Military Review

Ancient Russia. New way

225

VM Vasnetsov "A Knight at the Crossroads". Timing St. Petersburg


Speaking about the collapse of the clan system and the formation of the communal-territorial structure of Ancient Russia, one must understand that this process was not one-time. It took quite a long period from the end of the XNUMXth to the end of the XNUMXth century, and possibly to the beginning of the XNUMXth century.

It was the community that was the most important factor, as in stories Russia-Russia, and in other European countries, and even in the United States, remaining so today. But the community has undergone a tremendous evolution, undergoing serious changes in different historical conditions. Between the community of the XNUMXth and XNUMXth centuries, equality is only in name, since the first is based on a consanguineous principle, and the second is based on an economic principle. And in the period we are considering, it was the genesis of the community that determined the changes from the pre-state structure to the state. But first things first.

The community of Ancient Rus, clan and neighboring, from the XNUMXth to the XNUMXth centuries was built not on an agricultural and economic basis, but on a kindred basis.

This was the case among the Germans before the worldwide migration of peoples, and in the early history of Ancient Rome, etc.

From the middle - the end of the XIV century, with the formation of a new period in the development of Russia and with the emergence of the peasant as an agricultural producer, communities began to regulate, first of all, agrarian relations, which was reflected in the documents (petitions) of this period.

And they were akin to the German mark community of the Western European Middle Ages.
A similar period among the Germanic peoples who seized the lands of the Western Roman Empire began in the XNUMXth – XNUMXth centuries, depending on the region.



Our Lady of Oranta. XI century Saint Sophia. Kiev.

City-state


The new political system, which has become ubiquitous in Russia, is known to most readers as the "republican" system of Novgorod. Without its registration, the historical progress, which we know about from the monuments of architecture and literature that have come down to us of that time, would have been impossible.

Everywhere in Russia, the city with the volost gradually became (instead of a tribe or tribal principality) a new territorial political unit, which, by analogy with Greek city-states, researchers called a city-state (I. Ya. Froyanov and historians of his school).

Any Russian city, regardless of the way it was formed, acquired or had such a structure. There were many descendants of the Rurikovichs, and they all found cities for themselves. You can see how some of the princes moved throughout Russia: from Novgorod to Tmutarakan. We repeat, the structure that we traditionally know from Novgorod has been present in all cities of Russia since the XNUMXth century.

An analogy can be drawn here with the formation of city-states of Indo-European peoples, primarily in ancient Italy and Greece. The city-state of Ancient Greece was formed by the Greek conquering tribes during the period of land capture and colonization.
Unlike the Germans of the period of the neighboring community of the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries, in whom the formation of pre-state institutions took place on lands belonging to the Roman civilization (synthetic theory), seriously cultivated, having a system of cities, fortresses and roads, scientific knowledge and Roman law!


The city-states of the Eastern Slavs, as political structures of the communal-territorial system, were formed along the paths of colonization, in the "deserts" - forests, where everything happened from scratch. And this is important to remember.

Merya and Slavic colonization


Using the example of the Finno-Ugric tribe Merya, we will consider the process of colonization and assimilation in the north-east of Eastern Europe. Merya was one of the participants in the "vocation of the Varangians", this tribe took part in Oleg's campaign to the south, Smolensk and Kiev. This tribal union occupied the territory of the Volga-Klyazmensky interfluve, the modern regions of Yaroslavl, Suzdal, Rostov. And the tribal center, Sarskoe settlement, was located on about. Nero.


Beaver paws. Items of pagan worship. IX-XI centuries Historical Museum of the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery. Yaroslavl. Photo by the author.

The Slavs in these lands quickly arose fortified settlements, colonization was carried out by Slavic clans, mainly from the north-west. But from the land of the Krivichi, and from the south, there is a consolidation of newcomers. All Slavic "grads" are located on the territory densely populated by the merey. As archaeological data show, the Slavs did not initially mix with the Meray, but settled in separate villages. At the end of the 16th - beginning of the XNUMXth century, as the Slavic Rostov increased (XNUMX hectares of area), the Sarskoye settlement fell into decay.

And with the beginning of the 1071th century, the fortified Meryan settlements disappear (Sarskoye, Malo-Davydovskoye, possibly Tenkovskoye and Yakimanskoye settlements), the tribal structure is destroyed, the Meryas become tributaries or smerds, slaves-fisk of Suzdal (the excitement of smerds from Chud in XNUMX in the Suzdal land ), which leads to its disappearance or dissolution in the Slavic environment.


How was the community formed?


So, with the fall of the clan system, a neighboring community begins to form. How it is formed can be seen on the example of Novgorod.

Initially, the population in Novgorod was divided into city sides. Archaeological data show that the boyar landholdings or the possessions of the first clans had a clan, generic character.
In the period from X to XIV centuries. they occupied the same plots, and the territories between them began to be built up from the XI-XII centuries.

Since the 80s of the XII century, the city ends have been formed.

Near the ends there is a "hundredth" system. The centenary system is a clear sign not of a generic, but of a territorial-communal military organization. Centennial and Konchansk systems form a striped strip in the city.

Thus, in the XI-XII centuries. the formation of a territorial community takes place, where a neighboring community appears next to the tribal clans.

A similar structure was formed in ancient Rome of the same period, when next to the clan community, headed by the heads of clans, patricians, a neighboring community of plebeians was formed.

In the course of the disintegration of clan relations, somewhere she died under the blows of Russia, and somewhere the old nobility was modified. Large families united in a community (rope) outside the city, and in the cities in the streets and ends. The city and rural districts were a single and inseparable whole: there was no division into "peasants" and "townspeople".
Kiev at the beginning of the XI century became "a huge and rich" medieval city, in which there were 400 churches, 8 fairs, "and people - an unknown number." The city was inhabited not only by the Slavs, there were also Varangians from all over Scandinavia, merchants from different countries. But even such a very large city as Kiev was a “big village”. The agrarian primitive economy was absolute in this society.

So, new orders come to replace generic relations. And the tribe is being replaced by a volost, principality or city-state, to use the modern term. This process takes a long time.


VM Vasnetsov "Heroic Skok". Tretyakov Gallery. Moscow

Veche


The land was the property of the entire parish, as in ancient Rome... The princes and squads, as extraterritorial structures, did not have land ownership, but lived at the expense of military booty and income from tribute. Land ownership appears in the hands of princes only from the middle of the XIII century. The few land purchase transactions that we know with certainty are only evidence of land acquired for monasteries and churches.

The popular assembly of all free armed men or veche was a form of government for the entire volost or land, city-state or community, in modern scientific language, as before the entire tribe.

This period can be designated as the time of popular rule or veche and direct democracy. Gradually, it was with the growth of the importance and strength of the armed militia, warriors, that the city-state was strengthened and formed as a politically independent structure.

Only in such conditions could mass literacy of the population emerge, which we know from the Novgorod birch bark letters, testifying to the business, economic, everyday and even love correspondence of the townspeople. This phenomenon was not only in Novgorod, but everywhere and in all lands of Russia.

Veche, as the "highest form of government" of the city, did not have a permanent, established form. Life did not require such actions. And there was no need to “churn out laws” without stopping, as in our days. A veche or a meeting of all free people most often gathered on the most important problems, during periods of crisis caused by external threats or internal abuses, which is reflected in the annals when the "executive power" was lost and led management into a dead end.

Князь


The importance of the prince also changed, which from a representative of the Russian land, its governor, turned into an executive power that did not have supreme right.

In everyday life, management was carried out by the city's elected officials. The prince was the head of the army, the defender of the volost through his squad and "thousand" - the city militia, personally headed the courts.

In the conditions of continued colonization and the struggle for tributes between the principalities, the presence of public power with the prince at the head ensured success in the struggle.


N. Roerich "The Prince's Hunt". Voronezh Regional Art Museum. N.N. Kramskoy.

New Russian outposts of colonization and defense against external threats are being laid. Under Prince Yaroslav (Yuri) the Wise in the XNUMXth century, the city of Yaroslavl in Volyn, Yuryev in Estonia (the modern city of Tartu), Yuryev on the steppe border, Yaroslavl on the Volga, on the border with the Finno-Ugrians were founded.
When Pskov fell under the control of Novgorod, the Novgorodians had the opportunity to collect tributes from the Estonian Chudi and Latgalians (Latvia). The tribute that had previously gone to Russia, to Kiev, passed to them. At the same time, Novgorod, Polotsk, Smolensk are fighting for tribute from the border Baltic and Finnish tribes. And Novgorod and Suzdal for tribute from the Finno-Ugric tribes. Many of these tributes used to go to Russia in Kiev.


The prince was provided with a "salary" at the expense of vire and sales (fines and fees), as well as tribute from other cities. Not without abuse by the "primitive" executive power.

With the development of the volost, the importance of the city militia as a combat unit increased. And this forced the princes to reckon more and more with the decisions of the townspeople.

In 1015, Yaroslav, in order to take revenge on the Novgorodians who had beaten the Varangian mercenaries, interrupted the Novgorod "deliberate husbands", as the Laurentian Chronicle reports, or "fought the best thousand," as the Novgorod 1st Chronicle concretizes. But, having learned about the threat from Kiev, he was forced to apply for military assistance to the veche.
In 1021, Mstislav Vladimirovich defeated his brother Yaroslav the Wise with the help of the tribal militia of the northerners, he could not take Kiev, because the Kiev community did not accept him, and he did not have the strength to cope with it.


Ancient Russia. New way
Boris and Gleb. First Russian Saints. Icon. XIII century Kiev Museum of Russian Art. Kiev.

The task of the community was to have its own military and "executive power", to tie the prince to the volost. It often did not coincide with the views of the prince, who sought to find a better "table" for himself, to show courage in the war. A war that could also be contrary to the interests of the city.

This happened with the situation around the tribute from the Livs, the ancestors of modern Latvians, when the Germans founded their outpost in this land - Riga. Tribute from the Livs went to Prince Vladimir of Polotsk (d. 1216), and not to the community of Polotsk, and was a payment for the performance of his duties. At the critical moment of the German expansion, he was not supported by the townspeople, who did not see their advantage in the struggle for tribute from the Livs, and with the forces of one princely squad he could not resist the Livs and the military organization of the crusaders. This led to the loss of Livonia by the Russians in 1206.

A situation arose when the prince could conduct hostilities only with the support of the militia, without his participation it was impossible to achieve sensitive successes. The prince, sometimes in spite of the "row", evaded the performance of his duties as a judge, transferring this function to the tiuns, and often seriously abused his power. Gradually, in the course of the struggle, a mechanism is built up when the city community expels the princes, or, in modern language, refuses their services. It was defined by the expression "the path is clear."

Economic and social shifts


With the disintegration of the clan, with the emergence of a neighboring community, the process of separating a craft began, the division of labor began, but all these processes were just incipient. Written legislation is being created, it was a record of customary law and a record of changes taking place in Russia.

The monetary system of Russia, a system of measures and weights that bears a regional imprint, is being formed. There is credit and usury, interest rates, both trade and guest (long-distance trade) are developing, Russian trading posts appear in Constantinople, Crimea, guests reach the Middle East.

During this transitional period, on the one hand, many pre-class orders that came from the tribal period continue to play an important role. At the same time, the moments associated with property stratification are gaining momentum.

So, for the campaign of Yaroslav against Svyatopolk and Boleslav in 1025, Novgorodians "began to collect money from the husband for 4 kunas, and from the elders for 10 hryvnias, and from the boyars for 18 hryvnias," and when the tribute from the captured Kiev was divided, everyone received equal shares. The principle continues to work, when the power of bigger husbands is determined by how much wealth they distribute: the more, the more powerful the giver.
On the other hand, Prince Svyatoslav Yaroslavovich in 1075, who, unlike his ancestor Svyatoslav Igorevich, admired weapons and who despised gold, boasted of wealth to the German ambassadors, and received an answer from them:


“It costs nothing, because it lies dead. Better than this are warriors. After all, men will get more than that. "

In addition to free and non-free (slaves from foreign tribes), a number of semi-free categories appeared. For example, outcasts appear (people who have lost contact with the community), including among the princes.

With the disappearance of the protection provided by the clan, there appears a category of slaves from tribesmen - slaves. Before that, there was no such phenomenon as servitude in Russia. Prince Vladimir Monomakh (d. 1125) carried out a reform to limit interest and streamline the process of transition of a free person to slavery, servitude, due to debts.

Territorial fragmentation


The consequence of the emergence of the neighboring community was the formation and permanent formation of new volosts and city-states, fighting for their independence from the Russian land, headed by Kiev, with the older towns of the volost and among themselves. It was an endless "parade of sovereignties", and the growth of the princely family contributed to this.


N. Roerich "Fight". Tretyakov Gallery. Moscow

The presence of a large number of military leaders was the most important condition for the emergence of early state or pre-state institutions, which is observed during this period.

The desire of the city-states to secede and leave both from under the authority of Kiev and from under their older cities was reinforced by the presence of princes with squads ready to lead the executive and judicial authorities in the cities.

The Christianization of the lands continues, and the growth of church building is caused by the desire of the city-states to have their own sacred centers. An attempt to get their own metropolitans is also connected with this movement. So, if Russia was able to get the Russian, and not the Greek, metropolitan from Constantinople, then other cities are trying to rebuild themselves from the spiritual hegemony of Kiev.

And this is evidenced by the defeat by the militia of the northern cities of St. Sophia itself in Kiev. This was not an act of blasphemy or the simple fury of the warriors who took the enemy city. The roots here are much deeper, in the mentality of the people of this period, when the temples of hostile cities were looked at, first of all, as their spiritual centers, the defeat of which destroyed the sacred protection, deprived the city of divine protection.


Saint Sophia. Kiev. Reconstruction.

We also observe the strengthening of the community's ideological independence among other peoples. For example, in the Italian city-states of the early Middle Ages. But it takes place within a different social framework of the already class state in Italy.

All this contributed to the fragmentation of lands, naturally turning Russia into a conglomerate of volosts, lands or city-states, even completely microscopic.

Conclusion


To sum up. The unification of the Eastern Slavs into a super-union under the leadership of Russia led to the fall of the clan system and the transition to a neighboring community, the political form of which was the city-state.

The territorial-communal structure naturally led to the constant fragmentation of large political structures.

A system of direct, primitive democracy was only possible within a limited number of participating citizen citizens.

It was a natural process of sovereignty. And the complaints of the chroniclers about the former unity of the Russian land only misled many researchers, since this unity was conditional. And it disintegrated immediately with the fall of tribal isolation.

Because during this historical period and on such a vast, but scarce territory of resources, there were no mechanisms or systems of governance that could bring together all the Russian principalities. And there could not be such a goal: why do this?

Each Russian land independently coped with external military pressure, even with steppe raids, absolutely incomparable with the threats that arose after the Tatar-Mongol invasion.

How this process took place on the example of specific lands, we will consider in the next article.


List of historical sources and literature:

Laurentian Chronicle. PSRL. T. I. M., 1997.
Novgorod First Chronicle. PSRL. T. III. M., 2000.
Chronicle of Gallus Anonymous // Shchaveleva N.I. Polish Latin-speaking medieval sources. M., 1990.
Titmar of Merzebursky. Chronicles. Translated by I.V.Dyakonov. M., 2005.
Granberg Y. Veche in Old Russian Written Sources: Functions and Terminology. // The most ancient states of Eastern Europe, 2004. M., 2006.
Kotyshev D.M.On the written tradition of concluding land transactions in Ancient Rus: an epigraphic commentary // Eastern Europe in antiquity and the Middle Ages. XXVIII. M., 2016.
Laurentian Chronicle. PSRL. T. I. M., 1997. S. 140; Novgorod First Chronicle. PSRL. T. III. M., 2000.
Nasonov A. N. "Russian land" and the formation of the territory of the Old Russian state. M., 1951.
Neusykhin A. I. The emergence of the dependent peasantry in Western Europe in the VI-VIII centuries. M., 1956.
Ryabinin E.A.Finno-Ugric tribes in the structure of Ancient Russia. Publishing House of St. Petersburg University. SPb., 1997.
Froyanov I. Ya. Dvornichenko A. Yu. City-states of Ancient Rus. L., 1988.
Froyanov I. Ya. Ancient Russia. Experience in researching the history of social and political struggle. M., St. Petersburg. 1995.
Khrustalev D.G. Northern Crusaders. Russia in the Struggle for Spheres of Influence in the Eastern Baltic, XII-XIII centuries. SPb., 2018.
Yanin V.L. Medieval Novgorod. M., 2004.


To be continued ...
Author:
225 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 11 May 2021 05: 25
    +4
    Thank you Edward!
    Much is controversial in Fortyanov's works. At a minimum, it is necessary to divide the cities of the old (created at the initiative of the community-tribe) and the new formation (princely graveyards, fortifications, trade and transshipment centers). A typical example of the confrontation between Vladimir and Suzdal.
    By the way, with all due respect to the St. Petersburg Historical School, which basically operates on Novgorod the Great as an example, it must be remembered that he was the first to receive his benefits. And the Russian Truth itself was originally referred to as the norm for their consolidation.
    I also disagree with the author's message to link the presence of a single entity with the fact of the existence of the state. Switzerland as a confederation has existed for 700 years. Similarly, regardless of the form of government, the Old Russian state formation stands out under the rule of Princess Olga. If it is not included in the generally recognized outline, this does not mean that the institutions of this proto-state are flawed. The main thing is that they exist. However, the rudiment of the neighboring community and the institutions of public self-government survived until the last century. Stolypin, Trotsky and Stalin fought with them.
    So the existence of a system of self-organization and self-government does not in any way interfere with the existence of the state system.
    By the way, such remnants of a tribal society as neopotism and protectionism exist today, and the gender approach does not refute the existence of matriarchy.
    1. Edward Vashchenko
      11 May 2021 07: 13
      +8
      Vladislav,
      good morning!
      We have already discussed this issue with you. hi
      You proceed from the legal approach to the formation of the state, I - from the historical or anthropological.
      The difference, as it seems to me, is very simple, lawyers "justify" the existence of a "modern" state by explaining that such a structure has existed since ancient times, with all due respect.
      Historians come from documents, but it is a generally accepted fact that neither Russian truth, nor other barbaric truths are documents that determine the emergence of the state. These are classic pre-state systems in which common oral law, of course, with adjustments by epic legislators, was formalized in writing.
      This dispute can of course be endless, I repeat, the whole question is about the view of the state as such.
      As well as the modern state, someone considers it a power, someone a quasi-education with the external attributes of the state.
      Something like this.
      Yours faithfully,
      Edward hi
      1. El Barto
        El Barto 14 May 2021 00: 17
        +1
        Not certainly in that way.
        First of all, in the theory of state and law, the very definition of the state, the list of its features and the process of its emergence today do not have a single scientific explanation and are the subject of various theories.
        Nevertheless, there are a number of basic signs that all scientists agree with:
        - territory
        - public authority separated from the social structure
        - positive law (rules of conduct established / confirmed by the authorities and ensured by violence from the authorities)
        - based on positive law violence by the authorities, directed both inside the territory and outside)
        - taxes
        - sovereignty (external independence of power, law, violence within the territory)

        If at least you have it, you almost certainly have a state.

        And there is no contradiction between lawyers and historians. The historical method is one of the methods of legal science.

        Let's look at the historical documents. When did the main signs of the state appear in Russia?
        1. The territory is legendary since the time of Rurik, just like Oleg.
        2. Public authority, separated from the community - legendary from Rurik, just like Oleg
        3. Positive law - the legendary agreement of Rurik with the Slavic-Finnish union is already an instrument of positive law, like the subsequent series of agreements.
        4.Violence has never been a problem, but it becomes legal with the advent of law - Exactly from Oleg
        5. Taxes - from Oleg
        6. Sovereignty - exactly from Oleg

        Those. the main features of the Russian state are already present at the turn of the XNUMXth century.

        A couple more points:

        - the prince with his retinue / court could not live only at the expense of war booty. The main source of livelihood was all the same fees.
        - by the time of Yaroslav, the militia no longer played any role. And Yaroslav's campaigns were accompanied not by the Novgorod militia (which is clearly seen from the chronicle where it says "Novgorodians", and not "Novgorod land", that is, a city regiment or mercenaries), similarly with Mstislav.
        Plus, if you read the description of Yaroslav's battles, then the infantry there is only Swedish, the rest of the troops are cavalry, both from the Russian princes and from the Poles. This means that we are already talking about the formation of the military class.
        1. Edward Vashchenko
          14 May 2021 11: 38
          0
          Good afternoon,
          I'm talking about this
          The difference, as it seems to me, is very simple, lawyers "justify" the existence of a "modern" state by explaining that such a structure has existed since ancient times, with all due respect.
          Historians come from documents, but it is a generally accepted fact that neither Russian truth, nor other barbaric truths are documents that determine the emergence of the state. These are classic pre-state systems in which common oral law, of course, with adjustments by epic legislators, was formalized in writing.
      2. El Barto
        El Barto 14 May 2021 00: 30
        +1
        Oral customary law in the same way can be a positive law (law) if its implementation is ensured by the power of authority. As well as written rules of conduct that are not secured by violence from the authorities are not a right.

        Those. the oral custom provided by the power of the prince is the law, but the biblical commandments or the moral code of the builder of communism are not, even though they are written down.

        Rules secured by state violence are law. Rules not secured by state violence are morality. Law exists only in the state (and the opposite too), morality exists outside the state and much earlier
        1. Edward Vashchenko
          14 May 2021 12: 27
          0
          Alex,
          I will shuffle your observations
          Oral customary law in the same way can be a positive law (law) if its implementation is ensured by the power of authority.
          modernization of the historical situation, and does not specifically reflect historical moments.
          The system of communal self-government, without real state power, the state did not exist, it was managed with all issues, except for criminal ones in Russia until the 17th century, and only after the victory of one class over another, it became necessary to ensure law by force.
          Wherever there are classes, the right is provided exclusively by force, since this right, of course, does not correspond at all to the guidelines for the life of the majority.
          We just live in such a situation, and it can be anthropologically observed how the emerging class of the bourgeoisie, step by step, imposes on other classes by force laws that are contrary to the interests of other classes. Therefore, the state also arises where there are class contradictions, otherwise it is a hewn society)))
          hi
          1. El Barto
            El Barto 14 May 2021 13: 52
            0
            In this case, I was not talking about a historical perspective, but about the basic definitions of the theory of state and law.

            As for the historical perspective, I will not argue. If you mean that even with all the formal signs of a state in a classless society, it still cannot be called a state in full, because there is no basic element of CLASS suppression, why not agree with this?

            On the other hand, putting it into pop science without preliminary explanations "for dummies" will lead to "seething" on the part of "experts"
            1. El Barto
              El Barto 14 May 2021 14: 40
              0
              Dialectics is a great force :))) By the way, thus we come to the conclusion that the withering away of the state in a classless society of the future does not mean the withering away of the tools of suppression - the police and the army, since various variants of deviant behavior will remain like possible external enemies, and their will need to suppress
              1. Edward Vashchenko
                14 May 2021 16: 56
                0
                Good question:
                By the way, in this way we come to the conclusion that the withering away of the state in a classless society of the future does not at all mean the withering away of the instruments of suppression - the police and the army,

                But if we turn to the recent past of our country, we will see that the army in the USSR did not belong to the instruments of "suppression".
                BB - were part of the structure of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and as Stalin said, I am now writing solely from the point of view of events, not panegyrics: with the advancement to communism, the class struggle increases.
                These words were more than once ridiculed during perestroika, their unscientific nature and stupidity were noted, but, as usual, Stalin turned out to be more rusty than his critics.
                Strange as it may sound, the level of science in the 80s of the twentieth centuries. could not explain this phenomenon.
                Although the classlessness of society was a scientific mistake. The USSR was not a class one, but certainly a class-based one. And I'm not talking about the "nomenclature", but about the laws governing the transition to an urban society. Zinoviev described this with the term "cheloveinik", which is now so inappropriately used in relation to the construction and mortgage quarter-ghetto.
                And in a simple way, the psychotype and mentality of the masses has not grown to the realization of a classless society.
                Simply put, where there is a conscious understanding, the police are not needed, but if there is none, then there is no way without the police.
                A bit messy, but true.
                Yours faithfully,
                Edward
            2. Edward Vashchenko
              14 May 2021 16: 47
              0
              Alex,
              good evening,
              thanks for asking the question, my mistake hi
              YOU are right that you cannot write this way without explanation.
              Honestly, it's a mystery to me how briefly and within the framework of scientific pop to convey such information.
              I repeat, you are right that it is impossible without an explanation.
              Yours faithfully,
              Edward
    2. Korsar4
      Korsar4 11 May 2021 07: 21
      +8
      Switzerland, although it is called the "Swiss Confederation", is now a federation both in letter and in spirit.
      Yes, there the decisions of the community prevail over the decisions of the canton and the entire state.

      However, there is a way. Probably unlike anything else.
      1. Edward Vashchenko
        11 May 2021 08: 01
        +9
        Sergey, good morning,
        However, there is a way. Probably unlike anything else.

        The Swiss community is based on a grave community-mark or territorial community, but due to the geographical specifics, at the beginning, and "geopolitical" alignments, later, Switzerland managed to preserve such a political system of the community, of course, little directly related to the brand, nevertheless.
        However, communes or communities are the basis of many states in Europe, but only at the grassroots level, without political power.
        Yours faithfully, hi
        1. Korsar4
          Korsar4 11 May 2021 08: 13
          +5
          Good morning, Edward.

          Little country. And even mountainous. They say that in the two cantons whoever can still get together and make a decision on the spot.
      2. El Barto
        El Barto 13 May 2021 23: 22
        +1
        Switzerland has been a federation since 1798, not by "spirit", but by law. The word "confederation" in the name is just a tribute to the historical tradition.
        1. Korsar4
          Korsar4 14 May 2021 03: 10
          0
          The word "letter" corresponds to the word law. Only a federation has been there since 1848.
          1. El Barto
            El Barto 14 May 2021 12: 19
            0
            1798 - Helvetic Republic created under French occupation and at the initiative of the French. This was the end of the old confederation. After that, everything was already going along the federal path with varying degrees of centralization.
          2. Korsar4
            Korsar4 14 May 2021 17: 44
            0
            The Helvetic Republic lasted only 5 years. This was a fluctuation, not a succession stage.
    3. Bar1
      Bar1 11 May 2021 07: 49
      0
      Speaking about the collapse of the tribal system and the formation of the communal-territorial structure of Ancient Russia


      in general, according to Marx, there were 5 socio-economic formations
      -primitive communal system
      -slavery
      -feudalism
      -capitalism / imperialism
      -socialism / communism
      Do you invent your own?
      1. ee2100
        ee2100 11 May 2021 08: 26
        +6
        Hi Paul!
        Are you a rare guest now?
        I agree with the author. Most likely it was. This is only in the biography "met and got married." You do not deny the candy-bouquet period? But he is naturally absent in his biography.
        And besides, which of Karl Marx is a scientist?
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 11 May 2021 08: 47
          -4
          Quote: ee2100
          Hi Paul!
          Are you a rare guest now?
          I agree with the author. Most likely it was. This is only in the biography "met and got married." You do not deny the candy-bouquet period? But he is naturally absent in his biography.
          And besides, which of Karl Marx is a scientist?


          hi Alexander, yes Smirnov banned me for a month for saying "geeks" you cannot say such a word on topvo, although there is no such word in the list of forbidden words, you cannot protest either, such is democracy here.

          As for Marx: ALL world historical science agrees with this, whatever you know. And if each type of historian Vaschenko comes up with his own formations / structures, then it will be a complete mess.
          There was a "primitive communal system" where everything in common, including women according to OI, in fact in Russia was not a society of a primitive order and not slavery and feudalism, but a Russian MIR, where the community / world adopted laws and monitored their implementation.
          Beginning from Alexei Mikhailovich or from Peter, the Russian world was destroyed in the cities and control was intercepted by alien Germans / Jews and Christianity came, which replaced the Russian worldview - Peter 1, but the Russian community / world remained in the villages until Stalinist collectivization, when the Russian community was completely destroyed ...
          And what kind of civilization was in Russia in the pre-Christian era can be seen on the example of the remaining monuments of Russian entrepreneurship, for example, the Istinskaya blast furnace, which is made in such a way that they cannot do it now, namely, the iron ties that permeate the entire furnace DO NOT RUST, according to OI for 300 years , experts will understand that this civilization cannot create such iron.

          1. ee2100
            ee2100 11 May 2021 08: 57
            +4
            Marx and his ilk are looking at the scheme. But it does not happen that 25.10.1917/XNUMX/XNUMX capitalism, and in the morning socialism.
            Vaschenko describes precisely the period of formation, and I agree with him. You missed my message about the "candy flower" period.
            And then Ostap suffered "Starting from Alexei Mikhailovich or from Peter the Russian world was destroyed in the cities and control was intercepted by alien Germans / Jews and Christianity came, which replaced the Russian worldview - Peter 1, but the Russian community / world remained in the villages until Stalin's collectivization, when The Russian community was completely destroyed. "(c) No comments!
            1. Bar1
              Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 03
              -5
              Quote: ee2100
              Marx and his ilk are looking at the scheme. But it does not happen that 25.10.1917/XNUMX/XNUMX capitalism, and in the morning socialism.


              the period of transition from formation to formation is stretched along the OI, nothing happens at once.

              As for the real history, the facts of the Russian world and the old faith in the 19th century were cited not by me, but by the representative of academic science, Professor Pyzhikov, who in turn referred to the authors of the 19th century. Pyzhikov's speech is in the net, will you find it yourself?
              1. ee2100
                ee2100 11 May 2021 09: 07
                +2
                You are kind of annoyed. I didn’t tell you anything bad. Only your thoughts.
                It is a pity that Pyzhikov died so early. He has a lot of common sense.
                The fact that not everything is so unambiguous is and do not go to a fortune-teller!
                1. Bar1
                  Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 17
                  0
                  Quote: ee2100
                  You are kind of annoyed. I didn’t tell you anything bad.

                  no, I'm fine, where did you get that?
        2. IS-80_RVGK2
          IS-80_RVGK2 12 May 2021 08: 39
          0
          Quote: ee2100
          And besides, which of Karl Marx is a scientist?

          Ingenious. But I understand it is difficult for you to understand. I would say absolutely impossible.
      2. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 11 May 2021 10: 39
        +2
        Quote: Bar1
        in general, according to Marx, there were 5 socio-economic formations
        -primitive communal system
        -slavery
        -feudalism
        -capitalism / imperialism
        -socialism / communism
        Do you invent your own?

        Just, I don't see any disagreements with Karl Genrikhovich here.
        I see the problem differently.
        For the time being, everything fit into the primitive communal system, it is communal-clan, everything was normal. The community lives on a certain territory - its "living space" and is "assigned" to it. Everything is normal here. The whole world has gone through this, plus or minus 300 -500 or 1000 years. Not the point.
        But here, dear author, having quite decently passed the primitive communal system, without hesitation, stepped into early feudalism, somehow very cleverly passing an important social formation - slavery ... hi
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 11 May 2021 11: 20
          -3
          Quote: A. Privalov
          Just, I don't see any disagreements with Karl Genrikhovich here.


          that it is not clear that the Ph.D. Does Vaschenko oppose some kind of "clan system" and "communal-territorial" arbitrarily? What a libertine in terms of confusing everyone?

          Quote: A. Privalov
          stepped into early feudalism, somehow very cleverly bypassing an important social formation - slavery


          As for Russia, everything is complicated even from the point of view of OI. Where was there in what period there was classical slavery, like in other Rome? There was no such period in Russia. The "slaves of God", "the sale of the free into slavery for debts" were mentioned in some chronicles and that's all. . In short, the OI history in Russia is all confused.

          It is generally difficult about Marx's socio-economic formations. Marx himself never wrote about these 5 formations, but he wrote about
          -Asian system
          -ancient system
          -German system
          and he did not invent any capitalisms / socialisms. But these 5 formations were invented by the Stalinist theorists of "scientific communism" in 1953.

          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Общественно-экономическая_формация

          This is already tin. This is how it is this "official history" and as we see this arbitrariness continues: Ph.D. Vaschenko has already invented his own formations.
        2. kalibr
          kalibr 11 May 2021 12: 12
          +7
          Because all this division is already outdated. Now science has accepted something else: the era of natural compulsion to work (primitive time), the era of non-economic compulsion (slavery and feudalism, which were nowhere and no one in their pure form !!!) and the era of economic compulsion (if you don't want to work, don't work). Finally, it came to pass that under slavery there were both free and dependent and semi-dependent peasants, and under feudalism slave labor was widely used. It’s time for our local "experts" to know all this. Or do they not read anything else besides Pyzhikov?
          1. A. Privalov
            A. Privalov 11 May 2021 14: 40
            +4
            Quote: kalibr
            Because all this division is already outdated. Now it is just science that is different.

            We, the materialists of the old school, brought up on the Short Course and nourished by the precisely verified General line of the Party, the Marxist-Leninist theory, say the firm "NO!" bourgeois theories of non-Marxist systems of periodization of human history.

            We reductionists are staunch supporters and followers of William of Ockham. Our slogan is: "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem!"
            We will not allow any idle liberal revisionists to multiply things unnecessarily!
            "The teaching of Marx is omnipotent because it is true!" (C)
            So, we will win! hi
          2. Bar1
            Bar1 11 May 2021 15: 00
            -3
            Quote: kalibr
            Because all this division is already outdated. Now science has accepted something else:


            and who are these "science" who accepted such divisions, what kind of people are they, what textbooks are written according to their works and where are they taught?
            I don't know anything about it.

            Quote: kalibr
            Finally, it came to pass that under slavery there were both free and dependent and semi-dependent peasants, and under feudalism slave labor was widely used.


            we know this, but what about until 1861, before the abolition of serfdom in tsarist Russia, it was impossible to understand what kind of system, slavery, feudalism, capitalism, EVERYTHING TOGETHER. And by the way, without Pyzhikov. Pyzhikov discovered (for us) the presence in 19th century Old Belief i.e. a completely different religion and culture, or better to say the rituals of the Russian society, and on this he insisted. And as for the "baptism of Rus" in the 10th century by Prince Vladimir, then this fact has not yet been canceled by your "scientists"?
            1. kalibr
              kalibr 11 May 2021 15: 48
              +3
              Quote: Bar1
              I don't know anything about it.

              Who would doubt it! We don't have the Internet.
          3. IS-80_RVGK2
            IS-80_RVGK2 12 May 2021 09: 02
            +1
            Quote: kalibr
            Finally, it came to pass that under slavery there were both free and dependent and semi-dependent peasants, and under feudalism slave labor was widely used.

            Socio-economic formations are determined not by some pure forms, but by the dominant forms of socio-economic relations. Sit down, Shpakovsky. Deuce to you.
            1. kalibr
              kalibr 12 May 2021 18: 19
              -1
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              Socio-economic formations are determined not by some pure forms, but by the dominant forms of socio-economic relations.

              Pot calls the kettle black...
              1. IS-80_RVGK2
                IS-80_RVGK2 12 May 2021 19: 37
                +1
                And yours was silent. laughing
                1. kalibr
                  kalibr 12 May 2021 19: 46
                  -1
                  I am not reading you, but you are reading me. And you will. And you do not need to be clever at all. It does not suit, to be clever, to people who use exclusively what others have written. Explained easily? Now, if I could read something from you. Let's say a textbook or, at worst, an article on VO. Compare, so to speak, the result of the work of the gray matter of the brain, then ...
                  1. IS-80_RVGK2
                    IS-80_RVGK2 12 May 2021 20: 03
                    +1
                    Quote: kalibr
                    I am not reading you, but you are reading me.

                    Don't tell me our precious Vyacheslav Olegovich. All these attempts to put pressure on some kind of authority ... Arouse in me exclusively pity for you.
                    Quote: kalibr
                    It does not suit, to be clever, to people who use exclusively what others have written.

                    But what of the fact that you wrote yours? Form of presentation of the material? So valuable is not a wrapper in a candy. It's time for you to understand this simple truth in your old age.
                    Quote: kalibr
                    Let's say a textbook or, at worst, an article on VO.

                    That is unlikely. I'm not that talented at copywriting and expressing my stupid thoughts. smile
                    1. kalibr
                      kalibr 12 May 2021 20: 25
                      -1
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      I'm not that talented at copywriting and expressing my stupid thoughts.

                      It was already evident!
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      But what of the fact that you wrote yours?

                      You don't know, do you? Look on the Internet for books I authored, including those for which grants from the Russian Humanitarian Science Foundation were given. And textbooks at the same time. And I am not crushing you with any authority. I just remind you that you are no match for me. Be clever in a circle of the same, but I do not need to prove anything. I only accept criticism from candidates and doctors of historical sciences, ha-ha!
                      1. IS-80_RVGK2
                        IS-80_RVGK2 12 May 2021 20: 45
                        +1
                        Quote: kalibr
                        I just remind you that you are no match for me.

                        You are right demagogues and other fluffy political instructors are no match for me.
                        Quote: kalibr
                        Look on the Internet for books I authored, including those for which grants from the Russian Foundation for Humanities were given. And textbooks at the same time.

                        Interpreting other people's thoughts? Thank you. This secondary second-rate waste paper is not interesting to me.
                      2. kalibr
                        kalibr 12 May 2021 21: 47
                        -1
                        And for the first-class one you have to go to the archive, you have to work with artifacts. This is how I, for example, when I write articles about agitation and propaganda in the USSR or what Pravda reported on its pages. There you will find material for your own thoughts. But you won't go there, no. And who will let you go there? So ... you won't get there, unless you want to find a pedigree. For this today, anyone is allowed, just pay. Although in the regional library you have a chance to read the entire file of the same Pravda for the 1418 days of the war. Very instructive. Recommend. And "no" - then your destiny until the end of your days is to feed on our fables, that is, secondary waste paper. You can't see the primary as your ears.
                      3. IS-80_RVGK2
                        IS-80_RVGK2 12 May 2021 22: 39
                        0
                        Calm down already. Just do not write any nonsense and everything will be ok. And then every time it is the heirs of the great Tartary, then Shpakovsky with his wild reactionary views of the political leader, opportunist, conformist, opportunist and renegade, then some other fools adherents of correct capitalism. You have been annoying me very much lately. I read VO and my hand begins to reach for the revolutionary Mauser. And then I remember that there is no revolution yet, and I don't have a Mauser, and in general I'm not a Chekist.
                      4. kalibr
                        kalibr 13 May 2021 06: 32
                        -1
                        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                        You have been annoying me very much lately.

                        This is just very good! What do you need from you? Need clicks and comments. Their number increases the investment attractiveness of the site. You can't see a revolution, you can't grab a Mauser ... It remains to run on your computer. This is "poisoning steam" for you, we make money on it! By the way, if you really feel unbearable ... drink sedatives. There are many of them now.
                      5. IS-80_RVGK2
                        IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 07: 40
                        -1
                        Quote: kalibr
                        Need clicks and comments.

                        You probably think I don’t understand this?
                        Quote: kalibr
                        You can't see a revolution, you can't grab a Mauser ... It remains to run on your computer. This is "poisoning steam" for you, we make money on it!

                        Which is very convenient for the ruling class. But this only works for the time being. Then the discrepancy between propaganda and reality will make itself felt and no sites will save you.
                        Quote: kalibr
                        drink sedatives. There are many of them now.

                        What for? I am hoarding proletarian hatred.
                      6. kalibr
                        kalibr 13 May 2021 08: 34
                        -1
                        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                        You probably think I don’t understand this?

                        Someone who understands, but does ... twice!
                      7. IS-80_RVGK2
                        IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 10: 45
                        0
                        Keep thinking this way. It plays into my hands. smile
                    2. kalibr
                      kalibr 13 May 2021 08: 36
                      -1
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      I am hoarding proletarian hatred.

                      Save up. This will spill bile and the doctors will have to treat you. It's good. They also need to work to support their families.
                    3. IS-80_RVGK2
                      IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 11: 12
                      0
                      Quote: kalibr
                      They also need to work to support their families.

                      They need not to work, they work anyway. They need money for their work. But with this, as shown last year, everything is very sad.
                  2. kalibr
                    kalibr 13 May 2021 08: 40
                    -1
                    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                    Then the discrepancy between propaganda and reality will make itself felt and no sites will save you.

                    Hope. In the meantime, the facts are as follows: Within four months of 2021, 515 cars were sold, which is 935% higher than in the same period in 24. But still, compared to the same period in 2020, this is 2019% less. You see how many people buy cars. And mostly foreign cars. Do you think their owners will be on your side? How would ... And the company of nostalgic losers is not difficult to suppress.
                  3. IS-80_RVGK2
                    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 11: 00
                    0
                    Quote: kalibr
                    In the meantime, the facts are as follows: Within four months of 2021, 515 cars were sold, which is 935% higher than in the same period in 24. But still, compared to the same period in 2020, this is 2019% less.

                    I can play this game too. And cite the figures of GDP growth over 10 years and the fall in real incomes of the population and the number of the poor and the decline in the population over the past year and the rise in prices. And according to them, the jerks without swinging did not work out somehow. So it is not known whether these people will be on YOUR side as well.
                    Quote: kalibr
                    And the company of nostalgic losers is not difficult to suppress.

                    When there are 20 of them, no doubt. When there are 20 million of them, there will be some problems with this.
                  4. kalibr
                    kalibr 13 May 2021 14: 11
                    -1
                    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                    When there are 20 million of them, there will be some problems with this.

                    And it's even easier with them. You just need to know how ...
                  5. IS-80_RVGK2
                    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 17: 08
                    0
                    Quote: kalibr
                    And it's even easier with them. You just need to know how ...

                    Do you know the cherished word?
                  6. kalibr
                    kalibr 13 May 2021 17: 52
                    -1
                    I am compelled, Makar, to remind you again that for many years I taught a subject called "Technologies of Public Opinion Management". And there is a tutorial where all this is laid out. There is another - I recommended both above to Timur, but you can also read them. Everything is written there ...
                  7. IS-80_RVGK2
                    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 18: 16
                    0
                    Quote: kalibr
                    "Public Opinion Management Technologies"

                    If you know how to manage the Universe, why haven't you even become the rector of the university where you taught?
  2. kalibr
    kalibr 12 May 2021 21: 51
    -1
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    demagogues and other rhetoric political instructors

    They steered you with a scoop, and you spat, but they took it under the visor, they steer you today.
  3. IS-80_RVGK2
    IS-80_RVGK2 12 May 2021 22: 28
    0
    Quote: kalibr
    They steered you with a scoop, and you spat, but they took it under the visor, they steer you today.

    And like you are so independent and above the fight? Do you live in the forest by subsistence farming? The Internet seems to work on wood through hemp communication channels.
  4. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 06: 34
    -1
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    And like you are so independent and above the fight? Do you live in the forest by subsistence farming? The Internet seems to work on wood through hemp communication channels.

    My farm is built on the ignorance of 80% of the population. This is my cash cow ...
  5. IS-80_RVGK2
    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 07: 43
    +2
    Quote: kalibr
    My farm is built on the ignorance of 80% of the population. This is my cash cow ...

    Parasitism on ignorance is what distinguishes the capitalist intelligentsia from the Soviet. I know. smile
  6. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 08: 33
    -1
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    Parasitism on ignorance is what distinguishes the capitalist intelligentsia from the Soviet. I know.

    Did I make them that way? It is a sin not to take advantage of opportunities. By the way, the Soviet intelligentsia also parasitized. There is no difference here. Knowledge is exchanged for money. You don't understand this, do you? Does the word "Soviet" obscure everything? Well, then, "while they live in the world ... we must glorify our fate."
  7. IS-80_RVGK2
    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 11: 36
    0
    Quote: kalibr
    Did I make them that way?

    Of course, it's not just you.
    Quote: kalibr
    By the way, the Soviet intelligentsia also parasitized.

    Not that. And most importantly, it was not a trend.
    Quote: kalibr
    There is no difference here.

    Undoubtedly there is.
    Quote: kalibr
    Knowledge is exchanged for money.

    They are different money.
    Quote: kalibr
    Does the word "Soviet" obscure everything?

    It will force you into it. And scares you. I have an extremely sober view of things.
  8. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 13: 51
    -1
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    And scares you.

    Corpses cannot frighten. The calmest and quietest place is the cemetery.
  9. IS-80_RVGK2
    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 17: 07
    0
    Quote: kalibr
    Corpses cannot frighten.

    Ideas live much longer than humans. However, you are afraid of the dead. How else to explain your struggle with the dead.
  10. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 17: 44
    -1
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    How else to explain your struggle with the dead.

    Fighting ... the dead? What are you? There is simply a concept of "lost profits". The past owes me. So I am collecting debts from him. But, of course, I would not like to return it for my children, so I try to the best of my ability: a - to make money on it, b - to tell the truth about him so that it does not happen again. You know, I don’t want to bow to the hegemons again, just because their hands are in fuel oil. Remember you finally a simple truth: you need to make money on rarities. In summer, ice is rare and you need to sell ice. In winter, flowers are rare ... Have you seen a lot of articles on VO based on documents from the archives? At best, someone is referring to books and memoirs. And everything else is Vicki's correspondence. What I write about is rare and therefore doubly valuable. You, with all your desire, will not be able to get it in any way. That's all!
  11. IS-80_RVGK2
    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 18: 07
    0
    Quote: kalibr
    You, with all your desire, cannot get it in any way.

    Do you steal documents from archives?
  12. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 18: 17
    -1
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    Do you steal documents from archives?

    You're kidding, I hope. Why steal them? You come and work with them. You make photocopies yourself, a copier - 10 rubles. sheet. You've seen my articles with photocopies of archival files. Stupidity, why write?
  13. IS-80_RVGK2
    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 18: 20
    0
    So you yourself wrote that, with all my desire, I cannot get these documents.
  14. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 18: 25
    -1
    Do you want? Is it real? Go to the archive, write a statement explaining why you need it? Then go where you have never been ... Then you will have cases with which you have never worked ... And now you are sitting in the hall and do not know how to start all this. And the thought is one: "Why the devil brought me to this galley." That is why I wrote this way ... A desire may appear, but spending time and money on it is unlikely? And what will you look for there? It's funny even to think about it. Okay. They overcame everything. Found an interesting fact, two facts, three ... And what will you do with them? Write an article on VO? Don't make people laugh at me!
  15. IS-80_RVGK2
    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 18: 34
    0
    Small children.
    No way
    don't go kids
    in the archives you walk.
    There is a terrible one in the archives,
    There's a villain in the archives
    Harmful,
    Bad
    Shpakovsky Barmaley.
  16. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 19: 13
    -1
    It's funny, of course. But ... silly, you know. Once again: Do many authors here give you articles based on documents that you can check if you want? I have not met except myself. You should be happy, but ... alas, the reaction is the opposite. What city do you live? If the regional center, then there should be an archive of the Regional Committee of the CPSU. Sign up for a job there, gradually learn, then you will try to write, learn GOST for the registration of links to documents ... You will have an interesting occupation and general respect. Want to try? Yes or no? If not, then what is this whole conversation about? Purpose? Raise the rating of Eduard Vaschenko's article? For example, I have this - he is a "fellow in the pen." What are you trying to do? You will not prove anything to me with empty words.
  17. IS-80_RVGK2
    IS-80_RVGK2 13 May 2021 20: 31
    0
    Quote: kalibr
    What are you trying to do?

    I didn't try at all. Why did you decide that? If I tried in my life, I would achieve much more. smile
    Quote: kalibr
    many authors here give docs based articles

    First, as you know, gentlemen take their word for it. Secondly, you yourself scare that access to documents is an almost impossible task. So the value of links to documents turns out to be near-zero by your efforts as well. And in general, for a Russian person, it is not documents that are important, but a certain intuitive concept of rightness.
  18. kalibr
    kalibr 14 May 2021 07: 14
    0
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    And in general, for a Russian person, it is not documents that are important, but a certain intuitive concept of rightness

    And this is the worst thing that can be. Intuition often fails.
  19. kalibr
    kalibr 14 May 2021 07: 19
    0
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    Secondly, you yourself scare that access to documents is an almost impossible task.

    Makar! Don't be offended. But you are a little ... "bad at thinking". I am not afraid. I honestly (and it costs a lot!) Explained to you what difficulties await you on the way of working in the archive. But I also wrote to you that if you want ... then there are NO PROBLEMS, I came, wrote a statement and WORK. What city do you live? Write to me in a personal, I will tell you everything about your party archives, and even if you get to the state archives, you spit twice!
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    First, as you know, gentlemen take their word for it.

    Judging by the comments on VO, we don't have a lot of them ... They don't even believe articles with documents! What if my articles are without links? Do you understand what I'm talking about?
  20. Foul skeptic
    Foul skeptic 13 May 2021 08: 40
    +1
    My farm is built on the ignorance of 80% of the population. This is my cash cow ...

    Calling your readers backward is of course very strong.
  21. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 09: 27
    -1
    Quote: Nefarious skeptic
    it is strong of course.

    Of course, Timur, this does not apply to everyone. But ... we're talking about 80%. It's always like that. I myself am on a number of topics in this 80%. And they milk me there. And somewhere on the contrary. This is called the circulation of information in nature. There is nothing offensive here. This is a given that everyone uses. It is strange that you do not understand this.
  22. Foul skeptic
    Foul skeptic 13 May 2021 09: 46
    +1
    Of course, Timur, this does not apply to everyone. But ... we're talking about 80%. It's always like that. I myself am on a number of topics in this 80%. And they milk me there. And somewhere on the contrary. This is called the circulation of information in nature. There is nothing offensive here. This is a given that everyone uses. It is strange that you do not understand this.

    Vyacheslav, you understand what the matter is ... You made a proposal so unsuccessfully that the picture is drawn differently. After all, you wrote that the backward population, of which 80%, provides you with profit. Profit can only be from the goods you sold and your goods bought by the buyer. This means that those out of 80% of the ignorant population who bought your books are 100% of your readers. After all, if your book is bought by someone from 20% of the "respectable" population, then his money will also go into your profit. That would contradict your own words about who your "cash cow" is. And only 3 inputs follow from this unfortunate suggestion:
    1) You consider your readers to be retarded just because they are your readers.
    2) All your readers are retarded
    3) Your books are not interesting for non-backward people.
    And all would be fine, well, it so happened that an expression that was unfortunate in meaning came out, no one is immune from this. But you with your next offer
    "while they live in the world ... we must glorify our fate"

    only strengthen the above 3 conclusions - you are glad that there are fools who are ready to give money for your books)))
  23. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 10: 37
    -1
    You know Timur, I have no time to delve into these intricacies. You understood everything perfectly. There are a lot of ignorant people and those who know something. Of course, both people buy and read. But it gives some more, others less. More gives 80%. So we are working for them. Ah ... this is a vernacular and ambiguous word. And I used it in a conversation with Makar, right? Not with you, but why ... figure it out. It is people like him who give clicks and comments, trying to prove something. Here I am glad of their number.
  24. Foul skeptic
    Foul skeptic 13 May 2021 11: 11
    +1
    And I used it in a conversation with Makar, right? Not with you, but why ... figure it out.

    To be honest, I can't figure it out. I can assume that by this you meant to say that this very word behind three dots is applicable to Makar, but not to me. And if this is so, then I still - I cannot figure it out. This time why do you have Makar - ... I then decided to intervene in your conversation after this
    I just remind you that you are no match for me.

    Makar may not be an equal (in some separate topics), but he corrected you here
    Socio-economic formations are determined not by some pure forms, but by the dominant forms of socio-economic relations.

    quite correct.
    Here, after all, if you give you your own words
    And you do not need to be clever at all. It does not suit, to be clever, to people who use exclusively what others have written.

    Then at the beginning of your conversation with Makar about the OEF, I would like to ask a question, and your level of knowledge in this area is based on your own theories or on the fact that you used what others have written? It turns out that I missed your books on the OEF. Ready to purchase on your "tip" and as a request to send you by mail in order to get the author's autograph. And if they are not there ... then your words quoted above are quite suitable for this:
    It’s time for our local "experts" to know all this.
  25. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 13: 59
    0
    Timur, there are books. These are PR and advertising textbooks that have it all. I wrote about three eras back in 2005 in a book on the historiography of chivalry. I cannot send them to you, because I myself have only one copy. But they are on the Web, and it seems even in PDF. And you can read them and draw your own conclusions. Besides, they are not all mine. A whole team of authors worked on one, including a Ph.D. "Just like that" now nothing is published. And the books ... type on the Internet textbooks on PR and advertising Shpakovsky and everything will be for you ... They are not abstruse, not the same as before. They are read like a novel, and even in them there are references to films, books, creative tasks are given ...
  26. Foul skeptic
    Foul skeptic 13 May 2021 14: 10
    0
    Timur, there are books. These are PR and advertising textbooks that have it all. I wrote about three eras back in 2005 in a book on the historiography of chivalry.

    I'm somewhat confused, to be honest.
  27. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 14: 16
    0
    Look on the Internet, Timur.
  28. Foul skeptic
    Foul skeptic 13 May 2021 15: 12
    0
    This requires clarification, with the specific title of the books. No other way. I just bought two of your books: "Knights. Castles. Weapons" and "Knights" (the second year of publishing on Liters was listed as 2005, and when I downloaded it, it turned out that this book was released in 2018, maybe just a reprint, I don't know) ...
    I did not expect, in general, that I would find a consideration of the OEF there, because the topic and focus on the children's audience does not quite dispose (however, as in books about PR minus the children's audience). And so it turned out. Therefore, I don't even know whether to spend money on books about advertising. Maybe I'll get to the wrong one, which you had in mind.
  29. kalibr
    kalibr 13 May 2021 15: 20
    0
    I'll send everything now. I did not expect that you will not find ... Here: http: // textbooks.inform2000.rf/reklama/rek01.shtml "Shpakovsky V.O. Internet journalism and online advertising. 2018" It is downloaded there completely.

    https://www.labirint.ru/books/673127/ Технологии управления общественным мнением. Учебное пособие. Шпаковский Вячеслав Олегович, Сиушкин Альберт Евгеньевич, Милаева Оксана Всеволодовна
    Publisher: Infra-Engineering, 2019

  30. Foul skeptic
    Foul skeptic 14 May 2021 16: 07
    0
    Didn't expect that you won't find ...

    There was a misunderstanding. I don't "can't find". I don't know what specific books you had in mind. After all, if you say that in the book about knights you considered the OEF, I buy 2 such books and there is not a word about the OEF in them, then 2 cases are likely:
    1) there is nothing about the OEF
    2) I downloaded the wrong book about knights, since you have several of them.
    A similar situation can be with books on PR and advertising. Therefore, I asked you not to search for me where you can get them, but simply to give the exact title of the book.
    But since you even provided links, then I am doubly grateful for taking the time. Many thanks.
    With sadness I must say that in the book you proposed, which is available for general acquaintance, there is nothing about the OEF.
  31. The comment was deleted.
  32. The comment was deleted.
  • Foul skeptic
    Foul skeptic 12 May 2021 18: 12
    +2
    Finally, it came to pass that under slavery there were both free and dependent and semi-dependent peasants, and under feudalism slave labor was widely used. It's time for our local "experts" to know all this

    So, if it came down to it, then why are they stepping on the same rake as 150 years ago - because according to the modern division you mentioned, based on the method of motivation to work, there is an even greater mess and a mixture of non-economic and economic coercion in the same time interval.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr 13 May 2021 14: 00
      -1
      The same Kutuzov, Timur, once said: Since the truth is revealed to one person, and until everyone accepts it, sometimes a person's life is not enough!
  • Edward Vashchenko
    11 May 2021 14: 16
    +6
    Dear Timur,
    Marx lived 150 years ago, during this period science, including the Marxist formalin concept, has seriously changed.
    Already in the 30s. XX century. historians have argued about the "pre-feudal" period as a necessary stage preceding feudalism.
    Since the 50s (A.N. Neusykhin) in Russian history, the pre-class period, be it before feudalism or the slave-owning system, has become an axiom.
    In parallel, anthropological theories developed in the West and in our country since the 90s of the twentieth century. (chiefdom, as the most famous).

    Today, the formation or modern theory certainly includes the pre-class period: "a community without primitiveness" - a primitive communal system and territorial-communal one.
    All European history is viewed in this vein by neo-Marxists or supporters of formations.
    Of course you flatter me, it's not bad to "come up" with this, but the venerable colleagues are ahead.
    Yours faithfully, hi
    1. Bar1
      Bar1 11 May 2021 15: 19
      -1
      Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
      Already in the 30s. XX century. historians have argued about the "pre-feudal" period as a necessary stage preceding feudalism.

      what kind of scientists, bourgeois or Soviet? Soviet scientists could not argue about such a counter-revolution, otherwise they would quickly find themselves far from universities. This means that bourgeois scientists were arguing, but modern world historical science recognizes the Soviet division of history into formations, all five stages.
      Neusykhin may have expressed his personal opinions, but to what extent were they perceived by the world community? This is the question.
      The same, please, do not tell the story from the point of view of Neusykhin, but from the point of view of the ACCEPTED history, because your credo is the official story? Or are you also from alternatives?
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 11 May 2021 15: 58
        +2
        Open any university sociology textbook and read ... Find out where it is taught. However, what am I? It's too complicated. Here is a material for schoolchildren, it will be just right: https: //dmitrschool04.ru/personalii/sistema-vneekonomicheskogo-prinuzhdeniya.html
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 11 May 2021 16: 27
          +1
          Quote: kalibr
          Open any university sociology textbook and read it.


          I asked for a textbook for universities.
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 11 May 2021 18: 39
            +1
            Don't you know that a university (higher educational institution) and a university are one and the same?
            1. Bar1
              Bar1 11 May 2021 18: 42
              +1
              Quote: kalibr
              Don't you know that a university (higher educational institution) and a university are one and the same?

              but you didn’t understand, and I just asked him to introduce him, not a school one.
        2. Bar1
          Bar1 11 May 2021 16: 36
          +1
          Well, where in your little book is written about the division of history into periods?

          Economic coercion to labor is a characteristic of capitalism, the relationship of economic dependence and coercion between wage workers and capitalists. Its economic basis is the monopoly of the capitalists' private ownership of the means of production. Deprived ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia


          it is written about CAPITALISM, and "economic compulsion to labor" is a characteristic of capitalism. And about capitalism, as it is written in the textbook of the Soviet period "scientific communism". And also a quote from the TSB.
          Either you are lying that the division by formations was canceled by the Ministry of Education or deliberately misleading, or one of two things.
      2. Edward Vashchenko
        11 May 2021 16: 39
        +5
        Timur,
        A.I. Neusykhin is not an alternative man, he is just the most official one to eat.
        During his report in 1966, he was supported by such mastodons of historical science as A.R. Korsunsky, and even, with reservations, B.A. Rybakov. Are alternatives good?
        You are confusing the teaching of history in school and the development of history as a science.
        The theoretical basis of the formation period was developed by Soviet historians during the discussions at the end of the 20s.
        During discussions at GAIMK in Leningrad, the feudal development of Ancient Rus was defined by B.D. Grekov, in 1933.
        Opposed him I.I. Smirnov, who saw slaveholding foundations in Ancient Russia, pointed out slavery, but did not insist V.V. Mavrodin, as well as E.S. Leibovich, L.P. Yakubinsky etc.
        During the next discussion, V.I. Ravdonikas marked the transitional pre-feudal period associated with the formation of a territorial community;
        As for the pre-feudal period, it was even overexposed ... I.V. Stalin, article "Remarks on the synopsis of a textbook on the history of the USSR."
        And you say)))
        Yours faithfully,
        hi
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 11 May 2021 17: 15
          -1
          Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
          A.I. Neusykhin is not an alternative man, he is just the most official one to eat.


          Well, why did he then so departed from the main course of Soviet historical science described in the textbook of Scientific Communism? How can it be that the students were taught one thing, but they themselves did not believe what they had created? It cannot be so.
          Academician Rybakov is a person with double vision, in his work "Russian Maps of Muscovy", looking at the map, he could not see what was written in large letters all over the map of TARTARAY, but he talked about all sorts of little things for a long time.


          Quote: Edward Vashchenko
          You are confusing the teaching of history in school and the development of history as a science.


          wow, i.e. do you mean to say that there is one thing in school history textbooks, but something else for high school? No, of course, it cannot be so. All these Neusykhins, if they are not presented in the textbooks, are their personal opinion, nothing more.

          Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
          As for the pre-feudal period, it was even overexposed ... I.V. Stalin, article "Remarks on the synopsis of a textbook on the history of the USSR."


          https://diletant.media/articles/37333075/

          This article? Well, where is the "pre-feudal period" here? Stalin, Kirov, Zhdanov talk about a new history from the French revolution and do not touch on any "pre-feudalism"

          We believe that the main drawback of the summary is the fact that it does not sharply emphasize the depth of the difference and opposition between the French revolution (bourgeois revolution) and the October revolution in Russia (socialist revolution).


          Are you one of these who is misleading?
          1. Edward Vashchenko
            11 May 2021 17: 26
            +4
            Well, where is the "pre-feudal period" here? Stalin, Kirov, Zhdanov talk about a new history from the French revolution and do not touch on any "pre-feudalism"

            Quote:
            In the synopsis, feudalism and prefeudal periodwhen the peasants were not yet enslaved; the autocratic system of the state and the feudal system, when Russia was fragmented into many independent semi-states.
            1. Bar1
              Bar1 11 May 2021 17: 36
              -2
              Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
              In the synopsis, feudalism and the pre-feudal period, when the peasants were not yet enslaved, are heaped together; the autocratic system of the state and the feudal system, when Russia was fragmented into many independent semi-states.


              in the article to which I gave the link there is no such quote. Provide the entire article you are linking to.
              1. Edward Vashchenko
                11 May 2021 17: 54
                +3
                I.V. Stalin, A.A. Zhdanov, S.M. Kirov "Remarks on the synopsis of a textbook on the history of the USSR" // Stalin I.V. Writings. T.14. M .: Publishing house "Pisatel", 1997.
                1. Bar1
                  Bar1 11 May 2021 18: 18
                  -3
                  Quote: Edward Vashchenko
                  I.V. Stalin, A.A. Zhdanov, S.M. Kirov "Remarks on the synopsis of a textbook on the history of the USSR" // Stalin I.V. Writings. T.14. M .: Publishing house "Pisatel", 1997.

                  completely different articles and which one is correct?
                  Well, they mentioned Stalin, Zhdanov ... about "before the feudal period, when the peasants were not enslaved," why did you mention this article, because the conversation is about something else.
                  So in essence.
                  You introduce a new terminology that few people know "territorial-communal" and put it together with the generally accepted terminology "primitive communal" system. But at least such a system / formation / order does not exist, who spoke about it? Neusykhin? But these are his problems. And you would adhere to the generally accepted terminology in your articles. Otherwise, it turns out that we will consider the fantasies of different authors.
              2. Hantengri
                Hantengri 11 May 2021 21: 03
                0
                Quote: Bar1
                wow, i.e. you want to say that there is one thing in school history textbooks, but another for high school?

                Timur, you have not yet seen how Landavshits disfigured a school physics course! They shove, you know, one thing into the tender minds of schoolchildren, and then, at the university, they screw something completely different ... They completely went wild, bastards! wassat laughing
                1. Bar1
                  Bar1 11 May 2021 21: 41
                  0
                  Quote: HanTengri
                  Quote: Bar1
                  wow, i.e. you want to say that there is one thing in school history textbooks, but another for high school?

                  Timur, you have not yet seen how Landavshits disfigured a school physics course! They shove, you know, one thing into the tender minds of schoolchildren, and then, at the university, they screw something completely different ... They completely went wild, bastards! wassat laughing

                  give an example.
                  1. Hantengri
                    Hantengri 11 May 2021 22: 39
                    0
                    Quote: Bar1
                    give an example.

                    Well, take any volume of Landavshits, take the corresponding school textbook, and any authors, and compare! Good luck to you.
        2. kalibr
          kalibr 11 May 2021 18: 41
          +2
          Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
          GAIMK

          Why are you cursing, Edward? The bar will not survive such phrases.
          1. Edward Vashchenko
            11 May 2021 20: 26
            +2
            Vyacheslav Olegovich,
            no more, honestly! hi
  • El Barto
    El Barto 14 May 2021 12: 27
    0
    This is not according to Marx, but the "five-member" of the Soviet theoreticians. Moreover, not generally recognized, many theoreticians generally denied the slaveholding formation on the grounds that slave labor was never the basis for the production of a social product. And Marx did not have a slave-owning formation, but he had an "Asian"
  • Bar1
    Bar1 11 May 2021 08: 13
    -2
    An analogy can be drawn here with the formation of city-states of Indo-European peoples, primarily in ancient Italy and Greece. The city-state of Ancient Greece was formed by the Greek conquering tribes during the period of land capture and colonization.


    Greek people / language is not Indo-European
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Индоевропейцы

    We repeat, the structure that we traditionally know from Novgorod has been present in all cities of Russia since the XNUMXth century.


    except for Novgorod and Pskov, in which there were people's veche administrations in all other cities of Russia, Ryazan, Murom, Chernigov, Kiev, there were typical feudal princely administrations.
    Well, the article.
    1. ee2100
      ee2100 11 May 2021 08: 39
      +3
      Today I will speak on the side of the author. We only hear about the hyped-up Novgorod and Pskov. Veche was everywhere.
      Among the population, “structuring” begins, someone is an artisan, someone reaps and plows, and someone trades. Naturally, there are rich and not very rich, but what can a prince with a retinue? swing a sword?
      So all power is transferred under the control of the rich, first of all, and everything is formalized as a "people's veche".
      This does not mean that the rich row everything for themselves. No, they are more active and lucky.
      1. Bar1
        Bar1 11 May 2021 08: 55
        -1
        Quote: ee2100
        Today I will speak on the side of the author. We only hear about the hyped-up Novgorod and Pskov. Veche was everywhere.


        veche / evening was everywhere, but according to the OI (look at the Radziwil Chronicle)

        Two years later, Sineus and his brother Truvor died. And one Rurik took all the power, and began to distribute cities to his men - to Polotsk, to Rostov, to another Beloozero. The Varangians in these cities are discoverers, and the indigenous population in Novgorod is Slovenia, in Polotsk - Krivichi, in Rostov - Merya, in Beloozero - all, in Murom - Murom, and Rurik ruled over all of them.


        is it like "people's government"? This is an example of typical feudal / autocratic rule.
        1. ee2100
          ee2100 11 May 2021 09: 01
          +1
          Do not take the annals as the ultimate truth. This is a work of fiction based on some historical events.
          Chronicles were written by the church and mostly native to herself and interpreted the facts as she wanted.
          Chronicle is a reversal of propaganda.
          1. Bar1
            Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 05
            -1
            Quote: ee2100
            Do not take the annals as the ultimate truth. This is a work of fiction based on some historical events.
            Chronicles were written by the church and mostly native to herself and interpreted the facts as she wanted.
            Chronicle is a reversal of propaganda.


            and what to take, as the last resort, articles by Vaschenko?
            1. ee2100
              ee2100 11 May 2021 09: 10
              +3
              Draw your conclusions based on primary sources.
              Vaschenko does just that. I do not agree with his thesis about Pskov, but everything is quite logical.
              1. Bar1
                Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 16
                -1
                Quote: ee2100
                Draw your conclusions based on primary sources.


                and I brought you the chronicle, and you say "Do not take the chronicles as the ultimate truth", and now you say "draw conclusions from the primary sources," that you contradict yourself and through your speech, don't you?
                Maybe your primary sources are not chronicles?
                1. ee2100
                  ee2100 11 May 2021 09: 43
                  +2
                  Chronicles including, but everyone has their own head.
                  1. Bar1
                    Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 45
                    0
                    Quote: ee2100
                    Chronicles including, but everyone has their own head


                    Neil Armstrong, as he said "... a parrot is a bird that flies badly, but she can speak better than anyone else."
                    1. ee2100
                      ee2100 11 May 2021 09: 49
                      +3
                      True, but the ostrich neither speaks nor flies - the strongest and runs very fast.
                    2. Bar1
                      Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 55
                      -2
                      Quote: ee2100
                      True, but the ostrich neither speaks nor flies - the strongest and runs very fast.


                      you contradict yourself again, you yourself started talking about the head, and now you have jumped to your feet.
                    3. ee2100
                      ee2100 11 May 2021 10: 08
                      +3
                      Okay, then the woodpecker has a chronic concussion. And the smartest elephant, although it does not fly
                    4. Bar1
                      Bar1 11 May 2021 10: 14
                      -1
                      Quote: ee2100
                      Okay, then the woodpecker has a chronic concussion. And the smartest elephant, although it does not fly


                      Somehow everything is not right for you, a woodpecker cannot have an "eternal concussion", because a concussion is an injury / disease.

                      but about the brains of an elephant and a man, here it is: a pile of copper will not replace one gold coin.
  • Bar1
    Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 12
    -1
    Quote: ee2100
    So all power is transferred under the control of the rich, first of all, and everything is formalized as a "people's veche".
    This does not mean that the rich row everything for themselves. No, they are more active and lucky.


    about the fact that "the rich were the most fortunate." In the Russian WORLD it did not work, the Russian world was arranged differently, the power of the golden calf, as now then with the Russians, did not matter. All power belonged to someone who had no more money, and for skilled and knowledgeable people, those who could build pyramids, huge temples are from what has come down to us. That world was humane and just: there were no poor, the community took care of widows and orphans and others unable to support themselves. That world was destroyed, although what exactly happened is not clear from the OI it is impossible to understand, because OI is a lie on a lie.
    1. ee2100
      ee2100 11 May 2021 09: 46
      +3
      Do you have some popular idea of ​​ancient Russia. It doesn't work that way.
      Read birch bark letters. Everything is very tough.
      1. Bar1
        Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 50
        +1
        Quote: ee2100
        Do you have some popular idea of ​​ancient Russia. It doesn't work that way.


        I gave you an example of a real real Russia -Ita blast furnace, and you are all "Russian popular prints and bast shoes", you at least look at the materials.

        Birch bark letters are most likely Yaninsko / Zaliznyakovsk fakes together with his "Veliky Novgorod"
        1. ee2100
          ee2100 11 May 2021 10: 06
          +2
          I'll see about the blast furnace later, not now.
          Pavel, I don’t want to discuss fakes with you. If only for a glass of vodka. laughing
          1. Bar1
            Bar1 11 May 2021 10: 07
            +1
            Quote: ee2100
            Pavel, I don’t want to discuss fakes with you.


            why don't you want? That's why we have gathered here, and I don't drink vodka only rum.
            1. ee2100
              ee2100 11 May 2021 10: 09
              +2
              I already have time trouble. I'm running.
  • Slavutich
    Slavutich 11 May 2021 17: 33
    +2
    г
    river people / language does not belong to Indo-European
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Индоевропейцы

    That's cool!:

    The Greek language (self-name - Ελληνικά, Ελληνική γλώσσα) is one of the languages ​​of the Indo-European language family. Nowadays it is the only representative of the Greek group, although sometimes its separate dialects are considered to be separate languages ​​- Tsakonian, Cappadocian and Pontic languages, which are on the verge of extinction.
    1. Bar1
      Bar1 11 May 2021 17: 41
      -1
      Quote: Slavutich

      That's cool!:

      The Greek language (self-name - Ελληνικά, Ελληνική γλώσσα) is one of the languages ​​of the Indo-European language family. Nowadays it is the only representative of the Greek group, although sometimes its separate dialects are considered to be separate languages ​​- Tsakonian, Cappadocian and Pontic languages, which are on the verge of extinction.



      link to this
      1. Slavutich
        Slavutich 11 May 2021 17: 56
        +3
        And your link? Where did you find such nonsense about the Greek language? Open Wikipedia, can you learn something wassat
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 11 May 2021 17: 58
          -1
          Quote: Slavutich

          Slavutich (Slavutich)
          Today, 17: 33

          +1
          г
          river people / language does not belong to Indo-European
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Индоевропейцы

          That's cool!:

          The Greek language (self-name - Ελληνικά, Ελληνική γλώσσα) is one of the languages ​​of the Indo-European language family. Nowadays it is the only representative of the Greek group, although sometimes its separate dialects are considered to be separate languages ​​- Tsakonian, Cappadocian and Pontic languages, which are on the verge of extinction.


          Slavutich (Slavutich)
          Today, 17: 33

          +1
          г
          river people / language does not belong to Indo-European
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Индоевропейцы

          That's cool!:

          The Greek language (self-name - Ελληνικά, Ελληνική γλώσσα) is one of the languages ​​of the Indo-European language family. Nowadays it is the only representative of the Greek group, although sometimes its separate dialects are considered to be separate languages ​​- Tsakonian, Cappadocian and Pontic languages, which are on the verge of extinction.


          Well, what is this, you look in a book, see a fig?
          1. Slavutich
            Slavutich 11 May 2021 18: 28
            +2
            Sorry to look at the book and see it good
  • El Barto
    El Barto 14 May 2021 12: 34
    0
    In Kiev, a veche was (sometimes gathered) and even drove away some princes and appointed others. Remember at least the story of Vseslav
  • El Barto
    El Barto 14 May 2021 00: 38
    0
    How did Stalin fight against public self-government? Local self-government - councils were the basis, the primary link of Soviet power
  • Richard
    Richard 11 May 2021 05: 52
    +7
    Good morning Edward. Judging by the expression "the path is clear," you are probably well acquainted with the monograph by Valentin Lavrentyevich Yanin "The Emergence of Konchansk Representation in Novgorod Posadnichestvo".
    I am afraid that this purely professional historical term will not be entirely clear to most readers. I would simplify it as "state administration of the type: people - city streets and volosts - ends - city veche; with a prince called only as a military leader and arbitrator"
    scheme Novgorodskaya Konchanskaya control system according to V.L. Yanin
    1. Edward Vashchenko
      11 May 2021 07: 05
      +7
      Dear Dmitry,
      good morning,
      "the path is clear", I completely agree with you, an important term,
      but not scientific, but existing in Ancient Rus, characterizing the relationship between the city and the prince, the relationship that developed gradually, as the community and its military forces strengthened, when the city could already expel the prince, who did not suit, - "the path is clear."
      hi
      1. Richard
        Richard 11 May 2021 07: 21
        +6
        Great article. I really liked. Thank you.
        PS That's what a professional historian means!
        My clumsy attempt to modernize this term
        people - city streets and volosts - ends - city veche; with a prince called only as a military leader and arbitrator

        You corrected with just one clear phrase good
    2. depressant
      depressant 11 May 2021 07: 21
      +6
      Good morning everyone present!
      My ideas fail well ... if not collapse, then close to that. So the prince in those days was not in charge. Something like the Minister of Defense. He was hired. Some kind of inconsistency in the views.
      1. Richard
        Richard 11 May 2021 07: 32
        +5
        Something like the Minister of Defense

        no, it's more like a symbiosis of an arbitrator hired under a contract with the director of a PMC
        1. ee2100
          ee2100 11 May 2021 08: 20
          +3
          Hi Dmitry!
          Absolutely loyal, the commander of the PMC. The agreements with the princes are very interesting (the 11th threw me, thanks to him for that), they were short-term - 1 year, and then debriefing and extension or "suitcase-station".
          1. Richard
            Richard 11 May 2021 08: 31
            +4
            Good morning Alexander
            EMNIP, The oldest genuine agreements of Novgorod with the princes that have survived to this day are the agreements with Prince Yaroslav Yaroslavich, dating back to 1264, 1266 and 1270.
      2. Edward Vashchenko
        11 May 2021 07: 39
        +6
        Good afternoon,
        it is a long story about the debate that historians have waged and are waging on this issue.
        in short, the history that we learned at school, and the concept that underlies it, was developed by B.D. Grekov and his school. There are also many moments, but briefly, a serious aging of feudalism, class formation and state formation, this weight shifted to the 8-9 centuries. Plus minus. Another direction, which has been gaining more and more facts and substantiations since the 50s of the twentieth century, primarily on European history, and then on the history of Russia, is the existence of a pre-class, pre-judicial society.
        Feudalism in general has become a term of bad form since the mid-90s of the twentieth century, which is not entirely justified: from the fire to the fire.
        Now no one disputes the pre-state periods in the history of all mankind, but many continue to see political history in Russia only through the history of princes.
        Well, from here, the myths about the eternal Russian craving for strong power, stupid worship of the king, secretaries general, presidents and other amateurish mythology.
        Nevertheless, it is the period of the territorial community that gives us an example of the spontaneous self-organization and primitive democracy of the ancient Russian people, structures that really control everyday life, even in the period when they lost political power from the 14th century. The community was the basis on which the early Russian state and early monarchy would emerge in the late 15th and early 16th centuries, but not earlier.
        Yours faithfully,
        Edward
      3. Korsar4
        Korsar4 11 May 2021 08: 16
        +3
        Good morning, Lyudmila Yakovlevna!

        Think of the blacksmith from The Formula of Love. Everything depends on the situation.
        And also Feuchtwanger "Jew Süss". A very instructive book.
        1. depressant
          depressant 11 May 2021 08: 38
          +2
          Sergei, what does it have to do with it ...
          I've never thought about these questions. And then I read it - and ...
          How did the first professional squads come about? Well, probably due to the fact that there were dashing people, nomadic neighbors, as well as neighboring cities, the authorities of which were wondering: why not go rob those out there?
          On the other hand, Russia was washed, infant mortality did not go off scale, there were many children, there were superfluous ones, of which mischievous people grew up, all familiar with each other in the city. They had to be organized somehow, it was useful to adapt, to give them the skills, for example, to defend the city. Did the prince get out among them? Or were they given them as princes an experienced militia?
          I understand that I ask questions to those present as if I consider them to be alive at that time. In fact, for the first time in my life, on the basis of expediency, I form an idea of ​​the reasons for creating a professional squad and even go further. If the city did not have a need to fight with someone, to defend itself, then could a squad, led by the prince, be hired to serve another city, which had such a need? After all, it is expensive to maintain a squad, and not to contain it is dangerous for themselves.
          The only thing that does not surprise me is the empowerment of the prince with judicial powers. Indeed, if you have professional soldiers under your command, then you are both the police and the judge.
          1. Korsar4
            Korsar4 11 May 2021 08: 48
            +4
            For some reason, I think that people do not change that much. The scenery changes.

            So, I really look at what happened through the prism of today. Simply because we know modernity better.
          2. Bar1
            Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 25
            -2
            Quote: depressant
            How did the first professional squads come about? Well, probably due to the fact that there were dashing people, nomadic neighbors, as well as neighboring cities, the authorities of which were wondering: why not go rob those out there?


            it was not so
            watch the performance on Slavyanskoe radio performance by Dmitry Belousov "Novgorod ushkuyniki"

      4. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 11 May 2021 08: 31
        +5
        He was hired.

        Well, the story with Alexander Nevsky (though it will be a little later) is an example of this.
        1. ee2100
          ee2100 11 May 2021 08: 45
          +3
          Alexander Yaroslavovich is also a hired military manager. Reading the chronicles, a false impression is created that this, the prince, is the main one, like "Alexander decided ...." Where is he without the approval of the city, which pays him?
          The churchmen who wrote the chronicles deliberately shifted the emphasis in this way. Both the church and the prince were completely dependent on the executive branch.
          1. depressant
            depressant 11 May 2021 08: 55
            +1
            That is how it is. And then, apparently, there was a period of understanding by the princes: why are they hiring us? Whoever has an army has both power and strength. And a series of military coups began with the capture of complete power in the cities. And the clergy, who realized the situation before the princes (smart, scribes!), Supported, already having an influence on the state of mind, and, perhaps, even suggested. Or am I rushing history?
            1. ee2100
              ee2100 11 May 2021 09: 04
              +3
              The princes understood perfectly well who was hiring them and why, but they tried, as much as possible, to drag the "blanket" over themselves. Normal process
            2. Hantengri
              Hantengri 11 May 2021 10: 47
              +5
              Quote: depressant

              That is how it is. And then, apparently, there was a period of understanding by the princes: why are they hiring us? Whoever has an army has both power and strength. And there was a series of military coups with the capture of complete power in the cities.

              Hello Lyudmila Yakvlevna! hi So the townspeople also have an army, and more than that of the prince. For example, Alexander Yaroslavich arrives with 150 of his vigilantes (all, of course, on horseback, in armor and hung with piercing and cutting objects to their eyes) to Novgorod to ruin, well, about "full power" to ask if he will be fooled. And on the spot it turns out that Novgorod has about 500 of its own, in the same uniform and no worse than trained boys, and this, not counting the Nth number of weapons, is in the hands of the "civilian" population. Therefore, you can play in it, but as soon as the path is clear, you will have to go ...
              1. depressant
                depressant 11 May 2021 11: 25
                +1
                Good afternoon, colleague!)))
                But then the question. Didn't your own five hundred warriors have a leader-prince? Apparently there was, but not that military reputation, since Alexander Yaroslavovich was hired.
                I guess this is all my speculation. But is it not for the sake of reflection that articles are published. Or just for information? The more interesting the continuation of the cycle should be.
                1. Hantengri
                  Hantengri 11 May 2021 11: 52
                  +4
                  Quote: depressant
                  But then the question. Didn't your own five hundred warriors have a leader-prince?

                  No, they had a thousand, so they could go to war without a prince. These, conditionally, 500 people. - these are "the best people of the city" and the lads, equipped at their expense.
          2. Aviator_
            Aviator_ 11 May 2021 19: 02
            +2
            Alexander Yaroslavovich is also a hired military manager.

            Here I am about the same.
        2. Bar1
          Bar1 11 May 2021 09: 56
          -3
          Quote: Aviator_
          He was hired.

          Well, the story with Alexander Nevsky (though it will be a little later) is an example of this.


          Well, Duc, that astronomer, have you formulated your personal claim to Fomenko?
          1. Aviator_
            Aviator_ 11 May 2021 19: 07
            0
            It was formulated by Yu.N. Efremov. "An unprecedented scientific forgery", M.L. Gorodetsky "Star Wars with History" (Verification of the dating of "Almagest") The first work - p. 29 of the collection "Astronomy against a new chronology"; the second - p. 46. There is still, but enough for a start, a historian.
            1. Bar1
              Bar1 11 May 2021 20: 59
              0
              Quote: Aviator_
              It was formulated by Yu.N. Efremov. "Unprecedented Scientific Fraud"


              Efremov's article can already be answered. The link in the e-book to this chapter with the article is not active, probably Efremov himself after Fomenko's answer

              http://chronologia.org/article_ef.html

              deleted it, as it was not there, but this article is not.
              I'm still reading Gorodetsky.
  • kalibr
    kalibr 11 May 2021 07: 28
    +8
    Nice to read such articles!
  • ee2100
    ee2100 11 May 2021 07: 56
    +6
    Good morning!
    Most likely it was. But it seems to me that the author did not touch upon the topic of the third power - the power of the church. The church was completely dependent on the veche. And from the chronicles, we see that almost always the church supports the prince, who is also dependent on the power of the people.
    "primitive democracy was only possible within a limited number of participating citizens-townspeople"
    As far as, I know, the population delegated the solution of various issues to the Tysyats, hundredths, fifty-fifty. And this is not so many people that the veche turned into a "bazaar".
    I would like to ask the question: "were the inhabitants of the posadov part of the city?"
    Good morning reading!
    1. Edward Vashchenko
      11 May 2021 08: 04
      +3
      Good morning,
      about the Church quite so, I am writing about the sacred significance in the formation of individual city-states.
      Were the inhabitants of the townships included in the city?

      During this period, as well as almost until the 17th century, the city was an agrarian, not a handicraft center, in the case of Novgorod - an agrarian and industrial center with elements of trade, the community was the city plus its surroundings)
      Yours faithfully,
      Edward
      1. ee2100
        ee2100 11 May 2021 08: 15
        +2
        For some reason I thought that the townspeople were living outside the city wall and only they could take part in the veche. It makes more sense. By analogy, for example, with Riga and Tallinn.
        According to some reports, Novgorod of the XIII century is about 20 thousand inhabitants.
        How much do you estimate the size of the city.
        1. Richard
          Richard 11 May 2021 11: 00
          +3
          Dear Alexander and Edward, let me interfere in your conversation
          I would like to ask the question: "were the inhabitants of the posadov part of the city?"

          residents of the Novgorod Posad directly - yes (they took a direct part in the Ulitsa Novgorod Vecheh), the inhabitants of the other Posad were not part of Novgorod itself, but the Novgorod Republic (city-state)
          The Novgorod state or Novgorod land (republic) was located in the northern part of Russia from the Arctic Ocean to the upper Volga, and from the Baltic Sea to the Ural Mountains. The capital is Novgorod. The Novgorod land had not only settlements, but also many cities.
          Fig.Map of Novgorod land in the 12-13th centuries.

          Large cities: Novgorod, Pskov, Izborsk, Staraya Russa, Ladoga, Torzhok, Korela, Vyshny Volochek, Yuriev and others. Big cities were ruled by the heads of Konchansk, just like the Novgorod ends, and by small street heads from Ulitsa, like the Novgorod townships. Both those and others were approved by the Novgorod veche on the provision of Konchansk and Ulchan vecheas.
          1. ee2100
            ee2100 11 May 2021 11: 16
            +3
            I would not call this map a "map of the Novgorod land", but rather a sphere of influence. As for Pskov, this is a separate principality very closely connected with Novgorod, so closely that the Pskovians resisted this for several centuries. Many works are devoted to this relationship.
            On account of participation in the veche, including the street parties, I have great doubts among the posad. Street townships and the whole republic are actually tributaries.
            And as you know, whoever pays is the one who dances it.
            Formally m. Yes. The Russian Federation is a federation, but all issues are resolved in Moscow and a rather narrow circle of people's representatives. Formal democracy.
            1. Richard
              Richard 11 May 2021 11: 34
              +6
              but all issues are resolved in Moscow and in a rather narrow circle

              That's right, Alexander, since then, little has changed smile
              deputies (vecheviks) naively play democracy - puffing their cheeks, shouting, swearing and fighting, but all decisions are made by a rather narrow circle of people. In Novgorod it was the boyar council (the so-called "300 golden belts")
              1. ee2100
                ee2100 11 May 2021 11: 55
                +2
                Dmitry, a question that I have not solved for myself and therefore to you as an author.
                Did the prince come to reign with his retinue or headed a local PMC?
                1. Richard
                  Richard 11 May 2021 12: 31
                  +6
                  He appeared with his own squad, and the Novgorod militia was subordinate exclusively to the mayor, who appointed the thousand. If we somehow apply this to the present day, then - the prince's squad - troops of constant high readiness, and the militia - a mob reserve.
                  The most combat-ready and well-armed part of the militia were Ognischans (merchants, Novgorod boyars, wealthy artisans) and Gridba (professional soldiers accompanying merchant caravans). Since the participation of all Novgorodians in the militia was not required, then for recruiting the militia from each self-governing unit - street (posad, village), or end (city), both representative (a certain number of people were exhibited) and proportional (a given number of people with 10 yards or ships), and the choice took place at the local government level. The gathering of the militia in Pskov was called "cut" or "cut", in Novgorod - "twist", and the neighbors of the militia had to supply them with everything necessary for the campaign - "twist". Armament, boats and horses were issued from the city treasury. In the XII-XIV centuries, the number of the militia of the Novgorod land was usually 5-10 thousand people, for comparison, the princely squad of the Novgorod prince was then 100-300 people
                  1. ee2100
                    ee2100 11 May 2021 12: 43
                    +3
                    Thank you, but you can link. Litter for arrogance
                    1. Richard
                      Richard 11 May 2021 13: 00
                      +2
                      What impudence? Normal request
                      https://pikabu.ru/story/voysko_novgorodskoy_feodalnoy_respubliki_1215_v_6588278
                      https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/struktura-i-chislennost-novgorodskogo-voyska-v-xiii-xv-vekah
                      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Новгородское_войско
                      https://spravochnick.ru/istoriya_rossii/novgorodskoe_voysko/
                      http://www.redov.ru/istorija/rus_novgorodskaja/p19.php
                      https://arsenal-info.ru/b/book/2053031489/7
                      https://arheologija.ru/rabinovich-voennaya-organizatsiya-gorodskih-kontsov-v-novgorode-velikom-v-xii-xv-vv/
                      1. ee2100
                        ee2100 11 May 2021 13: 06
                        +4
                        Thank you Dmitry! I will read it.
                2. Catfish
                  Catfish 11 May 2021 16: 55
                  +4
                  Good afternoon, Sasha. hi

                  I really liked the comparison of the princely squad with PMCs. I imagined it for a minute and it turned out funny. smile

        2. Edward Vashchenko
          11 May 2021 14: 08
          +3
          Dear Alexander and Dmitry,
          here the question is what is considered "posad".
          Within the framework of the concept of the Western European Middle Ages, which was adopted by us by the Marxist historians of the 40s. XX century. (I write about historians without denying) the town had a posad and a castle where the feudal lord was located. But both sources, and anthropological observations, and archeology, say that there is no need to talk about any division of the city into a posad and a castle. This is the time of pre-class society, posad arises in Russia with the destruction of the territorial community and the genesis of feudalism, which I attribute to the end of the XNUMXth, first half of the XNUMXth centuries, not earlier.
          About what in the following articles, they are already ready.
          Archeology of Novgorod according to V.L. Yanin, and Moscow - the Kremlin, this is not a castle of a feudal lord or a grand duke, initially this is Moscow, not much, not a little, and the territory of the Kremlin is huge.
          Anthropology: during this period, the final separation of the craft did not take place, as was the case in the mid-annual western city of the XIV-XV centuries, there are the beginnings of bourgeois relations, in our country there is the disintegration of the territorial-neighboring community.
          City of Eastern Europe until the XNUMXth century. - it is primarily the center of the agrarian district, and the "more village" itself, and not a Western medieval burg.
          Yours faithfully,
          hi
          1. Richard
            Richard 11 May 2021 14: 42
            +1
            Thanks for the valuable clarification. I will know now
        3. El Barto
          El Barto 14 May 2021 18: 03
          -1
          Look, we take a conditional boyar clan, some "Perdyatichi".
          Let's say there are 5 boyar brothers, there is Perdyata Perdyatich, Fornication Perdyatich, Fatty Perdyatich, Duryata Perdyatich, Eytykatamtebya Perdyatich. Each of them has 5 sons (we don't count grandchildren yet). A total of 25 units of the highest aristocracy. Of these, 5 are fighting somewhere, 5 are trading somewhere, 10 are organizing housekeeping on the outskirts of the volosts, 5 elders are sitting in the city, are engaged in politics, sleepwalking and other important city affairs. It is these 5 elders who go to that very veche of 300 golden belts, and there they represent their entire family and its vast clientele. At the same time, they and their clientele living in the parishes are full-fledged citizens
  • Boris55
    Boris55 11 May 2021 08: 07
    0
    Each Russian land independently coped with external military pressure.

    Not certainly in that way. If they could solve the threat themselves, then they did not ask for help, and if not, the tribes united. As an example:

    A. Nevsky and the so-called "Tatar-Mongols" together opposed the cross-bearers - one in the north, the others in the south. It is a pity that the "Tatar-Mongols" did not reach Rome and crushed this reptile, carrying the concept of world governance to the enslaver, in its embryo ...

    The united tribes of the northerners defeated: Cyrus, Darius, Alexander, Roman crusaders ...

    ps
    Anyone who believes that these armadas of troops collapsed on their own because Their leaders were so stupid that they recruited so many people for the war with the "Northern Barbarians" that they could not cope with these, you can start minus, I will not be offended. laughing
  • Operator
    Operator 11 May 2021 09: 11
    -3
    "Lot - did not hear", - author (C)

    No need to drive misinformation:
    - there has never been any "Rus" as a state entity (and not a country), but there was a state of Rus Land with its capital first in Novgorod, and then in Kiev;
    - in the state of Russian Land, the princely dynasty of Rurikovich ruled in accordance with the ladder law (with the movement of princes along a chain across all appanage principalities), which ensured the unity of the state even with a difference in economic interests among the appanage principalities that are part of the Russian Land;
    - with the increase in the number of the ruling dynasty, legal contradictions in ladder law began to grow, which allowed the process of feudal fragmentation to begin (just like earlier in Western Europe in connection with the crisis of feudal law and later in the Horde state in connection with the crisis of Genghis Khan's law).

    The Russian state was restored on the basis of autocratic law (Caesarism) in the centralized Grand Duchy of Moscow (ideology of the Third Rome), which used the Byzantine institute of governorship in the process of the annexation of the Russian principalities - absolutely disregarding the negative experience of the Horde state, which disintegrated into many decentralized khanates at the head with individual representatives of the ruling Chingizid dynasty.
    1. Edward Vashchenko
      11 May 2021 14: 22
      +3
      Dear Alexander,
      "Lot - did not hear", - author (C)

      Districts, this is not about the 11th -12th centuries.
      hi
      1. Operator
        Operator 11 May 2021 14: 59
        +2
        Lot = appanage principality = territorial unit of the state Russian Land under the leadership of one of the members of the ruling dynasty of Rurik (as a rule, the former center of one of the East Slavic tribes).

        The districts arose in the 9th century immediately at the time of Rurik's arrival in Ladoga, since he decided to give the regional centers Belozero and Izborsk to the appanage reign of his brothers, Sineus and Truvor, respectively.
        Further, the personnel reserve of the princes of Rurikovich only grew and the inheritances in the Russian Land multiplied like mushrooms until the beginning of the withering away of the ladder law and the feudal division into independent principalities with hereditary succession to the throne of the reign in the former inheritance by the eldest son of the local prince.

        Feudal fragmentation was modified by the Mongols in the 13th century in the form of imposing vassal dependence on the Horde state on the Russian principalities with the assignment of the right of supremacy to one of the principalities. The Grand Duchy of Moscow made full use of the situation for the transition to a centralized Byzantine state (without dividing the country into appanages or feuds) with the hereditary succession to the throne as the eldest son of the Grand Duke.

        PS And in order not to get up twice - the ratio of carriers of European haplogroups R1a, R1b, I1 and I2 with carriers of the Ugric haplogroup N1a1 among today's Russians is 5 to 1, which demonstrates the overwhelming numerical superiority of the Eastern Slavs over the Ugric peoples at the time of the beginning of "colonization".
  • Vend
    Vend 11 May 2021 12: 13
    +3
    [quote] Using the example of the Finno-Ugric tribe Merya, we will consider the process of colonization and assimilation in the north-east of Eastern Europe. / quote]
    What do we know about this tribe?
    Merya first appears in sources in the XNUMXth century, simultaneously with the first mentions of the Slavs proper, by the way. Goth Jordan mentions her.
    The last time she was mentioned in the PVL about the legendary campaign of Prophetic Oleg to Constantinople. Between these mentions of information about the measure - no.
    Archeology indicates the following, in the XNUMXth century the previous culture of these places - Dyakovskaya - begins to fade away and be replaced by a new one, with "provincial-Roman" features, as archaeologists say. The new population came from the southwest. The Mary did not find any continuity with the "Dyakovites". And it is also typical for women of measure to wear ... temporal rings, which, for the Finno-Ugric peoples, are not characteristic of the word at all.
    By the turn of the X-XI centuries, the Meryan culture is dying out, until the middle of the XI century, individual things still flicker. then - everything.
    Linguistics DOES NOT KNOW what was the language of Mary. But the textbooks say her "Finno-ugliness". However otkupshchikov Yew.The. showed that the hydronymy of the "Merya" region is mainly Baltic. And Dybo V.A., Zamyatina G.I., Nikolaev S.L. showed that there are no Finnish borrowings in the Russian dialects of the Volga-Klyazma interfluve (but the dialects themselves are very archaic with almost proto-Slavic features of accentology).
    This is what it is. what is known about the Merya tribe. And in this information there is much more Slavic than Finno-Ugric.
  • ABC-schütze
    ABC-schütze 11 May 2021 12: 56
    -2
    Quotes from the text: 1. "And the complaints of the chroniclers about the former unity of the Russian land, only misled many researchers, since this unity was conditional. And immediately disintegrated with the fall of tribal isolation." and "." Because in this historical period and on such a vast, but scarce territory of resources, there were no mechanisms or systems of governance that could bring together all the Russian principalities. And there could be no such goal: why do this? "
    ************************************************** *******************************
    Excuse me, but I have a question ... Are we talking about the complaints of some such "chroniclers"? .. The teacher told us that writing in Russia (the basis for any "chronicles") appeared only in the time of "Cyril and Methodius". That is, after the baptism of Kievan Rus in the 980th (and this is the END of the 10th century ...), the great pagan prince, Vladimir. After that, they acquired the name "Saint". And all the "chroniclers" are literate (having mastered writing) inhabitants of monasteries. But Kievan Rus, by the time Vladimir Saints made a VOLUNTARY and RATIONAL decision to baptize his STATE, was already, FOR AT LEAST TWO CENTURIES, one of the leading subjects of "European politics" of that era. This is an axiom and is not discussed. And this STATE, - Kievan Rus, even then relied not at all on "kinship-communal" relations. And he collected tribute from other, less powerful principalities, which could be assumed to be vassals of the Kiev prince. And, also, very successfully and repeatedly "disturbed" with raids of neighbors. Incl. and very sickly Byzantium ... So why, the author, even the "chroniclers" of this period (10-11 centuries) refers to the "complaining in vain" about the allegedly mythical unity of Russia? .. Is there really any SCIENTIFIC grounds to believe that Kievan Rus, as a completely CENTRALIZED and POWERFUL STATE (military - feudal) - METROPOLY, EXISTING FOR ALMOST A CENTURY, was a kind of "myth" composed by the mentioned "chroniclers"? The teacher also told us that the main fatrom that stimulated the subsequent fragmentation of the CENTRALIZED state of Kievan Rus (and others ...) was the factor of PROLONGED distribution of "inheritances" to the heirs, who later, after the death of another "pope" of the Grand Duke, began mutual bickering among themselves for the "throne" in the metropolis ... We will return to the second quote a little later ...
    1. ABC-schütze
      ABC-schütze 11 May 2021 15: 10
      -1
      Now, in fact, let us turn to the second quotation from the "conclusions" of the author of the article ... There is an opinion that the main "mechanism" of the then system of military-feudal princely administration was the military squad of the prince. Moreover, the mechanism is very effective, time-tested and adequate to historical conditions. And the natural goal of using this mechanism by the princely, military - feudal power was to strengthen their power and influence (military, political and economic). That was then implemented in relation to weaker or when repelling threats, potentially emanating from equal in influence or stronger neighbors. And what is a "resource-based territory"? .. Is it about some kind of territory we are talking about? .. ALL of Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals and from the Baltic to the Dnieper, at that time was still covered with the richest forests. And this resource gave its owners EVERYTHING, at that time demanded by the "market" - fur, hemp, honey, wood, tar, etc. ... Fields gave flax ... Rivers (along which there was trade ...) - fish and money from sellers, buyers and "transit countries". "Scarce resources", sorry, at that time, could be considered the rocks and mosses of the Scandinavian Peninsula and the sands of the Mongolian and Central Asian deserts. This prompted their numerous nomadic inhabitants to raid more economically prosperous, and more culturally developed, already little-male-sedentary neighbors. Engaged in agriculture and crafts, bringing quite predictable and stable income.
    2. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master 11 May 2021 15: 45
      +5
      Quote: ABC-schütze
      was already, AT LEAST TWO CENTURIES, one of the leading subjects of "European politics" of that era. This is an axiom and is not discussed.

      I'm shocked. So that's it - once! - and an axiom. Probably in order not to be asked to prove ...
      For me personally, this "axiom" is not at all obvious, so let's designate it as a theorem after all and begin to prove it. After all, it probably won't be difficult for you to bring, for example, references to the embassies of the Old Russian state in the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries, to the European rulers or to any conflicts, coalitions in which it participated in Europe. I know about the treaties of our ancestors with Constantinople, but with the rest of the subjects of "European politics", and even for two centuries?
      And you, of course, are aware of the numerous monuments of Russian literature written in Russian even before the baptism of Rus ...
      Otherwise, I will have nothing to do but, in opposition to your axiom, bring out my own - Russia and the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries. was a conglomerate of loose and unstable state formations of purely regional, and often even just local importance. These formations arose, burst, reappeared, until among them, through the efforts of Prince Oleg and Princess Olga, the state of the Rurikids stood out, and through the efforts of Vladimir, the state of the Rurikids was not strengthened. And only after that, already under Yaroslav the Wise, this very power entered the international level and became a stable player at the regional level in Eastern Europe, not claiming in any way for a leading role in politics in Central and even more so in Western Europe.
      This is an axiom and is not disputed.

      It's all right? smile
      1. ABC-schütze
        ABC-schütze 11 May 2021 23: 06
        0
        "Two centuries", this is me, of course, a "war plant", bent ... But, in fact, Byzantium (Constantinople) was the main subject of European politics, with which the princes of Ancient Rus, in that era (before the baptism of Rus), built their "relations" and was. Who else?.. The Franks in those days, as the teacher told us, fought with the Vikings. They, somehow, had no time for contracts with the Slavs. Agreements "with the Greeks" in 907 and 912. are, (and not without pressure from the Russian squads) with the already emerging and growing Russian state in which the tendencies for expansion of influence and growth are clearly visible. One trouble, its representatives still "do not understand letters", for this, "sign" the Treaty with an oath on arms and Perun and Volos. That is to say, being still pagans, and Christians there are still exclusively Greeks. But this, I dare to remind, is ALREADY the beginning of the 10th century. So I actually asked the author a question, what kind of "chroniclers" could "complain" about the loss of unity in Russia and when? .. Until the beginning of the 10th century, the "chroniclers" in Russia, as it were, were not visible, in principle. But the growing Russian state, at the same time, is clearly growing out of the cradle of "communal-tribal" fermentation and relations. Russian princes of that time (10-11 centuries) were already quite well-developed military feudal lords - the leaders of formations bearing signs of the formation of statehood (cities, settled population, building hierarchical power relations with their own "taxpayers" and relations with neighbors), and already completely not "tribal leaders" like "Winnetou, the leader of the Apaches ...". And after the so-called. "Baptism of Rus", potential, future chroniclers, for DECADES, observed the formation of this state and its tendency to centralize power (unification), as they are quite eyewitnesses of REAL PROCESSES and EVENTS. So what is the "futility" of the complaints of their descendants (presumably ...) about what was REALLY lost? .. What kind of "later researchers", historians, and how could they "mislead"? ... By the way, in the text of the treaty with Byzantium we are talking about incl. and about the Russians who are, live or serve "in the Greeks." About their property, inheritance and other rights. And I would like to see how the Emperor Leo or some other Byzantine ruler would sign such agreements with representatives of the "loose conglomerate" you mentioned ... And the agreement on the provision of military assistance to Rus by Byzantium was long-term. Russian detachment (6000 people. constant number, but "variable" composition) has been part of the Byzantine army FOR DECADES (that is, "loose conglomerate", in a wonderful way, fulfills its contractual obligations. Moreover, successfully and not without benefit for themselves ...). in 999 they are fighting in Syria, smashing Hims and burning the Cathedral Temple there, by the way. In 1000, they were already on another campaign, but near Erzurum, in the course of an "unplanned conflict", they put the Georgian army to flight. In 1019, these "tribal" Russian guys were already in Italy, and under Cannes, they quite give themselves to the vagabonds - the Normans. And further, from Baghdad to Sicily. For this, I believe that the aforementioned "chroniclers" could really (and in various literary and artistic forms, such as "Lay ...") "complain" about the loss of unity in Russia, only after the defeat of Kiev by Batu in 1240.
        1. Trilobite Master
          Trilobite Master 12 May 2021 10: 56
          0
          Quote: ABC-schütze
          Who else?

          If we are talking about the XNUMXth - XNUMXth centuries, then in addition to the Byzantine Empire in Europe there were remnants of the empire of Charlemagne in the form of three sovereign and unfriendly kingdoms, the Kingdom of Jutland, Great Moravia, the Perov Bulgarian kingdom, the Kingdom of Wessex in Britain, Arabs in the Iberian peninsula ... In addition, kingdoms were about to arise in Poland, Scandinavia, and the proto-state of the Baltic Slavs, the situation there was close to what we had, and in the XNUMXth century. the Hungarians also appeared, settling on the middle Danube. All of them communicated with each other, clashed, in short, led a political process. Russia, by and large, participated only in relations between Byzantium and Bulgaria.
          When in 843 the emperor Louis the Pious was sent an embassy of the "kagan of the dews", he was at first very surprised, like "who is this?", But quickly found out that they were "sveons", that is, Swedes.
          Now for the ancient Russian state.
          Do you know the signs of the state? Let me remind you: this is a territory with borders, population, its own laws, governing and coercive bodies, taxes, and an army. Now look: do the ancient Russian state have all these signs and when do they appear ...
          Therefore, the question of whether the ancient Russian state was a state proper and when it acquired all the characteristics of a state is highly controversial. Someone says that even before Rurik there was a state, someone connects its emergence with Rurik, Oleg or Olga, someone with Vladimir.
          Concerning the laments of the chroniclers.
          It is believed that the first chronicle in Russia was written during the time of Mstislav the Great. "The Word about Igor's Regiment" was written by a contemporary of events - half a century after Mstislav. People who lived in the second half of the XII century. and those who remembered the times of Mstislav and his father Vladimir Monomakh, it is permissible to complain about the former unity, since in their time there was a real anarchy. But historians who read their lamentations are not allowed to take their words about unity literally. Yes, compared to the second half of the XNUMXth century, any other situation will seem like unity. It seems to me that the author wrote exactly about this - it is not necessary to ascribe certain qualities to the past on the basis of "complaints" about which they "complain".
          The "Russian service" in the Greeks is Varanga. Scandinavian mercenaries in the service of emperors. They did not represent any state, especially the ancient Russian one. Just seekers of adventure, wealth and fame, nothing more. The clearest example is Harald Hardrada. The emperor signed contracts of service not with the state, but with private individuals whom he hired to serve.
          1. ABC-schütze
            ABC-schütze 12 May 2021 13: 58
            0
            Sorry, but, then, let’s in textbooks and monographs, and on forums, call Oleg, in his campaigns to Constantinople, "Scandinavian", and not at all Russian (Slavic) prince. And the "peace treaties" concluded by Byzantium after these campaigns (907 and 912), we will consider concluded not with the Russians, but with the Scandinavian rulers. It is only strange that these "Scandinavians" (for illiteracy) swear allegiance to the Treaties by the Slavic pagan deities Perun and and Veles. But their own Odin and his "younger offspring" are remembered somehow "dully" ... Yes, the contract of 907 is "signed" by Oleg's vigilantes, with "Scandinavian names." The signatories to the Treaty of 912 are, in general, the same Oleg himself, a Varangian. But, excuse me, they act, as follows from the text "from Oleg the Great Prince of RUSSIAN and from ALL those who are UNDER HIS HANDS - the light and great princes and HIS great boyars." The text of the Treaty itself also refers to the "Russians" who have property in Constantinople, or are there in the service of the "Christian Tsar". And not at all about the Varangians. By the way, the fact that many of them are "servicemen", as you put it. - "seekers of adventure, wealth and fame", or, to put it simply, - mercenaries, does not diminish the INTERSTATE (by nature) STATUS of the Treaty itself and does not in any way reduce it to the level of a "private contract" with individuals. For all, at that time, the differences in the levels of development of Byzantium and the Old Russian state. And whether they are paid for the service in Byzantium, how much, how and how, these are already "details" arising from the FACT, concluded with the Byzantium RUSSIAN prince of the agreement. After all, the ambassadors of Kiev (the subsequent "mother of RUSSIAN cities" are accepted by Emperor Leo. What other "adventurers" and where did he come from? .. To the signs of a "real" state, I would also add the minting of "my own coin". Yes, only by states "at one moment" they do not become ... Yes, and Russia, as you yourself noted, "participated in relations" with Byzantium and Bulgaria, that is, with the subjects of European politics of that time, not at all of the last. the national interests of the emerging Rus of THAT time are connected. That is what I had in mind in my “commentary.” Why, THEN, was it for the Russian princes to break into Western and Central Europe, fighting among themselves and with the Scandinavians? .. What (what period) had in mind the author, remembering exactly in the CONCLUSIONS section of his article about the "laments of the chroniclers" in the context of the lost unity, I did not understand and therefore asked a comment - a question. Just as I still do not understand what the author is talking about, in the section of conclusions SAME, I myself "se thuja "on the scarcity of resources of the Old Russian territory ..." Our land is great and abundant, but there is no order in it. " The oral tradition mentioned in the "Tale of Bygone Years" speaks of the "scarcity" of order in Russia, and not of resources at all. So we will now, relying on the author's conclusions, "take it out of the brackets"? ..
            1. Trilobite Master
              Trilobite Master 12 May 2021 15: 16
              0
              Are you familiar with the origin of the term "rus"? "Rus" is, in fact, the Scandinavians. It's just that the Finnish "Ruotsi" (Swedes), Yaami and Suomi in the language of our ancestors were transformed into "Rus", "Em" and "Sum", respectively. This is not even said by historians, but by linguists.
              And yes, Oleg was still a full-fledged Scandinavian, just like Igor and Olga. Then there was a mixture of Scandinavian and Slavic components, but the name remained with the earth. "Land of Russia", "Russian land".
              I have listed for you the signs by which it is determined whether there is a state or not. Try to answer for yourself when all these signs appeared in the ancient Russian state. And when you answer this question, decide for yourself - can the treaties of Oleg and Igor with Byzantium be considered "international" or were they just personal agreements between the emperor and the head of the clan, community ...
              I say right away that this question in historical science does not have an unambiguous answer, but at least try to decide for yourself. Imagine that we are not talking about your ancestors, but, for example, about some African tribe.
              1. ABC-schütze
                ABC-schütze 13 May 2021 12: 48
                +1
                Are you familiar with the origin of the term "rus"? "Rus" is, in fact, the Scandinavians. It's just that the Finnish Ruotsi (Swedes), Yaami and Suomi in the language of our ancestors were transformed into “Rus”, “Em” and “Sum”, respectively. This is not even said by historians, but by linguists. "
                ************************************************** *********************
                I am familiar (from literature, for I am not a linguist or a historian). But, with all due respect, I still note that our discussion with you is not at all about "terminology." We have a discussion about whose objective interests the actors under discussion represented and what their status was in terms of representing these interests. And here we, alas, will not "get together". Oleg (and his "team"), at the conclusion of Treaties 907 and 912 with Byzantium (we will not call "signing", for the reasons already mentioned above), could have been anyone - "Scandinavians" (they are " Varangians ", they are" Rus ", and then also" Scythians "), but they swore fidelity to the treaty by SLAVIC pagan Gods. And not at all by their "paternal" - Scandinavian. I specially reminded you of this TWICE. But you, in your answers, stubbornly do not notice this "trifle". And without an intelligible and clear answer to the question WHY they did this, it is impossible to OBJECTIVELY understand their REAL status. Swearing an oath by the Gods of the state, taking the oath, UNIFORMALLY, thereby confirms its LOYALTY to them. Ancient Russia was already at that time (on the eve of Epiphany) a SLAVIC LANGUAGE POWER, united not only by the ethnic community of its population, but also by a deep cultural community of ALL strata of this population throughout its territory. And, because of this, its "diplomatic" representatives (Oleg and his "team"), acting by the "methods of diplomacy" of that time, OBJECTIVELY represented HER (Slavic state) OBJECTIVE interests. Which, by the way, I repeat once again, by no means excludes and does not contradict the possible personal interests of the Slavic feudal lord of Varangian origin, Prince Oleg. This, while the first part of the answer to your comment ...
              2. ABC-schütze
                ABC-schütze 13 May 2021 13: 02
                +1
                And yet, for a "warm-up" ... Have you carefully read the list of references given by the author at the end of the article? .. There, in particular, the "popular" Froyanov is mentioned twice. BUT Academician Boris Rybakov is NEVER mentioned. Does this surprise you? .. Indeed, between the two mentioned, precisely in the context of the topic of the article, there are known disagreements. Why shouldn't the author clarify in what way Rybakov was “wrong” and Froyanov “turned out to be right”? And why? .. I am not a historian, for this I dare not deny the authorities in the field of this science. As well as neglecting their labors. At one time, Rybakov offered Froyanov an OPEN discussion (precisely on the topic of the presence and nature of the ancient Russian statehood). Froyanov avoided it. So maybe the author will make his contribution here? .. After all, Rybakov's arguments, for me, in any case, look much more convincing ...
          2. ABC-schütze
            ABC-schütze 13 May 2021 13: 44
            0
            And, for now, - "the third with the fourth" ... I somehow did not hear the answer to the reason for the author's complaints about the "resource scarcity" of the ancient Russian Slavic territories. So what, what "resources", who and where was "lacking" for their development? .. You listed me the "signs of the state". And they offered to "think for yourself." Thank you for that ... I thought, and decided to add to your "list of signs", which I have already added, besides the already mentioned "minting of my own coin", in the course of HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT, the CULTURAL COMMUNITY of the "population" has formed. You mentioned the "population", but for some reason they kept silent about the CULTURAL community. But I dare to suggest that WITHOUT SUCH "sign", the state is SIMPLY IMPOSSIBLE. For the "population" NOT UNITED by an adequate time of events by the CULTURAL COMMUNITY (hierarchical, religious, etc.) is simply eaten by the CROWD. And the crowd, BY DEFINITION, cannot form a state. Avor, again, in the conclusions section, assures us that "there were no mechanisms." Sorry, but this is some kind of misconception. For such a MECHANISM of CULTURAL UNION was already ITSELF, formed over a LONG TIME SYSTEM of pagan polytheism, rooted in the territories of the Slavic tribes. And it was not for nothing that Prince Vladimir, having made a decision on FURTHER STRENGTHENING of his Slavic STATE, began precisely with the further reform of this SYSTEM, radically changing its character from pagan to monotheistic ... ) people are much more effective.
            1. Trilobite Master
              Trilobite Master 13 May 2021 15: 58
              0
              Everything is correct and everything is not quite. smile
              About what gods to swear by. To be honest, I did not attach the importance to this issue that you attach to it, because for me everything is clear and understandable in it.
              The modern idea of ​​religion cannot be transferred to those times, and the pagan ideas in general in no way correspond to our present ones, since they are, in one way or another, formed by the Christian tradition.
              It became a certain revelation for me in my time to realize the meaning of one phrase from the Scandinavian sagas. I don't remember literally, but the point is that some king told his wards that in a foreign land other people's gods are strong and therefore it is necessary to ask for help from them. Let's return home - we will pray to our gods, but here we need to pray to those who are stronger.
              For the pagan, God is not at all what for the adept of the monotheic religion. For a pagan, those gods who help more are better. Pure pragmatics: you to me - I to you. If one god has proved that he is stronger, we will make sacrifices to him. With Oleg, everything is simple - going on a hike, they made a sacrifice to Perun, as a local god. The trip turned out to be successful - it means that Perun helped and, accordingly, he was mentioned in the agreement. This does not testify to any statehood of religion.
              Regarding Rybakov and Froyanov. The author refers to the latter, ignoring the first, precisely because, with the development of historical science, Rybakov's concepts were subjected to thorough criticism and are currently considered outdated. Of course, if it were a fundamental historical work, Rybakov would certainly be mentioned in the section "historiography of the issue" and his theses, like their criticism, would have been voiced. Within the framework of such an article, this is simply impossible, due to the limited scope of its volume.
              Well, the third along with the fourth.
              The scarcity of resources is due to the harshness of the climate and the lack of minerals. Compared to Europe, our ancestors had to put in much more effort to achieve a certain result. To grow a bag of rye, it was necessary to cultivate more land in order to forge a high-quality ax or, even more so, a sword - to buy and bring iron, for swamp ores were suitable for making only the most primitive products. In Europe, all this was at hand and the harvests exceeded ours at times, and according to some sources, by an order of magnitude.
              Nothing needs to be added to the features of the state.
              Minting a coin is not at all obligatory for the recognition of a state by a state, and it also happened that different coins were minted within one state, but this did not cease to be one.
              As for a single cultural community - look at the Buryats, Dagestanis and, for example, the Nenets. Compare them with the Russians. Is the Russian Federation a single state?
              Systems of pagan polytheism never existed for the reasons described above. In one village, they could believe that the main one was Perun, in another - that Mokosh, in the third - Yarilo or Stribog. No system. There is no order or canons. No strict hierarchy of gods and no nomenclature or instructions for performing rituals. This is the essence of paganism - everyone believes how, when and in whom he likes. The only criterion for the "correctness" of faith is practical utility.
              Vladimir was just trying to introduce these uniform rules for the administration of rituals, unify the pantheon and distribute the gods according to their functions and meaning. It didn't work out. I had to radically change my faith. Christianity to a much greater extent met the requirements that the government makes to religion.
              And in general, I do not really understand anyone's attempts to "make our history more ancient". What for? Why, not really knowing what a "state" is, to prove that it was "formed" among our ancestors half a century earlier? It has been taking shape for hundreds of years, overgrowing with certain institutions, improving them, and the date of its "formation" is pure convention. In any case, our ancestors are not the first in this process, even among the Slavs, moreover, they are one of the last. There was also a state of Itself, Great Moravia, which I mentioned, the Bulgarian kingdom ... Why?
              1. ABC-schütze
                ABC-schütze 13 May 2021 21: 44
                +1
                We again, alas, do not understand each other. I didn’t talk about what gods Oleg and his “team” “prayed to”. Referring to the conclusion of the Treaties of Byzantium with the Slavic Prince of Varangian origin, I emphasized what gods he and his "team" BELIEVED on loyalty to the concluded agreement. Agree that between a rather personal "pray" (that is, to communicate with "your" Deity (you), according to your own, so to speak, "needs") and BELIEVE a public oath to the Gods, this is not quite the same thing. Moreover, an oath, as I stress once again, to the gods, not the Varangian. So, I suppose, you are in vain not attaching due importance to this circumstance ... For now, I am finishing. But your remark about the "obsolescence" of Rybakov's concepts does not look very convincing either. Especially, taking into account the fact that the academician voiced his justified criticism of Froyanov's concept 40 years ago. As suggested to the latter an open SCIENTIFIC discussion, from which Froyanov avoided. And now, when Rybakov is already 20 years old, it is much easier for Froyanov's supporters to declare that Rybakov's views are “outdated”. In short, as I believe, Rybakov's views are still far from being overwhelmed ... And at the expense of "minting a coin" as an "optional" feature. Well, it depends on "what" state. If for a vassal, maybe so. And for a developed and sovereign one, one cannot do without this "feature" ... In general, the maxims about the "features" of the state are the "product of agreement" of the authors of textbooks of the corresponding profile. And not at all scientific axioms and not the laws of physics. So on them, quite reasoned discussions are quite possible for themselves ... So, for now, I'm finishing ...
              2. ABC-schütze
                ABC-schütze 17 May 2021 11: 31
                0
                "The scarcity of resources is due to the harshness of the climate and the lack of minerals."
                ************************************************** *********************
                Good day. There is a little time and I would consider it necessary, in the context of your explanations to the conclusions of the author of the article, to clarify one more point. You see, the "severity of the climate" mentioned by you, there are climatic conditions, and the "scarcity of resources" which, for some unknown reason, the author blames, there is a LACK OF RAW MATERIALS OBJECTIVELY NECESSARY for SURVIVAL and COMPETITIVE (in comparison with close or distant neighbors) DEVELOPMENT of public formations. Sorry, but in the Russian Arctic, the climate is harsh, but the resources there are "immeasurable", and Russia's competitors, not relying only on the "severity of the climate", today are doing everything possible to make it difficult for Russia to quickly develop its Arctic resources and their use in the international arena. The economy of Ancient Russia, in its basis, presumably, relied on subsistence farming. For this, the "extractive industries", which constitute the basis of the economy of the initial period of the capitalist economy and the difficulties of access to raw materials for them, could hardly have been particularly critical for Ancient Rus. As for the yield, then Ancient Russia, sort of like, "exported" timber, hemp, honey, flax, ... slaves, etc. ... But, as climatologists and historians say today, again, at 10 -13 centuries the so-called medieval climatic optimum reigned on Earth. Moreover, we are talking about the WHOLE Earth. And, even in Greenland, the grass "turned green", which allowed the Vikings for a couple of centuries, it is very comfortable to "lodge" there. Oleg, Igor, Vladimir, approximately "from that" time period. In the south of ancient Russia, as the Chronicler assures us, telling us about the Slavic military feudal lord Svyatoslav, cheetahs were still found ... So the "severity of the climate" in Ancient Russia is still worth a closer look. Yours faithfully ...
                1. Trilobite Master
                  Trilobite Master 17 May 2021 12: 26
                  0
                  Good afternoon.
                  The main fossil resources of that time were iron, copper and lead. And, of course, gold and silver. The Eastern Slavs, in contrast to the Western or Southern Slavs, Scandinavians, Germans, Arabs - and anyone else - had none of this. I had to buy everything.
                  The climatic optimum did take place, but it concerned the whole of Europe. It was warmer here - it was warmer in Europe. In Germany and Britain, grapes grew, for example.
                  The fact is that between the Scandinavian and Ural mountains there is a huge plain, along which cold air constantly rolls from the Arctic, right onto the Central Russian plain. If you look at the climatic map of Europe, you will very clearly see that the isotherms in Western Europe go as they should be - in the latitudinal direction, and when entering the east, as ordered, they sharply turn south, leaving all of Central Russia in the climatic zone. in Europe, typical only for Finland.
                  Russia exported mainly what can be obtained in the forest, you are right - honey, wax, furs, slaves. Flax and hemp were added to this list later. About bread, vegetables, fruits, wines, there was no talk at all for a very long time.
                  Conclusion: they worked hard and a lot, but they still lived in poverty.
                  1. ABC-schütze
                    ABC-schütze 17 May 2021 12: 41
                    0
                    The fact of the matter is that we are talking about the climate of "all of Europe" (or, more precisely, the entire Northern Hemisphere) of that period. And to highlight the "scarcity of resources", precisely in the context of Ancient Russia, the author, as I believe, had no special objective grounds. Everyone "in terms of climate" was in relatively equal conditions. Yes, with "precious metals" in Ancient Russia it was tough. But ... There was also a BIG "sable treasury", wasn't there? .. Furs, in demand to the south and west, in short. And she served, more than regularly, the national interests of Russia, Russia, right from the initial ambassadorial "trips" of the representatives of Peter the Great to Europe, and up to the "seats" of the fat one in the Seven-Tower Castle. They exchanged it for gold, and paid for supplies, and paid tribute, and ... for centuries they gave bribes, corrupting the right people over the hill ...
                    1. Trilobite Master
                      Trilobite Master 17 May 2021 14: 42
                      0
                      As for the climate, you apparently did not understand, or I did not express myself clearly.
                      We speak about the scarcity of resources only by comparison.
                      The climatic optimum was for everyone, and in Europe it was as warm as in Russia. That is, Europe was still in an advantageous position and the harvests there, as well as now, were not much better, more abundant, respectively, and development went faster - more people could be removed from the production process without the risk of starving to death.
                      Plus the presence of the same metals.
                      Compared to Russia, Europe simply lived in hothouse conditions.
                      Fur was, of course, a valuable resource, but how much more valuable would it be simply to raise the average annual temperature by at least a couple of degrees ... With the same labor costs, this would mean an increase in the yield of thousands of tons. And in France, for example, the average annual temperature at the same geographic latitudes is higher by six degrees, in Germany - by four.
                      Or a couple of silver mines - hundreds of kilograms or even tons of silver a year.
                      Own iron or copper - no need to carry it from anywhere, pay the same silver received for the blood extracted - your own and someone else's - for many hundreds of kilometers from the place of sale of furs ...
                      Think about it - we had scarce resources or rich ones.
  • Trilobite Master
    Trilobite Master 11 May 2021 13: 33
    +5
    An interesting article and many theses, at least controversial.
    Oho-ho, that one needs to open an article in one window, and write a comment in the other ... Damn, it will take time ...
    In short, I will try to briefly state my point of view, which is called "based on" ...
    First: veche.
    It was in every city, not only in Novgorod. Somewhere it was stronger, somewhere weaker. Veche is not a people, not a rabble, not a stinker. This is a pure boyar. The strongest veche was in Novgorod, Galich, Kiev, Polotsk - cities with large transit trade, since the trading boyar elite, at the expense of their income, could maintain their own squads in much larger numbers than, for example, in Chernigov or Vladimir, where the main income is power the possessors were collected from the land in the form of taxes, taxes, etc. In these cities, the princely power was much stronger and the prince was, in fact, an autocratic authority. I can give examples for each city.
    Second: the princely squad.
    Initially - their compatriots who arrived with the first princes. Scandinavians. Russia. Quite quickly, within two generations, the Scandinavian and Slavic components merged with the unconditional predominance of Slavic, and the descendants of the first Rus, who already spoke the Slavic language, became princely warriors. The main function of the squad is to establish control over new lands, collect tribute, and protect against encroachments from neighbors. If necessary, the provision of an "officer corps" for the militia units. The squad acts in the interests of the prince, not the land.
    Third: the feudal militia. Conditionally feudal. Classical feudalism never took shape in Russia. It is probably better to call it the boyar militia. These are the boyars' squads, feeding on their income. The same professional warriors as the princely, but more sedentary. If the princes could walk (and walked) all over Russia with their squads, then the boyars passed from prince to prince relatively rarely, and after they began to settle on the ground, and vanishingly rarely. Nevertheless, they constituted opposition to the princes and had a significant influence on their policies. The combined forces of the boyar militia, as a rule, outnumbered the princely squad. In Novgorod there was still a "Vladychny regiment" - the personal squad of the archbishop and, probably, the city's thousand were the forces of the city's own militia, supported by the city and led by an elective thousand. It is difficult to judge the presence of similar subdivisions in other cities, but it cannot be ruled out either.
    Fourth: cities. Neither is like the other. smile Each has its own characteristics, and such that it is often possible to compare them only by the most general qualities and characteristics, but it is better to consider each separately, as something unique. Therefore, to speak about how power, money and everything else was distributed in them, in my opinion, can only be applied to a specific city, and not to all cities together. Of the common in them only the presence of walls, a prince and a certain number of people outside the walls and near them. smile
    Fifth: land. The most difficult question. I adhere to the point of view according to which, in the understanding of the people of that time, only the prince-Rurikovich could own the land. All Russian land is the property of one family. The boyars were originally "holders" of the land only after several centuries were able to secure the right of ancestral ownership of it. The land gave little income, so it was necessary to serve, go on hikes, etc. This is the difference between "Russian feudalism" and classical - large landowners served at the prince's court.
    Sixth: princes. Many often forget the main function of the prince, bringing to the fore his leadership of the squad and the militia, judicial functions, etc. And the main function of the prince is to represent him before God. This is, first of all, a sacred personality, an intercessor. Therefore, they could not do without the prince, albeit inferior, but there must be, not one so different. Judicial functions were allocated to the prince precisely for this reason, and not because he had a squad and strength. The strength was in many.
    Okay, enough for now. smile
    1. Edward Vashchenko
      11 May 2021 14: 32
      +7
      Michael,
      I greet you hi
      Have worked hard.
      Not as a comment, but as a ... addition.
      It is very difficult to consider each city separately, the sources are extremely and extremely scarce, therefore any theory: feudal, pre-class is based on certain assumptions and parallels. We do not have data for each city, there are a lot of retrospectives.
      as an example with the "regiment of the archbishop", which of course did not exist in the 11th or 12th centuries, there is no data., but there is in the 15th centuries.
      But it is important that the whole of Russia or Eastern Europe, as I. Ya. Froyanov, followed the same path, there were very few differences in Russia, which is obvious among related tribes. A little local specifics, which will be discussed in the following articles.
      Thanks for your opinion and comments.
      Yours faithfully,
      Edward
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 11 May 2021 15: 15
        +6
        Greetings, Edward.
        In general, I agree. The path that Russia traveled in the process of its development as a state, in general, repeated the path traveled before by other European states. It could not be otherwise. And she walked this path not at all at the same time, but also with backlash across different lands in several decades, or even centuries. Some lands were ahead of the general level, some lagged behind. Russia is big.
        The question is precisely in local specifics. In my opinion, this is the most interesting thing - "find ten differences". smile General - it is for that and general, that you can see from afar and with this everything is clear. And the specificity is a highlight that allows us to identify ourselves, to separate ourselves from others, to mark the milestones of our own path.
        The only thing that we can now debate about is the meaning of this very specificity for our history in a global sense.
        1. Edward Vashchenko
          11 May 2021 18: 47
          +4
          The only thing that we can now debate about is the meaning of this very specificity for our history in a global sense.

          I agree completely!
          good
      2. Engineer
        Engineer 11 May 2021 18: 41
        +3
        Edward,
        A conversation, or even an article, about the features of feudalism in Russia and its presence or absence in the 10-13th centuries has long been ripe. As well as other class-non-class society.
        Why is the Old Russian state pre-class?
        Is it not taught from school that the class stratification of Russia of that period is reflected in the Russian truth?
        The difference in fines for the murder of a fireman and a stinker, a direct reference to slaves - "slaves and robes."
        "Fruit from the servants" in the RP?
        The existence of purchases and smerds in the pre-Mongol period. The clergy finally.
        Aren't these classes?
        1. Edward Vashchenko
          11 May 2021 19: 43
          +3
          Denis, good evening!
          Is it not taught from school that the class stratification of Russia of that period is reflected in the Russian truth?

          Yes, they teach, but in school textbooks, with many changes in recent years, the concept of B.D. Grekov.
          Therefore, "Russkaya Pravda" is considered as a document confirming feudalization.
          These ideas got stuck in the historiography of the 40s-70s. XX century, completely ignoring the development of the same anthropology, observations on its basis, both in Europe and in Russia, fixation on elements such as "leaderism", as a theory developed since the 50s. XX century, and do not consider the key directions of historical development.
          And their development belongs to the same A.N. Neusykhin, A.Ya. Gurevich on Scandinavia and Western Europe and I.Ya. Froyanov on Russia.
          RP describes not classes, and not even estates, but groups of dependent. And in ancient Russia we have slaves (servants), the period of decomposition of primitive life, the transition to a terr-neighbor. community, the appearance of slaves-tribesmen - slaves, about which I am writing in the article, smerds, an analogue of the slaves of the fiscal of Ancient Rome, i.e., slaves, but who do not play a key role in production relations, like the Franks in the 6th century, or the Scandinavians in Khv. (All approximately).
          This period, both in European related language groups and in the Eastern Slavs, is a pre-class period. It leads to a class society, maybe to "feudalism", maybe to a "slave-owning" system, I will put it in quotation marks.
          There is a struggle of interests, but there is no antagonism, there are no classes, there is no property approaching private, everything around, well, not collective-farm, but communal.
          After the Mongol invasion, within the territory. community begins to form a service state, the rapid transition of political power from the city to the prince, the beginning of the formation !!!! estates, but not classes!
          All this is absolutely analogous to the Western European events.
          My opinion, feudal relations and class society began to form in Russia only from the very end of the 1649th century, and in reality from the XNUMXth century, through the “civil war”, the Troubles, to legalization in the Cathedral Code of XNUMX. Until the actual “ enslavement "of one of the classes, the peasants, there is no need to talk about any classes.

          All Russian legislation up to 1649, no matter how hard it is for lawyers to understand, the legislation of the potestary system, pre-class society, and not the state.
          Very briefly, chaotically, but so, I will write about this in the sequel.
          hi
          1. Mihaylov
            Mihaylov 11 May 2021 20: 04
            +3
            Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
            RP describes not classes, and not even estates, but groups of dependent.

            Edward, I would add: these are not classes, this is a way of life. Slavery as a way of life can exist in almost any society, even in an industrial one, which does not make it slave-owning.
            1. kalibr
              kalibr 11 May 2021 21: 24
              +1
              Quote: Mihaylov
              even in the industrial, which does not make it a slave.

              That is why, due to the mixture of structures, it makes no sense to make a society into 5 systems. It is much easier to divide into 3 eras in relation to labor: natural coercion, non-economic and economic. Why is it so difficult to enter with us? And the vestiges of feudalism under socialism immediately emerge: in the form of a mass of types of non-economic compulsion to labor.
          2. Trilobite Master
            Trilobite Master 11 May 2021 20: 35
            +2
            It seems to me that if there is any disagreement here, it is purely terminological. To judge whether a society was class or pre-class, it is necessary to agree on the wording of what a "social class" is.
            As far as I know (I'm not a great specialist in this matter), there are different opinions and definitions on this matter, which differ from the Marxist one.
          3. Engineer
            Engineer 11 May 2021 20: 59
            +1
            Thanks for the answer
            I proceed from the fact that classes are formed not only in relation to the means of production, but also in relation to the distribution system of the product.
            The clergy from this point of view is a class. The squad too.
            It is known from pre-Mongol sources about the forcible conversion to slaves. There are known surges of debt slavery. The community should have prevented such occurrences, but they did happen.
            The second argument in favor of the kolass character of pre-Mongol Russia is somewhat indirect. This is high income inequality. It is known that the princes made significant contributions and built "personal" temples.
            The structure of pre-Mongol Russia carries archaisms such as veche meetings, but at the same time it is still class, although the class division is just like three kopecks.
            What about the fiefdoms in the pre-Mongol period? It turns out they weren't there?
            1. Edward Vashchenko
              11 May 2021 21: 42
              +3
              Denis,
              What about the fiefdoms in the pre-Mongol period? It turns out they weren't there?

              in the sources - no.
              As well as data on forced servitude, for debts - yes, simply by violence, as in the XNUMXth century. in Ukraine - no.
              The point is that this is not the time of the tribal community, where blood protection, but the period of the formation of the territorial community, which consisted of families, and possibly childbirth, at the initial stage, is striped.
              No one considered the priests in the West to be a class, although in the narrative sources the society is considered three-member: the warring, praying and plowing.
              Yours faithfully,
              Edward
            2. Mihaylov
              Mihaylov 11 May 2021 22: 01
              +2
              Quote: Engineer
              The second argument in favor of the kolass character of pre-Mongol Russia is somewhat indirect. This is high income inequality. It is known that the princes made significant contributions and built "personal" temples.

              Good evening Denis, in my opinion a dubious argument about property inequality: in pre-class society, three tons of gold could be put in the grave of a tribal leader, and 18 pots of silver could be drowned in the lake in honor of the gods. In general, princely actions in this regard are more reminiscent of the redistribution of wealth characteristic of a tribal society. Edward wrote about this in one of his previous articles.
              The structure of pre-Mongol Russia carries archaisms such as veche meetings

              I would not say that this is archaism, it is quite a capable institution. hi
        2. El Barto
          El Barto 14 May 2021 13: 00
          0
          Classes are basically an economic category. If the social stratum is not the main productive force, then it is not a class either. In terms of production, society was then basically homogeneous, and therefore society is classless.

          In general, it is necessary to consider the development of society systematically. The development of social and political institutions, economic relations is interconnected and is a reflection of one another
      3. Richard
        Richard 11 May 2021 23: 05
        +2
        In Novgorod there was also a "Vladyka Regiment" - Vladyka's personal squad

        Michael hi
        I must correct you. There was no "Vladychny regiment" in Novgorod. This is a common misconception. Edward as a professional historian will confirm this. It's just that, out of ignorance, they call one of the four ambush Novgorod squads - the ambush Sophia squad - subordinate to the Novgorod ruler. It was relatively small - at different times there were 50-150 people. And she did not participate in hostilities outside Novgorod. It was called "ambush" because its task was to defend the garden (at that time the city fortifications were called) of the Vladychnaya (Sofia) side where the Novgorod Detinets was located - a fortress with a church of St. Sofia, and in peacetime the Novgorod city and Konchansk regimental banners, which were kept in the Sofia church. During the veche, the Sofians kept order there. Vladyka's personal guard was not in her functions - this was done by his gentleman.
        There were also other ambush squads in Novgorod from other sides of the city of Zagorodskaya, Nerevskaya and Torgovaya. But these already obeyed the Posadnik
        The soldiers of the ambush regiments in Novgorod were called Gridi. They carried out garrison service, for which they received a salary from the mayor (Sofia greedy - from the Vladyka). "Gridi" were sent as an "ambush" (garrison) to the suburbs (Novgorod had up to 30 suburbs: Pskov, Ladoga, Izborsk, Korela, etc.).
        In addition to weapons, the ambush squads had musical instruments - bells, trumpets, covers and large tambourines. But not for the musical delight of the townspeople, but for giving them alarm signals. Had and
        water carriers with huge barrels to extinguish fires during the siege of the city.

        link: https: //arheologija.ru/rabinovich-voennaya-organizatsiya-gorodskih-kontsov-v-novgorode-velikom-v-xii-xv-vv/
        Interesting fact... princely warriors and his servants at their place of residence at the Yaroslavl Dvor, in Novgorod were simply called nobles.
        1. Richard
          Richard 11 May 2021 23: 32
          +2
          Thus, the composition of the Novgorod army included the prince's squad, "greedy", Konchansk regiments and the militia of the posadov. In addition, there were squads of "volunteers" (from free people), which were private organizations of wealthy boyars and merchants.
          The most powerful were undoubtedly 12 Konchan regiments (5 were exhibited by Novgorod itself - Plotnitsky, Slavensky, Lyudinsky, Zagorodsky, Nerevsky, 7 of its cities and Konchansky posad), which were united by 6 thousand
          fig. The ends of Veliky Novgorod

          links: Novgorodskaya IV Chronicle, p. 200: "and turned into 12 regiments." ↩
          Novgorod I Chronicle, pp. 235-237; the same in the Tver Chronicle (p. 357) under 1231 ↩
          A.I. Nikitsky. Military life in Veliky Novgorod XI-XV centuries. Russian antiquity, 1870, vol. I.
          N. S. Golitsyn. Russian military history, part I, SPb., 1877, p. 188
          https://arheologija.ru/rabinovich-voennaya-organizatsiya-gorodskih-kontsov-v-novgorode-velikom-v-xii-xv-vv/
    2. Mihaylov
      Mihaylov 11 May 2021 15: 39
      +5
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      Veche is not a people, not a rabble, not a stinker. This is a pure boyar.

      These are the boyars' squads, feeding on their income. The same professional warriors as the princely, but more sedentary.

      Good afternoon, Mikhail, everything is so, but for the XNUMXth century, I'm not sure that even for the XNUMXth century these theses will fit, at least not completely. hi
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 11 May 2021 16: 29
        +4
        Good day, Sergey. Good weather. smile
        I remember that we already partially touched on this topic when we talked about Novgorod.
        I express my own opinion on this issue, nothing more, and I reason like this.
        In the early Middle Ages, the people were simple and pragmatic. Only the strong had the right to vote, and this every time had to be defended and proven. You can multiply your strength by teaming up with someone pursuing similar goals, even if he is not even your relative. Any association requires leadership. To do this, the members of the association single out someone from their midst and delegate to him the authority to act on their behalf, supporting him in word and, if necessary, in deed. Over time, the power of these people begins to be inherited and takes on traditional forms. The local aristocracy appears.
        Is everything right so far? smile
        With regard to the history of Russia, the boyars, as, for example, Gorsky believes, came from the merger of two components - the local aristocracy and newcomer find-warriors. A fusion of tradition and power. Could anyone have opposed this "alliance"? Who could compete with this "hybrid" if even the prince had to reckon with them? On what basis could a force be organized that could resist the boyars at veche meetings? I don't see such forces in a medieval city.
        At the time of the emergence of the city itself, most of its future residents ALREADY belonged to one or another group, that is, they followed "the boyar." And disagreements at the veche are, in my opinion, not a manifestation of the "class struggle", but a manifestation of a conflict of interests among the ruling class - between the boyars and the prince, or simply between certain boyar groups. Moreover, from the very beginning. They had no other opponents. I, in any case, did not find them.
        1. Mihaylov
          Mihaylov 11 May 2021 16: 55
          +2
          [quote = Trilobite Master] So far, right? [/ quote]
          Yes, Mikhail, there is no objection in this part.
          [quote] With regard to the history of Russia, the boyars, as, for example, Gorsky believes, came from the merger of two components - the local aristocracy and the newcomers-warriors. [Quote]
          To be honest, I haven't read Gorsky, at least I don't remember.
          Here is the question of the time interval of this process: if we are talking about the conditionally era of Ancient Russia, then in my opinion there is a serious aging of this process and the realities of the formation of the service aristocracy of a later time are transferred to an earlier one. Yes, in the era of the emergence of a centralized state since the XNUMXth century, the aristocracy is formed from the princely court and the local regional aristocracy, which is at least partially recruited into the upper class for quite understandable purposes.
          As for the time interval of the XI-XIII centuries and even partially in the XIV centuries, there is still a frankly still weak stratification of society and there are no boyar groupings in charge of all, they really will be, but later.
          So far we are witnessing a relatively unified community in social and political terms. Naturally, the process of its class decomposition into the boyar elite gradually begins, concentrating in its hands the main means of production - that is, the land, and ordinary communes who are gradually losing land and increasingly falling into dependence on the boyar elite. From them, private boyar military detachments begin to form, or let us call them "druzhinka" - as a consequence of them the service class of "boyar children" will grow. But before the XIV-XV centuries it seems to me that he does not speak of this as a fait accompli. hi
          1. Trilobite Master
            Trilobite Master 11 May 2021 17: 32
            +2
            Well, let's put it this way, we have known the concept of "boyar" for centuries, at least since H. Who were they at that time? Are they purely warriors? Officials? Aristocracy? How was their position in society, high position confirmed?
            My opinion - initially the highest representatives of the princely administration in the field with the right to inherit the position. Later - landowners. But during the period under review, they still do not have this status, although they already have a "settled life". While the princes ran from land to land, the boyars "grew" to it. And the free community members at the veche stood for "their" boyar, whom they knew.
            Imagine that these members of the community had some kind of organizational structure that could oppose themselves to the boyars, I cannot. Thus, it turns out that it was the boyars who tried to realize their interests with the hands of the peasants at the veche.
            1. Mihaylov
              Mihaylov 11 May 2021 18: 01
              +3
              Quote: Trilobite Master
              Well, let's put it this way, we have known the concept of "boyar" for centuries, at least since H.

              Yes, the term is very old and known very early. The question of both the origin of the term and the essence of the category remains controversial. I think that, firstly, the term has significantly transformed in time and the boyar of the 10th century is not at all the same as the boyar of the 15th century, for example, a nobleman of the 16th century is not at all the same as a nobleman of the 19th century, and secondly, it is quite possible that into one the category included several concepts.
              It seems to me that for the period under consideration, the boyar is the leader of the local community or part of it, possibly leading his "leadership" since ancestral times, belonging by origin to a noble and respected family, which of course does not exclude his military merits, which are quite probable in the era, when all the warriors.
              As you correctly noted:
              the community members at the veche stood for "their" boyar, whom they knew

              Gradually, like any elite of society, they begin to accumulate certain wealth in their hands in one way or another (their abuses are repeatedly mentioned in the annals) and concentrate in their hands both the means of production and, as a result, political power. hi
    3. Mihaylov
      Mihaylov 11 May 2021 16: 25
      +5
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      Fifth: land. The most difficult question. I adhere to the point of view according to which, in the understanding of the people of that time, only the prince-Rurikovich could own the land.

      Here Mikhail, I am ready to argue with you: again, this is the reality already in the XV-XVI centuries and even in the XVII centuries: to which Rurikovich could the land belong, if N-number of princes could change in any city within a few years. The land belonged to the parish community, the center of which was the main city of the parish. All cities had an openly agrarian character and were only a "continuation" of the agricultural district - its administrative and political center (and yes - a sacred center). The basis of the economy of even such an "exemplary trading city" as Novgorod is agrarian and invented modern terms like "Trade Republic" should not mislead us.
      The land gave little income, so it was necessary to serve, go on hikes, etc.
      The land provided the main income and even the basis of the local system of the XVI-XVII centuries is income from the land. All other sources of income were exclusively of secondary importance, although booty is without doubt the most coveted income, contributing to quick enrichment.
      This is the difference between "Russian feudalism" and classical - large landowners served at the prince's court.

      Again, in the era of the already centralized state. Large boyar landownership, firstly, is formed rather late: following the example of Novgorod, one can talk about it in the XNUMXth century, and secondly, it is not a princely "phenomenon", but a purely local, volost, not associated with the incoming and outgoing prince ...
      Regarding trade: trading posad can not be traced in Russian cities earlier than the middle of the XNUMXth century. This suggests that domestic trade existed almost in its infancy: the needs for products were satisfied within the tribal community and only with its final decomposition artisans slowly begin to move to the city, but there is no need to talk about any city as a center of craft and trade. and for a very long time.
      Foreign trade - yes, it appears quite early, at first as a result of military robberies, then as a result of surplus that is slowly appearing at the top of the community, which can be sold somewhere beyond the "sea" and for this, first of all, luxury goods, but this phenomenon is sporadic and compared to the rest of the "economy" of that period, it is essentially microscopic. hi
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master 11 May 2021 17: 09
        +1
        Yes, there is something to argue about. smile
        The first thing I would like to emphasize is that the Rurik people, apparently, considered the land their collective, precisely collective property. The property of the entire clan, which was perceived as a single whole. "Everyone keeps his fatherland" - this is already the XII century. Polotsk, however, stood out a little earlier, but in the end, the Polotsk princes were also Rurik.
        Agriculture during this period was unproductive, so income from the land was collected in kind, so that later it could be sold - furs, wax, honey, whatever else, but not agricultural products and certainly not silver ... time is still yourself.
        The income is not great, therefore, the limits of taxable lands were constantly expanding.
        The second source of income is war, robbery. Everything is clear here.
        The third source is international transit trade. And they fought fiercely for this piece. This is a stable income, and in its most liquid form - silver. Domestic trade was weak, tributes were scarce, and here such wealth floated by ... Cities grew up on trade routes and it seems to me that at certain stages the income from trade was not comparable with the income from the land, but, perhaps, exceeded it.
        The importance of land as a source of income steadily increased with the growth of agricultural productivity - yes, but the lion's share of income did not begin to be given very soon, probably somewhere in the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries, not earlier.
        1. Mihaylov
          Mihaylov 11 May 2021 17: 29
          +2
          Quote: Trilobite Master
          what could then be sold - furs, wax, honey, what else is there,

          Slaves.
          On the whole, in my opinion, you described everything correctly, but we are talking about the unproductive part of society, and what percentage of society was not then involved in production? I cannot say, but it seems to me microscopic - probably some fractions of a percent.
          Cities grew up on trade routes

          It seems to me that cities already as state formations (and not as fortified settlements) grew on rivers - first of all, as on routes of communication: rivers are the then "autobahns", roads of that time, and it was important for any "capital" city to be in the center of the roads, as always - "all roads lead to Rome." And such places were chosen deliberately, partly probably the effect of "transfer of cities" was connected with this. hi
          What role did transit trade play at this time? Well, I don’t know, for the top, I certainly played, for the general population - probably not very significant.
        2. El Barto
          El Barto 14 May 2021 13: 10
          0
          "Land" should be understood as an area with a population, and not agricultural or hunting grounds.
          As for control over trade routes, this racketeering as a source of income quickly died. As soon as the crusaders made their way across the Mediterranean. Domestic trade, as you noticed, was scarce. There were reasons for the development of agriculture and crafts, and as a result of the class division of society
      2. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave 11 May 2021 19: 07
        +2
        All cities were openly agrarian in nature and were only a "continuation" of the agricultural district
        Hmmm ... Polotsk, Pskov and Novgorod too? Until when? If I am not mistaken, already Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, "played the" hungry "card" of Novgorod. Meanwhile, this happened at the time of the medieval climatic optimum ...
        1. Mihaylov
          Mihaylov 11 May 2021 19: 39
          +2
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          Hmmm ... Polotsk, Pskov and Novgorod too? Until when?

          Good evening Anton, I guess until the end of their existence as independent subjects.
          We are often misled by the notion of Novgorod as a "commercial republic", but this is a purely modern construct. Undoubtedly, the extremely favorable position of Novgorod and its slightly later competitor Pskov (the former suburb of Novgorod) contributed to the development of international trade: furs, wax, hemp, flax were exported to the west, and goods strategically necessary in Russia were imported: high-quality iron, copper / bronze, silver and luxury goods. Actually, that's all, if I forgot to list something, then nothing significant. Of course, the elite had a good profit on this, but all this to a small extent concerned the main population of Novgorod, Pskov, or did not concern at all.
          The basis of the economy is agriculture, and the vast majority of the population is employed in it. For Novgorod, materials from scribes and other books of the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries are well preserved, so we know well its economics of this time, of course there are no such materials at an earlier time, but it is unlikely that it was significantly different.
          And hunger was a common thing at that time, especially in a society with an agrarian structure. It happened periodically: then they took out stash and tried to buy food where possible. hi
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 11 May 2021 20: 06
            +3
            My compliments, Sergei! Sometimes, being carried away, I forget about greetings, wishes of a good day; love, happiness, and prosperity; health of immunity and a mask that does not sneeze. Good luck to you!
            Meanwhile, give examples of famine in Central Russia at this time? And Yaroslav "pressed this button" in relation to Novgorod. That is, the city had something to give him, besides a small "lord"? ...
            1. Mihaylov
              Mihaylov 11 May 2021 20: 18
              +1
              good day wishes; love, happiness, and prosperity; health of immunity and a mask that does not sneeze. Good luck to you!

              Thank you very much Anton, I also wish you my best wishes! drinks
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              Meanwhile, give examples of famine in Central Russia at this time?

              Anton, it's easier to list the years when he was not there (a joke of course):
              1092g - Kiev
              1094g - the locust ate everything
              1127-28 - Novgorod
              1129 - southern lands
              1141 and 1144 - southern lands again: abnormal frosts, snow fell on Easter
              1145- Novgorod again
              1162 - Galich
              1164 - Kiev.
              1186 - Pskov
              etc. hi
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 11 May 2021 20: 52
                +1
                It would be nice to compare with the European chronicles. And what you have mentioned is, in most cases, a standard food crisis in a metropolis.
                1. Mihaylov
                  Mihaylov 11 May 2021 21: 43
                  +1
                  Quote: 3x3zsave
                  And what you have mentioned is, in most cases, a standard food crisis in a metropolis.

                  6636 (1128g) I Novgorod Chronicle:
                  Into the same l вto vdasha posadnitsstvo, Novѣgorodѣ, to Zavid Dmitrovits. All in all, it’s lto fiercely: the osminka of rye on the hryvnia byash, and the people are leafing linden, birch bark, and eat the moths, eat the mint, and eat the straw, and the ears, mkh’, the horse meat, and so on to others.
                  Corpse along the streets and along the road and along the roads and everywhere; Nayasha hirelings to carry the martyrdom out of the city; and smorod nelga get out tight, bda for all! father and mother, your child you enter into the lod of a guest for free, their ovo is worn out, and friends are scattered across other lands, and so, according to our sinfulness, our land is ours.
    4. El Barto
      El Barto 14 May 2021 12: 47
      0
      Your comment is also controversial. In the same Novgorod, the princes nearby were directly forbidden to own land. The chronicle term "land" had a different meaning than agricultural land.
      Also, you will not deny that the boyars were heterogeneous, there were representatives of the princely, clan nobility among him.
      Is this your personal discovery about the religious function of the prince?
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 11 May 2021 14: 36
    +4
    Colleagues, Valery, good afternoon.
    The law of meanness: yesterday I did not check the balance, but today I could not enter: there are not enough funds. And the weather is disgusting: rain and wind (17 meters), to go to the Magnet and put on the account.
    Now she came running and was happy that she was not running for nothing. It would be more than a shame to see: Frolov
    Tomorrow will be something to read
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 May 2021 19: 35
    +3
    Beaver paws. Items of pagan worship. IX-XI centuries Historical Museum of the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery. Yaroslavl.
    Suddenly I became interested in this cult. What is known about him? Is this Vyatichi?
    Thanks Edward!
    1. Edward Vashchenko
      11 May 2021 19: 47
      +5
      Anton,
      good evening,
      no - both beavers and bears are Finno-Ugric totems, not Slavic. Clay feet are found throughout the entire Finno-Ugric region from Finland to Komi.
      hi
      1. Korsar4
        Korsar4 11 May 2021 22: 03
        0
        And the Russian fairy tales about the bear's paw - from the same series?
        1. Edward Vashchenko
          11 May 2021 22: 36
          +1
          But I don't know about that
  • kalibr
    kalibr 14 May 2021 07: 21
    0
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    the value of links to documents is near zero

    Wrong again! You don’t understand: sitting at home, you can order any document by mail, knowing its code. Check out and find out more! But the toad ... it strangles.