Table of contents:
- Why Novgorod and Moscow were different
- Novgorod conspiracy, mutiny and the end of the republic
- Is the absorption by Moscow a tragedy or a blessing?
- Pogroms, disasters and irrevocable loss of the Novgorod spirit
Video: End of the Novgorod Republic: Was the annexation to Moscow a boon or a ruin for Novgorod culture
2024 Author: Richard Flannagan | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-15 23:55
Veliky Novgorod remained in history the oldest large settlement in Russia with a solid economic and cultural level for that period. The Novgorodians carried on a lively trade with Western Europe through Hanseatic intermediaries. The northern possessions of Novgorod extended to the Kola Peninsula, the eastern ones to the Urals. For all their apparent power, the Novgorodians did not have their own powerful army, being inferior in strength to Moscow. For more than a thousand-year history of Veliky Novgorod, this was the cause of the bloody events of the 16th century.
Why Novgorod and Moscow were different
Novgorod differed from Moscow so much that some historians speak of a separate North Russian civilization that developed along with North-Eastern Russia. In the 13th century, the Novgorod aristocracy, which won the princely power, formed a so-called feudal republic on its lands. It was headed by an archbishop, limited by the city authority - the Council of Masters. A separate role was played by the democratic freemen - the famous veche, in which contemporaries saw an alternative to the swallowing Moscow autocracy.
In the 15th century, even before the first Moscow-Novgorod wars under Ivan III, this city was in fact the most developed Russian land in all respects. Some foreigners seriously considered Novgorod as the Russian capital, and not Moscow. Ivan III, who did not suffer such liberties within his borders, defeated the Novgorod militias in 1471. The Moscow troops that entered Novgorod announced the inevitable oath of allegiance to the Grand Duke, seized the main archival documents, and exiled boyar families en masse to the territory of the Moscow principality. The veche bell, a century-old symbol of Novgorod independence, was sent there as a sign of the final abolition of local laws.
Novgorod conspiracy, mutiny and the end of the republic
According to the official version, Ivan the Terrible went to Novgorod because of a conspiracy against the tsarist government.
100 years later, in the summer of 1569, someone came to Ivan the Terrible with a denunciation. Say, Novgorodians decided to swear allegiance to the Polish king. The informer claimed that in the St. Sophia Cathedral there is even a corresponding letter, which the emperor's confidant allegedly found in the indicated place behind the image of the Mother of God. True, no one will ever know whether the document was genuine or was a trite forged motive. Whatever it was, but Grozny reacted to the denunciation in his usual manner. And the Novgorodians living in liberties potentially aroused all sorts of suspicions in him. He did not rule out the likelihood that on a land far from him they boldly talk about the revelry of the oprichnina and dissatisfaction with the existing order.
In the winter of 1569, Ivan the Terrible undertook a campaign to the north. With the tsar, not only the guardsmen moved forward, but also a large detachment of troops. The rout was launched without much hesitation. The first to suffer were the borders of the Tver possessions, from Klin to Novgorod itself. Representatives of the Moscow sovereign burst into the cities, allowed themselves to robbery, killing everyone suspicious. The counting of victims was carried out only during the first wave, when Ivan the Terrible gave orders to purposefully destroy the local nobility, as well as clerks. After the tsar began to detour Novgorod monasteries with the confiscation of all the wealth, and the guardsmen attacked the Novgorod posad, during which an uncountable number of townspeople died. Suppressed by brute force, the Novgorodians fell into final dependence on Moscow, which of course was not part of the plans of the freedom-loving people.
Is the absorption by Moscow a tragedy or a blessing?
Novgorod was completely ruled by Muscovites. Servants who were pleased with the authorities lived on the former lands of the exiled Novgorod nobles and merchants. Wealthy Moscow merchants, who took control of the lucrative urban production, also overgrown with farms here. Ivan IV undertook to transform the city, following the example of Moscow, into a reliable fortress. It was on his initiative that the red brick Novgorod Kremlin, which has survived to this day, was rebuilt here. Historians cannot unequivocally answer the question of whether the annexation to the capital was a boon for the Novgorodians.
But another thing can be argued: the conquest of competing neighbors played into the hands of the Moscow state. The landowners who settled here constituted the combat-ready part of the noble army - the heavily armed cavalry. Without the subordination of Novgorod, Ivan the Terrible could not count on vigorous activity on the Western Russian borders. The support of the Novgorod nobility during the Livonian War became extremely significant for the tsar. According to the historian Flory, the conquering position of the tsar in Livonia was only for the benefit of the Novgorod nobles and merchants. They received land and access to free international trade - and this is all not somewhere in the distant steppes, but practically at home.
Pogroms, disasters and irrevocable loss of the Novgorod spirit
"Cleared" of traitors Novgorod liked Ivan the Terrible as a royal residence. When in 1571 Khan Devlet-Girei set fire to Moscow, the tsar was hiding here from danger. He brought the state treasury with him in fifty wagons. During this period, Ivan the Terrible demonstrated his location to the Novgorodians. He regularly prayed in local monasteries, even initiating demonstrative executions of several guardsmen. However, Novgorod was not destined to become a full-fledged capital. The last years of Ivan Vasilyevich's life were spent in insufficient meaningfulness of actions.
Perhaps the Novgorodian vicissitudes, which coincided with the Tatar invasion, epidemics and famine that struck Russia, finally broke the sovereign. And Novgorod never recovered from the pogroms and disasters, and later survived the long-term Swedish occupation during the Time of Troubles. Later, it took decades to restore these lands. But the historical free spirit of Novgorod disappeared without a trace.
But the Novgorodians became the progenitors of a significant part of the Russian population.
Recommended:
How an engineer of a distillery created the Lokot "republic" and what came of it
In 1941, the Germans sanctioned the creation of Republik Lokot - "Lokot Administrative District". It included several districts located in the North-West of the Kursk and districts located in the south of the Bryansk (then Oryol) regions, and the population was over half a million people. Republik Lokot was subordinate to the rear command of the Second Panzer Army of the Wehrmacht, led by Colonel General Heinz Guderian. The so-called Russian liberation n
How the richest republic of the USSR lived: Soviet Georgia
Today you can often hear that Georgia was the best in the Union. There could be several reasons for the privileged position. This is a good geographical location, and the Georgian elite in the party elite, and the peculiarities of the Transcaucasian mentality. But the fact remains: in the Soviet Union, everyone had the same rights. But for some reason the Georgians were allowed a little more
How the fascist republic appeared in the USSR during the Great Patriotic War
In 1941, the Soviet Union entered a bloody battle with Nazi Germany. The Red Army retreated to Moscow, and the Germans began to rule over the abandoned territory. They established their own order everywhere except the Lokot Republic. This unique formation was founded by two Russian engineers, whose orders even the Germans did not dare to challenge
She did not promote the Germans, did not ruin Russia, did not leave the course of Peter: what is Anna Ioannovna accused of in vain?
Anna Ioannovna, niece of Peter the Great, went down in history with a terrible image. For what they just did not reproach the second ruling queen of Russia: for tyranny and ignorance, craving for luxury, indifference to state affairs and for the fact that the dominance of the Germans was in power. Anna Ioannovna had a lot of bad character, but the myth about her as an unsuccessful ruler who gave Russia to be torn apart by foreigners is very far from the real historical picture
Saving the Player: why the second marriage was a boon for Dostoevsky
"Fyodor Mikhailovich became my god, my idol, and I, it seems, was ready to kneel before him all my life," wrote Anna Snitkina about her husband, Fyodor Dostoevsky. A simple assistant stenographer became for the outstanding Russian writer not only an assistant, but also a muse, beloved, faithful wife. Widowed at 35, Anna never married again, remaining faithful to her youthful love