home Tool

Social structure of Europe and Asia. Cheat sheet: Russia and the medieval states of Europe and Asia. Reports and messages

The origin and formation of feudal relations in Europe and Asia.

The term "feudalism" appeared in France in the 17th century and was originally

used in the field of law: it was introduced into historical science in the 19th century

century by the famous French historian Francois Guizot.

Feudalism arose as a result of the disintegration of slave-owning orders

only in a few countries whose peoples have created high civilizations in

antiquity (China, India, Greece, Rome). Most other nations

feudal relations arose as a result of the decomposition

primitive communal formation (in Germany, among many Slavic peoples, in

Scandinavia, Japan, the Mongols, and a number of African countries). Known and

the path of formation of feudalism, which is characterized by interaction

named processes (an example is the Frankish state, which

arose in the 5th century. AD under King Clovis).

In many countries, feudal relations developed over the course of

for a long time, which was determined by the nature and slow pace

development of productive forces.

Defining the medieval era as a time of feudal dominance

relations, it should be borne in mind that the concept of “Middle Ages” and “feudalism”

are not entirely identical even for Europe, where in the early Middle Ages

feudal relations to a certain extent coexisted with patriarchal

way of life, and later with the capitalist one. Feudal period in Russia

falls on the IX-XIX centuries.

Feudalism is considered as a progressive social system according to

compared to slave ownership. Progressive was also the transition to

feudalism from the primitive communal system, since the established

individual production was more in line with the level of development

productive forces, and therefore was more efficient.

The progressive features of feudalism were most consistently manifested in

its Western European version. The economy of feudalism was based on

practically monopoly ownership of the land by the class of feudal landowners

and was natural in nature.

In an agrarian economy, land was the main means

production, and feudal property made it possible

exploit the direct producers-peasants, determined

social structure of society, its political structure. Feudal lords

part of their land was distributed to the peasants who lived on it

independent small-scale farming with your own tools. labor giving

part of the produced product goes to the landowners in the form of rent or tax. Rent

for the farmer was the only way to receive income from his

land ownership, and for peasants - duty for the use

earth. Historically, it came in three forms: labor labor (corvée),

produtovy (natural quitrent) and monetary.

Collecting payments on land on which peasants have toiled for centuries, but

did not have the right to freely dispose of either it or the products of their labor,

accompanied by coercive measures (non-economic coercion). IN

Western Europe, the dependence of the peasants was of a personal nature - the peasant

was considered attached to the lord and not to the land. Attaching the peasants

to land existed in Eastern and some Central European countries

(for example, in Russia, Poland, the Czech Republic, some areas of Northern Germany).

Commodity production (simple) and trade under feudalism

mainly related to urban development. European cities are becoming

center of craft production and trade since the 11th century. Product development

monetary relations and exchange between city and village developed natural

nature of the economy.

The needs, mainly of the nobility, were increasingly satisfied with

through trade, but reproduction was still carried out on

natural basis.

In cities, in addition to artisans, there were other social groups:

merchants, bankers, officials, intelligentsia. During the period of decomposition of feudalism and

the emergence of capitalist relations, new classes were formed -

proletariat and bourgeoisie. Feudal society was divided into classes,

each of which had its own rights and responsibilities and performed certain

functions. These are the clergy (praying), the nobility (warring), baptism and

artisans who were part of the third estate (producing material

Class rights and obligations existed in unity: the presence of rights

implied duties, failure to fulfill the latter led to deprivation of rights. So,

Vossal who ignored military service was deprived of rights to allotments

lands: those who used “market law” had to comply with their

obligations to the workshop or guild.

The classes also had their own special system of relations. IN

clergy it corresponded to the hierarchical structure of the Catholic

churches. The military class was subject to vassalage, which bound the vassal and

lord through personal relationships of service and obligatory patronage.

Corporate connections played a significant role in social relations.

Medieval man was subject to the ethical and legal norms of the corporation,

her traditions. Gradually a special psychological type of knight emerged,

clergyman, merchant, guild artisan, etc., that is, the mentality

medieval man.

Such was feudalism, which manifested itself in different forms and

not simultaneously in different countries of the world.

Answer to question 10: Russia under Ivan 4. Reforms of the elected Rada and Oprichnin.

Young Ivan IV, nicknamed the Terrible, was anointed king in January 1547 in the Assumption Cathedral by Metropolitan Macarius. A circle of like-minded people formed around the tsar, whose goal was to develop and carry out reforms (the Elected Rada). In 1549, the Zemsky Sobor, a representative body under the tsar, was convened for the first time, which approved the planned reform program.

By the end of the 40s, a small circle of people close to him had formed around the tsar, later called the Chosen Rada by Prince Andrei Kurbsky. In essence, it was the Near Sovereign Duma, which reflected the compromise nature of the internal policy pursued by Ivan IV at that time. It included: a representative of the humble but large landowners Alexei Adashev, Prince Andrei Kurbsky, priest Sylvester, Metropolitan Macarius, clerk Ivan Viskovaty. As the historian wrote, these were “reasonable and perfect men.” The elected Rada was not an official government body, but in fact for 13 years it was the government and governed the state on behalf of the Tsar.

3. In 1549, the first Zemsky Sobor was convened - an advisory body, a meeting of class representatives from boyars, nobles, clergy, merchants, townspeople and black-growing peasants. At the Council, measures were taken that expanded the rights of the nobles and limited the rights of large feudal lords - boyar-governors. The councils did not limit the power of the king, but contributed to the local political activities of the central government. They did not become permanent, but were subsequently gathered several times as needed. Based on the decisions of the Zemsky Sobor in the 50s of the 16th century. The following reforms were carried out:

> military; We started with military transformations. Local disputes between governors during campaigns were prohibited; all of them were subordinate to the first governor of a large regiment, i.e., the commander-in-chief. At the same time, it was decided to “place” a “selected thousand” in the Moscow district, that is, from 1070 nobles to create the core of a noble militia, which would be the support of autocratic power. A new procedure for recruiting the army was introduced. Each landowner was obliged to field one armed warrior on horseback for every 150 acres of land. A nobleman could serve from the age of 15, the service was inherited. For service, the nobleman received from 150 to 450 acres of land. A new standing army was created from archers armed with arquebuses. The archers received uniforms, cash and grain salaries, and in peacetime they lived like townspeople. At first, 3,000 people were recruited into the Streltsy army. They were divided into 6 “orders” (regiments) of 500 people each and constituted the Tsar’s personal guard. By the end of the 16th century, there were already 25,000 Streltsy in Russia. The Streltsy army was a powerful fighting force of the Russian state.

> judicial - a new all-Russian Code of Law of 1550 was adopted. The judicial functions of governors and volostels were limited, and the court was locally supervised by royal clerks. Bribery was punishable by monetary fines. The “judgment of God” (a duel between those disputing, “might belongs to the right”) was also preserved. The death penalty was introduced “for robbery.” During the trial of cases on the ground, the presence of land elders, selected from among local servicemen and “kissers”, who were elected from the townspeople and the black peasantry, became mandatory. The norm of the Code of Law of 1497 on St. George's Day was confirmed: peasants could leave the feudal lord only once a year, and the size of the “elderly” was even slightly increased. In 1581, reserved years were introduced for the first time, prohibiting the transition of a peasant from one feudal lord to another during a certain period of time. year.;

> church; In 1551, on the initiative of Ivan IV, a church council was held, which went down in history as the Hundred-Glavy Council, since the final document contained exactly 100 chapters. He compiled a pantheon (list) of all Russian saints, checked church books, unified worship and all church rituals, and decided to open schools for the training of priests and deacons. The council set the task of improving the morals of the clergy: monks were forbidden to drink vodka, they were allowed to drink kvass and grape wines, and shaving beards was condemned.

The council did not allow the tsar to confiscate church lands, but the monasteries themselves could sell or acquire lands only with the tsar's permission, and they were also prohibited from usurious activities.

> reforms of central and local governments. In the mid-50s, a lip reform was carried out. Power in the districts passed to provincial and zemstvo elders. They obeyed the Robbery Order. The system of “feeding” governors was abolished (1555), it was replaced by a national tax, from which the salaries of service people were paid. A restriction on localism was introduced. The reforms strengthened public administration, the military system, and significantly contributed to centralization. All transformations were aimed primarily at strengthening the power of the state and royal power.

A. On the eve of the oprichnina

1. Public administration reforms of the 50s strengthened the central government and undermined the political power of the boyars. The tsar, who was assisted by the Boyar Duma and the Zemsky Sobor, had the highest power, which limited the autocracy. In 1560, Ivan IV got rid of the Chosen Rada. But long and difficult wars, new taxes ruined the country, there were many dissatisfied among the nobles, priests and townspeople. Heretics called for the destruction of icons and the church itself; they preached the equality of all people and the community of property. Ivan Vasilyevich himself saw only slaves in all his subjects. Their duty, according to the king, was unquestioning submission to his will. In 1553, Ivan IV became seriously ill and made a will in favor of the infant Dmitry (the first son born from Anastasia). However, close boyars and many appanage princes did not want to support his heir Dmitry. According to rumors, they wanted "to the state" the Staritsky prince Vladimir Andreevich, the cousin of Ivan IV. The Tsar recovered, but his peace of mind was broken. The Tsar was afraid of Prince Vladimir Staritsky, who had great authority in the country. In addition, many boyars, having large estates , retained economic independence. In 1564, fearing execution, a former friend of Ivan IV, Prince Andrei Kurbsky, fled to Lithuania. The Tsar looked for treason everywhere, executed boyars. A very tense situation was created in the country. Then Ivan IV undertakes a major political maneuver: he decided voluntarily leave the throne and leave the reigning city of Moscow.

B. Events of early January 1565

1. At the beginning of December 1564, the tsar and his family, guarded and accompanied by a huge convoy, left Moscow for Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. In January 1565, Ivan sent two letters: the first, “angry” letter was addressed to Metropolitan Athanasius, the second, “tearful”, “to the posad, to all people” and was read “in the assembly of the people in a loud voice.” In the first message, the tsar accused the boyars and officials of treason, and the metropolitan and clergy of malicious complicity with the boyars; in another message, he assured the townspeople that he was not angry with them and would not subject them to disgrace. The boyars found themselves, as it were, between two fires - the king and the people. The people unanimously supported the sovereign. Boyars, clergy, nobles, officials, merchants and townspeople sent a delegation to Alexandrovskaya Sloboda to ask the sovereign to return to the throne. Ivan IV agreed to return to Moscow, but under certain conditions. In general terms, they boiled down to the fact that from now on the tsar would, at his own discretion, execute traitors “by disgrace, death, deprivation of dignity”...

B. Oprichnina politics 1565-1572.

1. On February 2, 1565, Ivan Vasilyevich solemnly returned to Moscow and the next day announced to the clergy and noble boyars the establishment of the oprichnina. Voprichnina (from the word “oprich” - except, especially), subject to the tsar (royal inheritance), included lands that included 20 cities in the central and richest regions of the country. It had its own Boyar Duma, orders, oprichnina army. The rest of the territory was called zemshchina , the old order was preserved in it, led by the boyars. Even Moscow was divided into the oprichnina (Arbat, Prechistenka, Znamenka) and the zemshchina. From the oprichnina, patrimonial boyars, nobles and officials were forcibly evicted if they did not voluntarily register as oprichniki; all this was accompanied robberies, murders by the oprichniki. Oprichnina opponents were destroyed: 200 deputies of the Zemsky Sobor of 1566, Metropolitan Efim Kolychev, the richest boyar Ivan Fedorov, the famous diplomat Ivan Viskovaty were executed, Prince Vladimir Staritsky and many, many others were poisoned.

2. The lands seized from the boyars were distributed to the guardsmen-nobles and feudal nobility, loyal to the tsar. A special oprichnina army was created, first from one thousand, then it was brought to five thousand people. When the first thousand guardsmen were selected, in the presence of the metropolitan, all the Kremlin clergy and boyars, they swore an oath to be faithful to the sovereign Grand Duke and his state, to eradicate “sedition” and report everything bad that was being plotted against the tsar and his state. The guardsmen were attached to their saddles the horses had dog heads and brooms, which symbolized their canine devotion to the Tsar and their determination to sweep away any treason.The guardsmen turned into the police force of the state, those suspected of treason were tortured and executed.

3. Fratricide in the country caused discontent and vague rumors among the people. At this time, a “normative” denunciation appeared that the Novgorodians were plotting treason and wanted to “surrender” to the rule of the Principality of Lithuania. In 1570, under the pretext of fighting treason, a punitive expedition was carried out against

In 1572, Ivan the Terrible abolished the oprichnina and forbade even mentioning this word, hated by the people. The oprichnina and zemstvo territories, the oprichnina and zemstvo troops, the oprichnina and zemstvo service people were reunited. The unity of the Boyar Duma was restored. Some zemstvo boyars received their estates back, but executions continued long after the abolition of the oprichnina.

reason contributed to the development of the despotic nature of the Russian autocracy; in fact, it turned both feudal lords and peasants into slaves;

> the country's economy was undermined, many lands were devastated, peasants fled from fiefdoms and estates. In 1581, Ivan the Terrible introduced “reserved years” - temporarily prohibited peasants from leaving the feudal lord even on St. George’s Day, i.e. serfdom was temporarily introduced in Russia;

> oprichnina policies led to a worsening of Russia’s position in the Livonian War

Answer to question 11: Troubles: 16th-early 17th century. Causes. Main stages. Consequences.

The origin of the Time of Troubles is associated with the extinction of the Rurik dynasty. The son of Ivan IV Fedor (1584–1598) was incapable of governing the state. He died childless, his younger brother, young Dmitry, died under very mysterious circumstances in Uglich in 1591. The dynasty of the descendants of Ivan Kalita came to an end. The question of succession to the throne was decided by the Zemsky Sobor, which elected the brother-in-law of the deceased tsar, boyar Boris Godunov (1598–1605), to the kingdom. This was the first time in the history of the Moscow kingdom. Before Godunov, not a single tsar had been elected, so it seems natural that the new tsar would strive in every possible way to emphasize his connection with the previous dynasty. He even used an obvious fiction about the will of Ivan IV, who allegedly “denied” the Moscow throne to Godunov. Godunov’s internal policy, reformist in content, was aimed at stabilizing the situation in the country, brought to a state of crisis by the oprichnina

An improvement in the economic situation was only just beginning, but the way out of the crisis was going through serfdom. To keep the peasants on the lands of the previous owners, according to the assumption of a number of researchers, in 1592 a decree was issued banning peasant crossings, and in 1597 a decree “on scheduled flights” was issued: the owner’s right to search for fugitives for five years. All this increased discontent among the peasantry. And then came crop failures and a terrible famine of 1601–1603.

Intra-class disagreements between different layers of the boyars, between the Moscow and provincial nobility, intensified, since the latter was denied access to the real governance of the country. In the struggle for influence in the army, the interests of the nobility and the Cossacks collided. In the end, everyone was unhappy. Added to this was the people’s idea that power in the country should belong to the “natural king”, a representative of the Rurik dynasty. Thus, the dynastic crisis with iron necessity gave rise to imposture. The impostor turned into an expected hero, capable of saving the people from oppression and social injustice. Various socio-political forces in the country will use impostors for their own purposes. Imposture will become a convenient form of organizing a mass anti-government movement. The first of the impostors, “the fugitive monk of the Chudov Monastery, the “defrocked” Grishka Otrepiev,” will declare himself the son of Ivan IV Dmitry, who supposedly survived by a miracle. The death of Boris Godunov in April 1605 also helped the impostor. Already in May, the governors recognized the impostor as the legitimate tsar; a significant part of the army followed their example, then the Moscow boyars. On June 20, 1605, he solemnly entered Moscow. Even before this, all the relatives of Boris Godunov were killed, including his son Fedor, who succeeded him.

Why did the man who came to the Russian state surrounded by foreigners and people of other faiths – “Latins” and the Cossacks, unpopular in the Moscow possessions – win?

The main reasons for the victory of False Dmitry I are as follows:

1. A social crisis from which no way out was found.

2. Weak legitimation of Godunov’s power, which resulted in the unpopularity of himself and his family, doubt about the legitimacy of his son Fedor to the throne.

3. The people’s faith in the “good king”, including faith in the story of the prince’s miraculous salvation, which ultimately turned into a people’s utopia, into a political intrigue.

4. Anti-Godudunov sentiments of part of the Moscow boyars, the majority of the capital's merchants and townspeople.

At the impromptu Zemsky Sobor, Prince Vasily Shuisky was “called out” by the tsar. For the first time in the history of Russia, he swore allegiance to his subjects - he gave a “record” (obligation), the observance of which he secured by kissing the cross. The “cross-record” contained obligations that gave subjects certain guarantees against arbitrariness. Of course, it must be borne in mind that this intriguer, who repaid the False Dmitry who pardoned him with a conspiracy, was guided by politicking considerations, nevertheless, this was “the first experience of building a state order on the basis of formally limited supreme power.” When False Dmitry II appeared within the Moscow kingdom, the country was divided: some were for Tsar Vasily, others were for the new pretender to the throne, who was located far from Moscow, in Tushino. Seeing no other way to deal with the Tushins, who were secretly supported by the Polish king Sigismund III, Vasily Shuisky turned to the Swedish king for help. He sent an auxiliary detachment. This became a convenient pretext for Poland to interfere in Russian affairs. In September 1609, Sigismund III besieged Smolensk. In December, False Dmitry II fled from the Tushino camp to Kaluga (there he would be killed by Prince Pyotr Urusov). In February 1610, the embassy led by boyar Mikhail Saltykov, disappointed in the “Tushino king,” concluded an agreement with the Polish king on the conditions for the accession of his son Vladislav to the Moscow throne. The document provided guarantees for Russia against absorption by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and reflected the personal rights of its subjects.

The idea of calling Prince Vladislav to the Russian throne also found its supporters in Moscow. Boyars and nobles overthrew Shuisky in July 1610 and forced him to become a monk. Power temporarily passed into the hands of a government of seven boyars (“seven boyars”), which decided to place Vladislav on the Russian throne. Some historians believe that in this way an opportunity arose to strengthen Russia’s ties with Europe, which was not realized due to the prince’s Catholic faith. Another point of view is that those boyars who swore allegiance to Vladislav and allowed Polish troops led by Hetman Gonsevsky into Moscow on the night of September 21, 1610, committed an act of national treason. The Time of Troubles was not so much a revolution as a severe shock to the life of Moscow states. Its first, immediate and most severe consequence was the terrible ruin and desolation of the country; In the inventories of rural areas under Tsar Michael, many empty villages are mentioned, from which the peasants “escaped” or “went to an unknown place,” or were beaten by “Lithuanian people” and “thieves.” In the social composition of society, the Time of Troubles produced a further weakening of the power and influence of the old noble boyars, who in the storms

During the Time of Troubles, some died or were ruined, and some morally degraded and discredited themselves with their intrigues, “pranks” and their alliance with the enemies of the state. In relation to the political, the Time of Troubles - when Russia, having gathered its strength, itself restored the destroyed state - showed with its own eyes that the Moscow state was not the creation and “patrimony” of its own

"master" - the sovereign, but was a common cause and a common creation of "all cities and all ranks of people of the entire great Russian Kingdom."

Answer to question 12: The first Romanovs on the Russian throne: Mikhail and Alexei Romanov.

The Romanov dynasty ruled Russia for 304 years. During this time, one of the strongest and most powerful states in the world arose - the Russian Empire. It was great not only for its territory, its natural and economic potential, but above all for its spiritual power, the highest culture and the remarkable rise of scientific thought. Representatives of the Romanov family made a huge contribution to the creation of this unique civilization. The election of the new Tsar by the Zemsky Sobor was very stormy. Seventeen-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich was crowned king in the summer of 1613. Kazan Metropolitan Ephraim crowned him with the royal crown. The gentleness and kindness of the new king, noted by the sources of that time, gave hope to ordinary people and made a good impression on them. True, everyone knew that without the boyars and their advice, Tsar Mikhail would not be able to take a step. Indeed, Tsar Mikhail entrusted all matters to the Romanovs, Cherkasskys, Saltykovs, Sheremetevs, Lykovs, and Repnins. They controlled everything, even “disdained” the king, and he turned a blind eye to all their tricks, tricks, untruthful deeds. Liveliness, covetousness, and greed reigned at court. In the summer of 1619, Mikhail Fedorovich’s father, Filaret, returned from Polish captivity. Upon arrival in the capital, a week and a half later, the Jerusalem Patriarch Theophan, who arrived in Russia for alms, and the Russian hierarchs offered Philaret the patriarchal throne - “he is worthy of such a rank, especially because he was a royal father in the flesh; let him be a helper and builder for the kingdom, a protector for the poor and a representative for the offended.” 1 Dual power began - the young Tsar and the wise Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', two “great sovereigns,” as they were called in official charters. Together with them, the Boyar Duma and the Zemsky Sobor participated in governing the state. Contemporaries report that the “great sovereigns” together listened to reports on cases, made decisions on them, received ambassadors, gave double charters, double gifts.

After the death of Filaret in 1633, Mikhail Fedorovich began to rule independently, relying on a narrow circle of trusted in-laws, in whose hands the leadership of the main orders was concentrated (Prince I. B. Cherkassky, boyar F. I. Sheremetev).

The military alliance with Sweden did not take place, the very idea of a war with Poland was unpopular in society. In June 1634, the Peace of Polyanovsky was concluded; the former border was declared “eternal”, and King Vladislav IV renounced his rights to the Russian throne. In the few sources that have survived, Mikhail Fedorovich appears as a benevolent, deeply religious person, prone to pilgrimage to monasteries. His favorite pastime is hunting, "animal trapping". His government activities were limited by poor health

ALEXEY MIKHAILOVICH, Russian Tsar from the Romanov dynasty. Took the throne in 1645 after the death of his father, Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich.

In the first years of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, the boyar B. I. Morozov (“uncle”, tutor of the tsar) actually disposed of the power. In 1646, duties on salt were introduced, as a result of which the products rose in price, became unavailable to the population, and merchants' stale goods rotted. In 1647, the tax was abolished, but in order to compensate for losses, they decided to reduce the salaries of service people. This caused the Salt Riot of 1648, during which the Tsar’s relatives L.S. Pleshcheev and P.T. Trakhaniotov died, and Morozov miraculously survived. The government was forced to make concessions, and the collection of arrears was stopped. In fulfillment of the wishes of the nobility and merchants, in September 1649 the Zemsky Sobor approved a set of laws - the Code, prepared by the commission of Prince N.I. Odoevsky, it is believed, with the participation of Alexei Mikhailovich. The Code, which represented a new level of legislative practice for Russia, included special articles that regulated the legal status of certain social groups of the population. The local salary of service people was increased, and additional allotments were introduced for impoverished landowners. According to the Code, the serfdom of peasants was established as hereditary, and the period for searching for runaway peasants was indefinite. Thus, the process of legislative registration of serfdom was completed. The forced conversion of peasants into slaves was prohibited. The demands of the townspeople, dissatisfied with the existence of the “white” settlements, were also satisfied, since they were included in the tax, which made life easier for the towns as a whole. The Code established the concept of a crime against the state, which included treason, conspiracy against the sovereign and criminal intent to harm the “state’s health.” Certain legal norms of the Council Code of 1649 continued to be in force until the beginning of the 19th century.

Under Alexei Mikhailovich, the strengthening of the autocratic, unlimited power of the tsar continued in the second half of the 17th century. Zemstvo councils were not convened, but the order system of administration reached its peak, and the process of its bureaucratization was intensively underway. A special role was played by the Secret Order established in 1654, subordinated directly to Alexei Mikhailovich and allowing him to manage other central and local institutions. Important changes took place in the social sphere: the process of rapprochement between the estate and the patrimony was underway, and the decomposition of the “service city” system began. The government of Alexei Mikhailovich supported the interests of the Russian merchants, the Customs (1653) and Novotorgovy (1667) Charters protected merchants from foreign competitors. A reflection of new trends in Russian life was the invitation to serve in Russia of foreign specialists, the creation of regiments of the "foreign system".

In the XIV century. foreign policy finally stood out as a specific and important sphere of state administration in Russia. There was an expansion of the volume of international information, a complication of diplomatic relations, and most importantly, foreign policy priorities and national-state interests of the country were determined.

The difficulty of including Russia in the international life of Europe and Asia lay in the fact that this happened in the era of the first stage in the formation of the world system. A core of advanced Western European states was formed. The network of international relations became denser, their efficiency and significance for the internal development of each state included in the system sharply increased. The structure and forms of international communication have become noticeably more complex.

Formulated in the last third of the 15th century. the goals of Russian diplomacy determined its activities over the next two or three centuries.

The main thing for Russia was the western direction. In 60-7 years. it did not come to war with Lithuania precisely because the priority goal of the Moscow Grand Duke was to suppress attempts by Lithuanian politicians to return to Vytautas’s eastern policy. The inclusion of Novgorod into a single state took almost 20 years: all this time, the figure of the Lithuanian Grand Duke loomed behind the anti-Moscow forces in Novgorod. Muscovite politicians rightly attributed to his actions the campaigns against Rus' by the Khan of the Great Horde, Akhmad, in 1472 and 1480.

The eastern direction of Moscow's policy came to the fore in 1480 - at a decisive moment in the struggle to eliminate dependence on the Golden Horde. Its characteristic detail is the active defensive position of Rus'. So far, there is no talk of a diplomatic or military offensive, Moscow is only repelling the invasion of Ahmad's army.

Moscow's politicians had to solve the problem with Kazan: there was a danger of frequent raids by Kazan troops, the task was to ensure conditions for the trade of Russian guests along the Volga. That is why Ivan III began to strengthen his direct influence in Kazan. The internecine struggle of the sons of the Kazan Khan Ibrahim in the mid-80s. XV century gave Moscow a reason to intervene. After the siege, Kazan was taken. The protege of Moscow, Muhammad-Emin, was placed on the khan's throne.

In the northern direction, the set of problems was reduced to border conflicts with Sweden, Livonia, Hansa, repelling periodic attacks by the Livonian Order, protecting the property and personal rights of Russian merchants who traded in Livonia, and protecting merchants and churches in Derpt, as well as in Kolyvan (Tallinn).

Moscow diplomats completed all these tasks. The events of 1473-1474 and 1480-1481 are especially significant. We are talking about major military actions of the Order against Pskov and Moscow's response. It is significant that the Moscow army did not even have time to start the campaign. Her mere appearance in Pskov in the late autumn of 1473 forced both the order authorities and the Derpt "Biskup" to start negotiations. The truce concluded in January 1474 (with the Order - for 20 years, with the bishopric - for 30 years) included a number of new articles that gave advantages to Pskov merchants (the right to retail and guest trade, etc.), and also confirmed the ownership of the disputed border territories of Pskov.

During the first Russian-Lithuanian war (1492-1494), the Moscow government managed to avoid the creation of an anti-Russian coalition in the west.

In September 1495, the Russian army headed from Novgorod to Vyborg. The siege began. The Swedish garrison was in a critical situation, but the fortress survived. Ivan III did not have the opportunity to solemnly enter the defeated city. Military operations continued. In the first months of 1496, Russian ratis passed with fire and sword through southern and partly central Finland, returning with a lot of booty. Later in the same year, a campaign took place in the northern and central regions of Finland.

At the beginning of 1497, a truce was signed for a period of six years. In half a century the Baltic question was to become central in Russian foreign policy. For now, other priorities have come to the fore. The main obstacle even in internal conflicts - whether we are talking about Novgorod, Tver, specific princes - was often Lithuania. Of course, the focus of Casimir and his numerous sons on the Central European thrones, the well-known substitution of the national-state interests of Poland and Lithuania by family-dynastic ones, restrained the activity of Lithuania's eastern policy.

Russia failed to create a broad anti-Lithuanian coalition. But something else is more important. In strategic terms, the active interaction of Rus' with Crimea, taking into account the almost constant Turkish pressure, turned out to be much more effective than the alliance of Lithuania with Ahmad, and after 1481 - with his sons. Casimir failed either to isolate Russia from the Crimean Khanate or to create an anti-Russian alliance in the Baltic states.

In May, Ivan III sent a messenger to Lithuania with a letter of marking: a new Russian-Lithuanian war had begun. International conditions at that time were less favorable for Russia than in the late 80s and early 90s. Moldavia came under the joint patronage of Poland and Lithuania (1499). The Jagiellonian relations with the Habsburgs were settled at that time. Moreover, Lithuania tried to create a broad anti-Russian coalition in the Baltic states. But this did not work out, just as it did not work out to lure the Crimean Khanate to the Lithuanian side.

The campaign of 1500 was carried out brilliantly. The Russian army operated in three directions. The southwestern group achieved its first great successes: Bryansk fell already in May, and the transition of S.I. Starodubsky and V.I. Shemyachich meant the transfer to Russia of almost a dozen fortresses between the Desna and Dnieper rivers.

The first success here was the capture of Dorogobuzh in the first half of June 1500. Then a large army led by Prince D.V. Shchenei moved into the area of action (it consisted of regiments from the entire Tver land and detachments from several central districts). On the banks of the Vedrosha River in mid-July, a decisive battle took place between the main forces of the Principality of Lithuania, led by Hetman Prince K. I. Ostrozhsky and the Russian army. The beginning of the battle remained with the Lithuanians: they managed to defeat the Russian advanced detachments. The opponents spent several days waiting and reconnaissance.

On July 14, the hetman went on the offensive, crossing the river. The battle lasted almost six hours and ended with the complete victory of the Russian army thanks to the skillful use of the ambush regiment. The hetman himself, many small and large Lithuanian military leaders, and ordinary nobles were captured (about 500 people); According to Russian data, several thousand Lithuanians were killed.

The spring and summer of 1501 brought new complications. The main one was the finally realized union of the Livonian Order and Lithuania: in accordance with the agreement, Master von Plettenberg planned a joint attack on Pskov. But military cooperation once again failed. Alexander had no time for war - in mid-June 1501, the Polish king (his brother) Jan Olbracht died, the Diet session was supposed to begin in August.

The Order did not achieve decisive success. Although the Livonians won an undoubted victory at the battle of Ssritsa at the end of August 1501, they did not achieve any real benefits. They were forced to abandon the captured fortress (Ostrov), Izborsk generally held out, and there was no longer any talk of a campaign against Pskov.

A retaliatory raid by Russian forces took place in the fall - the territory of the Dorpat bishopric was subjected to a severe pogrom. The battle of Helmed was most likely won by the army of Ivan III, but this did not have serious consequences. At the beginning of 1502, the master launched two attacks: one near Ivangorod, the second in the direction of Pskov. Neither one nor the other brought decisive success,

Actions on the Livonian front in September 1502 brought another setback to the Moscow army, but this did not change the overall picture. For various reasons, the parties sought to conclude peace. In the spring of 1503, a truce was concluded for six years with Lithuania and for the same period with the Livonian Order and the Bishopric of Dorpat. The last agreement almost completely restored the pre-war state of affairs. The truce with Lithuania practically secured all its Lithuanian acquisitions in Moscow.

It is difficult to overestimate the significance of the era of Ivan III in the foreign policy history of Russia. The country has become an important element of the Eastern and Northern European subsystem of states. "The western direction is becoming - and for a long time - leading in Russian diplomacy. The internal difficulties of the Principality of Lithuania were perfectly used by the Moscow government: the western border was pushed back more than a hundred kilometers, almost all of the Verkhovsky principalities and the Seversk land (captured at one time by Lithuania) crossed under Moscow's rule.

The Baltic issue became an important and independent part of Russian foreign policy: Russia sought guarantees of equal conditions - legal and economic - for the participation of Russian merchants in maritime trade. Relations with Italy, Hungary, and Moldova provided a powerful influx of specialists in various fields into the country and greatly expanded the horizon of cultural communication.

After eliminating dependence on the Golden Horde, Rus' objectively becomes the strongest state in the Volga basin in terms of economic, demographic and military potential. Her intentions are not limited by traditional boundaries. Following the Novgorodians of the XII-XIV centuries. detachments of Russian troops, artels of merchants and fishermen begin to develop the endless expanses of the Urals and Trans-Urals. The campaign to Ugra and the lands of the lower Ob in 1499 outlined the goals and guidelines of Moscow's expansion to the east. The emerging Russian state firmly entered into the complex system of international relations.