home

The composition of the squad in ancient Rus'. Prince, warriors and militias

In written monuments Ancient Rus' The prince invariably appears against the backdrop of his squad, in the company of his comrades and assistants, who shared both successes and defeats with him.

As A.A. notes Gorsky, the squad “is recruited and formed not according to the tribal principle, but according to the principle of personal loyalty; the squad is outside the community structure; it is separated from it socially (the vigilantes are not members of separate communities) and territorially (due to the isolated residence of the vigilantes).” At the same time, princely-squad relations were a continuation social relations period of military democracy. The Old Russian squad was a kind of military community, led by a prince - first among equals. From the community came relations of equality, which were externally reflected in squad feasts, reminiscent of peasant “brothers”, in the egalitarian order of division of booty (later transformed into the division of tribute) - the main source of existence of the squad.

Having broken away from the community, the squad first copied its rules in its internal structure. The squad should be understood as professional warriors, who were recognized as nominal collective ownership of the lands from which they had the right to collect tribute.

The Tale of Bygone Years provides enough information to solve the problems of this paragraph. The prince resolved many issues not on his own, but with his squad. "In the summer of 6452. Igor, having gathered together many forces, the Varangians, the Rus, and the Glades, the Slovenes, and the Krivichi, and the Tivertsy, and the Pechenegs, and the Tales singing from them, went against the Greeks in boats and on horses, although to take revenge on himself. Behold, the king heard the ambassador to Igor, the radiant bolyars, begging and saying: “Do not go, but take the tribute that Oleg received, and add more to that tribute.” The same goes for the Pecheneg ambassador, who sent a lot of pavoloks and a lot of gold. Igor, having reached the Danube, convened a squad, and began to think, and told them the Tsarev’s speech. Igor’s squad decided: “If the king says so, then what do we want more than that, without hesitating to take gold, and silver, and grass? Whenever someone knows; who can overcome, us or them? Who is bright with the sea? Because we are not walking on land, but in the depths of the seas: the way is bad for everyone.” Listen to them Igor...” As we see, the question of whether it is worth continuing the campaign or whether it is better to conclude peace for a long time favorable conditions(if you trust the chronicler), the prince decides not on his own, but with his retinue. It is her opinion that turns out to be decisive. Let us note in passing that the refusal to forcibly seize all the wealth that the Greeks offered Igor was most likely regarded negatively by the chronicler’s contemporaries. Nevertheless, the prince agrees with the squad and goes to sign peace with the Greeks.

However, the prince did not always agree with the opinion of the squad, but, on the contrary, the squad supported the prince’s decisions. “In the summer of 6479... And the ambassador [Svyatoslav] sent word to the Tsarev in Derevstr, for she was the Tsar, crying to her: “I want to have peace and love with you.” Having heard this, the king was glad and sent gifts to him greater than the first. Svyatoslav accepted the gifts, and began to think with his squad, shouting: “If we do not make peace with the king, and the king knows that there are few of us, they will come and step in the city. But Ruska is a distant land, and the Pechenesi are with us as warriors, and who can help us? But let us make peace with the king, behold, we will pay tribute, and that will be good enough for us. If we feel like we can’t manage the tribute, let’s go to Tsar’s City again from Rus', having collected our forces.” It was nice to speak quickly to the squad, and sent the sculpted men to the princess...”

The question arises why the prince had to rely on his soldiers. The answer can also be found in The Tale of Bygone Years. For example, the chronicler explains Svyatoslav’s refusal to be baptized this way. “In the summer of 6463...Olga was alive with her son Svyatoslav, and her mother was baptized, and not scolding, but swearing [mocked] him. . As if Olga often said: “I, my son, have come to know God and rejoice; Once you know it, you will begin to rejoice.” He didn’t pay attention to this, saying: “How would you like the law of acceptance to be one and the same? And the squad will start laughing at this.” She said to him: “If you are baptized, you will also have everything.” He didn’t listen to his mother...”

Perhaps this was due to the fact that his status in the squad environment was not yet unconditional. Apparently, the attitude of his comrades towards their prince was largely determined by the extent to which his actions corresponded to what was included in the concept of honor, and it was possible to receive honor if the behavior was approved by his “comrades”.

But, as already mentioned, there were cases when the prince acted at his own discretion, and the squad followed him, and this shows that not only the prince was guided in his actions by the squad, but also the squad followed the prince. “In the summer of 6496... By God’s will, Volodymer fell ill with his eyes, and could not see anything, and was in great pain, and could not imagine what to do. And the queen [Byzantine princess Anna, whom Vladimir wanted to marry] sent to him, saying: “If you want to get rid of this illness, then do not want to get rid of this illness.” Hearing Volodymer, he said: “If the truth be, then truly great God will be a Christian.” And he commanded to be baptized. The Bishop of Korsun and the Tsarina’s priest, having announced, baptized Volodimer. As if you lay your hand on her, you will see clearly. Seeing this vain healing, Volodimer glorified God and said: “First I brought to light the true God.” And when his squad saw him, they were baptized many times.” Perhaps this passage marks a certain turning point in the relationship between the prince and the squad. If before the authority of their leader, now the actions of the leader are a certain model of behavior for the warriors.

The basis of the relationship between the prince and the squad was also the transfer to the latter of some material assets. Moreover, values are not important in themselves. The resulting wealth, apparently, had no economic substance. I think the vigilantes were more concerned about the act of transfer itself than about enrichment as such. “In the summer of 6583... a German came to Svyatoslav; Svyatoslav, magnifying himself, showed them his wealth. They saw the countless multitudes, gold, and silver, and drags, and decided: “It’s worthless, it’s lying dead. This is the essence of the matter. Men are afraid of looking for more than this.” Ezekiy, the king of the Jews, praised Sitsa, to the ambassador of the king of Asuria, and all of him was taken to Babylon: and so after this death, all his property was scattered in various ways.”

It is noteworthy that the vigilantes’ complaints were focused on external signs wealth. At the same time, unlike Western European chivalry, land grants were never discussed, which indicates the underdevelopment of feudal relations. As is known, feudal relations are based on corporate land ownership and on the distribution of land plots to soldiers on the condition of their service to the owner of the land. On the one hand, land in Rus' was in abundance, on the other hand, there was a constant shortage of developed areas (the need permanent shift cultivated land due to the fact that land cleared from forest was quickly “plowed up”). Under such conditions, land grants were largely meaningless. Their borders could not be secured in any way. Exactly this for a long time did not allow the development of “normal” feudal relations. In Rus', feudalism with its characteristic estates, benefices, immunities and regulation of vassal service began to take shape only at the turn of the 13th-14th centuries. and received full development in the 16th century Until this time, connections conditionally correlated with vassal-suzerain relations Western Europe, existed in a more patriarchal form of personal relationships associated with the centralized exploitation of corporately owned lands. This late appearance of feudal relations is due to the fact that the emergence of early feudal relations was interrupted by the Mongol invasion.

In Rus', the formation of a corporation of professional warriors was based not on conditional land ownership, but on the personal connections of the prince-leader and his warriors. They were based on a system of donations, one of the forms of which can be considered feasts for the prince and his squad. Everything that the prince gave to the warrior made the latter dependent on the donor. The same applies to princely feasts. Treating the warriors to the warriors by the prince cemented personal connections that had existed since childhood: “Behold, [Vladimir Svyatoslavich] packs with his people: all week long, set up a feast in the courtyard in the gridnitsa and come as a bolyar, and a gridem, and a socialist, and a tenth, and a deliberate husband, with princes and without princes. There was an abundance of meat, of livestock, and of animals; there was an abundance of everything.” Apparently, at such feasts, rituals of accepting new warriors and meetings, “dumas” of the prince with his squad, also took place. This “thought” was almost the prince’s daily occupation, as it appears from the Teachings of Vladimir Monomakh; Moreover, the opinion expressed by the warriors is by no means binding on the prince. He could act in his own way, which was made easier by the fact that disagreements arose in the squad when discussing issues, and the prince could choose one of the squad’s many decisions.

Thus, the squad Kievan Rus lived largely on princely funds, so the ideal prince was considered to be the one who generously gave gifts to his warriors, but if a warrior for some reason was dissatisfied with his prince, then he could leave.

Over time, however, the relationship between the prince and the squad began to change, as can be judged by the above story about the feast. The property stratification of the squad led to the formation of a new social group- boyars, which also influenced the relationship between the prince and the squad.

Drawing analogies between the Old Russian squad and the German one, one can identify a number of characteristics characteristic of both. The warrior community is united around the overlord, this group follows the leader, where he is first among equals. The military community models itself on the family model, which can be seen in the names of the groups of the squad and its members. The system of gifts is more of a sacred character than an economic one. But the German squad was cut off from the community; any valiant warrior could become its leader, which cannot be said about the Slavic one.

To summarize, it should be noted that the relationship between the prince and the squad was built on personal connections, secured by a developed system of “gifts” in various forms. At the same time, the prince acted as “first among equals.” He depended on his warriors no less than they depended on him. The prince resolved all state issues (about the structure of the “land,” about war and peace, about adopted laws) not independently, but with his squad, accepting or not accepting their decisions.

Let's take a look at the composition of Russian society, which was ruled by Grand Duke Kiev Upper class This society, with which the prince shared the labors of managing and protecting the land, was the princely squad. It was divided into higher and lower: the first consisted of princely men, or boyars, the second of children, or youths; the oldest collective name for the junior squad, grid or gridba (Scandinavian grid - yard servant) was later replaced by the word yard or servants.

This squad, together with its prince, came, as we know, from among the armed merchants of large cities. In the 11th century she was still no different from this merchant class sharp features neither political nor economic. The squad of the principality constituted, in fact, a military class; but large trading cities were also organized in a military manner, forming each solid organized regiment, called a thousand, which was divided into hundreds and dozens (battalions and companies). A thousand was commanded by a thousand chosen by the city, and then appointed by the prince; hundreds and tens were also commanded by elected sotskiy and ten's. These elected commanders were military administration city and the region that belonged to it, a military-government foreman, who is called in the chronicle “city elders.” City regiments, or more precisely, armed cities, took a constant part in the prince’s campaigns along with his squad. On the other hand, the squad served the prince as an instrument of governance: members of the senior squad, the boyars, constituted the prince’s Duma, his state council. “Bo Volodymyr,” the chronicle says about him, “loving the squad and thinking with them about the system of the earth, and about the military forces, and about the charter of the earth.” But in this druzhina, or boyar, Duma also sat the “city elders,” that is, the elected military authorities of the city of Kyiv, and perhaps other cities, thousand and sotsky. Thus, the very question of accepting Christianity was decided by the prince in consultation with the boyars and “elders of the city.” These elders, or city elders, appear hand in hand with the prince, together with the boyars, in matters of government, as in all court celebrations, forming, as it were, a zemstvo aristocracy next to the princely servants. Along with the boyars and mayors, “elders throughout the city” were invited to the princely feast on the occasion of the consecration of the church in Vasilevo in 996. In the same way, by order of Vladimir, boyars, gridis, sotskys, tens and all deliberate men were supposed to come to his Sunday feasts in Kyiv. But, constituting the military-governmental class, the princely squad at the same time remained at the head of the Russian merchant class, from which it separated, and took an active part in overseas trade. These are Russian merchants around the half of the 10th century. was far from being Slavic-Russian.
Kyiv could not remain the capital city of one of the local Varangian principalities: it had all-Russian significance as a key point of the commercial and industrial movement and therefore became the center of the political unification of the entire land. Askold's activities, apparently, were limited to protecting the external security of the Kyiv region: from the chronicle it is not clear that he conquered any of the devious tribes from which he defended his glades, although the words of Photius about Rosa, who was proud of the enslavement of the surrounding tribes, seem to hint at This. The first thing Oleg did in Kyiv is the expansion of his possessions, the gathering of the Eastern Slavs under his rule. The chronicle records this matter with suspicious consistency, adding one tribe to Kyiv every year. Oleg occupied Kyiv in 882; in 883 the Drevlyans were conquered, in 884 - the northerners, in 885 - the Radimichi; after that a long series of years were left empty. Obviously, this is the order of chronicle memories, or considerations, and not the events themselves. By the beginning of the 11th century. all tribes Eastern Slavs were brought to hand Prince of Kyiv; at the same time, tribal names appear less and less often, being replaced by regional names based on the names of the main cities. Expanding their possessions, the princes of Kyiv established state order in the subject countries, first of all, of course, tax administration. The old urban areas served as a ready-made basis for the administrative division of the land. In the subordinate city regions of the cities of Chernigov, Smolensk and other cities, the princes installed their governors, posadniks, who were either their hired warriors or their own sons and relatives. These governors had their own squads, special armed detachments, acted quite independently, stood only in a weak connection with the state center, with Kiev, they were the same conings as the Prince of Kiev, who was considered only the eldest among them and in this sense was called the “Grand Duke Russians" in contrast to local princes and governors. To increase the importance of the Kyiv prince, these governors were called “grand princes” in diplomatic documents. Thus, according to a preliminary agreement with the Greeks in 907, Oleg demanded “structures” for the Russian cities of Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl, Polotsk, Rostov, Lyubech and other cities, “because the city of the great princes is under Olga.” These were still Varangian principalities, only allied with the Kyiv principality: the prince then retained its former military-squad significance, without having yet acquired dynastic significance. The genealogical dispute that Oleg started near Kiev, reproaching Askold and Dir for the fact that they reigned in Kiev, not being princes, “not the kind of prince” - Oleg’s claim, which warned the course of events, and even more likely - the same speculation of the chronicle compiler himself vault. Some of the governors, having conquered this or that tribe, received it from the Kyiv prince for control with the right to collect tribute from it in their favor, just as in the West in the 9th century. The Danish Vikings, having captured one or another coastal region of the Empire of Charlemagne, received it from the Frankish kings as fief, that is, for feeding. Igor's governor Sveneld, having defeated the Slavic tribe of the Uluchi, who lived along the lower Dnieper, received tribute in his favor not only from this tribe, but also from the Drevlyans, so that his squad, the youths, lived richer than the squad of Igor himself.

IN. Klyuchevsky

Composition and evolution

The prince and the princely squad, along with the city council, personified the most important state institutions Kievan Rus.

As I.Ya. writes Froyanov, the word squad is common Slavic. It is derived from the word "friend" original meaning whose companion, comrade in war.

In Russian historical science, a squad is usually understood as a detachment of warriors (“Svyatopolk, and Volodymyr and Rostislav, having completed the squad, went away”) or the prince’s inner circle (“you love the squad greatly”).

It is difficult to say when and how the squad appears among the Eastern Slavs. One can only speculate about the origin of the squad based on indirect data and analogies. As a rule, when it comes to such questions, one is drawn to early evidence about the squads of the ancient Germans. In the 1st century AD among the ancient Germans, the warriors were special group. She lived separately from her community with the chief. The warriors existed thanks to military campaigns in which booty was captured, as well as thanks to gifts from their fellow tribesmen and neighboring tribes. The leader had the right to distribute the funds received in this way. He was bound to the squad by mutual obligations of personal loyalty. The squad was recruited from noble youths and valiant warriors. Tacitus also mentions some hierarchical division among the warriors.

Apparently, the East Slavic squad also had similar characteristics. However, we can only draw this conclusion by analogy. Moreover, in the sources the word “squad” is clearly not unambiguous. Thus, in the story about the Kiev uprising of 1068, two different squads are mentioned: “Otherwise people speak against the governor of Kosnyachka; I went up the mountain from the evening, and came to the Kosnyachkov courtyard and did not find it, standing at the courtyard of Bryachislavl and deciding: “Let’s go and disembark our squad from the cellar.”<…>Izyaslav sits on the senekh with his squad...” As we see, in addition to the princely squad, “their” squad of the rebels of Kiev is also mentioned here. It is difficult to say who it consists of in this case, but it is obvious that in addition to the princely squads, there were others. However, in historical literature it is customary to call a princely detachment of warriors a squad.

The selection of the princely squad, according to A.A. Gorsky, contributes to the destruction of the tribal structure that engulfed the Slavic ethnic group in the V-VI centuries. S.V. Yushkov believes that the princely squads as a circle of his closest associates and collaborators have existed since their inception Kyiv State. I agree with both of them, since I consider the armed detachments of tribal leaders of the V-VII centuries to be the prototype of the princely squad of Kievan Rus.

Despite the paucity of sources, we can guess what the size of the squad was and who it consisted of. One of the earliest mentions of the size of the squad of Russian princes is a fragment from the notes of Ibn Fadlan, who says that “together with the king of the Russians in<…>Four hundred men from among the heroes, his associates, are constantly in the castle.” A.A. Gorsky supports the opinion of T. Vasilevsky that the squad consisted of two hundred to four hundred people, with which I.N. agrees. Danilevsky, but M.B. Sverdlov believes that the number of soldiers reached five hundred to eight hundred people.

There is a unity of opinion on the issue of squad composition in historical literature. The main contingent of the squad, according to S.V. Yushkov, can be considered “the ancestral nobility, but anyone whom the prince considered valuable in military affairs could be included in the number of warriors.” From this it is clear that the prince could receive people different nations and tribes, as confirmed by sources. In addition to the Slavs and Varangians, the squad also included Ugrians (Hungarians), Torci, and other tribes. I.D. Belyaev believes, and one cannot but agree with him, taking into account the Varangian origin of the Rurik dynasty, that initially the squad consisted only of Varangians. But already under Vladimir Svyatoslavich, this element loses its primary importance, since, according to I.D. Belyaev, these free and restless warriors could become an obstacle in the exercise of his power, and after the death of Yaroslav, the chronicles do not mention the Varangian squads at all. However, already under Oleg, the Varangians perceived themselves as an indigenous population (as Slavs). Such assimilation is depicted before us by Oleg’s treaty with Byzantium in 911, in which his warriors swear by “Perun, their god, and Volos, the cattle god.” I.D. Belyaev also says that Hungarians, Pechenegs, Poles, Polovtsians, etc. now served in the squad.

It is indisputable that the princely squads had a hierarchical structure. As a rule, it is divided into “senior”, “junior” and “middle” - a group of “husbands” that cannot be classified as either the first or the second.

The “senior” squad consisted of those who served the prince’s father (“the father’s squad”). It passes to the younger generations of princes, armed with the same influence and authority in the druzhina and public environment. Most often, this group of warriors includes boyars, less often husbands, S.V. Yushkov believes that “from its ranks come the thousanders, posadniks and other representatives of the princely administration.” The chronicles are replete with stories about princes who were in boyar company under a variety of life situations, social and everyday: “... and after singing the liturgy, the brothers dined on a stingy meal, each with his boyars,” “and the noble prince Vsevolod went against him with his son<…>and all the bolyars, and blessed Metropolitan John with the monks and with the prosvutera. And all the kiyans wept greatly over him,” “Svyatopolk convened the bolyars and kiyans, and told them what Davyd had told him<…>. And deciding the boys and the people...” The old tradition of the duma of the prince and his squad was fundamental in the relations of the prince with the boyars. Whatever the prince was up to, he always had to “reveal” his plan to the boyars who served him, otherwise risking losing the boyars’ support, which threatened him with failure. Princes sometimes neglected to consult with the boyars, but such facts were rare. However, over time, the prince prefers to focus on the “average” squad, not listening to the advice of the boyars, but from the “senior” squad, the commanders of the “warriors” invariably stand out, because they are the most experienced and valiant.

The “middle” layer of the squad consisted of the Gridba, according to S.M. Soloviev and I.E. Zabelin, or princely men (S.V. Yushkov, I.A. Porai-Koshits). It is possible that, unlike the boyars who were involved in governance, the men were only engaged in military service. These warriors constituted the main combat contingent of the prince's personal military forces. Gradually, the prince prefers to rely not on his father’s warriors - the boyars, but on his peers. Perhaps this is precisely what is connected with the numerous reproaches of the chroniclers against the princes that they listen to the advice of the “unsmart”, neglecting the opinion of their elders: “And [Grand Duke Vsevolod Yaroslavich] began to love the meaning of the wise, creating light with them, and began to make Prince of Truth, I began to rob this union and sell people, for this I do not lead in my illnesses.” Perhaps this hides the gradual strengthening of the role of the prince, who sought to get rid of the influence of the squad. The layer of the “middle” squad consisted of the prince’s peers. According to I.N. Danilevsky, they grew up and were raised with the prince from the age of 13-14. Together with these warriors, the prince studied military affairs and went on his first campaigns. Hence it is clear why their position was closer to the prince, why he sought support among his peers.

Also, strong ties connected the prince with the “junior” squad, which included youths, children, almsmen, stepsons, who, depending on the individual duties assigned to them, were swordsmen, throwers, virniks, and others. The sources introduce us to the youths earlier than to the rest of the representatives of the “younger” squad - in the 10th century: “therefore the gray villagers drank, and at Olga’s command, serve before them as a youth,” “and Svyatoslav said, except in vain, as his youth...” . They are with the prince, one might say, relentlessly. The youths are, first of all, servants of the prince. This can be judged by the relationship between the words “youth” and “servant”: “and when he heard the war, he left him. Boris stood with his youths<…>and behold, she attacked like a beast near the tent, and put on spears, and gored Boris, and his servant, falling on him, and gored with him.” The official purpose of the youths is revealed quite easily in written monuments. “The Tale of Bygone Years” tells about the youths who served Olga and Svyatoslav. In the Extensive Pravda, the princely youth is placed in a row with the groom and the cook: “even as a princely youth, or as a groom, or as a cook.” Based on material Dimensional Truth we can conclude that the boy performed the functions of an assistant to Virnik (“And behold, the horses of Virnia were beaten under Yaroslav: for Virnik, take seven buckets of malt for a week, weed the ram, any two nogate; and on Wednesday kuna the same cheese, and on Friday the same<…>now and then a virnik with a youth..."), a bridge worker ("And this is the lesson of the bridge workers"), according to M.B. Sverdlov, and a swordsman, and an independent agent in collecting vir. The youths are not only household, but also military servants of the prince. Svyatopolk Izyaslavich had 700 youths ready for battle: “He [Svyatopolk Izyaslavich] said: “I have 700 of my own youths.” Data about the youths indicate their belonging to the princely house. But the question of their freedom remains open. Most likely, some of them were slaves in the past, however, I think that among them there were also free ones, because... the youth could occupy the usual position of assistant to a virnik for a free man and, in general, be in the service.

Many researchers combine adolescents and children, which is not entirely correct, because they differed in their functions and position. According to Article 86 of the Dimensional Pravda, “pay forty kunas to an ironman, and five kunas to a swordsman, and half a hryvnia to a child; then this is an iron lesson, who knows what.” It follows that the child supervised the testing of the iron in court, and therefore was the main executor of the sentence in court. According to Article 108 of the Dimensional Pravda, “even if the brothers stretch themselves before the prince on their butts, which children go and divide, then he will take the hryvnia kun.” It turns out that in the event of a judicial division of the inheritance between brothers, the child is entitled to a small payment. “During the uprising in Vladimir in 1178, not only the princely posadniks and tiuns were killed, but also the children’s and swordsmen, “and their houses were plundered,” which means that the children’s had a house like the tiuns and posadniks.” From the above material it is clear that the activities of children are much more limited, hence their unequal position.

From the end of the 12th century. one can trace how the “junior” squad is gradually absorbed by the princely court. The term “nobles” appears in the sources. Over time, the princely squad began to collapse, become attached to the ground, losing its ability to fight, because... most of To preserve traditions, warriors should be exempted from management and service at the princely court.

S.V. Yushkov believes that “already by the beginning of the 11th century. there has been a process of disintegration of the squad relations, which manifested itself in the separation of the most influential squad members from the princely court.” I am also of the opinion that with the split of the squad into “senior” and “junior”, with the constant growth of differences between them, symptoms of the collapse of the squad began to appear.

To summarize, it should be noted once again that within the Old Russian squad there was a hierarchical division into “senior”, “middle” and “junior”. Within each specific social layer, only its specific functions were inherent. Over time, the role of the squad in political affairs and its influence on the prince changed. The Old Russian squad existed until the 13th century.

Prince and squad

In the written monuments of Ancient Rus', the prince invariably appears against the backdrop of a squad, in the company of his comrades and assistants, who shared both successes and defeats with him.

As A.A. notes Gorsky, the squad “is recruited and formed not according to the tribal principle, but according to the principle of personal loyalty; the squad is outside the community structure; it is separated from it socially (the vigilantes are not members of separate communities) and territorially (due to the isolated residence of the vigilantes).” At the same time, princely-squad relations were a continuation of social relations during the period of military democracy. The Old Russian squad was a kind of military community, led by a prince - first among equals. From the community came relations of equality, which were externally reflected in squad feasts, reminiscent of peasant “brothers”, in the egalitarian order of division of booty (later transformed into the division of tribute) - the main source of existence of the squad.

The Tale of Bygone Years provides enough information to solve the problems of this paragraph. The prince resolved many issues not on his own, but with his squad. "In the summer of 6452. Igor, having gathered together many forces, the Varangians, the Rus, and the Glades, the Slovenes, and the Krivichi, and the Tivertsy, and the Pechenegs, and the Tales singing from them, went against the Greeks in boats and on horses, although to take revenge on himself.<…>Behold, the king heard the ambassador to Igor, the radiant bolyars, begging and saying: “Do not go, but take the tribute that Oleg received, and add more to that tribute.” The same goes for the Pecheneg ambassador, who sent a lot of pavoloks and a lot of gold. Igor, having reached the Danube, convened a squad, and began to think, and told them the Tsarev’s speech. Igor’s squad decided: “If the king says so, then what do we want more than that, without hesitating to take gold, and silver, and grass? Whenever someone knows; who can overcome, us or them? Who is bright with the sea? Because we are not walking on land, but in the depths of the seas: the way is bad for everyone.” Listen to them Igor...” As we see, the prince decides not on his own, but with his retinue, the question of whether it is worth continuing the campaign or whether it is better to make peace on fairly favorable terms (if you trust the chronicler). It is her opinion that turns out to be decisive. Let us note in passing that the refusal to forcibly seize all the wealth that the Greeks offered Igor was most likely regarded negatively by the chronicler’s contemporaries. Nevertheless, the prince agrees with the squad and goes to sign peace with the Greeks.

The question arises why the prince had to rely on his soldiers. The answer can also be found in The Tale of Bygone Years. For example, the chronicler explains Svyatoslav’s refusal to be baptized this way. “In the summer of 6463...Olga was alive with her son Svyatoslav, and her mother was baptized, and not scolding, but swearing [mocked] him.<…>. As if Olga often said: “I, my son, have come to know God and rejoice; Once you know it, you will begin to rejoice.” He didn’t pay attention to this, saying: “How would you like the law of acceptance to be one and the same? And the squad will start laughing at this.” She said to him: “If you are baptized, you will also have everything.” He didn’t listen to his mother...”

The basis of the relationship between the prince and the squad was also the transfer of certain material values to the latter. Moreover, values are not important in themselves. The resulting wealth, apparently, had no economic substance. I think the vigilantes were more concerned about the act of transfer itself than about enrichment as such. “In the summer of 6583... a German came to Svyatoslav; Svyatoslav, magnifying himself, showed them his wealth. They saw the countless multitudes, gold, and silver, and drags, and decided: “It’s worthless, it’s lying dead. This is the essence of the matter. Men are afraid of looking for more than this.” Ezekiy, the king of the Jews, praised Sitsa, to the ambassador of the king of Asuria, and all of him was taken to Babylon: and so after this death, all his property was scattered in various ways.”

It is noteworthy that the complaints of the vigilantes were focused on external signs of wealth. At the same time, unlike Western European chivalry, land grants were never discussed, which indicates the underdevelopment of feudal relations. As is known, feudal relations are based on corporate land ownership and on the distribution of land plots to soldiers on the condition of their service to the owner of the land. On the one hand, there was an abundance of land in Rus', on the other hand, there was a constant shortage of developed areas (the need for a constant change of cultivated land due to the fact that land cleared from forests was quickly “ploughed up”). Under such conditions, land grants were largely meaningless. Their borders could not be secured in any way. It was this that for a long time did not allow the development of “normal” feudal relations. In Rus', feudalism with its characteristic estates, benefices, immunities and regulation of vassal service began to take shape only at the turn of the 13th-14th centuries. and received full development in the 16th century. Until this time, connections conventionally associated with vassal-suzerain relations in Western Europe existed in a more patriarchal form of personal relations associated with the centralized exploitation of corporately owned lands. This late appearance of feudal relations is due to the fact that the emergence of early feudal relations was interrupted by the Mongol invasion.

The squad also received monetary support from the hands of the prince or used deductions from the volost feed and various payments received from the population, while carrying out the police, judicial and administrative orders of the prince. Thus, the squad of Kievan Rus lived largely on princely funds, so the ideal prince was considered to be the one who generously gifted his warriors, but if the squad for some reason was dissatisfied with his prince, then he could leave.

Over time, however, the relationship between the prince and the squad began to change, as can be judged by the above story about the feast. The property stratification of the squad led to the formation of a new social group - the boyars, which also influenced the relationship between the prince and the squad.

Conclusion

To summarize, it should be noted that neither the princely power, nor the squad, nor the veche assembly remained unchanged.

The origins of the political institutions under study lie in the era of military democracy. It is difficult to say which of them formed earlier.

Princely power originates in the era of military democracy from the power of the tribal leader; a squad already formed around him, from which the princely squad subsequently grew. The question of the existence of the veche during this period remains open. The chronicles do not yet speak of public assemblies in tribal principalities, but some researchers believe that at that time the veche already existed.

With the growth of the tribe's population, the clans included in it gradually turn into a number of related tribes, which already form a tribal union (tribal princedom). At the head of each union are leaders (princes), towering above the tribal leaders. The “super union” arises after the creation Old Russian state and the subjugation of a number of East Slavic tribes by Oleg - tribal reigns are united into one great union. Tribal principalities were abolished by Vladimir Svyatoslavich after he placed his sons in Largest cities- tribal centers. Each rank of tribes had certain functions. The leader of the tribe was elected only for the duration of the war. Leader status tribal union constant. His responsibilities include foreign policy, internal construction of the union, organization, command of the troops assembled by it, performance of religious rites. The functions of the prince of the "union of unions" include all the duties of the above-mentioned leaders. The development of the institution of princely power was facilitated by the collapse of the tribal system, the calling of the Varangians, and the creation of the Old Russian state. In the 10th century New princely functions are formed - legislative and judicial. Subsequently, the prince’s functions deepen, except for the religious one, which he lost after accepting Christianity.

As already mentioned, squads began to form around tribal leaders. By the time of the creation of the Old Russian state, the squad grew from a small armed detachment of warriors into a squadron layer, built not on the clan principle, but on the principle of personal loyalty. The squad lived on the gifts of their fellow tribesmen and the prince and on spoils of war. It consisted of 200-400 people and was recruited from noble youths and valiant warriors; anyone could get into it if the prince was interested in him. After the calling of the Varangians, the Varangian element becomes the main contingent. But the Varangians very quickly became glorified, although they gave impetus to the detachment from the community base; another reason was the destruction of the tribal structure. There is no doubt that the princely squad had a hierarchical structure. The “eldest” initially had a claim on the prince greater influence. Most often, boyars, less often husbands, are included in this community of warriors. Perhaps from its ranks come the thousanders, posadniks and other representatives of the princely administration. Over time, the prince prefers to focus on the “average” squad, which was the main combat contingent of the prince’s personal military forces. It was composed of Gridba, possibly princely men. Also, strong ties connected the prince with the “junior” squad, which included youths, children, almsmen, stepsons, swordsmen, metal workers, etc. From the end of the 12th century. The “younger” warriors are gradually absorbed into the princely court. The term “nobles” appears in the sources. The princely squad began to collapse as soon as it began to “settle” to the ground and lose its mobility.

By veche, most researchers understand a meeting of city people. I am inclined to believe that the veche has always existed, even during the period of military democracy, since its absence would indicate an uncharacteristically high development of other political institutions for this era. It is quite difficult to determine the composition of the participants of the evening. The conduct of the evening is not chaotic, but quite orderly. It takes place in compliance with traditional rules: those who have gathered are seated and await the start of the meeting, which is led by the prince, metropolitan, and thousand. The veche participated in solving a wide range of problems: issues of war and peace, the fate of the princely table and administration, issues related to monetary collections among citizens, management of city finances and land resources. It is not clear whether the veche was always held similar problems, or sources have recorded exceptional cases, usually associated with emergency situations.

Bibliography

The Tale of Bygone Years. M.; L., 1950. Part 1.: Text and translation / Prepared. Text and translation D.S. Likhachev and B.A. Romanova.

The Tale of Bygone Years. M.; L., 1950. Part 2.: Commentary/Prepared. Text and translation D.S. Likhachev and B.A. Romanova.

Russian truth. M.; L., 1940.

Tacitus Publius Cornelius. Germany/Workshop on the history of the Middle Ages. Voronezh, 1999. Part 1.

Belyaev I.D. Lectures on the history of Russian legislation. M., 1879.

Gorsky A.A. Old Russian squad. M., 1953.
Read in full: http://www.km.ru/referats/E504AF2FB97C4A209A327617BD45F8C9

Was the ancient Russian prince completely free in his decisions?

Status squads, i.e. her place (position) in power relations, determined by two factors:

1. The princely squad is component of the control apparatus , and the closest warriors (boyars) formed a permanent council, the “Duma”.

The prince resolved all actual state issues (about the structure of the “land”, about war and peace, about adopted laws) not independently, but with his squad, listening to their opinion.

Exactly didn't existmandatory composition princely council and any formal competencies.

Sometimes the prince consulted with the whole squad(or announced his intention to her), sometimes only with her top layer, Sometimes–with two or three close boyars. The Duma with the boyars and warriors was only a matter of practical necessity, custom and convenience. She is by no means was not mandatory for the prince, nor did it impose any formal obligations on him.

2. The prince is constantly in his actions had to focus on the squad, and if he did not fulfill her demands, then, in any case, he was forced to take her opinion into account. The squad represented for the prince what modern scientists call reference group .

Reference group – group of people , With attitudes, beliefs and actions which must be considered a leader(ruler) when carrying out his actions.

I.N. Danilevsky: “Apparently, the attitude of fellow warriors towards their prince was largely determined by the extent to which his actions corresponded to what was included in the concept of honor. We are talking about a set of moral and ethnic principles that guided a person in his behavior and which gave him the right to respect "from those around him. It was possible to receive honor if the behavior was understandable to his "comrades". The prince's place in society directly depended on the assessment of his behavior by those around him. The claim to recognition must necessarily correspond to accepted standards of behavior."

The strengthening of the prince's power over time leads to a weakening of the squad's influence on the prince's actions and a decline in its authority.

The right of a warrior to leave the princely squad in case of violation by the prince of the terms of the contract or if the warrior disagrees with some of the prince’s actions. During the period of political fragmentation, the warriors moved from one prince to another. This right to “leave” forced the prince to correlate his actions with the opinion of the warriors.

Two points of view of historians on the role of the squad in the system of power relations in Kievan Rus

Princely squad was not an independent institution of power,because it did not limit the power of the prince. The squad was only advisory and auxiliary body to the prince.

The princely squad is an institution of power (" aristocratic element of power"). Attention is focused on the fact that the prince had to navigate and take into account in his actions the opinion of the squad.

III. Prince and princely power

1. In the first period of the history of the state ( union of tribal principalities)Velikiy Kievsky prince from the Rurik dynasty - first among other princes(princes of local tribal dynasties).

2. After the liquidation of tribal kingdoms ( during the period of a single state)all power is concentrated in the hands of one ruler–Kyiv prince.

3. With the emergence on the territory of the Kyiv state sovereign states in each principality are ruled by a representative of the local Rurik dynasty.

The eldest in the family was considered the Grand Duke of Kiev. The princes called him their “father,” but this was nothing more than an honorary appointment without any real content.

In reality, each prince, both within his own land and in inter-princely relations, behaved as an independent sovereign.

a) within his volost, the prince was the head of the administration, the highest military leader and judge.

b) in relations between princes - “brothers” all controversial issues were resolved"either by army or by peace", i.e. or by force of arms, or agreements, treaties with other princes. This contractual principle in inter-princely relations runs through the entire history and ceases only in the Moscow state.

Functions of the prince:

1). The prince's duty, first of all, was to maintain external security and protect the land from attacks by external enemies. The prince was military organizer and leader :

- collected and formed a squad that was in personal service him;

- appointed the head of the people's militia ("tysyatsky");

- During hostilities he commanded both his squad and the people’s militia.

2) . The prince led foreign policy , was in charge of relations with other princes and states, concluded alliances and treaties, declared war and made peace (in the case when the war required the convening of a people's militia, the prince had to secure the consent of the veche).

3). The prince was also legislator and administrator. The most striking example is a collection of ancient Russian laws of the 11th-12th centuries, called “Russian Truth”.

4). The prince was highest judge . He had to “deal truthfully in this world”, “judge the court in truth”, “judge the court truthfully and without hypocrisy”, “deliver the offended from the hand of the offender”, etc. The prince often entrusted the court to his deputies, "mayors" and "tiuns", but this led to numerous abuses and insults of the population, and therefore the people always preferred the personal court of the prince.

5). The prince was head of government and appointed all officials.

In their government activities, the princes usually used the help and advice of their senior warriors; with them the princes consulted or “thought” about any important matter (they were sometimes called the prince’s “Dumtsy”). On important occasions, especially before the outbreak of hostilities, the princes sometimes gathered for council and a squad.

Various regions states were governed by governors Kyiv prince. Regional governors appointed by the prince were called "posadnikov". In the hands of the mayors, as well as in the hands of the prince, was administrative and judicial power, since antiquity did not know the separation of these functions. Under the prince and under the posadniks there were minor officials, partly from free people, partly from their slaves, for all kinds of judicial and police executive actions.

Ways for a prince to come into power:

By inheritance:

– until the middle of the 11th century: lateral order

– since 1054: the next order of reign (possession)

– since 1097, transfer of princely power in a direct line (to the son); the beginning of dynastic rule in individual principalities

Seizing the throne by armed force.

Election (calling by decision of the veche).

The prince and the princely squad, along with the city council, personified the most important state institutions of Kievan Rus.

As I.Ya. writes Froyanov, the word squad is common Slavic. It is derived from the word “friend”, the original meaning of which is companion, comrade in war.

It is difficult to say when and how the squad appears among the Eastern Slavs. One can only speculate about the origin of the squad based on indirect data and analogies. As a rule, when it comes to such questions, one is drawn to early evidence about the squads of the ancient Germans. In the 1st century AD Among the ancient Germans, warriors constituted a special group. She lived separately from her community with the chief. The warriors existed thanks to military campaigns in which booty was captured, as well as thanks to gifts from their fellow tribesmen and neighboring tribes. The leader had the right to distribute the funds received in this way. He was bound to the squad by mutual obligations of personal loyalty. The squad was recruited from noble youths and valiant warriors. Tacitus also mentions some hierarchical division among the vigilantes.

Apparently, the East Slavic squad also had similar characteristics. However, we can only draw this conclusion by analogy. Moreover, in the sources the word “squad” is clearly not unambiguous. Thus, in the story about the Kiev uprising of 1068, two different squads are mentioned: “Otherwise people speak against the governor of Kosnyachka; I went up the mountain from the evening, and came to the Kosnyachkov courtyard and did not find it, standing at the courtyard of Bryachislavl and deciding: “Let’s go and disembark our squad from the cellar.”<…>Izyaslav sits on the porch with his retinue...” As you can see, in addition to the princely squad, “their” squad of the rebels of Kiev is also mentioned here. It is difficult to say who it consists of in this case, but it is obvious that in addition to the princely squads, there were others. However, in historical literature it is customary to call a princely detachment of warriors a squad.

The selection of the princely squad, according to A.A. Gorsky, contributes to the destruction of the tribal structure that engulfed the Slavic ethnic group in the V-VI centuries. S.V. Yushkov believes that the princely squads, as a circle of his closest associates and collaborators, have existed since the very emergence of the Kyiv state. I agree with both of them, since I consider the armed detachments of tribal leaders of the V-VII centuries to be the prototype of the princely squad of Kievan Rus.

There is a unity of opinion on the issue of squad composition in historical literature. The main contingent of the squad, according to S.V. Yushkov, can be considered “the ancestral nobility, but anyone whom the prince considered valuable in military affairs could be included in the number of warriors.” From this it is clear that the prince could receive people of different nations and tribes, which is confirmed by sources. In addition to the Slavs and Varangians, the squad also included Ugrians (Hungarians), Torci, and other tribes. I.D. Belyaev believes, and one cannot but agree with him, taking into account the Varangian origin of the Rurik dynasty, that initially the squad consisted only of Varangians. But already under Vladimir Svyatoslavich, this element loses its primary importance, since, according to I.D. Belyaev, these free and restless warriors could become an obstacle in the exercise of his power, and after the death of Yaroslav, the chronicles do not mention the Varangian squads at all. However, already under Oleg, the Varangians perceived themselves as an indigenous population (as Slavs). Such assimilation is depicted before us by Oleg’s treaty with Byzantium in 911, in which his warriors swear by “Perun, their god, and Volos, the cattle god.” I.D. Belyaev also says that Hungarians, Pechenegs, Poles, Polovtsians, etc. now served in the squad.

The “senior” squad consisted of those who served the prince’s father (“the father’s squad”). It passes to the younger generations of princes, armed with the same influence and authority in the druzhina and public environment. Most often, this group of warriors includes boyars, less often husbands, S.V. Yushkov believes that “from its ranks come the thousanders, posadniks and other representatives of the princely administration.” The chronicles are replete with stories about princes who were in boyar company in a variety of life situations, social and everyday: “... and after singing the liturgy, the brothers dined on a stingy meal, each with his own boyars,” “and the noble prince Vsevolod went against him with his son<…>and all the bolyars, and blessed Metropolitan John with the monks and with the prosvutera. And all the kiyans wept greatly over him,” “Svyatopolk convened the bolyars and kiyans, and told them what Davyd had told him<…>. And deciding the boys and the people...” The old tradition of the duma of the prince and his squad was fundamental in the relations of the prince with the boyars. Whatever the prince was up to, he always had to “reveal” his plan to the boyars who served him, otherwise risking losing the boyars’ support, which threatened him with failure. Princes sometimes neglected to consult with the boyars, but such facts were rare. However, over time, the prince prefers to focus on the “average” squad, not listening to the advice of the boyars, but from the “senior” squad, the commanders of the “warriors” invariably stand out, because they are the most experienced and valiant.

The “middle” layer of the squad consisted of the Gridba, according to S.M. Soloviev and I.E. Zabelin, or princely men (S.V. Yushkov, I.A. Porai-Koshits). It is possible that, unlike the boyars who were involved in government, the men were engaged only in military service. These warriors constituted the main combat contingent of the prince's personal military forces. Gradually, the prince prefers to rely not on his father’s warriors - the boyars, but on his peers. Perhaps this is precisely what is connected with the numerous reproaches of the chroniclers against the princes that they listen to the advice of the “unsmart”, neglecting the opinion of their elders: “And [Grand Duke Vsevolod Yaroslavich] began to love the meaning of the wise, creating light with them, and began to make Prince of Truth, I began to rob this union and sell people, for this I do not lead in my illnesses.” Perhaps this hides the gradual strengthening of the role of the prince, who sought to get rid of the influence of the squad. The layer of the “middle” squad consisted of the prince’s peers. According to I.N. Danilevsky, they grew up and were raised with the prince from the age of 13-14. Together with these warriors, the prince studied military affairs and went on his first campaigns. Hence it is clear why their position was closer to the prince, why he sought support among his peers.

Also, strong ties connected the prince with the “junior” squad, which included youths, children, almsmen, stepsons, who, depending on the individual duties assigned to them, were swordsmen, throwers, virniks, and others. Sources introduce us to the youths earlier than to the rest of the representatives of the “younger” squad - in the 10th century: “therefore the villagers sat down to drink, and Olga commanded her youth to serve before them,” “and Svyatoslav said, except in vain, his youth...”. They are with the prince, one might say, relentlessly. The youths are, first of all, servants of the prince. This can be judged by the relationship between the words “youth” and “servant”: “and when he heard the war, he left him. Boris stood with his youths<…>and behold, she attacked like a beast near the tent, and put on spears, and gored Boris, and his servant, falling on him, and gored with him.” The official purpose of the youths is revealed quite easily in written monuments. “The Tale of Bygone Years” tells about the youths who served Olga and Svyatoslav. In the Extensive Pravda, the princely youth is placed in a row with the groom and the cook: “even as a princely youth, or as a groom, or as a cook.” Based on the material of the Extensive Pravda, we can conclude that the youth performed the functions of Virnik’s assistant (“And behold, the horses of Virnia were beaten under Yaroslav: Virnik take seven buckets of malt for a week, either weed the ram, or two nogate; and on the middle, kuna cheese, and in Friday same<…>now and then a virnik with a youth..."), a bridge worker ("And this is the lesson of the bridge workers"), according to M.B. Sverdlov, and a swordsman, and an independent agent in collecting vir. The youths are not only household, but also military servants of the prince. Svyatopolk Izyaslavich had 700 youths ready for battle: “He [Svyatopolk Izyaslavich] said: “I have 700 of my own youths.” Data about the youths indicate their belonging to the princely house. But the question of their freedom remains open. Most likely, some of them were slaves in the past, however, I think that among them there were also free ones, because... the youth could occupy the usual position of assistant to a virnik for a free man and, in general, be in the service.

Many researchers combine adolescents and children, which is not entirely correct, because they differed in their functions and position. According to Article 86 of the Dimensional Pravda, “pay forty kunas to an ironman, and five kunas to a swordsman, and half a hryvnia to a child; then this is an iron lesson, who knows what.” It follows that the child supervised the testing of the iron in court, and therefore was the main executor of the sentence in court. According to Article 108 of the Dimensional Pravda, “even if the brothers stretch out before the prince on their ass, which children go and divide, then he will take the hryvnia kun.” It turns out that in the event of a judicial division of the inheritance between brothers, the child is entitled to a small payment. “During the uprising in Vladimir in 1178, not only the princely posadniks and tiuns were killed, but also the children’s and swordsmen, “and their houses were plundered,” which means that the children’s had a house like the tiuns and posadniks.” From the above material it is clear that the activities of children are much more limited, hence their unequal position.

From the end of the 12th century. one can trace how the “junior” squad is gradually absorbed by the princely court. The term “nobles” appears in the sources. Over time, the princely squad began to collapse, become attached to the ground, losing its ability to fight, because... Most of the soldiers, in order to preserve traditions, should be exempted from management and service at the princely court.

What else to read

Abstract: History of the development of hygiene 1. The development of hygiene in primitive and slave societies. The emergence and development of hygiene has a centuries-old history...

Formation of estimated liabilities and reserves for vacations As in 1s 8 Hello, dear blog readers. Lately, in my consulting work, I have quite often...

Puff khinkal in a pressure cooker Puff DAGESTAN KHINKAL Puff khinkal is often prepared in Dagestan. A very tasty, but high-calorie, masculine dish....

The composition of the squad in ancient Rus'. Prince, warriors and militias

III. Prince and princely power

What else to read

THE LAST NOTES

Categories