Negative statements by historians about the activities of Ivan Kalita. Personality of Ivan Kalita. Opinions of historians. maintaining good relations with the Horde

Ivan Kalita invites Metropolitan Peter to Moscow. Smolin A
XIII and XIV centuries - first centuries Tatar yoke- were perhaps the most difficult in Russian history. The Tatar invasion was accompanied by terrible devastation of the country. The ancient Dnieper regions of Rus', once so densely populated, for a long time turned into a desert with meager remnants of the former population. Most of the people were either killed or taken captive by the Tatars, and travelers passing through the Kyiv region saw only countless human bones and skulls scattered across the fields. After the defeat of 1240, Kyiv itself turned into an insignificant town with barely 200 houses. This land remained in such desolation until the middle of the 15th century.

North-Eastern Rus', although it suffered no less from the attack, managed to recover from it much faster. Even in the darkest times, life did not stop here for a moment. One of the important consequences of the Tatar invasion was the rapid fragmentation of the previously united Vladimir-Suzdal volost. Even after the death of Vsevolod the Big Nest (younger brother of Andrei Bogolyubsky), it broke up into five appanage principalities. Vladimirskoye, Rostovskoye, Pereyaslavskoye, Yuryev-Polskoye and Starodubskoye. Under the grandchildren of Vsevolod, this fragmentation continued, and we already see twelve appanage principalities, so Suzdal, Kostroma and Moscow emerged from the Vladimir region; from Rostovskaya - Yaroslavskaya and Uglitskaya, from Pereyaslavskaya - Tverskaya and Galitskaya. Then this fragmentation continued in an ever-increasing progression. For example, from Principality of Suzdal Nizhny Novgorod was separated, Belozerskoye was separated from Rostov, etc. As a result, by the beginning of the 14th century, on the site of the formerly united North-Eastern Rus', there were already several dozen small fiefs, each of which had its own princely dynasty established. The constant hostility between them did not allow any some successful fight against the Tatars, who felt like complete masters here. In these circumstances, the capital city of Vladimir almost lost its signs of primacy. Receiving a label for a great reign from the khan, the princes were not required to stay in Vladimir; they could be great princes and live in their former inheritances. However, the title of Grand Duke was far from being an empty phrase - which of the princely branches held it for their offspring ultimately depended on which of the northern Russian cities could become the center around which the country would unite. And just as before in the south the entire political struggle revolved around the right to possess the Kyiv table, so now it revolved around the right to receive the khan’s label and be called the Grand Duke of Vladimir. The struggle became especially fierce at the beginning of the 14th century, when a long-term war broke out between two lines of descendants of Vsevolod the Big Nest - the princes of Tver and Moscow. The town of Moscow arose among a wooded and swampy area on Borovitsky Hill, rising high above the confluence of the Moscow and Neglinnaya rivers. It was first mentioned in the chronicle in 1147. At that time, apparently, it was not yet a city, but a rural princely estate of the Suzdal prince Yuri Dolgoruky. The chronicler speaks about the fortification of Moscow with walls in 1156. The Kremlin hill, covered with a dense coniferous forest, at that time stood out very noticeably from the surrounding landscape (the water level in the Moscow River was 2–3 m lower than today, the foot of the hill was not hidden by the filling of embankments, the top was not cut off, and there were no large structures around).


Vasnetsov A.M. Moscow Kremlin under Ivan Kalita.
This place was crowded, there was brisk trade along the Moscow River, so a settlement began to develop near the Kremlin walls very early. At first he occupied the narrow “hem” of the hill along the Moscow River, and then, turning up the mountain, he occupied the area between the Moscow River and Neglinnaya.

As a new town and far from the Suzdal centers - Rostov and Vladimir - Moscow, later than others, could become the capital city of a special principality. And indeed, for a long time there was no permanent reign here. Only under the great-grandsons of Vsevolod the Big Nest, after the death of Alexander Nevsky, did Moscow have its own prince in 1263 - Nevsky’s young son Daniil. This was the beginning of the Moscow principality and the dynasty of Moscow princes. Daniil took the first step towards elevating his family name: in 1301, by cunning and deceit, he took away the prince of Kolomna from the Ryazan city, and the next year he inherited his father’s main inheritance - the Principality of Pereyaslavl. His descendants continued his policy, slowly taking over neighboring lands and rounding out their possessions. A natural question arises: how should we explain their constant and solid success? Alas, even with a very strong desire, one cannot see great personal merit in these figures. The first Moscow princes, according to Klyuchevsky, had no splendor, no signs of heroic or moral greatness. They never shone major talents, nor bright virtues. In terms of their personal qualities, they were more than average politicians, distinguished, however, by great dexterity and skillful obsequiousness. But just such figures were required by the era!:

“Each time,” wrote Klyuchevsky, “has its own heroes, suitable for it, and the 13th and 14th centuries were a time of general decline in Rus', a time of narrow feelings and petty interests, petty, insignificant characters... In the chronicles of this time we will not hear previous speeches about the Russian earth, about the need to protect it from the filthy, about what never left the language of the South Russian princes and chroniclers of the 11th–12th centuries. People closed themselves in the circle of their private interests and came out only to benefit at the expense of others. And when common interests decline in society... the state of affairs is usually taken over by those who act more energetically than others in the name of personal interests...

The Moscow princes were in exactly this position. Therefore, they knew better than others how to adapt to the character and conditions of their time and began to act more decisively for the sake of personal interest." The princes of Moscow have to do big things.”

The irony of history is that personal valor, high virtues and civic sense, which we do not find either in Daniel, or in his children, or in his grandchildren, were to a much greater extent characteristic of their opponents - the first princes of Tver. Moreover, the Tver princes had the right on their side, that is, all legal and moral means. On the side of the Moscow princes there was no right, neither moral nor legal, but they had money and the ability to take advantage of circumstances, that is, material and practical means.

In vain did the unfortunate Tver prince Alexander call on his brethren, the Russian princes, “to stand for each other and brother for brother, and not to betray the Tatars and to all together resist them, to defend the Russian land and all Orthodox Christians.” Such feelings at this time did not find any response in the Moscow princes. They did not think at all about fighting the Tatars and believed that it was much more profitable to act on the Horde with servility and money than with weapons and force. For several generations they diligently courted the Tatar khans and eventually managed to make them the instrument of their plans. No one went to bow to the khans more often than they did, no one was a more welcome guest in the Horde than the rich Moscow prince, and no one knew better than him how to slander and slander his compatriots, the Russian princes, before the Tatars. This was the reason that laid the foundation for the rise and prosperity of Moscow. And yet, which of the two opponents - Tver or Moscow - should we recognize as more right in this historical dispute? The conclusion, alas, is completely clear: the inevitable course of events ultimately confirmed that Moscow was right. While the obstinate Tver experienced all the horrors over and over again Tatar invasions The Moscow volost, freed from raids, grew richer and gained strength. And when these forces turned out to be enough, then among the Moscow princes they found their own valiant hero, who managed to lead the Russian army to the Kulikovo field. Therefore, it was not the brave Mikhail Tverskoy and not his son Alexander, but the insidious Yuri Moskovsky and his crafty brother Ivan Kalita who earned the fame in our history as “gatherers” of Russian lands. Clashes between Moscow and Tver began in 1304 after the death of the Grand Duke of Vladimir Andrei Alexandrovich. According to the previous custom, seniority among the northern princes belonged to Mikhail Yaroslavich Tverskoy. However, the place of tribal disputes between the princes was now replaced by rivalry based on the right of force. Moscow was then ruled by the eldest son of Daniil Alexandrovich, Yuri Danilovich. He was as strong as Mikhail Tverskoy, if not stronger than him, and therefore considered himself entitled to be his opponent. When Mikhail went to the Horde for a label, Yuri also went there to compete with the khan. But the label still went to the Tver prince.

However, Yuri did not calm down. In 1315 he went to the Horde and lived there for two years.

During this time, he managed to get close to the family of Khan Uzbek and married his sister Konchak, who was named Agafya at baptism. In 1317 he returned to Rus' with strong Tatar ambassadors. The main one was Kavgady.

Yuri's troops went to the Tver volost and greatly devastated it. 40 versts from Tver, near the village of Bortenev, a fierce battle took place, in which Mikhail won a complete victory. Yuri and a small retinue managed to escape to Novgorod, but his wife, brother Boris, many princes and boyars remained prisoners in the hands of the winner. Konchaka-Agafya never returned to Moscow after this: she died in Tver, and a rumor spread that she had been poisoned. This rumor was beneficial for Yuri and dangerous for Mikhail. Appearing to Uzbek, Kavgady and Yuri slandered Mikhail and presented his behavior in the most unfavorable light. The Khan was angry and ordered to call Mikhail to the Horde. In September 1318, Mikhail reached the mouth of the Don, where the Horde was roaming at that time. He lived quietly for a month and a half, then the Uzbek ordered him to be tried. The Horde princes, based mainly on the testimony of Kavgady, found Mikhail guilty. At the end of November he was executed.

In 1320, Yuri returned to Moscow as a winner. He was carrying a label for the great reign and the body of his enemy. Both sons of Mikhail and his boyars returned to Rus' as prisoners. In an effort to take full advantage of his position, Yuri returned Mikhail’s body to his relatives only after concluding a beneficial peace with Tver. In 1324, the son of the executed Dmitry went to Uzbek and, apparently, managed to show the untruth of Yuri and the innocence of Mikhail. The Khan gave him a label for a great reign. At the same time, the Khan's ambassador came to Yuri to invite him for investigation. Dmitry did not want to let his rival alone to the khan, knowing his resourcefulness, and he himself hurried after.

The details of the meeting between the two enemies are unknown. The chronicler only reports that Dmitry killed Yuri and was later himself executed by order of Uzbek.

Under such circumstances, the reign of Yuri's younger brother, Ivan Danilovich Kalita, began. (Ivan probably got his nickname from the habit of constantly carrying a wallet with money with him to distribute alms.) He remained in the shadows for a long time under his older brother, but when the latter died, he successfully continued his policy. Eighteen years of Kalita's reign were an era of unprecedented strengthening of Moscow and its rise above other Russian cities. The main means to this, again, was Ivan’s special ability to get along with the khan. He often traveled to the Horde and acquired the full favor and trust of Uzbek. While other Russian lands suffered from Tatar invasions and settlements, and were also subject to other disasters, the possessions of the Prince of Moscow remained calm, filled with inhabitants and, compared with others, were in a flourishing state.

“The filthy ones stopped fighting the Russian land,” says the chronicler, “they stopped killing Christians; Christians rested and rested from great languor and much burden, and from Tatar violence; and from that time on there was silence throughout the whole earth.”

The city of Moscow expanded and strengthened. This can be seen from the fact that under Ivan a new oak Kremlin was built. Villages sprang up one after another around the capital. The limits of the principality itself also increased. At the beginning of Kalita's reign, his possessions consisted of only five or seven cities with counties. Those were: Moscow, Kolomna, Mozhaisk, Zvenigorod, Serpukhov, Ruza, Radonezh and Pereyaslavl. However, having significant material resources in his hands, Ivan bought up a huge amount of land in different places, near Kostroma, Vladimir, Rostov, on the Meta River, Kirzhach and even in Novgorod land, contrary to Novgorod laws that prohibited princes from buying land there. He established settlements in the Novgorod land, populated them with his people, and thus had the opportunity to impose his power in this way. In addition to many villages, he even managed to acquire three specific cities with their districts: Belozero, Galich and Uglich. Rumors about the wealth of the Moscow prince spread throughout the neighboring volosts. The boyars left their princes, went into the service of Kalita and received lands from him with the obligation of service; The boyars were followed by free people fit to bear arms. Ivan took care of internal security, strictly persecuted and executed robbers and thieves, and thereby made it possible for trading people to travel on the roads. He also managed to give Moscow special moral significance by transferring the metropolitan see from Vladimir to it. Ivan gained such favor with Metropolitan Peter that this saint lived in Moscow more than in other places. Here he died and was disgraced. The tomb of the holy man was as precious for Moscow as the presence of a living saint: the choice of Peter seemed to be an inspiration from God, and the new Metropolitan Theognostus no longer wanted to leave the tomb and house of the miracle worker. Other princes clearly saw the important consequences of this phenomenon and were angry, but they could no longer correct matters in their favor. Throughout his reign, Kalita deftly took advantage of circumstances in order, on the one hand, to increase his possessions, and on the other, to have primary influence on the princes in other Russian lands. What helped him most in this was the enmity that began between Tver and the Horde. Prince Alexander Mikhailovich, who reigned in Tver after the death of Dmitry, took part in a popular uprising in 1327, during which the Tver residents killed the Tatar ambassador Cholkan and his entire retinue.

The Uzbek, having learned about Cholkan’s fate, became very angry. According to some news, he himself sent for the Moscow prince, and according to others, Kalita went to the Horde without a call, in a hurry to take advantage of the Tver incident. The Uzbek gave him a label for a great reign and 50,000 troops. Having also joined the Prince of Suzdal, Kalita went to the Tver volost; The Tatars burned cities and villages, took people into captivity and, in the words of the chronicler, “lay the whole Russian land empty.” Only Moscow and Novgorod were saved, who gave the Tatar governors 2000 hryvnias of silver and many gifts. Alexander fled to Pskov. His brother Konstantin, ruling the devastated Tver land, was forced to please the Moscow prince, the khan’s favorite, in everything. The princes of other Russian lands were put in the same position. Ivan gave one of his Daughters for Vasily Davydovich Yaroslavsky, and the other for Konstantin Vasilyevich Rostovsky and autocratically disposed of the inheritance of his sons-in-law.

In 1337, Alexander Tverskoy made peace with the khan and received his principality back. This was a strong blow to the power of Moscow. But two years later, Ivan went to the Horde with a denunciation of his enemy. As had happened more than once, the Moscow prince’s slander was believed unconditionally. The Tver prince received an order to appear in the Horde. Alexander went, already realizing that his fate was decided. And indeed, both he and his son Fedor were executed. Kalita returned to Moscow in great joy, sent to Tver, ordered to remove and bring to Moscow the bell from the local Church of St. Savior. According to the concepts of that time, this was a very sensitive humiliation, clearly indicating that in the rivalry between the two cities, Moscow received complete triumph over its enemy. Prince Ivan Kalita died on March 31, 1340

K.V. Ryzhov.

Among a considerable number of historians of the 19th-20th centuries, there was a popular skeptical attitude towards the Moscow princes in general and in particular towards Ivan Danilovich Kalita (life: about 1288 - 1340; Prince of Moscow from 1325, Grand Duke Vladimirsky since 1328). This is explained by several reasons. Firstly, the Tver chronicles, which were critical of the Moscow rulers and their policies (Tver in those days was a rival of Moscow), have been preserved better than the Moscow ones. Secondly, several Tver princes died as martyrs in the Horde and were later recognized as saints. Therefore, in the memory of their descendants moral image was more vivid than the image of the Moscow sovereigns, engaged in the painstaking and thankless work of state building. Finally, thirdly, it is necessary to take into account the general political mood of part of the pre-revolutionary Russian and later Soviet historiography, in the eyes of which the Moscow princes appeared as the creators of the “hated autocracy”, and therefore as “oppressors” and “usurpers”, worthy of condemnation even if they achieved success .

Under the influence of these factors, the image of Ivan Kalita was formed as a greedy, selfish character, capable of any immoral acts. Of course, the life of any person, especially a ruler endowed with enormous power, cannot be sinless. However, such an image is unlikely to correspond to reality. Anyway, research recent years, deprived of their former political engagement, paint a different image of the Grand Duke: a sincere believer, wise, unhurried, economical, in some situations tough and even cruel, but always concerned about the good of his land.

It's in the bag

We can name two factors that seem to have ensured the economic power of the Moscow Principality. Firstly, the establishment of control over the collection of the Horde output from all Russian northeastern lands, which made it possible for Ivan Danilovich to use a certain (“unaccounted for”) part of it for the benefit of his own principality.

Secondly, control over the mining and trade of “soft gold”, furs, which since then and for many years to come has become practically the main article of Moscow export. According to one version, it was for his skillful rule and prudent attitude towards the inheritance that Ivan Danilovich received the nickname Kalita: “Kalita” translated from Old Russian means a purse, a bag for carrying money.

Time of executions

In the XIII-XIV centuries, the Horde yoke fell as a heavy burden on Russian shoulders. The Russian principalities lost their political independence. Now the Horde khans, who were called tsars in Rus' until the end of the 15th century, were considered the supreme rulers. It was the Horde Khan who, with his authority, allowed or forbade the Russian princes to occupy tables. One of the signs of vassal dependence was the obligatory practice of Russian princes in the Horde receiving a label not only for the great reign of Vladimir, but also for appanage reigns.

All Russian lands were subject to tribute. The most difficult of them was the Horde exit, or the Tsar's tribute, which all Russian principalities had to pay annually. Almost everything they managed to earn was taken away from people. At the same time, in addition to leaving, the Russian lands were obliged to fulfill more than ten types of Horde duties. Only the Horde church, trying to appease the Christian God they did not understand, did not impose taxes.

The Mongols established the most brutal order in the Russian lands under their control. To collect taxes, Baskaks settled in the cities - the khan's governors, who robbed the local residents completely, and punished the slightest insubordination with death. In addition, the Mongols often attacked the Russian principalities with devastating and predatory raids, which in Rus' were called Horde armies. In the last 25 years of the 13th century alone, there were 15 large Horde campaigns against Russian lands. One of them, the so-called Dudenev’s army of 1293, was considered by contemporaries to be worse than Batu’s invasion, and their descendants - rural residents of the Vladimir province - remembered with horror even in the 19th century. So, probably, those eyewitnesses were right who called the tragic events of the 13th century “the time of God’s executions” and believed that the horrors of the Mongol pogrom “could have brought the Antichrist to tears”... The consequences of the Horde yoke were truly catastrophic. First of all, the Russian principalities found themselves on the verge of a demographic crisis: the number of inhabitants of the devastated lands decreased several times. In addition, due to the fault of the Horde, an economic catastrophe broke out in Rus': hundreds of previously prosperous cities and villages perished, and in the surviving populated areas Stone construction stopped for many years, and many crafts disappeared.

Russian culture was on the brink of destruction: during Mongol invasion Thousands of churches, books, and icons were burned and destroyed, chronicles were interrupted in Russian cities, tens of thousands of craftsmen of various specialties died or were driven into slavery. Finally, as a result of Tatar rule, a geopolitical catastrophe occurred. The Russian land was finally torn into two parts: Southwestern Rus' fell under the rule of Lithuania, Poland and Hungary, and only the northeastern lands, despite the Horde oppression, still retained economic and political potential for the struggle for the restoration of independence and the new unification of Russian principalities .

No chance

According to tradition, power in the family of Russian princes was transferred according to the principle of “eldership”: to the eldest in the family, and not to the eldest son. It would seem that Kalita had no chance.

It is worth recalling that his father, Prince Daniil Alexandrovich of Moscow (1261-1303), was only the fourth son of Alexander Nevsky. Moreover, he did not even have time to be the Grand Duke, for he died before his older brother Andrei. His sons had even less rights to the Grand Duke's table: Prince of Tver Mikhail Yaroslavich (nephew of Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky, son of his younger brother Grand Duke Yaroslav Yaroslavich) had the advantage of the third generation over the fourth over Yuri and Ivan of Moscow (grandsons of Alexander Nevsky).

But thanks to a confluence of many circumstances and because of the rash actions of Mikhail Yaroslavovich Tverskoy, Ivan Kalita nevertheless occupied the grand-ducal table.

In the fight for the title

Unfortunately, even the Mongol-Tatar invasion did not teach the Russian princes anything, and they, having already submitted to the Horde “tsar,” continued endless strife with each other. After short period calm from 1252 to 1263, when the Grand Duke's table was occupied by Alexander Yaroslavich Nevsky (1220-1263), internecine wars began with renewed vigor and blazed throughout the last decades of the 13th century and the first two decades of the 14th century. First, the sons of Alexander Nevsky fought among themselves, then his grandchildren and nephews... At the same time, the warring princes began to call upon the same Horde troops to become their allies, which further ravaged the Russian lands.

The subject of rivalry was the title of Grand Duke of Vladimir, which gave the prince who owned it a dominant political position in North-Eastern Rus'. But it is interesting that the more brutal the struggle of the princes became and the longer it lasted, the less important the city of Vladimir itself was. But new northeastern principalities with centers in Tver, Ryazan, Nizhny Novgorod and Moscow.

At the beginning of the 14th century, the Tver and Moscow principalities turned out to be especially strong, and princes Mikhail Yaroslavich of Tverskoy (1271-1318) and Yuri Danilovich of Moscow (early 1280s-1325) entered the struggle for the grand ducal title.

Mikhail had more rights to the grand ducal title - he was older than the Moscow prince. Taking advantage of his rights as the eldest in the family, Mikhail Yaroslavich Tverskoy was the first to achieve a label for the great reign in the Horde. However, it turned out that it was easier to seize the grand ducal table than to keep it in one’s hands. Not only Moscow rulers, but also many Russian lands did not want to obey the Tver prince. Things even got to the point that there were uprisings against him in Kostroma and Nizhny Novgorod. The reason was that Mikhail Yaroslavich, in the fight for the grand ducal title, took on inflated obligations to pay tribute to the Horde and therefore got into huge debts. And now he had to forcefully extract from his subordinate lands the funds necessary to cover his expenses. And Novgorod the Great did not recognize Prince Mikhail Yaroslavich at all, since the Tver prince was very close to Lithuania, and the Novgorodians feared Lithuanian dominance in the Russian lands after his victory. Mikhail Tverskoy was unable to establish relations with the new head of the Russian Church, Metropolitan Peter. After the death of the previous Metropolitan Maxim of Tver, the prince wanted to see only his protege in his place, but the Patriarch of Constantinople appointed Abbot Peter, a native of the Galicia-Volyn principality, to this post. Prince Mikhail Yaroslavich never accepted the new metropolitan; moreover, he plotted all sorts of intrigues against him.

The Horde rulers benefited from the enmity of the Russian princes: by pitting contenders for the grand ducal title against each other, it was easier to manipulate them. Therefore, when Yuri Danilovich Moskovsky once again found himself in the Horde, he was told: “If you give more tribute than Prince Mikhail, then you will have a great reign.” Yuri Danilovich promised a greater tribute and also received a label for Vladimir. In addition, he married the sister of Khan Uzbek in the Horde, who received the name Agafya in Christian baptism, and now hoped for the full support of the Horde ruler. Yuri Danilovich returned to Rus' with a Tatar detachment and immediately began new war with Mikhail Tversky. However, in a fierce battle, the Tver prince defeated both the Moscow army and the Horde detachment and captured Princess Agafya. But she died in Tver captivity. Following the denunciation of Yuri Moskovsky, Mikhail Tverskoy was summoned to the Horde for trial. There he suffered martyrdom. After the death of Mikhail Tverskoy, the Grand Duke's table finally completely belonged to Yuri Danilovich. But in 1325, in revenge for his father, the son of Mikhail Tverskoy, Dmitry Mikhailovich Terrible Eyes, killed the Moscow prince right in the Horde. And then Prince Dmitry himself was executed for this crime by order of the khan.

Guardian of the Throne

Ivan Kalita was the godfather of the future Metropolitan Alexy, who played an outstanding role in Russian history in the second half of the 14th century.

It was Metropolitan Alexy who managed to preserve the grand-ducal table for the descendants of Ivan Kalita, when all the sons of Ivan Danilovich died in a short time in the 1350s. Only his grandchildren survived: cousins ​​- nine-year-old Dmitry and six-year-old Vladimir.

It was thanks to the tireless care of Saint Alexy that these two young princes grew into real heroes of Russian history - Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoy and Serpukhov Prince Vladimir Andreevich the Brave - who led the army in the Battle of Kulikovo in 1380. So the godson not only saved the godfather’s family, but also continued his work.

During the great reign

This is how the dynastic situation was resolved in favor of Ivan Danilovich (the future Kalita) - in the mid-20s of the 14th century, he unexpectedly turned out to be the eldest among the Russian princes (his older brothers Alexander and Boris died earlier). True, the right of the “eldest” alone was not a sufficient basis to begin the unification of Rus'. But Ivan Danilovich managed to take advantage of the circumstances and laid a solid foundation for further development Moscow Principality.

However, everything did not work out right away. In 1325, the label was again in the hands of the Tver princes, but two years later, in 1327, an uprising broke out in the capital of the principality against the Baskak Chol Khan (in Rus' he was nicknamed Shchelkan). Another punitive expedition came from the Horde to Tver - Fedorchukov’s army, so called by the name of its leader. By order of the khan, many Russian princes joined this army, and Ivan Danilovich was appointed senior over them. The Tver princes fled from the city, and their land was completely destroyed and burned. As the chronicler wrote: “And they killed many people, and took others into captivity, and burned Tver and all the cities with fire.” After such a defeat, Tver was never able to regain its former greatness. But Ivan Danilovich, by his participation in the campaign against Tver, saved the Moscow lands from ruin. It is no coincidence that the chronicles say that during the Fedorchuk pogrom, Moscow and the Moscow principality were “interceded” by the “human-loving God”: “The Lord God preserved and protected Prince Ivan Danilovich, and his city of Moscow and his entire fatherland from the captivity and bloodshed of the Tatars.”

In 1328, Ivan Danilovich received a label for the great reign and no longer gave it up (however, until 1331 he shared the great reign with Suzdal prince Alexander Vasilievich). As shown further history, it was Ivan Danilovich who, to the greatest extent, became the successor of the saving political line developed by his grandfather Alexander Nevsky. In foreign policy- careful, peaceful relations with the Horde and active actions on the western borders; in domestic politics - a leisurely but purposeful limitation of the influence of the Horde on the direct management of Russian lands. Both contemporaries and descendants were amazed by Kalita’s patience, foresight and determination. Already during his lifetime, he earned the nickname “gatherer of the Russian land,” for by any means he strove to annex new lands to his principality, conquering them or buying them. Moreover, if it was not possible to annex an entire principality, he acquired cities and surrounding areas (Uglich, Galich, Belozersk), villages, villages. Another feature is that Ivan Danilovich in his activities often relied on the surviving city (zemstvo) self-government of various lands, and the zemstvo power itself in many cities began to gravitate towards Moscow. Even the capricious Novgorod the Great preferred to see representatives of the Moscow ruler rather than other princes.

Ivan Danilovich often traveled to the Horde, conducted delicate diplomatic negotiations, presented the khans and khanshas with “a lot of gold and silver,” and distributed bribes to numerous Horde officials. By these means, for the first time in a hundred years of Horde rule, he achieved the right to collect the Horde exit himself, and the hated Baskaks no longer appeared in Russian cities. In his own possessions, he restored order and with a hard hand suppressed any resistance to his power. And if someone showed disobedience, Ivan Danilovich forcefully achieved submission. So he suppressed protests in Rostov and Pskov. But with these actions he saved the Russian lands from the disastrous Horde invasions for several decades. And it was worth a lot! And it is no coincidence that all the chronicles talk about the “silence” that fell throughout Rus' after the reign of Ivan Danilovich. Even the Tver chronicler, who was hostile towards Moscow, wrote with delight: “And from that time there was great silence for forty years, and the Tatars stopped fighting the Russian land.” Contemporaries quite rightly credited this “silence” under Ivan Danilovich and his descendants to the credit of the Moscow prince.

Moscow, in which tribute was now collected from all over Rus', became increasingly rich and expanded. New stone (!) churches and houses were built in the city. In the winter of 1339-1340, Ivan Kalita built a new Moscow Kremlin - from mighty oak logs. This fortress protected the city from enemy invasions for twenty-five years. And by the end of the reign of Ivan Danilovich, Moscow turned into a real capital city.

For the good of God

The methods of “gathering” Rus' and ensuring “silence” in Russian lands were different: sometimes the carrot was used, but more often the stick. In 1328, in order to ensure the collection of the Horde exit, Moscow governors entered Rostov, which found itself among the debtors, and carried out the most severe rule, but achieved their goal - they collected the necessary amount.

However, this story had a paradoxical and fateful continuation for the entire Russian history. To prevent unrest, many Rostovites were evicted from the city to Moscow lands. Thus, by the will of Grand Duke Ivan Kalita, the Rostov boyar Kirill with his wife Maria and sons Stefan, Bartholomew and Peter ended up in Radonezh near Moscow. A few years later, Bartholomew will leave home, take monasticism and become the founder of the Trinity Monastery.

And then St. Sergius of Radonezh, who was considered the heavenly patron of all Moscow sovereigns and the main heavenly prayer book for the Moscow state, would become famous as the greatest Russian ascetic.

Under the protection of the Virgin Mary

In addition to the economic and political factors that determined the rise of Moscow, there was another one associated with the spiritual and political uniqueness of Russian life: Ivan Danilovich managed to establish good relations with the church, which the Tver princes failed to do. Back in 1308, Metropolitan Peter stood at the head of the Russian Church. Not getting along with Mikhail Tverskoy, Saint Peter begins to support the Moscow princes, and the position of the church played important role in the political confrontation between the Russian principalities. And apparently, especially warm, one might say, friendly relations were established between Metropolitan Peter and Ivan Danilovich. In 1325, when Ivan Danilovich took the Moscow throne, Metropolitan Peter moved from Vladimir to Moscow and founded the first stone cathedral in the city - the Church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary. According to legend, Metropolitan Peter said to Prince Ivan Danilovich: “And if you listen to me, the temple Holy Mother of God you will build it in your city, and you yourself will become famous more than other princes, and your sons and grandsons, and your city will be famous throughout Rus', and the saints will live in it, and God will be glorified in it.”

In other words, according to the plan of Metropolitan Peter and Prince Ivan Danilovich, with the construction of the temple, Moscow became the spiritual successor of two Russian capitals - Kyiv and Vladimir. The first temple, built by Saint Vladimir in Kyiv in the 10th century, was also dedicated to the Mother of God (the famous Church of the Tithes), like the Assumption Cathedral, which stood in Vladimir. But through the glorification of the Mother of God, Moscow also joined a deeper religious and mystical tradition. The thread stretched to Byzantium: Constantinople was under the guardianship of the Most Pure One. Thus, by establishing and supporting special veneration of the Mother of God in Moscow, Ivan Danilovich placed his principality under the guidance and protection of the Most Holy Theotokos and emphasized the Lord’s special disposition towards Muscovite Rus'.

Metropolitan Peter lived in Moscow for only a short time. On the night of December 20-21, 1326, he died and was buried in the Assumption Cathedral, which was under construction. The chronicler notes that there he “even now lies, performing many miracles for those who came to him in faith.” Soon after the death of the saint, on the initiative of Ivan Kalita, preparations began for his official canonization. With the full support of the new Metropolitan Theognostus, in 1339 the holiness of Metropolitan Peter was recognized in Constantinople. Thus, Moscow found its first saint, which in the eyes of the people of that time testified to its special purpose as a spiritual leader. And this factor must be taken into account in order to answer the question of why the Moscow Principality united the rest of the lands around itself. If this faith had not existed, if this faith had not been strengthened in the consciousness of contemporaries, then Moscow itself would not have been able to fulfill the mission entrusted to it of saving Rus' from Horde rule.

Countless treasures

Ivan Danilovich Kalita was a very zealous owner. Reading his spiritual charter (will) creates the impression that he knew his property down to the very last thing: he so carefully distributes among his descendants not only lands, cities and villages, but even items of clothing and other princely household items. And in this regard, Ivan Kalita laid down the most important tradition, which was certainly supported by all subsequent Russian sovereigns, both from the Rurik family and from the Romanov dynasty: scrupulous collection and replenishment of the state treasury. Evidence of this is the collections of the Armory Chamber and other museums of the Moscow Kremlin.

Some objects from the time of Ivan Danilovich Kalita have become the most important state symbols and all-Russian shrines. For example, the golden hat mentioned in the spiritual letter of Ivan Kalita. This, according to researchers, is the very famous Monomakh hat in the future, the wedding headdress of the Russian tsars. And the most important symbolic object for the installation of patriarchs of Moscow and all Rus' today is the staff of Metropolitan Peter, which has survived to this day.

But the main legacy of Ivan Kalita was the Moscow Principality itself, from which 140 years later an independent Russian state. Of course, Ivan Kalita himself, however, like other princes of his contemporaries, did not even think that the Russian principalities would be able to enter into an open struggle with the Horde for their liberation. But already for his grandchildren this task became quite feasible, because it was during those “forty years of silence” that Ivan Danilovich provided for the Russian land that a new generation grew up that did not know the horrors of Horde violence (the most important psychological condition!) and therefore boldly entered into battle with Mamaeva's horde on the Kulikovo field.

The death of Ivan Danilovich was calm and blissful, which was rare in those turbulent times when Russian princes too often found their death on the battlefield, in Horde dungeons or in torment from terrible diseases. Kalita died in his own bed, surrounded by his family, on March 31, 1340, having taken monastic vows under the name Ananias before his death.

It was Ivan Kalita who understood how to make Moscow the most influential principality of Rus'.
He adhered to four unwritten rules:

1. live in peace with the Horde;
2. control the “output”, that is, tribute;
3. collect lands;
4. be friends with the Church.

Skillfully turning the punitive expeditions of the Horde against his enemies, Kalita quickly achieved the grand-ducal table, which then mainly went to the Moscow princes. In 1327, when an uprising against the Horde baskak (tax collector) Chol Khan (Shchelkan) began in Tver, Kalita participated in its suppression, and then achieved the return and execution of the fleeing Tver prince Alexander. Kalita tried to achieve his goals without war. Under him, the Moscow principality rested from the invasions, so the chronicler wrote: “There was a great silence throughout the entire Russian land for forty years, and the Tatars stopped fighting the Russian land.” Tired of strife and raids, people flocked to the Principality of Moscow, which quickly grew and became richer.

The Principality of Moscow became a “quiet place” where people sought

The Horde entrusted Kalita, as a reliable ally, with collecting tribute from Russian lands. He carried out this duty cruelly and even went to war against the debtors. Moscow could now support its allies and punish its enemies, the whistle whistled in its hands " financial whip».

Kalita strengthened his friendship with the head of the Church in Rus', Metropolitan Peter. Often visiting Moscow from Vladimir, where his predecessor had moved from devastated Kyiv, Peter finally moved here at the end of his life and died here. Before his death, he began construction of the first stone Cathedral of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary (1326). Kalita insisted that the Church immediately declare Peter a saint. So Moscow received its miracle worker, that in the Middle Ages it was vital. Now the metropolitans lived mainly in Moscow, and the city acquired the significance of the ecclesiastical center of Rus'.

Moscow gained importance as the ecclesiastical center of Rus'

The Moscow princes were obsessed with the passion for “gathering lands.” They captured lands, bought them, received them from princes in need of protection - in a word, they got them by any means. These land plots became the private property of the prince, his fatherland, and he could completely dispose of them and bequeath them. It was possible to “place” their devoted servants on them, and this increased the prince’s military forces. The inventions lay in different parts of Rus', often inside principalities hostile to Moscow and gradually covered the country as if with a network. In his spiritual charter (will), Kalita included all his possessions: 5 cities, 54 volosts and 32 villages - it was a whole state. By this time, the Galician, Belozersk and Uglitsky principalities had become dependent on Moscow.

Kalita's sons were worthy of their father, but they were unlucky. In the 1350s, all of Europe was struck by an epidemic of pneumonic plague, which wiped out an entire generation of Moscow princes. The eldest son, Prince Simeon the Proud, and the younger Andrei died in 1353. Their middle brother, Ivan the Red, did not rule for long. The eldest man in the family was Dmitry Ivanovich, who was only 8 years old. At the head of the principality were Metropolitan Alexey, respected in the Horde, the prince’s mother, his tutor, the Moscow thousand (a position roughly corresponding to the Minister of War) Vasily Velyaminov and others. But over the past half century, two generations of Moscow boyars have grown up, who firmly linked their fate with the prosperity of the dynasty . They returned to Moscow the Vladimir grand-ducal table that had been lost and maintained peace with the Horde. But life already demanded other decisions.

Studying the history of early Moscow is also complicated by the fact that almost all of its book wealth was lost during the invasion of Tokhtamysh in 1382. Trying to preserve the books, the Metropolitan ordered them to be collected in one of the Kremlin stone churches. There were so many books that they reached the vaults. But the Tatars managed to capture and burn the Kremlin. All that was left of the books were ashes.

Ancient Moscow books perished in subsequent centuries. It is known, for example, that the famous figure from the time of Peter I V.N. Tatishchev (1686 - 1750) used for his work “Russian History” a whole series of chronicles that have not survived to this day. The historian N.M. Karamzin (1766 - 1826) had at his disposal the Trinity Chronicle, which was lost in the fire of Moscow in 1812.

Summing up the losses and problems, we note the main thing: our knowledge about Ivan Kalita and his time is fragmentary and fragmentary. His portrait is like an ancient fresco, scarred by time and hidden under a thick layer of late oil painting. The path of knowledge of Ivan Kalita is the path of painstaking restoration. But at the same time, this is a path of self-knowledge. After all, we are dealing with the builder of the Moscow state, whose hand forever left its mark on its facade.

The opinion of historians about Ivan Kalita.

Well-read in the sources, Karamzin first of all defined Prince Ivan with the words that one ancient Russian author found for him - “Gatherer of the Russian Land.” However, this was clearly not enough to explain. Why did Prince Ivan become this “Collector”? In the end, all the Russian princes of that time collected land and power as best they could, in other words, rowed for themselves...

Then Karamzin offered additional explanations. It turns out that Kalita was “cunning”. With this cunning he “gained the special favor of Uzbek and, with it, the dignity of the Grand Duke.” Using the same “cunning”, Ivan “lulled” the khan’s vigilance with caresses and convinced him, firstly, not to send his Baskaks to Rus' anymore, but to transfer the collection of tribute to the Russian princes, and secondly, to turn a blind eye to the annexation of many new territories to region of the great reign of Vladimir.

Following Kalita’s behests, his descendants gradually “assembled Rus'.” As a result, the power of Moscow, which allowed it to gain independence from the Tatars at the end of the 15th century, is “a force trained by cunning.”

Another classic of Russian historiography, S. M. Solovyov, in contrast to Karamzin, was very restrained in his characterizations of historical figures in general and Ivan Kalita in particular. He only repeated the definition of Prince Ivan found by Karamzin as “The Gatherer of the Russian Land” and noted, following the chronicle, that Kalita “saved the Russian land from thieves.”

Some new thoughts about Kalita were expressed by N. I. Kostomarov in his famous work “Russian history in the biographies of its main figures.” He noted the unusually strong friendship between Yuri and Ivan Danilovich for the princes of that time, and said about Kalita himself: “The eighteen years of his reign were the era of the first lasting strengthening of Moscow and its rise above the Russian lands.” At the same time, Kostomarov could not resist repeating the stereotype created by Karamzin: Kalita was “a man of a non-military character, although cunning.”

The famous student of Solovyov, V. O. Klyuchevsky, was a great lover of historical paradoxes. In essence, the entire history of Russia seemed to them as a long chain of large and small paradoxes, captivating the listener or reader, but not leading to beacons of guiding truths. The Moscow princes also fell victim to one of the small paradoxes. “Life conditions,” said Klyuchevsky, “often develop so capriciously that large people are exchanged for small things, like Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, and small people have to do big things, like the princes of Moscow.” This premise about “small people” predetermined his characterization of Kalita. According to Klyuchevsky, all the Moscow princes, starting with Kalita, are cunning pragmatists who “zealously courted the khan and made him an instrument of their plans.”

Carried away by the creation of an artistic image of the Moscow prince, Klyuchevsky argued, although without any reference to sources, that Kalita had “ample material resources” in her hands and had “free money.” The logic of the image conceived by Klyuchevsky required the following judgment: rich means stingy. This is where the well-known characterization of Kalita as a “hoarding prince” came from, which stuck to our hero for a long time. The historian was not stopped even by the complete opposite of the image he painted of the nickname of Prince Ivan, which indicated his generosity and kindness. He only slightly covered up this stretch with a cursory remark: “Perhaps the ironic nickname that contemporaries gave to the hoarding prince, later generations began to adopt a moral interpretation.”

So, to the portrait of the flatterer and cunning created by Karamzin, Klyuchevsky added a couple more dark strokes - hoarding and mediocrity. The resulting unattractive image thanks to his artistic expression and psychological authenticity became widely known. It was imprinted in the memory of several generations of Russian people who studied according to the gymnasium history textbook of D. I. Ilovaisky. Here Kalita is the “gatherer of Rus'”. However, his moral qualities are disgusting. “Unusually prudent and cautious, he used all means to achieve the main goal, that is, the rise of Moscow at the expense of its neighbors.” The Moscow prince “often traveled to the Horde with gifts and servilely bowed to the khan; he received help from the khan in the fight against rivals, and thus made the Tatars themselves an instrument for strengthening Moscow.” To all Kalita’s previous vices, Ilovaisky adds a new one - cheating. “Having arrogated to himself the right to collect tribute from appanage princes and deliver it to the Horde, Kalita skillfully used this right to increase his own treasury.” Ilovaisky decisively translates the nickname of Prince Ivan as “bag of money.”

Consciously or unconsciously, this historical caricature of the founder of the Moscow state revealed the attitude of the liberal Russian intelligentsia towards this state itself, or more precisely, towards its historical successor Russian Empire. Reluctantly recognizing the historical necessity of this state, the intelligentsia at the same time passionately hated its attributes - autocratic power and bureaucratic administrative apparatus.

The debunking and blasphemy of Ivan Kalita ultimately raised a legitimate question: could such a base person have accomplished such a great historical task as the founding of the Moscow state? The answer was twofold: either he was not the founder, or the image of Kalita created by historians is unreliable. The first answer was given by the historian of Russian law V.I. Sergeevich. He decisively took away from Kalita his last dignity as a “collector of Rus'” and called him “devoid of the qualities of a sovereign and politician.” The famous researcher of the political history of Rus' A.E. Presnyakov came to the second answer. “A review of factual information about the activities of Grand Duke Ivan Danilovich,” he wrote, “does not provide grounds for characterizing him as a “hoarding” prince, a representative of the “appanage” narrowness and isolation of patrimonial interests. This characteristic of him, so common in our historical literature, is based on the impression of his spiritual letters, which, however, relate only to the Moscow patrimonial land and its family and patrimonial routines.”

After 1917, the diversity of opinions in Russian historical science quickly disappeared, replaced by the dominance of “highly approved” ideas. The founder of new, openly ideological and politicized approaches to Russian history, M. N. Pokrovsky, advised to stop arguing about historical figures and move on to the study of socio-economic processes. “Let us leave the exploits of the “collectors” to the old official textbooks and will not go into a discussion of the question of whether they were politically untalented or politically talented people,” wrote Pokrovsky.

Following Pokrovsky’s advice, historians abandoned the genre for many decades historical portraits, excluding only custom-made iconographic images. The general critical attitude towards the old rulers also affected Kalita. In school textbooks and historical works Little was written about him and mostly critically. A good fly in the ointment was added by Karl Marx’s “Secret Diplomacy” - a sharp political pamphlet full of sarcasm regarding Russian history and its figures. Based on Marx, historian A.N. Nasonov in his famous book “Mongols and Rus'” (M., 1940) wrote: “Kalita was not and could not be either a unifier of Rus' or a pacifier. The popular movement for the unification of Rus' began when the possibilities of fighting the Tatars opened up; and this movement, supported by the church, ensured the victory of the Moscow prince within the country and success in the fight against the Tatars, ending with the Battle of Kulikovo. About Kalita, Marx correctly said that he combined “the traits of a Tatar executioner and a sycophant and a chief slave.”
Ten years later, another famous historian, V.V. Mavrodin, followed the same method in assessing Ivan Kalita. “Extortions from the population, from trade operations, and the appropriation of Tatar tribute made the Moscow prince the richest of all Russian princes. “He paved his way with a bag, and not with a sword,” says K. Marx about Kalita.” However, Marx had different opinions on this matter. Mavrodin also agrees with this: “Under him, the foundation of Moscow’s power was laid.”

Page 1

Many years later, something happened that the great Russian historian N.M. Karamzin spoke quite definitely in “Notes on Ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations." He writes: “A miracle happened. The town, barely known before the 14th century, raised its head and saved the fatherland.” And it all started with the fact that Prince Ivan Danilovich Kalita, “Gatherer of the Russian Land,” sat down on the Moscow table.

Against the background of the glorious deeds of his grandfather Alexander Nevsky and grandson Dmitry Donskoy, the deeds of Ivan Kalita seem very insignificant, and his personality inexpressive. According to some historians, Ivan Danilovich is a mediocrity, seeking, with the help of the Tatars and his own frugality, only to increase his possessions at the expense of his arrogant and imprudent neighbors. Other scientists point to the results of the activities of Ivan and his descendants - the creation of a powerful Russian state with its center in Moscow. In their works, Kalita turns into a talented politician, diplomat, economist and psychologist, who worked tirelessly for the future, laying the foundations for the future power of Moscow. It's hard to say who is right. Much depends on the researcher's point of view. Here are some opinions of famous historians:

Solovyov S.M.:

“From then on, says the chronicler, when the Moscow prince John Danilovich became the Grand Duke, there was a great silence throughout the Russian land and the Tatars stopped fighting it. This was the direct consequence of the strengthening of one principality, Moscow, at the expense of all others; in one ancient monument, Kalita’s activity is indicated by the fact that he rid the Russian land of thieves (tatias) - it is clear that our ancestors imagined Kalita as the establisher of silence, security, internal order, which until then was constantly violated, first by princely family strife, then by strife princes or, better said, individual principalities to strengthen themselves at the expense of others, which led to autocracy.

...Kalita knew how to take advantage of the circumstances, end the fight with complete triumph for his principality and let his contemporaries feel the first good consequences of this triumph, gave them a foretaste of the benefits of autocracy, which is why he passed on to posterity with the name of the collector of the Russian land.”

Klyuchevsky V.O.:

“Obviously, the political successes of the Moscow prince were illuminated in the popular imagination with the assistance and blessing of the highest church authority in Rus'. Thanks to this, these successes, achieved not always by pure means, became the lasting property of the Moscow prince.” Klyuchevsky believed that all the Moscow princes, starting with Ivan Kalita, “zealously courted the khan and made him an instrument of their plans.”

Borisov N.:

“Between two giant fighters - Alexander Nevsky and Dmitry Donskoy - Ivan Kalita stands as a dark shadow.

The grandson of one hero and the grandfather of another, Ivan became the embodiment of cunning, treachery and other far from heroic qualities. This myth about Kalita was born about a hundred years ago. The commoner historian Vasily Klyuchevsky, who did not like the aristocracy in general and the old Moscow princes in particular, made a malicious assumption that Prince Ivan received his original nickname... for stinginess. Meanwhile the ancients historical sources(in particular, the Volokolamsk Patericon) report that the prince was nicknamed Kalita because he always carried a purse on his belt - “kalita”, from which he was ready to give alms to the poor at any moment...

Dog breeding in the twentieth century
At the beginning of the 20th century, the active development of service dog breeding in Russia began. One of the most widely used areas of service dog breeding in our time is emerging - criminal dog breeding. The origins of this service were a talented dog handler, a passionate dog lover and a man who stood up for the safety of his homeland - on...

Russia in the 1st quarter of the 19th century.
Alexander 1, Catherine's beloved grandson, ascends the throne. The reign of Alexander was distinguished by maneuvering between supporters and opponents of reforms. The most painful issue in Russia was the peasant question. Alexander, on the sidelines, was sincerely indignant at this state of affairs, but further than the publication of a decree on free cultivators, according to which landowners could...

Prerequisites for the Time of Troubles in Russia
TO early XVII century, the process of formation of Russian statehood was not completely complete; contradictions accumulated in it, resulting in a severe crisis that engulfed the economy, the socio-political sphere, and public morality; this crisis was called “The Troubles.” Time of Troubles- a period of virtual anarchy, chaos and unprecedented...