What were the reasons for the feudal fragmentation of Western Europe. Feudal fragmentation in Europe
Ministry of Sports of the Russian Federation Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Povolzhskaya GAFKSIT"
ABSTRACT
in history
TOPIC:Feudal fragmentation in Western
Europe
Completed:
Abdullin Nurzat Almazovich, student 4213z
Accepted:
Shabalina Yulia Vladimirovna
Kazan
1) Feudal fragmentation is a natural process.
2) Feudal fragmentation in Western Europe
A) Feudal fragmentation in England
b) Development of medieval Germany
c) The growth of Byzantine cities
d) Predatory campaign in Italy
e) Reasons for the fragmentation of Western Europe
f) War between feudal lords
g) Feudal ladder
h) Result
Introduction
As the ruling dynasty in early feudal states branched out, their territory expanded and the administrative apparatus, whose representatives exercised the power of the monarch over the local population, collecting tribute and troops, the number of contenders for central power increased, peripheral military resources increased, and the control capabilities of the center weakened. The supreme power becomes nominal, and the monarch begins to be elected by large feudal lords from among themselves, while the resources of the elected monarch, as a rule, are limited to the resources of his original principality, and he cannot pass on the supreme power by inheritance. In this situation, the rule “my vassal’s vassal is not my vassal” applies.
The first exceptions are England in the north-west of Europe (the Salisbury Oath of 1085, all feudal lords are direct vassals of the king) and Byzantium in its south-east (around the same time, Emperor Alexius I Komnenos forced the crusaders, who captured lands in the Middle East during the first crusade East, recognize vassal dependence on the empire, thereby including these lands into the empire and maintaining its unity). In these cases, all the lands of the state are divided into the domain of the monarch and the lands of his vassals, as in the next historical stage, when the supreme power is assigned to one of the princes, again begins to be inherited and the process of centralization begins (this stage is often called patrimonial monarchy).
The full development of feudalism became a prerequisite for the end of feudal fragmentation, since the overwhelming majority of the feudal stratum, its ordinary representatives, were objectively interested in having a single spokesman for their interests:
Feudal fragmentation is natural
process
In the history of the early feudal states of Europe in the X-XII centuries. are a period of political fragmentation. By this time, the feudal nobility had already become a privileged group, membership to which was determined by birth. The established monopoly ownership of land by feudal lords was reflected in the rules of law. “There is no land without a lord.” The majority of peasants found themselves in personal and land dependence on the feudal lords. Having received a monopoly on land, the feudal lords also acquired significant political power: transferring part of their land to vassals, the right of legal proceedings and minting money, maintaining their own military force, etc. In accordance with the new realities, a different hierarchy of feudal society is now taking shape, which has a legal basis: “My vassal’s vassal is not my vassal.” In this way, the internal cohesion of the feudal nobility was achieved, its privileges were protected from attacks by the central government, which by this time was weakening. For example, in France until the beginning of the 12th century. the king's real power did not extend beyond the domain, which was inferior in size to the possessions of many large feudal lords. The king, in relation to his direct vassals, had only formal suzerainty, and the major lords behaved completely independently. This is how the foundations of feudal fragmentation began to take shape. It is known that in the territory that collapsed in the middle of the 9th century. During the empire of Charlemagne, three new states arose: French, German and Italian (Northern Italy), each of which became the basis of an emerging territorial-ethnic community - a nationality. Then a process of political disintegration engulfed each of these new formations. So, on the territory of the French kingdom at the end of the 9th century. there were 29 possessions, and at the end of the 10th century. - about 50. But now these were mostly not ethnic, but patrimonial-seigneurial formations
Disintegration of early feudal territorial organization state power and the triumph of feudal fragmentation represented the completion of the process
the formation of feudal relations and the rise of feudalism in Western Europe. In its content, this was a natural and progressive process, due to the rise of internal colonization and the expansion of the area of cultivated land. Thanks to the improvement of tools, the use of animal draft power and the transition to three-field farming, land cultivation improved, industrial crops began to be cultivated - flax, hemp; new branches of agriculture appeared - viticulture, etc. As a result, peasants began to have surplus products that they could exchange for handicraft products, rather than making them themselves. The labor productivity of artisans increased, the equipment and technology of handicraft production improved. The artisan turned into a small commodity producer working for trade exchange. Ultimately, these circumstances led to the separation of craft from agriculture, the development of commodity-money relations, trade and the emergence of a medieval city. They became centers of crafts and trade. As a rule, cities in Western Europe arose on the land of a feudal lord and therefore inevitably obeyed him. The townspeople, the majority of whom were mainly former peasants, remained in land or personal dependence of the feudal lord. The desire of the townspeople to free themselves from such dependence led to a struggle between cities and lords for their rights and independence. This is a movement widely developed in Western Europe in the 10th-13th centuries. went down in history under the name of the “communal movement.” All rights and privileges won or acquired through ransom were included in the charter. By the end of the 13th century. many cities achieved self-government and became city-communes. Thus, about 50% of English cities had their own self-government, city council, mayor and their own court. Residents of such cities in England, Italy, France, etc. became free from feudal dependence. A runaway peasant who lived in the cities of the named countries for a year and one day became free. Thus, in the 13th century. a new class appeared - the townspeople - as an independent political force with its own status, privileges and liberties: personal freedom, jurisdiction of the city court, participation in the city militia. The emergence of estates that achieved significant political and legal rights was an important step towards the formation of estate-representative monarchies in the countries of Western Europe. This became possible thanks to the strengthening of central power, first in England, then in France. The development of commodity-money relations and the involvement of the countryside in this process undermined subsistence farming and created conditions for the development of the domestic market. The feudal lords, in an effort to increase their incomes, began to transfer lands to the peasants as hereditary holdings, reduced lordly plowing, encouraged internal colonization, willingly accepted runaway peasants, settled uncultivated lands with them, and provided them with personal freedom. The estates of feudal lords were also drawn into market relations. These circumstances led to a change in the forms of feudal rent, weakening, and then the complete elimination of personal feudal dependence. This process happened quite quickly in England, France, and Italy. .
Feudal fragmentation in Western Europe
Feudal fragmentation in England
The process of feudal fragmentation in the X-XII centuries. began to develop in England. This was facilitated by the transfer by royal power to the nobility of the right to collect feudal duties from peasants and their lands. As a result of this, the feudal lord (secular or ecclesiastical) who received such a grant becomes the full owner of the land occupied by the peasants and their personal master. The feudal lords' private property grew, they became economically stronger and sought greater independence from the king. The situation changed after England was conquered by the Norman Duke William the Conqueror in 1066. As a result, the country, which was heading towards feudal fragmentation, turned into a united state with a strong monarchical power. This is the only example on the European continent at this time.
The point was that the conquerors deprived many representatives of the former nobility of their possessions, carrying out a massive confiscation of land property. The actual owner of the land became the king, who transferred part of it as fiefs to his warriors and part of the local feudal lords who expressed their readiness to serve him. But these possessions were now in different parts England. The only exceptions were a few counties, which were located on the outskirts of the country and were intended for the defense of border areas. The scattered nature of feudal estates (130 large vassals had land in 2-5 counties, 29 in 6-10 counties, 12 in 10-21 counties), their private return to the king served as an obstacle to the transformation of barons into independent landowners, as it was, for example in France
Development of medieval Germany
The development of medieval Germany was characterized by a certain originality. Until the 13th century. it was one of the most powerful states in Europe. And then the process of internal political fragmentation begins to rapidly develop here, the country breaks up into a number of independent associations, while other Western European countries embarked on the path of state unity. The fact is that the German emperors, in order to maintain their power over their dependent countries, needed the military assistance of the princes and were forced to make concessions to them. Thus, if in other European countries the royal power deprived the feudal nobility of its political privileges, then in Germany the process of legislatively securing the highest state rights for the princes developed. As a result, imperial power gradually lost its position and became dependent on large secular and church feudal lords. . Moreover, in Germany, despite the rapid development already in the 10th century. cities (the result of the separation of crafts from agriculture), an alliance between royal power and cities did not develop, as was the case in England, France and other countries. Therefore, German cities were unable to play an active role in the political centralization of the country. And finally, in Germany, like England or France, a single economic center that could become the core of a political unification was not formed. Each principality lived separately. As the princely power strengthened, the political and economic fragmentation of Germany intensified.
Growth of Byzantine cities
In Byzantium by the beginning of the 12th century. The formation of the main institutions of feudal society was completed, a feudal estate was formed, and the bulk of the peasants were already in land or personal dependence. The imperial power, granting broad privileges to secular and ecclesiastical feudal lords, contributed to their transformation into all-powerful fiefs who had an apparatus of judicial-administrative power and armed squads. This was the payment of the emperors to the feudal lords for their support and service. The development of crafts and trade led to beginning of XII V. to the fairly rapid growth of Byzantine cities. But unlike Western Europe, they did not belong to individual feudal lords, but were under the authority of the state, which did not seek an alliance with the townspeople. Byzantine cities did not achieve self-government, like Western European ones. The townspeople, subjected to cruel fiscal exploitation, were thus forced to fight not with the feudal lords, but with the state. Strengthening the positions of feudal lords in the cities, establishing their control over trade and sales of manufactured products, undermined the well-being of merchants and artisans. With the weakening of imperial power, feudal lords became absolute rulers in the cities. . Increased tax oppression led to frequent uprisings that weakened the state. At the end of the 12th century. the empire began to fall apart. This process accelerated after the capture of Constantinople in 1204 by the Crusaders. The empire fell, and on its ruins the Latin Empire and several other states were formed. And although in 1261 the Byzantine state was restored again (this happened after the fall of the Latin Empire), its former power was no longer there. This continued until the fall of Byzantium under the attacks of the Ottoman Turks in 1453.
Predatory expedition to Italy
In the 10th century, German feudal lords, led by their king, began to carry out predatory campaigns in Italy. Having captured part of Italy with the city of Rome, the German king declared himself Roman emperor. The new state later became known as the “Holy Roman Empire.” But it was a very weak state. The large feudal lords of Germany did not obey the emperor. The population of Italy did not stop fighting the invaders. Each new German king had to make a campaign beyond the Alps in order to re-conquer the country. For several centuries in a row, German feudal lords plundered and ravaged Italy.
The states of Western Europe were not united. Each of them broke up into large feudal estates, which were split into many small ones. In Germany, for example, there were about 200 small states. Some of them were so small that they jokingly said: “The head of the ruler, when he goes to bed, lies on his land, and his legs have to be stretched into the possessions of his neighbor.” This was a time of feudal fragmentation in Western Europe
Reasons for the fragmentation of Western Europe
Why were the states of Western Europe fragmented? With a subsistence economy, there were and could not be strong trade ties between individual parts of the country; there were no ties even between individual estates. In each estate, the population lived its own isolated life and had little contact with people from other places. People spent almost their entire lives in their village. And there was no need for them to go anywhere: after all, everything they needed was produced locally.
Each fief was almost an independent state. The feudal lord had a detachment of warriors, collected taxes from the population, carried out trials and reprisals against them. He could himself declare war on other feudal lords and make peace with them. Whoever owned the land had power.
Large feudal lords - dukes and counts - had little regard for the king. They argued that the king was only “first among equals,” that is, they considered themselves no less noble than the king. Many large feudal lords themselves were not averse to seizing the royal throne.
The dominance of subsistence farming led to the fragmentation of the states of Western Europe. Royal power in the 9th - 10th centuries. was very weak.
War between feudal lords
During times of fragmentation, the feudal lords continuously fought among themselves. These wars were called internecine warriors 
.
Why did internecine wars break out? The feudal lords sought to take away each other's land along with the peasants who lived on it. The more serfs the feudal lord had, the stronger and richer he was, since serfs bore duties for the use of the land.
Wanting to undermine the strength of his enemy, the feudal lord ruined his peasants: he burned down villages, stole livestock, and trampled down crops.
The peasants suffered the most from internecine wars; The feudal lords could sit behind the strong walls of their castles.
Feudal staircase
In order to have his own military detachment, each feudal lord distributed part of the land with serfs to smaller feudal lords. The owner of the land was a seigneur (“senior”) in relation to these feudal lords, and those who received land from him were his vassals, that is, military servants. Taking possession of the fief, the vassal knelt before the lord and swore an oath of allegiance to him. As a sign of transfer, the feudal lord handed the vassal a handful of earth and a tree branch.
The king was considered the head of all feudal lords in the country. He was a lord for dukes and counts.
There were usually hundreds of villages in their domains, and they commanded large detachments of warriors.
One step below were barons - vassals of dukes and counts. Usually they owned two to three dozen villages and could field a detachment of warriors.
Barons were lords of small feudal lords - knights.
Thus, the same feudal lord was the lord of a smaller feudal lord and the vassal of a larger one. Vassals were supposed to obey only their lords. If they were not vassals of the king, they were not obliged to carry out his orders. This order was fixed by the rule: “ My vassal's vassal is not my vassal».
The relationship between feudal lords resembles a ladder, on the upper steps of which stand the largest feudal lords, and on the lower steps the small ones. This relationship is called feudal ladder
Peasants were not included in the feudal ladder. And the lords and vassals were feudal lords. All of them - from the petty knight to the king - lived by the labor of serfs.
The vassal was obliged, by order of his lord, to go on a campaign with him and bring a detachment of warriors. In addition, he was supposed to help the lord with advice and ransom him from captivity.
The lord defended his vassals from attacks by other feudal lords and from rebel peasants. If peasants rebelled in a knight’s village, he sent a messenger to the lord, and he and his detachment hurried to his aid.
When a war with another state began, the entire feudal ladder seemed to come into motion. The king called on dukes and counts to go on a campaign, they turned to the barons, who brought detachments of knights. This is how the feudal army was created. But the vassals often did not carry out the orders of their lords. In such cases, only force could force them to submit.
During the period of fragmentation, the feudal ladder was the organization of the feudal class. With its help, feudal lords fought wars and helped each other to keep the peasants subjugated.
Conclusion
Feudal fragmentation is a progressive phenomenon in the development of feudal relations. The collapse of early feudal empires into independent principalities-kingdoms was an inevitable stage in the development of feudal society, whether it concerned Rus' in Eastern Europe, France in Western Europe or the Golden Horde in the East. Feudal fragmentation was progressive because it was a consequence of the development of feudal relations, the deepening of the social division of labor, which resulted in the rise of agriculture, the flourishing of crafts, and the growth of cities. For the development of feudalism, a different scale and structure of the state was needed, adapted to the needs and aspirations of the feudal lords
References
Textbook. History of the Middle Ages. V.A. Vedyushkin. M "Enlightenment" 2009
2.History of the Middle Ages. M. Boytsov, R Shukurov. M.
"Miros", 1995
3.R.Yu.Viller A brief textbook on the history of the Middle Ages
Parts 1-2 M. School - Press, 1993
| reasons | process | manifestation | result |
| 1.Development of private land ownership | Transformation of land grants for military service into hereditary property. | "My vassal's vassal is not my vassal." The king's power extended over the territory of his own possessions - the royal domain. | The dependence of the feudal nobility on the central government weakened. |
| 2.Increasing dependence of peasants on feudal lords | Instead of a foot militia of communal peasants, a heavily armed knightly cavalry was created under Charles Martel. | The decline in the role of meetings of tribal nobility and free community members. distribution of land and peasants to knights (feudal lords) for lifelong ownership. | Consolidation of the peasants. Support for the monarch's power on the part of the once free community members weakened. |
| 3. Dominance of subsistence farming | Weak economic ties between parts of the feudal state. | "On my territory I am the king." In the structure of medieval society, townspeople were not distinguished as a separate class. | Feudal farms were economically self-sufficient. Trade was poorly developed. |
| 4.Cultural and ethnic differences | The peoples who were part of the Carolingian Empire spoke different languages, had different customs and traditions. | The desire for separation, opposition to the central government in the person of the monarch (separatism). | Verdun section 843 and the emergence of the kingdoms that gave rise to the modern European states of France, Italy and Germany. |
Feudal society in the Middle Ages
Questions and tasks
1. Define the concepts:
- “dynasty” [a series of monarchs descended from a common ancestor, succeeding each other on the throne by right of kinship];
- "feudal fragmentation" [period in history medieval Europe, which is characterized by the fragmentation of the state into large and small feudal estates];
- “hierarchy” [sequential arrangement of social strata or official ranks from lower to higher, in order of subordination];
- “feudal lord” [land owner, owner of a fief];
- “vassal” [a feudal lord who received land ownership (fief) from a lord and was obliged to perform military service];
- “estates” [social groups endowed with certain rights and responsibilities on the basis of state laws];
- “feudal society” [agrarian (pre-industrial) society of the Middle Ages, which is characterized by: a combination of land ownership of feudal lords with their subordinates peasant farming, corporatism, the dominance of religion in the spiritual sphere].
2. What influence did antiquity and barbarian peoples have on medieval civilization?
3. Prove that it was Christianity that became the basis of the medieval civilization that emerged in Europe.
4. Name the forms of interaction between the civilizations of the East and West in the Middle Ages.
5. If you had the opportunity to make a historical film about one of the famous battles in which representatives of different civilizations fought, which one would you choose? Justify your choice.
Historical figures
Hugo Capet
French king who lived around 940-996, founder of the Capetian dynasty.
Ancient Greek historian who lived around 484-425. BC founder of European historical science.
Homer
Ancient Greek philosopher who lived around 427-347. BC, creator of the ideal state project, student of Socrates.
Gladiator, leader of the largest slave revolt in Roman history; died in 701 BC
Roman commander statesman and a writer who lived 100-44. BC; conqueror of Gaul, established his own dictatorship in Rome.
Aeschylus
Ancient Greek poet-playwright who lived 525-456. BC, one of the main representatives of ancient tragedy.
An ancient Greek physician who lived around 460-370. BC, reformer of ancient times and founder of European medicine.
King of the Franks, emperor (from 800), who lived in 742-814, creator of a vast empire in Western Europe.
Karl Martel
The Frankish majordomo, who lived from 686-741, defeated the Arabs at the Battle of Poitiers, which put an end to their expansion into Europe.
Italian political thinker who lived in 1469-1527, historian, author of the books “History of Florence”, “The Prince”.
Ancient Chinese sage, founder of Confucianism, who lived c. 551-479 BC; his teaching had a huge impact on Chinese civilization, the formation of the national character and value system of the Chinese.
An ancient Chinese sage, founder of Taoism, who lived in the 6th century. BC; his teaching had a huge impact on Chinese civilization, the formation of the national character and value system of the Chinese.
The period of feudal fragmentation is a natural stage in the progressive development of feudalism. Dismemberment of the early feudal grandiose empires (Kievan Rus or the Carolingian Empire in Central Europe) into a number of virtually sovereign states was an inevitable stage in the development of feudal society.
Back in the 4th century. (395) The Roman Empire broke up into two independent parts - Western and Eastern. The capital of the Eastern part became Constantinople, founded by Emperor Constantine on the site of the former Greek colony Byzantium. Byzantium was able to withstand the storms of the so-called “great migration of peoples” and survived after the fall of Rome (in 1410 the Visigoths took Rome after a long siege) as the “Roman Empire.” In the VI century. Byzantium occupied vast territories of the European continent (even Italy was briefly conquered). Throughout the Middle Ages, Byzantium maintained a strong centralized state.
The overthrow of Romulus Augustine (1476) is generally considered to be the end of the Western Roman Empire. On its ruins, numerous “barbarian” states arose: the Ostrogothic (and then Lombard) in the Apennines, the Visigothic kingdom on the Iberian Peninsula, the Anglo-Saxon kingdom in Britain, the Frankish state on the Rhine, etc.
The Frankish leader Clovis and his successors expanded the borders of the state, pushed back the Visigoths and soon became hegemons in Western Europe. The position of the empire strengthened even more under the Carolingians (VIII-IX centuries). However, behind the external centralization of Charlemagne's empire, its internal weakness and fragility was hidden. Created by conquest, it was very variegated in its ethnic composition: it included the Saxons, Frisians, Alamans, Thuringians, Lombards, Bavarians, Celts and many other peoples. Each of the lands of the empire had little connection with the others and, without constant military and administrative coercion, did not want to submit to the power of the conquerors.
This form of empire - outwardly centralized, but internally an amorphous and fragile political unification, gravitating towards universalism - was characteristic of many of the largest early feudal states in Europe.
The collapse of the empire of Charlemagne (after the death of his son Louis the Pious) in the 40s of the 9th century. and the formation of France, Germany and Italy on its basis meant the beginning new era in the development of Western Europe.
X-XII centuries are a period of feudal fragmentation in Western Europe. There is an avalanche-like process of fragmentation of states: The feudal state in Western Europe in the X-XII centuries. exists in the form of small political entities- principalities, duchies, counties, etc., which had significant political power over their subjects, sometimes completely independent, sometimes only nominally united under the authority of a weak king.
Many cities of Northern and Central Italy - Venice, Genoa, Siena, Bologna, Ravenna, Lucca, etc. - in the 9th-12th centuries. became city-states. Many cities in Northern France (Amiens, Soussan, Laon, etc.) and Flanders also became self-governing commune states. They elected the council, its head - the mayor, had their own court and militia, their own finances and taxes. Often the city-communes themselves acted as a collective lord in relation to the peasants living in the territory surrounding the city.
In Germany, a similar position was occupied in the 12th-13th centuries. the largest of the so-called imperial cities. Formally they were subordinate to the emperor, but in reality they were independent city republics (Lübeck, Nuremberg, Frankfurt am Main, etc.). They were governed by city councils, had the right to independently declare war, conclude peace and alliances, mint coins, etc.
A distinctive feature of the development of Germany during the period of feudal fragmentation was the predominance of the territorial principle over the tribal principle in its political organization. In place of the old tribal duchies, about 100 principalities appeared, over 80 of which were spiritual. Territorial princes took the place of tribal dukes in the feudal hierarchy, forming the class of imperial princes - direct lenients of the crown. Many German imperial princes in the 12th century. found themselves in vassal dependence on foreign sovereigns (sometimes even from several states).
In general, the period of feudal fragmentation was a period of economic growth in Europe. In the X-XII centuries. The feudal system in Western Europe took on a pan-European character and was experiencing a time of takeoff: the growth of cities, commodity production, and the deepened division of labor turned commodity-money relations into most important factor public life. Clearing for arable land was accompanied by deforestation and reclamation work (Lombardy, Holland).
The secondary landscape has increased; The area of marshes has decreased. Mining and metallurgical production experienced a qualitative leap: in Germany, Spain, Sweden, and England, mining and metallurgical industries grew into independent, special industries. Construction is also on the rise. In the 12th century. The first water supply system with sewerage elements is being built in Troyes. Production of mirrors begins (Venice). New mechanisms are being created in weaving, mining, construction, metallurgy and other crafts. So, in Flanders in 1131 the first loom appeared modern look etc. There was an increase in foreign and domestic trade.
On the other hand, the increase in the needs of the feudal lords in connection with the development of the market not only led to an increase in the exploitation of the peasantry, but also increased the desire of the feudal lords to seize other people's lands and wealth. This gave rise to many wars, conflicts, and clashes. Many feudal lords and states found themselves drawn into them (due to the complexity and interweaving of vassal ties). State borders were constantly changing. More powerful sovereigns sought to subjugate others, making claims to world dominion, and tried to create a universalist (comprehensive) state under their hegemony. The main bearers of universalist tendencies were the Roman popes, Byzantine and German emperors.
Only in the XIII-XV centuries. In the countries of Western Europe, the process of centralization of the state begins, which gradually takes the form of an estate monarchy. Here, relatively strong royal power is combined with the presence of class-representative assemblies. The process of centralization took place most rapidly in the following Western European states: England, France, Castile, and Aragon.
In Rus', the period of feudal fragmentation began in the 30s of the 12th century. (dies in 1132 Grand Duke Kyiv Mstislav, son of Vladimir Monomakh; under 1132, the chronicler wrote: “And the whole Russian land was angry...”). In place of a single state, sovereign principalities began to live an independent life, equal in scale to Western European kingdoms. Novgorod and Polotsk became isolated earlier than others; followed by Galich, Volyn and Chernigov, etc. The period of feudal fragmentation in Rus' continued until the end of the 15th century.
Within this more than three-century period of time there was a clear and difficult line - Tatar invasion 1237-1241, after which the foreign yoke sharply disrupted the natural course of the Russian historical process and greatly slowed it down.
Feudal fragmentation became a new form of statehood in the conditions of rapid growth of productive forces and was largely due to this development. Tools were improved (scientists count more than 40 types of them made of metal alone); Arable farming became established. Cities became a major economic force (there were about 300 of them in Rus' at that time). The connections with the market of individual feudal estates and peasant communities were very weak. They sought to satisfy their needs as much as possible using internal resources. Under the dominance of subsistence farming, it was possible for each region to separate from the center and exist as independent lands.
The local boyars of many thousands received recent years existence Kievan Rus Extensive Russian Truth, which determined the norms of feudal law. But the book on parchment, stored in the grand ducal archive in Kyiv, did not contribute to the real implementation of boyar rights. Even the strength of the grand ducal virniks, swordsmen, and governors could not really help the distant provincial boyars of the outskirts of Kievan Rus. Zemsky boyars of the 12th century. they needed their own, close, local government, which would be able to quickly implement the legal norms of the Truth, help in clashes with the peasants, and quickly overcome their resistance.
Feudal fragmentation was (as paradoxical as it may seem at first glance!) the result not so much of differentiation as of historical integration. Feudalism grew in breadth and was strengthened locally (under the dominance of subsistence farming); feudal relations were formalized (vassal relations, immunity, right of inheritance, etc.).
The optimal scale and geographical boundaries for feudal integration of that time were developed by life itself, even on the eve of the formation of Kievan Rus - “tribal unions”: Polyans, Drevlyans, Krivichi, Vyatichi, etc. - Kievan Rus collapsed in the 30s. XII century into one and a half dozen independent principalities, more or less similar to one and a half dozen ancient tribal unions. The capitals of many principalities were at one time centers of tribal unions (Kyiv near the Polyans, Smolensk among the Krivichi, etc.). Tribal unions were a stable community that took shape over centuries; their geographical limits were determined by natural boundaries. During the existence of Kievan Rus, cities that competed with Kiev developed here; the clan and tribal nobility turned into boyars.
The order of occupation of the throne that existed in Kievan Rus, depending on seniority in the princely family, gave rise to a situation of instability and uncertainty. The transfer of the prince by seniority from one city to another was accompanied by the movement of the entire domain apparatus. To resolve personal disputes, the princes invited foreigners (Poles, Cumans, etc.). The temporary stay of the prince and his boyars in one or another land gave rise to increased, “hasty” exploitation of peasants and artisans. New forms of political organization of the state were needed, taking into account the existing balance of economic and political forces.
Feudal fragmentation became such a new form of state-political organization. In the centers of each of the principalities, their own local dynasties formed: Olgovichi - in Chernigov, Izyaslavich - in Volyn, Yuryevich - in the Vladimir-Suzdal land, etc. Each of the new principalities fully satisfied the needs of the feudal lords: from any capital of the 12th century. it was possible to ride to the border of this principality in three days. Under these conditions, the norms of Russian Truth could be confirmed by the sword of the ruler in a timely manner. The calculation was also made on the prince's interest - to transfer his reign to his children in good economic condition, to help the boyars, who helped to settle here.
Each of the principalities kept its own chronicle; the princes issued their statutory charters. In general, the initial phase of feudal fragmentation (before the factor of conquest intervened in normal development) was characterized by the rapid growth of cities and the vibrant flowering of culture in the 12th - early 13th centuries. in all its manifestations. New political form contributed to progressive development, created conditions for the expression of local creative forces (each principality has its own architectural style, their artistic and literary directions).
Let us also pay attention to the negative aspects of the era of feudal fragmentation:
A clear weakening of the overall military potential, facilitating foreign conquest. However, a caveat is needed here too. Authors of the book “History of the Russian State. Historical and bibliographical essays” pose the question: “Would the Russian early feudal state be able to resist the Tatars? Who will dare to answer in the affirmative? The forces of only one of the Russian lands - Novgorod - a little later turned out to be enough to defeat the German, Swedish and Danish invaders by Alexander Nevsky. In the person of the Mongol-Tatars, there was a clash with a qualitatively different enemy.
Internecine wars. But even in a single state (when it came to the struggle for power, for the grand ducal throne, etc.), princely strife was sometimes more bloody than during the period of feudal fragmentation. The goal of strife in the era of fragmentation was already different than in a single state: not the seizure of power in the entire country, but the strengthening of one’s principality, the expansion of its borders at the expense of its neighbors.
Increasing fragmentation of princely possessions: in mid-XII V. there were 15 principalities; at the beginning of the 13th century. (on the eve of Batu’s invasion) - about 50, and in the 14th century. (when the unification process of the Russian lands had already begun), the number of great and appanage principalities reached approximately 250. The reason for such fragmentation was the division of the princes' possessions between their sons: as a result, the principalities became smaller, weakened, and the results of this spontaneous process gave rise to ironic sayings among contemporaries (“In the Rostov land - a prince in every village”; “In the Rostov land, seven princes have one warrior,” etc.). Tatar-Mongol invasion 1237-1241 found Rus' a flourishing, rich and cultural country, but already affected by the “rust” of feudal appanage fragmentation.
In each of the allocated principalities-lands on initial stage During the feudal fragmentation, similar processes took place:
The growth of the nobility (“youths”, “children”, etc.), palace servants;
Strengthening the positions of the old boyars;
The growth of cities - a complex social organism of the Middle Ages. The union of artisans and merchants in cities into “brotherhoods”, “communities”, corporations close to the craft guilds and merchant guilds of the cities of Western Europe;
Development of the church as an organization (dioceses in the 12th century coincided territorially with the borders of the principalities);
Increasing contradictions between the princes (the title “Grand Duke” was borne by the princes of all Russian lands) and the local boyars, the struggle between them for influence and power.
In each principality, due to the peculiarities of its historical development, its own balance of forces developed; its own special combination of the elements listed above appeared on the surface.
Thus, the history of Vladimir-Suzdal Rus' is characterized by the victory of the grand ducal power over the landed aristocracy by the end of the 12th century. The princes here were able to suppress the separatism of the boyars, and power was established in the form of a monarchy.
In Novgorod (and later in Pskov), the boyars were able to subjugate the princes and established boyar feudal republics.
In the Galicia-Volyn land, there was extremely intense rivalry between the princes and local boyars, and there was a kind of “balance of power.” The boyar opposition (moreover, constantly relying either on Hungary or on Poland) failed to transform the land into a boyar republic, but significantly weakened the grand ducal power.
A special situation has developed in Kyiv. On the one hand, he became first among equals. Soon, some Russian lands caught up and even ahead of him in their development. On the other hand, Kyiv remained an “apple of discord” (they joked that there was not a single prince in Rus' who did not want to “sit” in Kyiv). Kyiv was “conquered,” for example, by Yuri Dolgoruky, the Vladimir-Suzdal prince; in 1154 he achieved the Kyiv throne and sat on it until 1157. His son Andrei Bogolyubsky also sent regiments to Kyiv, etc. Under such conditions, the Kiev boyars introduced a curious system of “duumvirate” (co-government), which lasted throughout the second half of the 12th century.
The meaning of this original measure was as follows: at the same time, representatives of two warring branches were invited to the Kyiv land (an agreement was concluded with them - a “row”); Thus, relative balance was established and strife was partially eliminated. One of the princes lived in Kyiv, the other in Belgorod (or Vyshgorod). They went on military campaigns together and conducted diplomatic correspondence in concert. So, the duumvirs-co-rulers were Izyaslav Mstislavich and his uncle, Vyacheslav Vladimirovich; Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich and Rurik Mstislavich.
Feudal fragmentation in Europe occurred during the early Middle Ages. The king's power became formal; he retained it only within his domain.
- Internecine wars of feudal lords
- What have we learned?
- Evaluation of the report
Bonus
- Test on the topic
Relations between the king and the feudal lords during the period of fragmentation
The duties of the feudal lords included military service for the benefit of the king and the state, the payment of monetary contributions in a number of cases, as well as submission to the decisions of the king. However, starting from the 9th century, the fulfillment of these duties began to depend solely on the goodwill of the vassals, who often did not show it.
Causes of feudal fragmentation
The prerequisites for this process were the death of Charlemagne and the division of the possessions under his hand between his sons, who were unable to retain power.
As for the reasons for the feudal fragmentation of European countries, they lay in weak trade ties between the lands - they could not develop in a subsistence economy. Each estate owned by a feudal lord fully provided itself with everything necessary - there was simply no need to go to neighbors for anything. Gradually, the estates became more and more isolated, so that each fief became almost a state.
Rice. 1. Feudal estate.
Gradually, large feudal lords, dukes and counts, ceased to reckon with the king, who often had less land and property. An expression appears that states that the king is only the first among equals.
TOP 4 articleswho are reading along with this
The second reason was that each feudal lord had his own army, which meant that he did not need the king's protection. Moreover, this king called vassals under his banners when he needed protection.
Internecine wars of feudal lords
The formation of feudal relations took place in the conditions of constant wars between nobles, because whoever had the land had more power. In an effort to take away both land and peasants from each other in order to become stronger and richer, the feudal lords were in a state of permanent war. Its essence was to capture as much territory as possible and at the same time prevent another feudal lord from capturing his own.
Rice. 2. Capture of a medieval castle.
Gradually, this led to the fact that there were more and more small feudal estates - even a comic expression about land-poor nobles appeared. It was said that such a feudal lord, when he goes to bed, touches the borders of his possessions with his head and feet. And if it turns over, it could end up with a neighbor.
The results of feudal fragmentation
This was a difficult period in the history of Western Europe. On the one hand, thanks to the weakening of the power of the center, all lands began to develop, on the other hand, there were numerous negative consequences.
Thus, wanting to weaken their neighbor, each feudal lord who started an internecine war first of all burned crops and killed peasants, which did not contribute to economic growth - the estates gradually fell into disrepair. Even sadder results of feudal fragmentation in Europe were observed from the point of view of the state: the endless fragmentation of lands and civil strife weakened the country as a whole and made it easy prey.
Rice. 3. Map of Europe during the period of feudal fragmentation.
Name exactly the year when this period European history ended, it is impossible, but around the 12th-13th centuries the process of centralization of states began again.
What have we learned?
What were the causes of feudal fragmentation and what results did it lead to? What was the essence of this phenomenon, what kind of relationships connected the king and the feudal lords during this period, as well as the reasons for which internecine wars were constantly waged. The main results of this period were the economic decline of feudal estates and the weakening European countries generally.
Test on the topic
Evaluation of the report
Average rating: 4.7. Total ratings received: 165.
