Выбрать главу

The critical importance of Novgorod in this political rivalry derived from its commercial wealth, which was the source of silver that the khan demanded in tribute. By the fourteenth century responsibility for collecting and delivering tribute was passing from the baskaki to the grand prince of Vladimir.[55] By successfully gathering and delivering the tribute as well as rich gifts for the khan and other influential Tatar notables a prince could gain credibility and the khan's favour. Failing to do so gave the khan reason to transfer the patent for the grand principality and the responsibility for delivering the tribute that accompanied that honour to another prince. Iurii's attention to Novgorodian affairs reflected his determination to control the sector of the economy that could satisfy the khan's demand for tribute. By securing Novgorod's supplies of luxury fur transported from the distant north-east through Ustiug and the trade routes used by the Swedes and Germans who bought those furs with silver, he supported Novgorod's commercial activities and gained access to its wealth.

When Ivan Daniilovich became grand prince of Vladimir, he too became deeply involved with Novgorod, from which he collected not only regular tribute payments but special assessments. Possibly in response to the Golden Horde's demand for increased revenue prompted by its wars against Ilkhans of Persia during the 1330s, Ivan placed greater pressure on Novgorod. In 1332, just after he received the sole patent for the grand principality, he demanded a special payment from Novgorod (zakamskoe serebro) and forced it to comply by setting up a blockade that cut off its contacts with north-eastern Russia.

Novgorod for the first time turned to Lithuania for a prince and welcomed Narimunt, the son ofGedimin, to the city. It again recognised Ivan as its prince only in i334-5. Ivan also applied pressure on Novgorod's northern empire. Whereas Iurii had compelled Ustiug to keep the transit route to the north­east open for Novgorod's benefit, Ivan attacked Ustiug as well as Novgorod to collect tribute. In 1337, he also sent forces against Novgorod's possession, the North Dvina land. In 1339, Ivan once again demanded unusually high contributions from Novgorod, prompting a renewal oftheir conflict that lasted until after Ivan's death in 1341.[56]

Despite Novgorod's resistance, the first Daniilovichi gained and held dom­inance over that city and thus had access to its wealth. There is broad schol­arly agreement that the Moscow princes' control over Novgorod's supplies of goods, such as luxury fur, as well as the silver that it received for them enabled them to pay the tribute demanded by the Golden Horde khans. The khans responded by awarding the post of grand prince of Vladimir to the Daniilovichi, who had thus demonstrated their reliability.[57]

By the end of the reign of Grand Prince Ivan I Kalita the territorial orienta­tion of the princes ofVladimir had been substantially altered. Their ties with western and south-western Russia were reduced. They concentrated their attention on north-eastern Russia, on Novgorod, and on the Golden Horde. The Daniilovichi, furthermore, had begun to expand their territories and extend their authority over patrimonial principalities in north-eastern Russia. They thus began to stem the tendency to divide the principalities ofVladimir and Rostov into multiple principalities that had prevailed in the thirteenth century. By curtailing the fragmentation and accumulating territories under their own authority, the Daniilovich princes subordinated and weakened their dynastic opponents while also gaining access to a larger pool of economic and human resources. They were better able to collect taxes, to assemble and support more military retainers, and to enforce the Mongol demand for tribute.

In addition to extending their authority over patrimonial principalities in north-eastern Russia, the Daniilovichi sought the position of prince of Nov­gorod. An important source of wealth, Novgorod was the object of contention between the princes of Tver' and the princes of Moscow. Even before the

Daniilovichi secured the throne of Vladimir they gained favour in Novgorod by defending its commercial interests and securing its trade routes. But while Iurii Daniilovich, who was competing with the princes of Tver', pursued such policies in the service of Novgorod's need to keep its routes open, Ivan Dani­ilovich did so to control Novgorod and its commercial resources.

Although in their capacity of grand princes of Vladimir and princes of Nov­gorod the Daniilovichi engaged in military campaigns against the Swedes and the Livonian Order, their focus was not on the western frontier of the Russian lands. While they were engaged in their struggle with the princes of Tver' and winning the support of the Golden Horde khans for the throne of Vladimir, Prince Gedimin of Lithuania (1316-41) was extending his influence over west­ern Russian principalities. Smolensk, Chernigov and Kiev all pledged their allegiance to him and his successor, Ol'gerd (1345-77). After Iurii II of Galicia and Volynia died in 1340, Volynia also fell under Lithuanian control. Gedimin also arranged the marriage of his daughter to Dmitrii Mikhailovich of Tver' (1320) and responded to Pskov's request for a prince (1323). When Novgorod turned to Lithuania for Prince Narimunt in 1332, it was clear that Novgorod too was considering Lithuania as an alternative to Vladimir. Lithuania's expansion was penetrating into north-western Russia and challenging the pre-eminence of the princes of Moscow.[58]

The Church

Although the Golden Horde had confirmed Iurii Dolgorukii's heirs as the ruling dynastic branch in Vladimir, it negated the Kievan Rus' legacy when it appointed the Daniilovichi to be grand princes of Vladimir. The Daniilovichi adopted policies, furthermore, that weakened bonds with the other princi­palities that had formed Kievan Rus' while they consolidated their authority within the territorial framework of northern Russia. In contrast to the dynasty, the Church, the other institution that had given identity and definition to Kievan Rus', did not narrow its range of interests or its field of operations. Its metropolitans continued to regard the Orthodox population throughout all the lands of Kievan Rus' as their flock and resisted efforts to divide their ecclesiastical realm.

The first metropolitans to head the Russian Church after the Mongol inva­sion were Kirill (Cyril; 1242-80/1) and Maksim (Maximus; 1282/3-1305). Despite the reported destruction of the city, Kiev remained their base of operation until the end of the century. Their activities and concerns, however, cov­ered the entire see. Thus, Kirill, although nominated for his office by Prince Danylo of Galicia, travelled throughout his domain during his tenure in office. He was reported to have been in north-eastern Russia on at least six occa­sions. He was in Vladimir to welcome Aleksandr Nevskii on his return to the city in 1252 and he officiated at Nevskii's funeral in 1263; Kirill himself died in Pereiaslavl'-Zalesskii. When not travelling, he remained at Kiev; after his death his body was returned there.[59] Maksim similarly served all sec­tors of his domain.[60] In 1299, Maksim moved the metropolitan's residence to Vladimir.[61]

вернуться

55

Ibid., pp. 199, 228.

вернуться

56

PSRL, vol. iii, pp. 99, 344-8, 350; Janet Martin, Medieval Russia 980-1584 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 184-5; Martin, Treasure, p. 131; Fennell, Emergence, pp. 140,148,153,156-7, 242-3; Bernadskii, Novgorod, p. 24.

вернуться

57

Borisov, 'Moskovskie kniaz'ia', 35; Halperin, The Tatar Yoke, p. 81; Fennell, Emergence, p. 193; Martin, Medieval Russia, pp. 182,185.

вернуться

58

Vernadsky, Mongols, pp. 202-3, 238; Fennell, Emergence, pp. 98-9,104,122-3.

вернуться

59

PSRL, vol. I, col. 473; PSRL, vol. x, pp. 139, 143; Jaroslaw Pelenski, 'The Origins of the Muscovite Ecclesiastical Claims to the Kievan Inheritance (Early Fourteenth Century to 1458/1461)', in Gasparov and Raevsky-Hughes (eds.), Slavic Cultures in the Middle Ages, p. 103; Ostrowski, 'Why Did the Metropolitan Move?', 83, 87, 92; Fuhrmann, 'Metropoli­tan Cyril II', 162-4,166, 171.

вернуться

60

Fuhrmann, 'Metropolitan Cyril II', 164; Meyendorff, Byzantium and the Rise of Russia,, p. 79.

вернуться

61

Ostrowski, 'Why Did the Metropolitan Move?', 93-4.