Evaluation of the activities of Ivan III Great Historians and Contemporaries. And got the best answer

Answer from Judex [Guru]
N. M. Karamzin puts Ivan III to a very high place. In his opinion, this is a leader not only Russian, but also of world history. Without possessing the attractive properties of Monomah or Dmitry Donskoy, he "stands as a sovereign, at the highest stage of magnitude." Its caution can not be caught, sometimes it seems even fearfulness and indecision (behavior on the river of the Ugra, in view of the Haling of Khan Ahmet), but she is suggested by prudence, thanks to her "Creation" of Ivana acquired proper strength, stability and survived it. Ivan III left after himself "the state, amazing space, a strong peoples, even the strongest spirit of the Board." He created the current Russia.
S. M. Solovyov: "A happy descendant of a number of smart, hardworking, leaning ancestors, John III joined the Moscow throne, when the business of gathering Northeast Russia could be worshiped, the old building was completely loosened in their grounds, and was needed last , I'm easy to hit to boo it. Taking advantage of the funds received from the ancestors, a happy position of their relatively neighboring states, he will do old and however, it is necessary to begin a new one. This new is not a consequence of its one activity; But John III belongs to the honorable place among the collectors of the Russian Earth, among the European states; John III belongs to honor for being able to enjoy its means and happy circumstances in which he was in all continued life. When using His funds and its position, John came the starly descendant of Vsevolod III and Kalita, the High Prince of Northern Russia: preciseness, slowness, caution, a strong disgust from the decisive measures, which could be won a lot, but also to lose, and at the same time resilience in bringing to The end of the time started, the composure is the distinctive features of John III. "
N. N. Kostomaarov: "It was a steep man, cold, reasonable, with a stivest heart, a powerful, steady in pursuit of the chosen goal, hidden, extremely cautious; In all his actions, graduality is visible, even slowness; He did not differ in any courage, nor courage, but he knew how to perfectly enjoy the circumstances; He was never fond of, but he did decisively when he saw that the case was ripe to the fact that success is undeniable. The injury of land and, possibly, the firm joining of them to the Moscow State was the cherished goal of his political activities; Following this case for their progenitors, he surpassed them all and left an example of the imitation of descendants for long times. "
D. I. Ilovaysky: "Ivan III seems to us the founder of that truly state system, which, from now on, the entire Russian land and which it is obliged to their subsequent magnitude. Stern, despotic, extremely cautious and generally a little attractive character of this first Moscow king, which has developed even under heavy impressions of the meaningful of the princely interdiscructures and a shameful barbaric yoke, cannot diminish his extraordinary state mind and great merits in the eyes of the historian. And if from Vladimir Saint to Peter I, which of the Russian soverees is worthy of the name of the Great, then it is Ivan III. "

Answer from Lilya.[active]
Thank you


Answer from _Kenni58_ ------------[newcomer]
He proclaimed himself with a self-container, taking the title "Sovereign of All Russia," he was the first representative from the Rurikovich dynasty.
With Ivan II, in the course of the formation of the Russian Unified State, the power of the Grand Duke Moskovsky began to increase significantly. The Grand Duke relied on the servicant people, distributing them as a fee for the service of land awards. With the increasing number of places, the peasant freedom is restricted, the attachment of peasants to Earth (officially since 1497 in the Ivan III judicial system)


Answer from Nikita Panov[newcomer]
Ivan Grozny: Personality and Epoch, as well as the surrounding atmosphere
The Russian king, who ruled from 1547, was the grandson of Ivan the Great and Son of Vasily Third. His mother is a princess of Mongolian origin. When Ivan was three years old, his father died, and in another five years the mother died (according to some reports, it was possible, poisoned). Around the growing boy reigned atmosphere of permanent rivalry and deception. Young people suffer from poor health, ill-treatment, manipulation and lack of education.

The solemn laudatory word Karamzin about Ivana 3 begins with the 6th Tom "History ...". Karamzin compares Ivan with Peter 1, praising the national policy of the first policy.

I established a unifiedness, the first true autocrat of Russia, made a reverend before sideways and the people, admiring the charity, terrible anger, canceling the private rights, disagree with the fatigue of the vencence.

John in 1480 had already 19 boyars and 9 okolnichi, and in 1495 and 1496 established the San State Treasurer, bedding, nursery, keen. Chairming at the Cathedrals of Church, John Mascotum was the head of the clergy. Radding the secrets of autocracy, as it were, as it were, the earthly God for Russia (outwardly showed his difference, wanted to rise by all the external ways to rise before people, loved lush festivity and so on). He was first given in Russia the name of the Terrible, but in the commendable sense: Grozny for enemies and plump smelles. All trembled before his gaze, even women fainted.

John as a person did not have any kind properties of neither monomach, nor Donskoy, but stands as a sovereign to the highest degree of magnitude. He seemed sometimes afraid, indecisive, because he wanted to always act carefully. Sia

caution is generally prudence, it does not captivate us like generous courage, but the successes are slow, no matter how incomplete gives its creations. Donskoy left after himself glory, and Ivan is a state.

Russia is formed by John, and the great powers are formed not by mechanical blinding parts, like mineral bodies, but excellent mind of the present.

Question 41. Compare the characteristic of Ivana 3 in Karamzin and Solovyov.

Karamzin Solovyov

Ivan left behind the current state. True autocrat of Russia. I solved the secret of autocracy, earthly God for Russia. As a sovereign stands above its predecessors, above Donskoy, Kalita, and TD. - He sometimes seemed frantic, indecisive, because he wanted to always act carefully. This caution is generally prudence, it does not captivate us like generous courage, but the successes are slow, no matter how incomplete gives their creation.

The Board of Ivan is just the consequence of the meeting of the Russian Earth near Moscow. Ivan took advantage of the funds received from the ancestors, using the happy position of its relatively neighboring states, it becomes old and however, it is necessary to begin a new one. Ivan is one of the honorary gatherers of Russian lands, but not the only one. He skillfully took advantage of the funds and circumstances that took him from the ancestors. He is not above the predecessors. - Excusability, slowness, caution, strong disgust from decisive measures, which could be won a lot, but also to lose, and at the same time the resistance in bringing to the end of the time started, composure.

Question number 2:

Russian chronicles of the XII - XIII centuries.

The chronicles of the 8th centuries were an ideological core connecting the past present that supports the idea of \u200b\u200bthe unity of the people and statehood, from the legendary cius, cheek and choriv and semi-fine Rurik with brothers to the Moscow kingdom of the XVI-XVII centuries. The tree of chronicles broke through cities and lands; Ambolism and the referee of individual rulers struggled on parchment sheets, displacing something eternal, valuable for all people. Chronicles and rewriters have rewritten in their taste, eliminating some white spots and creating others. Whole branches of the chronicle disappeared as a result of external raids and conquests and internal gravestics. Chronicles devoted in detail A. Schmatov in detail and substantiated the historical comparative method.

In most chronicles of the XV-XVI centuries. Based on the "Tale of Bygone Years" and it is this fact that encouraged to perceive the "PVL" as an initial writing belonging to one author. More often was called the name of Nestor, which was a special example of scientist monastic, a kind of synthesis of knowledge and faith. PVL dates back to the second decade of the XII century.

Three questions are indicated in the header of the composition: "There is a Russian land", "who started the first of the princes in her," the Russian Earth has become extinguished. " And the answers are significantly different.

Two versions of the beginning of Rus are reproduced in PVL: Migration of Slavs and Rus with the Rukov Danube from Norik on the traditional Danube-Dneprovskiy route, and the migration of Slavs, Varyagov and Russia in Volga - the Baltic Way.

Varyags: like all the population from Denmark to Volga Bulgaria; as one tribe along with other Baltic; As a totality of the Baltic tribes.

The question of the origin of the dynasty is solved differently. Nestor half amelonized with those who did not recognize the princely dignity of Kiya, in Novgorod the princely dynasty was led either from Igor, or from Rüric, and for the first time this name was the great-grandmother of Yaroslav Wise Ryric Rostislavich (the second half of the XI B).

Internally contradictory the story of the baptism of Vladimir. The chronicler who processed different materials knew more than three versions.

The chronicle article of 1015, telling about the death of Boris and Gleb, is a connection of the texts of "Tale of Boris and Gleb" Sonach Jacob and "Words about how to be baptized by Vladimir Usch Korsun" and the work of the chronicle itself appears exactly as a connection of different sources, inclusion in the chronicle Lands of independent monuments. Traditionally, three chronicles are recognized as basic when contacting the events of the IX - XIII centuries: Lavrentiev, Ipatiev and Novgorod first. It was them that they were attracted to restore the early stages of chronicles, identifying the initial editions of PVL and the chronicle monuments preceding it. The reconstruction of the early Novogorodsky chronicles on the senior lists of Novgorod chronicles led some authors to the conclusion that Novgorod chronicle was not at all in the XI century. In the Novogorod's first chronicle, even Novgorod news is given in the Kiev edition, that is, in the editorial office of PVL, brought to 1115. Also were Pecherski

"The initial arch of 1095" and the "Ancient Court of 1039", which came in the Pechersk edition of the 70s. XI V. on Chessov, it turned out that almost all the lunches were conducted in the Kiev-Pechersk monastery, but the history of this monastery was presented in the chronicles and in extreetopic monuments, the history of this monastery is presented with significant discrepancies.

The protograph was the original from which the chronicle manuscript was rewritten.

In Pereyaslavl Russian from the second decade of the XII century, their own chronicle entries were conducted. But here the chroniclers did not claim much, as the Earth did not claim political leadership. Kiev, Pereyaslavl, Galitskaya Earth, Rostov, Novgorod are centers whose participation in ideological struggle is viewed by sources. Another, in particular, Smolensk, Polotsk, Chernigov is less fortunate.

The chronicles of the XIII V. is the "Tale of Ryazan Batym".

In the XIV, the litigation continues in Novgorod, it is born in Tver and Moscow. But the oldest text of the Tver Chronicles - Rogozhsky Chronicler, preserved in the Mid-XV in the list; Leaves the impression of preparatory materials for the preparation of the arch.

Question # 24:

A.S. Lappo - Danilevsky.

Alexander Sergeevich Lappo-Danilevsky (1863-1919)

A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky was born 15 (27) January 1863 in the village of Successful Verkhnedneprovsky county of Yekaterinoslav province in the noble family. Mother - Natalia Fedorovna, nee Chuykevich, was from the nobles of the same province. The father of the historian - Sergey Aleksandrovich served a few three years of served by the county and the provincial leader of the nobility, in 1872-1886. He was the governor in Simferopol. A brilliant home education was received by a future historian in the noble estate. There was also a "a number of typical spiritual and domestic skills" (pupil, wellness, knowledge of languages, a brilliant game on the piano), which were celebrated by contemporaries. In the home estate, "the main elements" of Lappo-Danilevsky's personality: a constant scientific interest, love for nature and music. "The impression of an increased generic and organic culture, in-depth and sophisticated in the personal warehouse of his spiritual life and household setting, was given immediately at the first meetings with him and only increased with further communication." So I understood the person who was carefully watching the Lappo-Danilevsky Presnyakov, persistently emphasized the connection of the environment , traditions and the worldview of the historian. It is the press who belongs to the words about the teacher: "Deeply and unreassed were laid in his mood of the start of religiosity, not an external, surface, based on the habit to the forms of traditional church, and the deep and personal, connected with a relaxed desire to illuminate the everyday, eternal, to become The patronage of the absolute start. "

The region of philosophical education opened the Lapto-Danilev "History of Philosophy" Lewis, which has become the starting point in acquaintance with philosophical systems and problems for many young peers. In the gymnasium and the University of Lappo-Danilevsky thoughtfully studied the ancient Greek philosophy, the works of Plato and Aristotle, the French thinkers of the XVIII century, I.

Kant. A great influence on Lappo-Danilevsky provided N.K. Mikhailovsky. His desk books were the "History of Greece" by J. Grota, "Primitive culture" E. Taylor. He knew perfectly works by N.M. Karamzin, S.M. Solovyova, V.O. Klyuchevsky.

Lappo-Danilevsky, surviving a passion for positivism (by the works of Conte and Mill) and coming out for his theoretical and ideological framework (a great influence in the 1890s. His works of German philosophers-Neokantians V. Vindelband (1848-1915) and Rickert (1863-1936), wrote an article in the collection "Problems of Idealism" "The basic principles of the sociological doctrine O. Konta" (1902). Lappo-Danilevsky becomes a recognized authority in the Russian Neokantians. In the literature you can meet another opinion that The historian adhered to the positivist principles of the theory of historical research until the revolution of 1905, expressed by A.N. Neshukhnaya and S. P. Ramazanov. It is still presented that by this time Lappo-Danilevsky conversations of the legacy of positivism, who fought in itself the creative that he Gave a source in understanding. There is no doubt that the philosophical views of the historian undergo a serious evolution.

Externally, Lappo-Danilevsky's life was calm. In 1882, he graduated from Simferopol gymnasium with a gold medal and entered the University of St. Petersburg Faculty of History and Philology (1882-1886), with which his further fate was connected. But among the mentors, and they were: K.N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, V.G. Vasilyevsky, A.N. Veselovsky, E.E. Plotovsky, V.I. Sergeevich - he did not find his only teacher.

A.S. Lappo-Danilevsky distinguished "scholarship", seriousness, hard work. In aggregate with the characteristics of the character and its inherent restraint, all this led to the fact that Lappo-Danilevsky was held separately and held a special place in St. Petersburg University. Nevertheless, historians traced fundamental historiographic influences on the formation of the concept of Lappo-Danilevsky, allocated the works of the History and Law School (A.D. Gradovsky, B.N. Chicherina).

The tragic and symbolic was the end of Lappo-Danilevsky on February 7, 1919. He died of infection that arose as a result of a huge naway on his leg. Contemporaries perceived his death as a tragedy corresponding to the historical moment. Lappo-Danilevsky himself, for the last year of life, was painfully worried about the collapse of culture and misfortune, which fell into science, and only for which he lived.

Lappo-Danielevsky becomes an academician at 33 years. His term coursework is called "Scythian Kurgans", which is transferred to foreign languages. His work "Organization of direct taxation in the Moscow State" was assessed by P.N. Milyukov. Instead of the review, it turned out a published monograph. Also A.S. Lappo - Danilevsky published a job called "History Methodology" and achieved the introduction of this course to universities.

He believed that various new cultural trends were adapted to the territory of Ukraine, and then gradually penetrated the territory of Central Russia, Moscow lands. It expresses the theory of factors according to which several decisive factors coexist and in a certain era of them are dominant. In the destruction of generic relations, there are not public unions, but the state. In the middle of the XVIII V., the ideas of personality and

states. There is also a concept about a police state, but I did not find here. Please read and add there yourself.

Question number 29:

Assessment of the Tatar Mongolian Iga from Karamzin.

In the same way, the Tatar conquest has become the source of the revival of the Russian Uniform, in the saving force of Russian history. "The invasion of Batyevo has not spoiled Russia ... further observation opens up in the very evil cause of good, and in the very destruction of the benefit of the kiss." The internal development of the country led it to political death: "It could pass for another hundred years and more in the princely interdients: what would these? Probably the death of our Fatherland ... Moscow is obliged to his greatness of Khanam "

Negative consequences of Tatar-Mongolian yoke.

1. Fall of morals.

2. Settlement in art.

3. Loan executions

4. Stop assessing the vessel.

5. Rule of communication with Western Europe.

Positive traits.

1. Encouled science

2. Birth of autocracy

3. Elevation of the clergy

4. Association of Russia

5. Trade development

Question number 34:

The era of Grozny. Solovyov.

The child was born with brilliant dating; Maybe he was born susceptible, easily fascinating, passionate nature, but no doubt, this susceptibility, passion of the stimulus - because were developed to external degree upbringing, childhood circumstances. At the time of his mother's death, he was surrounded by people who took care of their own benefits, among the political aspirations of people around him. John was completely granted to his own egoism. John is used to not pay attention to the interests of others, you used to do not respect human dignity, not to respect the lives of people. The young prince was insulted, insulted the memory of the parents, killing people with whom he value, and was tied. And they did not listen to his orders. During his reign: a campaign on Kazan 1552, the invasion of the Crimean Khan, the conquest of Astrakhan I.T.D. It was high height, well folded, chest (full), his eyes were small and alive, the nose curved, the mustache is long. He had an extensive memory, found great activity, he looked at all requests. Loved monastic life.

N. M. Karamzin about Ivan III

"Inside the state, he not only established the unifiedness - until the time leaving the rights of the provinces of the provisions with one Ukrainian or former Lithuanian to keep the word and do not give them a reason for treason, - but was the first, true self-container of Russia, forcing the alert, before sideways and the people, Admiring charity, horrible anger, canceling private rights, dissent with the fatigue of the vengeance. The princes of the Rurikov and St. Vladimir tribe served him on a par with other subjects and were famous for the title of Boyar, Palendi, Ocolnichi, when he was famous, the minion was acquired by the service. Vasily Dark left the son of only four grand monastery boyars, butler, rally; John in 1480 had already 19 boyars and 9 okolnichi, and in 1495 and 1496 established the San State Treasurer, bedding, nursery, keen. The names of them fit into a special book for the notice of descendants. Everything has become hesitus or the sore state. Between the boyars are courtesy, or younger nobles, there were sons of princes and nobles. Chairming at the Cathedrals of Church, John Mostodino itself was the head of the clergy; Proud of intercourse with kings, the magnificent in the reception of their embassies, loved the magnificent solemnity; I installed the rite of the kissing of the monarch of the hand in the sign of flights, I wanted to rise with all the external ways to rise before people in order to act on the imagination; In a word, solving the secrets of autocracy, as it were, as it were, the earthly God for Russia, which since now began to surprise all other peoples, its infinite effect of the monarch. He was first given in Russia the name of the Terrible, but in the commendable sense: Grozny for enemies and plump smelles. However, without being tyrant, like his grandson, John Vasilyevich the second, he, no doubt, had natural cruelty in moral, who had a reason for reason. Rarely the founders of the monarchies are famous for non-sensitive sensitivity, and the hardness needed for the great cases of state, borders with the sirovost. They write that timid women have fainted from an angry, fiery gaze of John; that the petitioners were afraid to go to the throne; that Velmazby trembled and in the Palace in the Palace did not dare to whisper the words, nor to touch the scene when the sovereign, tired by the noisy conversation, dried by wine, dreamed for the whole clock at dinner; Everyone was sitting in deep silence, waiting for a new order to merge him and have fun. Already noticing the severity of John in punishments, add that the most noble officials, secular and spiritual, deprived of the Sana for crimes were not exempted from the terrible trade execution; So (in 1491) Massodily sequels of the Ukhtomsky Prince, nobleman Homutov and the former Archimandrite of the Chudovsky for a false diploma, composed by them on earth of the deceased Brother John.

The story is not a commendant word and does not represent the greatest husbands perfect. John as a person did not have any kind properties of neither monomach, nor Donskoy, but stands as a sovereign to the highest degree of magnitude. He seemed sometimes afraid, indecisive, because he wanted to always act carefully. This caution is generally prudence, it does not captivate us like generous courage, but the successes are slow, no matter how incomplete gives their creations. What left the world Alexander Macedonian? Glory. John left the state, an amazing space, a strong peoples, an even strongest government, then, who is now with love and pride in our homework. Russia Olegova, Vladimirov, Yaroslavov died in the invasion of the Mongols; Russia is formed by John, and the great powers are formed not by mechanical blinding parts, like mineral bodies, but excellent mind of the present. Already contemporaries of the first happy deeds of John were announced in history to His glory; The famous chronicler of Polish, Dlugosh, in 1480 he concluded his creation to the praise of Casimirov's enemy. German, Swedish historians of the sixth-tolerant century according to him the name of the Great, and the newests notice in it the dedication similarity with Peter first; Both, no doubt, are great, but John, including Russia into the general state system of Europe and the jealously borrowing art of educated peoples, did not think about the introduction of new customs, about the change of the moral nature of the subjects; I don't see also to be baked on the enlightenment of the minds of sciences, calling on artists to decorate the capital and for the success of military art, wanted the only splendor, forces; And other ingenians did not block the way to Russia, but the only thing that could serve as a tool in the business of embassy or trade: loved to express them only grace, as a decent great monarch, to honor, not to humiliate his own people. Not here, but in the history of Peter should be explored who, famous two Venzenztsev, enrolled prudently or agree with the true benefit of the Fatherland. "

By turning autocracy in the determining force of Russian history, Karamzin created periodization of history, entirely dependent on the history of autocracy. The first period from the vocation of the princes of Varangi to Svyatopolka 862 1015GH begins the period from Rurik of the first autocrat of Russian and ends with the jurisdiction of Vladimir, who divided the state to the lot. It was the heyday of the Russian state than it was obliged to "happy administration of monarchical power." The second period from Svyatopolka Vladimirovich to Yaroslav 2 Vsevolodovich 1015 1238. It was a period of gradual focus of autocracy, specific civil engineers and, finally, Tataro Mongolian invasion. Karamzin noted the prince of Vladimir Monomakh, restored the autocracy of great princes, but not thinking "to change the system of hereditary land, so nasty good and calmness of the Fatherland." The period of the invasion of Batya, which "NOT WRITE RUSSIA". The main cause of the defeat of Russian Karamzin sees in the destruction of autocracy, replaced by the specific fragmentation of Russia. The third period from Yaroslav Vsevolodovich to Ivana 3,1238,1262. It was a period of falling the Russian state, the domination of conquerors and the binding association of Russia under the rule of Moscow princes. The fourth time of the reign of Ivan 3 and Vasily 3 under Ivan 3 was eliminated by the dependence on Tataro Mongol, the fragmentation of Russia was eliminated and fully approved autocracy. Ivan 3 was the "first genuine self-container of Russia" and from it "The story of our acceptance of the dignity of truly state." The fifth period of the reign of Ivan the Terrible and Fyodor Ivanovich. According to Karamzin, the aristocratic image of the board is preserved into the thought of Ivana 4. The "Tsarskoy Unit" was restored only in 1547 after the wedding of Ivan 4 to the kingdom. The very reign of Karamzin divided into 2 periods until 1560. The death of Queen Anastasia, when the king, with the help of Sylvester and Adashev wisely, the country's rules, and after 1560, when the autocracy of the king turned into tyranium. The sixth period covers "Troubles" 1598,1212, which begins with the top of Boris Godunov. All-Russian Boyar, "Multi-Rogging Hydra of Aristocracy" blossomed after the overthrow of Vasily Shui and led the state to the face of death. The troubles of the Troubles and the revival of the Russian state are related to the restoration of autocracy. The approach of Karamzine is peculiar to the question of the nature of power. He introduced the concept of the monarchy "unique" and the monarchy "autocratic". Uniform he called the political system with the spread of the specific system, where the monarch acts as the head of the specific princes with the real but not absolute power. Under the autocracy, he understood the political system in which there was no specific system, and the monarch had an unlimited power. The historical concept of Karamzin became the official, supported by the entire power of state power. Karamzin had a deep influence on the historical views of Slavophiles, as well as M.P.Pogodina and other representatives of the theory of official nationality. Its influence has been inflicted, Bestuzhev Ryumin, Ilovai, Kojavich and other representatives of official historiography.