Выбрать главу

After Aleksandr Mikhailovich lost the throne of Vladimir in 1327, the polit­ical, dynastic legacy inherited by north-eastern Russia from Kievan Rus' lost its potency. The norms of seniority and succession, which had been hon­oured by the Riurikids in north-eastern Russia as in all of Kievan Rus' for centuries and which had combined with the khan's patent to provide legiti­macy for the grand prince, were overruled. They were replaced by the khan's favour, which became the exclusive basis for the selection and retention of the highest political position in north-eastern Russia. Although Uzbek may have divided the principality of Vladimir and Novgorod between Ivan Daniilovich and Aleksandr Vasil'evich of Suzdal' in 1328, by 1331 Ivan Daniilovich was the sole grand prince of Vladimir.[40] Uzbek and his successors with rare exceptions bestowed the position on the Daniilovichi, the princes of Moscow. Thus, Ivan Daniilovich, also known as Ivan I Kalita ('Money-bag'), possessed the throne exclusively from 1331 until his death in 1341. Despite recurrent dynastic opposi­tion, which arose not only from the princes of Tver' but also from princes of Beloozero, Iaroslavl' and Suzdal' as well as from Novgorod, he was succeeded by his sons Semen (1341-53) and Ivan II (1353-9).

Territorial reorientation

As the princes of Vladimir developed close ties with Sarai and particularly as the princes of Moscow gained ascendancy in the principality, the bonds linking north-eastern Russia with the western and south-western portions of Kievan Rus' weakened. As they concentrated their attention more exclu­sively on northern Russia, the Daniilovichi also began the process of gathering patrimonial principalities within Vladimir and Rostov under their authority.

The bonds linking north-eastern and south-western Russia had noticeably loosened even before the Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus'. In the immediate aftermath of the invasion, however, Kiev continued for a brief period to be recognised as the symbolic political centre of the realm. Iaroslav, possibly as the first Rus' prince to present himself before Baty, may have been given a patent not only for Vladimir-Suzdal', but also for Kiev.45 When Aleksandr and Andrei returned from Karakorum, Aleksandr had a mandate for the throne of Kiev. But the north-eastern princes no longer recognised the centrality of Kiev. While Andrei, presumably on the authority of the great khan, claimed the throne of Vladimir and evicted their uncle Sviatoslav, Aleksandr went to Novgorod. He never physically went to Kiev to assume his post.46

Although the princes of Vladimir refrained from occupying the throne of Kiev and focused their attention on their north-eastern realm, they did retain personal and political ties with the princes in other parts of Kievan Rus'. Their relationships manifested themselves in a variety of ways. Prince Boris Vasil'kovich of Rostov, for example, displayed solidarity with Chernigov by attending his grandfather, Prince Mikhail, in Sarai in 1246.47 Prince Fedor Rostislavich of Mozhaisk, the brother of Prince Gleb of Smolensk, married into the Rostov clan and c.1260 became the prince of Iaroslavl'.48

The most dramatic demonstration of such associations, however, was the alliance forged between Prince Andrei of Vladimir and Prince Danylo (Daniil) of Galicia-Volynia. Prince Danylo had been confirmed in his position after visiting Khan Baty in 1245. He nevertheless sought assistance against the Tatars from his Western neighbours. Aided by his candidate for metropolitan, Kirill (Cyril), he arrangedthe marriage ofhis son Leo to the daughter of King Bela IV of Hungary. Danylo himself married the niece of the Lithuanian king (1251).49 He also established close ties with Andrei of Vladimir. In 1250, Kirill, having been confirmed as metropolitan, travelled to northern Russia. He escorted

45 PSRL, vol. ii: Ipat'evskaialetopis'(Moscow: Iazyki russkoikul'tury 1998), col. 806; Fennell, Crisis, p. 100.

46 PSRL, vol. i, col. 472; PSRL, vol. iii, pp. 80, 304; PSRL, vol. x, p. 137; Fennell, Crisis, p. 107; Vernadsky, Mongols, p. 147; Kuchkin, Formirovaniegosudarstvennoi territorii, p. 111.

47 PSRL, vol. iii, p. 301.

48 PSRL, vol. x, pp. 153-4; Gail Lenhoff, Early Russian Hagiography: The Lives of Prince Fedor the Black (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1997), pp. 41-52; Fennell, Crisis, pp. 121-2 n. 2, 125, 143.

49 Vernadsky, Mongols, p. 156.

Danylo's daughter to Vladimir, where she married Prince Andrei in 1251.[41]Andrei's refusal to pay homage to the khan the following year was perceived as an act of defiance undertaken in alliance with Prince Danylo. The Tatars sent armies against both princes.[42] Defeated at Pereiaslavl'-Zalesskii in 1252, Prince Andrei fled the country. Danylo persisted in his efforts to muster support from the West. He subsequently accepted a crown from Pope Innocent IV and entertained the possibility of uniting the Church in Galicia-Volynia with Rome in return for aid.[43] But when military support did not materialise, he abandoned those ties. By 1256, he was again at war with the Mongols and was forced to flee to Poland and Hungary in 1260.[44] Danylo received no assistance from the Riurikids of north-eastern Russia. By that time Andrei had returned from exile and accepted a submissive role towards his brother and the Mongols. Metropolitan Kirill too had shifted his allegiance to Prince Aleksandr Nevskii and spent long periods away from Kiev in Vladimir.[45]

Although active political co-operation between north-eastern and south­western Russia ended with the defeat of the allies, Andrei and Danylo, other princes ofthe two regions maintained relationships. Prince Iaroslav Iaroslavich, prince of Tver' and grand prince ofVladimir (1263-71/2), arranged a marriage for his daughter with Iurii of Galicia. Tver' also developed ties with Lithua­nia, its expanding Western neighbour. Prince Iaroslav's grandson Dmitrii Mikhailovich, who served as grand prince ofVladimir from 1322 to 1325, mar­ried Maria, the daughter of Gedimin of Lithuania. The Daniilovichi of Moscow did not maintain such relations. As they eclipsed the Tver' princes, the range of political interest and involvement of the Vladimir princes narrowed from Kievan Rus' as a whole and its western frontiers to their own domain in north­ern Russia. [46]

From the late thirteenth century Prince Daniil of Moscow and his heirs also began to reverse the trend of territorial fragmentation by attaching the patrimonial principalities of other Vsevolodichi to their own domain. The tendency to create patrimonial principalities had begun before the Mongol invasion. Rostov had become the realm of Konstantin Vsevolodich and his descendants. The trend continued after the invasion. The number of sub­divisions within Vladimir-Suzdal' as well as principalities detached from it multiplied. When Prince Iaroslav Vsevolodich succeeded his brother Iurii, he distributed territories to his nephews. During Aleksandr's reign Iur'ev Pol'skii, which had originally been assigned to Prince Sviatoslav Vsevolodich in 1213, was recognised as a hereditary principality. Upon Sviatoslav's death in 1253, it passed to his son Dmitrii.[47] Pereiaslavl'-Zalesskii became the domain of Alek- sandr Nevskii's son Dmitrii, and Moscow was apparently reserved for his son Daniil. Suzdal' was given to Prince Andrei after his return from his exile in

вернуться

40

PSRL, vol. III, p. 469; PSRL, vol. x, p. 195; Cherepnin, Obrazovanie, pp. 497-8; A. E. Presniakov, The Formation of the Great Russian State. A Study of Russian History in the Thirteenth to Fifteenth Centuries, trans. A. E. Moorhouse (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1970), pp. 123-4; Fennell, Emergence, pp. 112-13, 119.

вернуться

41

PSRL, vol. I, col. 472; Joseph Fuhrmann, 'Metropolitan Cyril II (1242-1281) and the Politics of Accommodation', JGO 24 (1976): 164; Vernadsky, Mongols, p. 147.

вернуться

42

PSRL, vol. II, col. 829; Fennell, Crisis, pp. 107, 111; Vernadsky, Mongols, p. 148.

вернуться

43

Martin Dimnik, 'Principality of Galicia-Volynia', in MERSH, vol. xii (Gulf Breeze, Fla.: Academic International Press, 1979), p. 68; Michael Zdan, 'The Dependence of Halych- Volyn' on the Golden Horde', SEER 35 (1957): 515; Nasonov, Mongoly i Rus', pp. 24-6.

вернуться

44

Fuhrmann, 'Metropolitan Cyril II', 167; Vernadsky, Mongols, p. 158.

вернуться

45

Nasonov Mongoly i Rus', pp. 40, 47; Fuhrmann, 'Metropolitan Cyril II', 162-7; Fennell, Crisis,p. 112; Donald Ostrowski, 'Why Did the Metropolitan Move from Kiev to Vladimir in the Thirteenth Century?', in Boris Gasparov and Olga Raevsky-Hughes (eds.), Slavic Cultures in the Middle Ages (California Slavic Studies, vol. 16) (Berkeley, Los Angeles and Oxford: University of California Press, 1993), pp. 83-8.

вернуться

46

Fennell, Emergence, pp. 103-4.

вернуться

47

Fennell, Crisis, pp. 47,111.