Feudal fragmentation is a period in Russian history when the state was fragmented into many principalities. The period of weakening of the power of the center was characteristic not only for Russia, but also for the whole of medieval Europe. As many historians note, fragmentation is a natural process during the formation and development of the state. The pros and cons of feudal fragmentation are also noted, because, like any other historical process, the weakening of centralization has positive and negative consequences for the state and citizens.
Features of feudal fragmentation in Russia
The beginning of feudal fragmentation is considered to be the death of Prince Mstislav, the son of the famous ruler of Kievan Rus Vladimir Monomakh. The conventional date for the decentralization of land is considered to be 1132. However, fragmentation is a complex evolutionary historical process, the prerequisites for which have evolved over decades.
Feudal fragmentation in Russia was different from European. In the West, there was the principle of succession to the throne, when power passed directly from father to son. In Russia, there was a ladder law, which suggested that power passed to the eldest in the family. This feature generated constant feuds between the brothers and sons of the deceased prince. The first clashes between the Kiev princes in the struggle for the throne occurred after the death of Svyatoslav in 972. However, then civil strife was overcome.
Causes of fragmentation in Russia
The reasons for the decentralization of the Russian state can be divided into several categories.
1. Economic.
- The lack of economic ties between the regions of the country allowed the principalities to conduct independent economic activity. Kiev ceased to be the economic center of the country.
- Cities grew, new points of trade with other states appeared.
2. Socio-political.
- Constant internecine wars led to the weakening of central authority.
- The weak center contributed to the strengthening of the role of local princes, the dualism of power was taking shape.
- Active growth of the estates of the boyars in individual principalities.
3. External causes
- In the XII century, at the time of the beginning of feudal fragmentation, there was no serious external enemy. This contributed to the decentralization of power.
Territorial division during the period of fragmentation
During the period of feudal fragmentation, the territories of the former Kievan Rus were divided into separate independent principalities, each of them headed by its own prince. The quantitative composition of the principalities changed due to ongoing feuds. By the middle of the XII century, about 15 specific territories were recorded. At the beginning of the period of the Mongol invasion in Russia, there were about 50 independent principalities, and during the collection of Russian lands 250.
Principality as an independent territory
The princedoms during the period of feudal fragmentation were separate quasi-states with their own economy, culture and social life. Based on this independence, historians distinguish various pros and cons of feudal fragmentation as a process of decentralization of the state. By the beginning of the process of disunity, the largest principalities were the Vladimir-Suzdal, Galicia-Volyn and Novgorod Republic.
Pros and cons of feudal fragmentation
Like any major historical process, the period of specific principalities in Russia has a number of advantages and disadvantages. In order to most clearly demonstrate these characteristics, it is necessary to consider a comparative table on feudal fragmentation.
pros | Minuses |
Simplified management system: it is much easier to manage one principality than the whole state | Weakening external defenses |
The rapid development of the cultural and economic characteristics of each individual principality | The constant feuds between the princes contributed to the ruin of the land |
The growth of new cities and the development of new lands | Decline in the international authority of Russia |
Active creation of cultural monuments and heritage | The throne of Kiev lost its primacy and significance |
| The uneven development of land due to the geographical inaccessibility of individual principalities to trade routes |
Thus, using a comparative analysis of the pros and cons of feudal fragmentation, we can conclude that the period of specific principalities had more negative consequences for the development of the state.
The Principality of Vladimir-Suzdal as a center for collecting land
Due to geographical and resource unevenness, there was an inequality in the development of specific lands. The most successful historians call the Vladimir-Suzdal principality, which subsequently will initiate the process of centralization of Russia.
Yuri Dolgoruky is the main accomplice in strengthening the Vladimir-Suzdal principality. Specific land achieved the greatest success under his son Andrei Bogolyubsky. The territory did not have a strong resource and climatic potential, and it was required to use a power tool to strengthen power. In accordance with this principle, Andrei Bogolyubsky began the implementation of his policy. He executed the local nobility, which refused to obey the prince. Subsequently, Bogolyubsky suffered from his actions and was killed in the boyar conspiracy.
Vladimir-Suzdal land had a convenient geopolitical position. It was located far from the territories of the nomads who escaped to Russia and ruined it. In this regard, there was a constant influx of population into these lands. As a result, the labor force and economy of the principality grew.