was about time! Their own mutuzili, burned volosts, townships, cities were captured almost every year. Narodishko were driven from place to place (interestingly, did they manage to settle down at least a little in the new place, before their next owner dragged them to new lands?). it is not surprising that with such a disarray the Horde of Rus milked like that cow ...
    1. Moskovit
      Moskovit 13 October 2020 07: 09
      11
      Bestial grin of feudal fragmentation!
      Tver grandmothers, by the way, continue to fight the descendants of Dmitry Donskoy. Mushrooms and berries are always more expensive for Muscovites than they sell locally)).
      1. Nazar
        Nazar 13 October 2020 18: 25
        +4
        Moskovit - how to get rid of this fragmentation, at what cost - is superbly described in a series of fictional books by Dmitry Balashov - "Sovereigns of Moscow", if you have time, read.
        After reading it, it remains only to be surprised with the author - well, Moscow had no chance of becoming the center of a huge country, but it did! fellow
        1. Dzungar
          Dzungar 15 October 2020 07: 15
          +1
          Back in school in the 80s, I read all of Balashov ... He writes great
          1. Nazar
            Nazar 15 October 2020 09: 20
            +1
            Dzungar - I also read the entire series for a long time, now I reread it, depending on my mood - I choose the one from the series that most "corresponds" to the moment smile
    2. ee2100
      ee2100 13 October 2020 07: 25
      -1
      "Full" - most likely for sale
      1. Far B
        Far B 13 October 2020 07: 32
        0
        The withdrawal of people at that time was a common occurrence during the war. They were settled in their own lands
        I start from what is written in the article. And, as far as I remember, the slave trade did not flourish in Russia. And slaves, as a rule, were designated as workers. However, I did not live at that time, so fig knows him. And to the "polonyanniki" what so, what kind - it was clearly not a thrill.
        1. Deniska999
          Deniska999 13 October 2020 07: 39
          +8
          Even if they talk about the industry of exporting slaves from Russia, it is somehow bashful. Meanwhile, it is difficult to find a more characteristic feature of the economic system of the Kiev period of Russian history as the sale of one's own tribesmen to Asian and Mediterranean countries. To quote Klyuchevsky:

          “Economic prosperity of Kievan Rus XI and XII centuries. kept on slavery ... Already in the X-XI centuries. servants made up the main article of Russian export to the Black Sea and Volga-Caspian markets. The Russian merchant of that time invariably appeared everywhere with his main product, with his servants. Oriental writers of the XNUMXth century in a living picture they draw us a Russian merchant who sells servants on the Volga; After unloading, he placed in the Volga bazaars, in the cities of Bolgar or Itil, his benches, shops, on which he seated live goods - slaves. He came to Constantinople with the same goods. When a Greek, an inhabitant of Constantinople, needed to buy a slave, he went to the market, where “Russian merchants sell their servants as they come” - as we read in one posthumous miracle of Nicholas the Wonderworker, dating back to half of the XNUMXth century. Slavery was one of the main subjects to which the attention of the most ancient Russian legislation was drawn, as far as can be judged from the Russian Pravda: articles on slavery constitute one of the largest and most processed departments in its composition.

          Baptism, contrary to the statements of a number of Orthodox authors, did not in the least affect the reduction in the export of slaves. In the "Word of Blessed Serapion about lack of faith" (the first half of the 1270s), among the sins common in Russia, the following are also mentioned: "We rob our brothers, kill them, sell them to trash."

          In the later Middle Ages, the export slave trade did decline. This was influenced by the transfer of the demographic, political and economic center of the country to the north - as a result of the colonization of modern Central Russia. Because of this, Russia was cut off from the Asian and Mediterranean markets, which received most of the slaves. And although German merchants still came to Novgorod and Vitebsk to “buy girls”, the aggregate demand for slaves in Europe was relatively small, so that a slave-trade economy comparable in scale to Kiev never emerged in North-Eastern Russia.

          However, one should not think that the scale of slavery as such has decreased, or that it has become in any way softer. The slave as it was and remained the property of the owner, over whom he had the right to life and death. For example, in the Dvina Charter of 1397, issued after the annexation of the region to Moscow, it is clearly said: "And whoever makes a mistake, hits his slave or slave and death occurs, the governors do not judge in that, nor do they take guilt. In short, killing your own slave or female slave is a religious sin, not a crime, and therefore is not punished in any way. In this regard, it is difficult to see any progress in comparison with the formulations of "Russian Pravda".
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 13 October 2020 08: 06
            +3
            Great comment! Everything was so ...
          2. ee2100
            ee2100 13 October 2020 08: 20
            0
            That's right, otherwise historians somehow shyly bypass this topic. As well as the topic of robberies. And this article is an example of that. Those. killing a neighbor and co-religionist seems to be as possible, but to plunder his farm and sell him and his family into slavery is "not comme il faut"
            1. kalibr
              kalibr 13 October 2020 08: 51
              +7
              Quote: ee2100
              but historians somehow shyly bypass this topic.

              Again you, Alexander, "are scurrying into the water, not knowing the ford" ... Klyuchevsky wrote about this more than once, but is he not a historian? From modern historians can be called the work of I. Froyanov Slavery and tributary among the Eastern Slavs. - SPb .: Publishing house of SPbSU, 1996.
              Finally, type on the Web "Slavery among the Slavs." There it is told in some detail and there is a list of references.
              1. ee2100
                ee2100 13 October 2020 08: 57
                +2
                I mean here and now, as the author claims, that those who were taken were "resettled somewhere." Here is the author and point to the work of his colleagues.
                1. kalibr
                  kalibr 13 October 2020 09: 04
                  +1
                  Yes, I didn't mean to offend you, Alexander. I was surprised by the phrase "bashfully bypassed."
                  1. ee2100
                    ee2100 13 October 2020 09: 24
                    +5
                    Isn't that so? Samsonov writes about some kind of "resettlement" of prisoners, so take and correct your colleague. This is just about "bashfully bypassing"
                    He taught some of the "Russian Truth" in high school, namely, that for the murder of a slave the owner will not. Well, about the rates for murders and drills.
                    1. kalibr
                      kalibr 13 October 2020 09: 43
                      +3
                      I did not understand you, I thought that you were talking about historians in a general sense, but here is a specific case ...
                      1. ee2100
                        ee2100 13 October 2020 09: 47
                        +2
                        It's good that we figured it out!
                    2. Trilobite Master
                      Trilobite Master 13 October 2020 11: 05
                      +7
                      Quote: ee2100
                      Samsonov writes about some kind of "resettlement" of prisoners,

                      Here, just Samsonov is right. (Didn't think I would ever say this laughing )
                      Below there is my more detailed commentary on this topic. I do not know if the author read something on this topic or just hit the sky with his finger, but here he is right.
                      Yes, and I want to ask you once again: there is no need to call Samsonov a historian. The fact that he writes articles on a historical topic does not make him a historian. As for the content of his articles, it is more appropriate to speak of "pseudo-history" here.
                      By the way, today's article, despite the extreme infantilism and primitiveness of interpretations, clearly falls short of the usual level of stupidity.
                      1. Catfish
                        Catfish 13 October 2020 15: 15
                        0
                        "And there is a hole in the old woman ..." laughing
                      2. Dzungar
                        Dzungar 15 October 2020 07: 26
                        0
                        Well, what are you talking about about him .... He just got on the right path, and you did it like that .... It would be necessary to praise him, gently correct ..... And so, in spite of us, he will again return to the sect of "the great empire of the empire and the ancient Russians"
          3. Trilobite Master
            Trilobite Master 13 October 2020 10: 49
            +6
            The issue of slavery and the slave trade in Russia, as they say, is "very difficult." smile
            It is easier to understand it if you understand its economic essence. And the bottom line is this: selling people is profitable only when this sale brings in more income than taxation.
            During the formation of the ancient Russian state, the slave trade was one of the main sources of income, for taxation was still in its infancy, and labor productivity was extremely low. But with the streamlining of this system and with an increase in productivity, and hence the wealth of the taxable population, the slave trade gradually curtailed. Already by the time of Monomakh, the princes preferred not to sell, but to settle on their lands, and even provided "ease" for this - exemption from taxes for a period of up to thirty years (on average, five to seven). Traded in Russian slaves, mainly steppe nomads, their economy was built somewhat differently.
            By the end of the XIV century. the slave trade as such existed almost exclusively in relation to the Horde. It often happened that the princes themselves bought (!) Full from the steppe inhabitants, seating the ransomed on their lands. The sale of people somewhere "over the hill" was no longer discussed at all.
            Slavery as a phenomenon was, rather, a form of personal dependence, rather than a form of property.
            So the prisoners taken during the internecine wars of the XIV century. could be sold only within the framework of the principality where they were brought and in the end either they were attached to the case on the spot, or returned home for ransom.
  3. Sovpadenie
    Sovpadenie 13 October 2020 09: 41
    +3
    I advise you to read the collection of novels "Sovereigns of Moscow" by D. Balashov, describing this era (starting with Daniel of Moscow). Very interesting. Lovers of Russian history will enjoy it. Reading, you involuntarily draw parallels with Italy. In terms of the identity of the nation. They still have a strong human self-determination as a representative of a particular city / historical region. There is still an opposition to a representative of another region. Apparently, in Russia, the Tver people for the Muscovites (and vice versa) were not considered "fellow citizens" as well. Therefore, robbing and capturing a neighbor was the norm.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr 13 October 2020 09: 53
      +1
      But the level of development with Italy is different !!! There, in 1378, the first uprising of hired workers was the Chompi, and we have a battle on the Piana River in 1377!
      1. Sovpadenie
        Sovpadenie 13 October 2020 10: 03
        0
        .... and what does this mean?
      2. Ryazan87
        Ryazan87 13 October 2020 12: 55
        +6
        But the first pogrom in Russia due to the exorbitant percentage appetites of "microcredit organizations" was already recorded in the time of Monomakh :)))
        1. Dzungar
          Dzungar 15 October 2020 07: 31
          0
          In what veiled form you clothed this fact ... Bravo
    2. Moskovit
      Moskovit 13 October 2020 10: 17
      +1
      I myself really love the work of Dmitry Mikhailovich, but nevertheless it is in many ways fiction. It was interesting to watch him drift from Martha the Posadnitsa to the Great Table. Wisdom, it comes over the years ...
      On the other hand, the Moscow state held us all together long enough)), so we don't have such a difference as in Italy.
      1. Sovpadenie
        Sovpadenie 13 October 2020 10: 24
        0
        Yes. The centralized state in Italy was formed in the second half of the 19th century. In Russia, it was 300 years earlier (and if we take into account the results of the reign of Ivan 3, then by 400).
        I wrote about how a person in that era determined himself. How did a person treat representatives of the same ethnic group, but living in a different region
    3. Lynx2000
      Lynx2000 13 October 2020 12: 43
      +1
      Quote: Sovpadenie
      I advise you to read the collection of novels "Sovereigns of Moscow" by D. Balashov, describing this era (starting with Daniel of Moscow). Very interesting. Lovers of Russian history will enjoy it. Reading, one involuntarily draws parallels with Italy.


      There is also a novel by M.A. Rapov's "Dawns over Russia" well described the events preceding the Battle of Kulikovo and its outcome.

      Regarding Italy, it is not surprising as indicated in the comments, because its unification took place in the second half of the 19th century.
      1. Dzungar
        Dzungar 15 October 2020 07: 34
        +1
        The magnificent book "Dawns over Russia" ..! I reread it several times during my studies at school. Thomas ... Semyon Melik ...
    4. Marine engineer
      Marine engineer 13 October 2020 14: 30
      +2
      "I advise you to read the collection of novels" Sovereigns of Moscow "by D. Balashov,"

      The first novel "The Youngest Son" in this series is the most powerful.
      For each book, you can shoot serials, "Game of Thrones" with their dragons, rest.
  4. Aitvaras
    Aitvaras 13 October 2020 13: 37
    0
    The author incorrectly calls the ON the Lithuanian-Russian state. This is, for example. to call the Golden Horde a Mongolian-Russian state. In the Grand Duchy of Lithuania from the 13th century, Lithuanian princes, pagans, and at the end of the 14th century, Catholics ruled. Then the decision was finally made to Lithuania to follow the European path of development. In the GDL, the Orthodox were not allowed to rule the country. The Russians served in the GDL army, similarly the Russians served the Mongol khans.
  5. Trilobite Master
    Trilobite Master 13 October 2020 14: 10
    +6
    No, I still can't resist a voluminous comment, although there is not much time and the author is ... let's just say, unsympathetic.
    It's just that everything is so simplified in the article that it's just a shame for the ancestors - they were so primitive and stupid. After all, the audience here is adult, schoolchildren, if there are, there are not so many of them.
    So, a little on Prince Dmitry Ivanovich and his "achievements".
    By the end of the XIV century. in the eastern part of Europe there were two main political players - the Horde and Lithuania. Lithuania was going through a period of take-off, two princes stood out in it - brothers Olgerd and Keistut, who solved all important issues. Keistut was mainly engaged in resisting the German onslaught in the west, Olgerd - in the expansion of Lithuania's possessions in the east. The brothers ruled amicably and always helped each other. The Horde was going through a period of strife ("the great zamyatnya"), during which it actually divided into three parts - the east - to the east of the Volga, the west - the Dnieper and Crimea and the north, in fact, Russia in the person of the Grand Duchy of Vladimir, ruled from Moscow.
    The eastern and western parts of the Horde were incessantly at war with each other, while Russia, through the efforts of the de facto ruler, Metropolitan Alexy, did not get involved in these showdowns, financially supporting one applicant or another and thus observing the balance of power and quietly solving its internal problems. The last one supported by Moscow was Mamai, who dealt with Khan Murut with the help of Russian silver (it seems so). In exchange for help, Alexy demanded a reduction in tribute and the recognition of the Vladimir reign by his fatherland, that is, the hereditary possession of the Moscow princes, which was done by Mamai.
    Moscow had three problems of its own - Nizhny Novgorod, Tver and Ryazan, and princes ruled in Tver and Ryazan no match for Dmitry of Moscow - both Bali are much older, smarter, and more talented. This refers to Oleg Ivanovich Ryazansky and Mikhail Alexandrovich Tverskoy. In the struggle for the independence of their principalities, due to their geographical position, the first relied on the Horde, the second on Lithuania. Nizhny Novgorod could not boast of such a ruler and by the 70s fell under the full influence of Moscow (a strife broke out there, which Muscovites skillfully used). Tver survived thanks to the help of Lithuania - Olgerd made three campaigns against Moscow in 1368, 1370 and 1372. and the internal unity of the principality, when in 1375 Tver was besieged by a united Russian army, but withstood the siege, although Mikhail signed agreements beneficial for Moscow. However, signing does not mean fulfilling (later Mikhail will boldly spit on these agreements), and Tver retained its independence and ability to conduct an independent policy at all levels. Moscow has not yet taken seriously for Ryazan.
    The precarious balance was disturbed by the death of Metropolitan Alexy in 1378. Prince Dmitry Ivanovich did not possess the talents of a statesman, and the successes achieved under Alexy apparently turned his head. He immediately fell out with Mamai, making him an enemy instead of an ally. The point, apparently, was the usual greed. Mamyu needed help (money) to fight Tokhtamysh, which had gained strength in the east. Under the former Metropolitan, the issue was resolved with silver - the Russians paid first to one, then to the other, they were not touched, the war in the steppe continued. Dmitry refused to pay. Instead of an ally and a shield from the steppe for Russia, as was the case under Alexy, Mamai became an enemy of Moscow.
    The conflict was resolved on the Kulikovo field, as a result, the unity of the Horde was restored with Russian blood, and everything that Dmitry wanted to save on Mamai had to be paid to Tokhtamysh after the burning of Moscow in 1382, and besides, leave his eldest son Vasily hostage with the khan.
    Having broken off the teeth on Tver in 1375, they did not touch it any more. The attack on Ryazan ended with the defeat of Moscow in the battle of Perevitsk in 1385 and the forced abandonment of Ryazan, as Tver had been before, in peace for many years.
    So the bottom line is:
    Restoring the unity of the Horde, I repeat, with Russian blood.
    Resumption of regular tribute payments to the Horde.
    Restoration of the complete political sovereignty of the Horde over Russia, which did not shake even after the defeat of Tokhtamysh by Timur.
    Suspension of the unification of Russian lands.
    Here he is - "the prince-warrior".
    1. ee2100
      ee2100 13 October 2020 16: 59
      +1
      This is not a commentary or addition, but a fresh and not blurry look at a well-known historical event. It is a pity that it is concise.
      The best of this author, not counting a series of his articles about Yaroslav Vsevolodovich.
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 13 October 2020 20: 37
        0
        Quote: ee2100
        fresh

        This concept is at least twenty years old. I first got acquainted with its basis with Anton Gorsky, if I am not mistaken, in a work that was published in the early 2000s. Gorsky is currently, perhaps, the most authoritative expert on Russian-Horde relations. And so it has already been repeatedly discussed and in the scientific community, in general, is now considered as one of the main, gaining more and more supporters. And this is the "official" story.
        By the way, the same Gorsky evaluates the events of the struggle between Moscow and Tver in a very peculiar way - everything is again not as unambiguous as some think, and he postpones the date of the overthrow of the "yoke" eight years earlier than standing on the Ugra. And in general, these points of view are also very, very well argued for him.
        1. ee2100
          ee2100 13 October 2020 20: 43
          +3
          Here (here) I, at least have not seen this version. Yes, she has the right to be, maybe it was, but the article is called "Dmitry Ivanovich" that's our everything.
          From under the next "idol" choose a pedestal
    2. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 13 October 2020 19: 15
      +1
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      Here he is - "the prince-warrior".

      This is the fourth version of the events of those years.
      Which one to choose?
    3. Dzungar
      Dzungar 15 October 2020 07: 41
      0
      This is not the first time I have already read about doubts and direct instructions about the state and military leadership qualities of Dmitry Ivanovich ... Apparently it was so
  6. Igor Litvin
    Igor Litvin 13 October 2020 20: 15
    -1
    Quote: Trilobite Master
    ... By the end of the XIV century. in eastern Europe, there were two main political players - the Horde and Lithuania ...

    Rather, three are still crusaders. GDL fought against the crusaders from the northwest and the Horde from the southeast. If it weren't for the ON, there would be just a Mongolian-German border, without Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians.
    1. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master 13 October 2020 20: 24
      0
      Quote: Igor Litvin
      Rather, three are still crusaders.

      I don't know if they can be attributed to Eastern Europe. The Germans, after all ... Well, let them be. For Lithuania, they were an important component of geopolitics.
    2. ee2100
      ee2100 13 October 2020 20: 46
      +1
      By the XIV century, the crusaders, as before, had regional significance
    3. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 14 October 2020 20: 50
      +1
      Quote: Igor Litvin

      Rather, three are still crusaders. GDL fought against the crusaders from the northwest and the Horde from the southeast. If it weren't for the ON, there would be just a Mongolian-German border, without Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians.

      Controversial statement.
  7. Igor Litvin
    Igor Litvin 13 October 2020 20: 18
    0
    the author of the article somehow strangely bypassed the fundamental event - the Battle of Blue Water in 1362, as a result of which the Grand Duchy of Lithuania liberated a significant part of Rus (now Ukraine) from the Tatar yoke. In Moscow, if you remember, the yoke was still a century old.
    1. ee2100
      ee2100 13 October 2020 20: 47
      +2
      You will remind who coined the word "yoke"
  8. Igor Litvin
    Igor Litvin 13 October 2020 20: 48
    -1
    Quote: ee2100
    You will remind who coined the word "yoke"

    Dlugosh
  9. Igor Litvin
    Igor Litvin 13 October 2020 20: 56
    0
    Quote: ee2100
    By the XIV century, the crusaders, as before, had regional significance

    The dominant state formation in the Russian lands of that time was ON. This means that the events in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania are of fundamental importance for that period for the Eastern Slavs. You will not deny that in Eastern Europe in the twentieth century, the main thing happened in the USSR?
    GDL confronted two global threats - the crusaders and the Tatars. I had to allocate resources and balance. For example - before going to Vorskla with an attempt to impose the payment of tribute from the Golden Horde in 1399, Vitovt had to conclude the Treaty of Sali in 1398 with the crusaders and give them Samogitia. And vice versa...
  10. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 13 October 2020 21: 11
    0
    the material for the construction came from the quarries of the village of Myachkova at the confluence of the Pakhra into the Moskva River. The stone was delivered to the city by the Moscow River. In the summer he was taken by boat, and in the winter by sleigh along the frozen river.

    In winter, building materials were transported across the ice, naturally, and in summer the Moskva River became very shallow (where the Crimean bridge is now, there was a Crimean ford - Turgenev has it about it), so the stone was delivered on ships only in spring, during floods.