home » Cardiology » Internecine wars. The internecine war of the Russian princes: description, causes and consequences

Internecine wars. The internecine war of the Russian princes: description, causes and consequences

Civil strife is an internal discord, a war between people living in the same territory.

Kievan Rus from the 9th to the 11th centuries quite often faced internecine wars; The reason for the princely feuds was the struggle for power.

The largest princely feuds in Rus'

The first civil strife of the princes (late 10th - early 11th century). The enmity of the sons of Prince Svyatoslav, caused by their desire to achieve independence from the authorities of Kyiv.
Second civil strife (early 11th century). Enmity between the sons of Prince Vladimir for power.
Third civil strife (second half of the 11th century). Enmity between the sons of Prince Yaroslav the Wise for power.

The first civil strife in Rus'

Old Russian princes had a tradition of having a large number of children, which was the reason for subsequent disputes over the right of inheritance, since the rule of inheritance from father to eldest son did not exist then. After the death of Prince Svyatoslav in 972, he was left with three sons who had the right to inheritance.

Yaropolk Svyatoslavich - he received power in Kyiv.
Oleg Svyatoslavich - received power in the territory of the Drevlyans
Vladimir Svyatoslavich - received power in Novgorod, and later in Kyiv.

After the death of Svyatoslav, his sons received sole power in their lands and could now govern them according to their own understanding. Vladimir and Oleg wanted to gain complete independence for their principalities from the will of Kyiv, so they launched their first campaigns against each other.

Oleg was the first to speak; on his orders, in the lands of the Drevlyans, where Vladimir ruled, the son of the governor Yaropolk, Seneveld, was killed. Having learned about this, Seneveld decided to take revenge and forced Yaropolk, on whom he had great influence, to go with his army against his brother Oleg.

977 - the beginning of the civil strife between the sons of Svyatoslav began. Yaropolk attacked Oleg, who was not prepared, and the Drevlyans, together with their prince, were forced to retreat from the borders to the capital - the city of Ovruch. As a result, during the retreat, Prince Oleg died - he was crushed under the hooves of one of the horses. The Drevlyans began to submit to Kyiv. Prince Vladimir, having learned about the death of his brother and the outbreak of family feud, runs to the Varangians.

980 - Vladimir returns to Rus' along with the Varangian army. As a result of battles with the troops of Yaropolk, Vladimir managed to recapture Novgorod, Polotsk and move towards Kyiv.

Yaropolk, having learned about his brother’s victories, convenes advisers. One of them persuades the prince to leave Kiev and hide in the city of Rodna, but later it becomes clear that the adviser is a traitor - he conspired with Vladimir and sent Yaropolk to the city dying of hunger. As a result, Yaropolk is forced to enter into negotiations with Vladimir. He goes to the meeting, however, upon arrival he dies at the hands of two Varangian warriors.

Vladimir becomes prince in Kyiv and rules there until his death.

Second civil strife in Rus'

In 1015, Prince Vladimir, who had 12 sons, dies. A new war for power began between the sons of Vladimir.

1015 - Svyatopolk becomes prince in Kyiv, having killed his own brothers Boris and Gleb.

1016 - the struggle between Svyatopolk and Yaroslav the Wise begins.

Yaroslav, who reigned in Novgorod, gathered a detachment of Varangians and Novgorodians and moved to Kyiv. After a bloody battle near the city of Lyubech, Kyiv was captured and Yaroslav was forced to retreat. However, the feud did not end there. In the same year, Yaroslav gathered an army, using the support of the Polish prince, and recaptured Kyiv, driving Yaroslav back to Novgorod. A few months later, Svyatopolk was again expelled from Kyiv by Yaroslav, who gathered a new army. This time Yaroslav forever became a prince in Kyiv.

The third civil strife in Rus'

Another civil strife began after the death of Yaroslav the Wise. The Grand Duke died in 1054, which provoked civil strife between the Yaroslavichs.

Yaroslav the Wise, fearing another enmity, himself distributed the lands among his sons:

Izyaslav - Kyiv;
Svyatoslav - Chernigov;
Vsevolod - Pereyaslavl;
Igor – Vladimir;
Vyacheslav - Smolensk.

1068 - Despite the fact that each of the sons had his own inheritance, they all disobeyed the will of their father and wanted to claim power in Kyiv. Having replaced each other several times as the prince of Kyiv, power finally went to Izyaslav, as Yaroslav the Wise bequeathed.

After the death of Izyaslav and until the 15th century, there were princely feuds in Rus', but never again was the struggle for power so large-scale.

Civil War- the most acute form of resolving accumulated social contradictions within a state, which manifests itself in the form of large-scale armed confrontation between organized groups or, less commonly, between nations that were part of a previously unified country. The goal of the parties, as a rule, is to seize power in a country or in a particular region.

Signs of a civil war are the involvement of the civilian population and the resulting significant losses.

Methods of waging civil wars often differ from traditional ones. Along with the use of regular troops by the warring parties, the partisan movement, as well as various spontaneous uprisings of the population and the like, are becoming widespread. Often a civil war is combined with a struggle against foreign intervention by other states.

Since 1945, civil wars have claimed an estimated 25 million lives and forced the deportation of millions of people. Civil wars have also caused the economic collapse of the countries involved in them; Burma (Myanmar), Uganda and Angola are examples of states that were widely seen as having a prosperous future until they fell into civil war.

Definition

James Fearon, who studies civil wars at Stanford University, defines a civil war as “violent conflict within a country, the struggle of organized groups that seek to seize central and regional power, or seek to change government policy.”

Some researchers, in particular Ann Hironaka, believe that one of the parties to the conflict is the state, which in practice is not at all mandatory. The point at which civil unrest becomes civil war is highly controversial. Some political scientists define a civil war as a conflict with more than 1,000 casualties, while others consider 100 casualties on each side sufficient. American Correlates of War, whose data is widely [ ] used by conflict scholars, classifies a civil war as one with more than 1,000 war-related deaths per year of conflict.

Using 1,000 deaths per year as a yardstick, there were 213 civil wars between 1816 and 1997, 104 of which occurred between 1944 and 1997. Using the less stringent criterion of 1,000 total casualties, more than 90 civil wars occurred between 1945 and 2007, with 20 of them still ongoing as of 2007.

The Geneva Conventions do not include a definition of "civil war", but they do include criteria for which a conflict can be considered a "non-international armed conflict", which includes civil wars. There are four criteria:

The parties to the uprising must possess part of the national territory.
The rebel civil authorities must have de facto power over the population in a certain part of the country's territory.
The rebels must have some recognition as a belligerent.
The government is "obliged to resort to regular military force against insurgents with a military organization."

Research into the causes of civil wars

Scientists who study the causes of civil wars look at two main factors that cause them. One of the factors may be ethnic, social or religious differences between social strata of people, the tension of which reaches the scale of a national crisis. Another factor is the economic interests of individuals or groups. Scientific analysis shows that economic and structural factors are more important than population group identification factors.

In the early 2000s, World Bank experts conducted a study of civil wars and formulated the Collier-Hoeffler model, which identifies factors that increase the risk of civil war. 78 five-year periods from 1960 to 1999 in which civil wars occurred, as well as 1,167 five-year periods without civil wars, were examined to establish correlations with various factors. The study showed that the following factors had a statistically significant impact on the likelihood of a civil war:

Availability of funding

Any civil war requires resources, so its risk is higher in countries that have them. An additional factor is the possibility of financing from abroad.

Educational factor

Civil war is less likely where the level of education of young men who could form the basis of the armed forces is higher, since they would lose the opportunity for a successful career in the event of war. Income distribution inequality, however, was not correlated with civil wars. However, with increased education, people's self-awareness also increases. People with high self-awareness may be dissatisfied with the state of affairs in the state, such as the lack of necessary rights and freedoms, corruption, etc., and can start a civil war with the support of like-minded people.

Military advantages

Civil war is most likely in countries with inaccessible areas such as mountains and deserts.

Harassment

It has been established that ethnic dominance leads to an increase in the likelihood of civil war. Religious and ethnic fragmentation, on the contrary, reduces the risk of war.

Population

The risk of war breaking out is directly proportional to the size of the country's population.

Time factor

The more time has passed since the last civil war, the less likely it is that the conflict will resume.

Processes of ending civil wars

In the period 1945-1992, only a third of the negotiation processes launched to end the civil war ended in success.

Research confirms the obvious conclusion that the more participants are involved in a civil war, the more difficult the process of finding a compromise and the longer the war continues. A larger number of parties who have the power to block a truce almost definitely means difficulties in achieving this truce and its postponement for the long term. One possible example is the two wars in Lebanon - the crisis of 1958 and the civil war (1975-1990), when the first civil war lasted about 4 months, and the second - 15 years.

In general, three large groups of civil wars can be distinguished by duration:

lasting less than a year
lasting from one year to 5 years
long civil wars lasting 5 years or more.

Research shows that the duration of wars does not depend on their geography; they can occur in any part of the globe.

The theory of sufficient information, when it is believed that a party agrees if it becomes clear to it that the chances of winning are small, does not always work. An example is the actions of UNITA in Angola in 1975-2002, when it continued military operations, even after losing any significant support from the population and foreign powers, ending its actions only with the death of its leader, Jonas Savimbi.

A more successful theory is the “sufficiency of spoils” theory, which explains the continuation of hostilities by the economic benefits received by the belligerent, regardless of how much support it has in the country. It is personal enrichment that can be considered one of the reasons for the functioning of UNITA for so long [ ] . Accordingly, in order to end the conflict, it is necessary to introduce measures that would reduce the economic benefits of the parties. Attempts to introduce appropriate sanctions were used by the UN in the conflicts in Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Accordingly, the more parties to the conflict, the greater the likelihood that at least one of them may consider either its chances of victory sufficient (due to the more problematic assessment of chances in the presence of several participants), or the benefits from the war sufficient, and continue the fight, making it difficult to achieve a truce . At the same time, the entry of an external participant into the conflict, whose goal is to facilitate the achievement of peace agreements, can only bring effect if all significant parties to the conflict are settled at the negotiating table. At the same time, the role of the third party in the success of such negotiations is very significant.

The third party in the negotiations serves as a guarantor of security for the parties to the conflict during the transition period. Reaching agreements on the causes of a war is often insufficient to end it. The parties may fear that the cessation of hostilities and the beginning of disarmament could be used by the enemy to launch a counterattack. In this case, the commitment of the third party to prevent such a situation from occurring can greatly contribute to the development of trust and the establishment of peace. In general, it is often agreements on how the process of transition to peaceful life will be established that are critical to achieving peace agreements, and not the actual disputes about the causes of the conflict and their resolution.

Civil wars in history

Throughout world history, civil wars have had different forms and types: slave uprisings, peasant wars, guerrilla wars, armed struggle against the government, struggle between two parts of the people, etc.

Slave revolts

The topic of slave rebellions remains a controversial topic in historical scholarship, part of a larger debate about whether all of human history is a history of class struggle. The question of what the largest slave uprisings can be considered - rebellions or attempted revolutions - remains open. The significance of a particular uprising in the history of a country does not necessarily depend on its duration and scale. Small rebellions could play an important role in the history of the state and, if not actually “civil wars,” then be one of the reasons causing them.

The most famous purely slave states arise only in the era of antiquity - in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome.

They are also associated with movements in Roman Spain: the national liberation uprising of the Lusitanians under the leadership of Viriatus in -139 BC. e., as well as the movement led by Quintus Sertorius -72 BC. e., directed against supporters of the Roman commander and politician Lucius Cornelius Sulla. In both of these wars, fugitive slaves acted on the rebel side.

Military actions of the civil war in Rome - gg. BC e. between supporters of Gaius Julius Caesar and Gnaeus Pompey the Great were fought on the territory of several provinces: Italy, Africa, Spain, Illyria, Egypt, Achaia, and were accompanied by the mass death of soldiers and the devastation of the civilian population.

Along with the movements of slaves and dependent people, mass movements on religious grounds took place in the Arab Caliphate, acquiring the scale of civil wars. Thus, as a result of the uprising of the Khurramites of Abu Muslim in Khorasan in -750, the ruling Umayyad dynasty was overthrown and a new Abbasid dynasty was established, and the war of the Khurramites of Iranian Azerbaijan with the troops of the caliphate led by Babek lasted over 20 years: from 837.

Slavery, replaced almost everywhere in Europe by serfdom, was restored in the New World in the 17th century, after the beginning of the Age of Discovery. This leads to new slave uprisings. Armed insurrections are breaking out across America. From 1630 to 1694, Quilombu Palmaris, a state of runaway black slaves, existed in northeastern Brazil. The territory of Palmaris reached 27 thousand km², where about 20 thousand people lived (blacks, mulattoes, Indians). In -1803, the Haitian Revolution took place in the French colony of Saint-Domingue - the only successful slave uprising in history, as a result of which the colony (which changed its name to Haiti) gained independence from France. In 1832, a slave revolt occurred in Jamaica. 60 thousand of the three hundred thousand slaves on the island took part in the uprising. In the United States in August 1831, the Net Turner Rebellion took place. Nat Turner's slave rebellion).

The methods of slave warfare had much in common with the tactics of guerrilla warfare. They skillfully took advantage of the terrain, used natural conditions to their advantage, tried to avoid large-scale battles and attack the weakest areas of the enemy’s defense.

Peasant revolts

As historical development progressed and the slave-owning system transitioned into a feudal system, the number of slaves decreased, moving into the category of feudal-dependent peasantry and courtyard people. Moreover, the position of many serfs was very similar to the position of slaves.

Increased extortions from peasants, expansion of “lordly” rights over the rural population, unfavorable changes in the general social conditions of peasant life that took place at the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries, fermentation of minds caused by the Reformation - these were the main reasons for the Peasant War, a popular uprising in the central Europe, primarily on the territory of the Holy Roman Empire in -1526. It was one of the many wars of that period. Popular revolt in late-medieval Europe ). The growing social gap between the elite and the rest of the population, increasing extortions by the nobility, rising inflation, mass famine, wars and epidemics - all this led to popular uprisings.

The first “peasant war” in Russia is traditionally considered to be the movement led by I. I. Bolotnikov -1607, caused by the devastation of the Time of Troubles and suppressed by the troops of Tsar Vasily IV Shuisky with great difficulty. In 1670, a peasant war begins in Russia under the leadership of Stepan Razin. This war lasted about two years and ended with the defeat of the rebels and mass executions. A little over a hundred years later, a new large-scale war begins - the Pugachev uprising of 1773-1775. Up to 100 thousand rebels, both Russian peasants and factory workers of the Urals, as well as Cossacks and representatives of non-Russian nationalities - Tatars, Bashkirs, Kazakhs, etc., took part in military operations on the side of E.I. Pugachev and his supporters. Just like in the time of Razin, the uprising was defeated and caused numerous repressions.

In ancient and medieval China, mass movements of the tax-paying, including peasant, population often acquired religious overtones and caused a change in the ruling dynasty. Already in 17 AD. e. In the provinces of Shandong and Jiangsu, a peasant uprising of the “red brows” broke out, caused by the atrocities of the rule of the usurper Wang Mang and the floods of the Yellow River, which lasted for several years and captured neighboring provinces. And the mass movement led by the Taoist sect of the “yellow bandages” -204 AD. e. led to the collapse of the Han Empire and the division of the country (the “Three Kingdoms” period). The largest “peasant” uprising in medieval China led by Huang Chao -878, accompanied by massacres, destruction of cities and villages, and persecution of ethnic minorities (Arabs and Jews), led to the fall of the Tang dynasty (-).

At first, the national liberation uprising of the “red bands” of 1368, directed against the Mongolian Yuan dynasty and led by people from the Taoist White Lotus sect, was also peasant in its social nature and religious in its political program, as a result of which the national liberation revolt came to power Chinese Ming dynasty (1368-1644).

The Taiping Uprising in Qing China, which broke out in the summer of 1850 in the province of Guangxi, initially as a peasant movement, and quickly spread to neighboring provinces with a population of over 30 million people, acquired the character of a genuine civil war. Lasting until 1864 and suppressed only with the help of British and French troops, it was accompanied by the death of millions of people and caused a protracted economic crisis, ultimately leading to the partial loss of the country's independence.

Notes

Civil War// Military encyclopedia / P. S. Grachev. - Moscow: Military Publishing House, 1994. - T. 2. - P. 475. - ISBN 5-203-00299-1.
Fearon, James. (English)Russian . Iraq's Civil War Archived March 17, 2007. // “Foreign Affairs”, March/April 2007. (English)
E. G. Panfilov. Civil War. Great Soviet Encyclopedia: In 30 volumes - M.: “Soviet Encyclopedia”, 1969-1978.
Flaherty Jane. Review of Nicholas Onuf and Peter Onuf, Nations, Markets, and War: Modern History and the American Civil War(English) (unavailable link). // Website “EH.Net” (Economic History Services) (23 October 2006). - “Two nations developed because of slavery.” Retrieved June 5, 2013.

Civil strife between the sons and grandsons of Yaroslav the Wise. The order of succession to the throne, established by Yaroslav the Wise, was maintained for 19 years. His eldest son stood at the head of Rus'. ruled in Chernigov, and Vsevolod ruled in Pereyaslavl, bordering the steppe. The younger sons sat in other distant cities. All of them, as the father established, obeyed their elder brother. But in 1073 everything changed.

There was a rumor in Kyiv that Izyaslav wants to rule just like his father, to be "autocratic". This alarmed the brothers, who did not want to obey their elder brother as they obeyed their father. Svyatoslav and Vsevolod moved their squads to Kyiv. Izyaslav fled to Poland, then to Germany. The Grand Duke's throne was captured by Svyatoslav, the second most important city in Rus' - Vsevolod took Chernigov into his own hands. But in 1076 Svyatoslav died. Not wanting to shed blood, Vsevolod voluntarily gave Kyiv to Izyaslav, and he himself retired to Chernigov. The brothers divided Rus' among themselves, pushing aside the sons of the late Svyatoslav. Vsevolod gave Pereyaslavl to his eldest son Vladimir, who was born in 1053 from the daughter of the Byzantine Emperor Constantine Monomakh. From birth, Vladimir was assigned the family name of his Byzantine grandfather Monomakh. He entered Russian history as Vladimir Monomakh.

It was here that the beginning of another great and long unrest in Rus' was born. Svyatoslav's eldest son Oleg fled to Tmutarakan. In 1078, he gathered a large army, attracted the Polovtsians to his service and went to war against his uncles. This was not the first time that a Russian prince involved nomads in internecine wars in Rus', but Oleg made the Polovtsians his constant allies in the fight against other princes. For their help, he provided them with the opportunity to plunder and burn Russian cities and take people captive. No wonder he was nicknamed Oleg Gorislavich in Rus'.

A. Kalugin. Civil strife of princes

In the battle on Nezhatina Niva, Oleg was defeated and again took refuge in Tmutarakan. But in the same battle, Grand Duke Izyaslav was also killed. Vsevolod Yaroslavich settled in Kyiv, Chernigov passed to his son Vladimir.

Since the time of this internecine struggle, the Polovtsy began to constantly interfere in the struggle of the Russian princes with each other.

For the first time, hordes of Turkic Polovtsians appeared at the borders of Rus' in 1061. This was a new, numerous, merciless and insidious enemy. In the autumn, when the horses of the Polovtsians were well-fed after the free summer pastures, the time for raids began, and woe was to those who stood in the way of the nomads.

All adult Polovtsians went on a hike. Their horse avalanches suddenly appeared in front of the enemy. Armed with bows and arrows, sabers, lassos, and short spears, the Polovtsian warriors rushed into battle with a piercing cry, shooting while galloping, showering the enemy with a cloud of arrows. They raided cities, robbing and killing people, taking them captive.

The nomads did not like to fight with a large and well-organized army. To attack by surprise, to crush a numerically weak enemy, to suppress him, to separate enemy forces, to lure him into ambush, to destroy him - this is how they fought their wars. If the Polovtsy faced a strong enemy, they knew how to defend themselves: they quickly formed the carts in several circles, covered them with bull skins so that they could not be set on fire, and desperately fought back.

Illustration. Polovtsy in a devastated Russian city.

In former times, an invasion of such nomads would have brought Rus' to the brink of disaster. But now Rus' was a single state with large, well-fortified cities, a strong army, and a good security system. Therefore, nomads and Rus' began to coexist. Their relationship was sometimes peaceful, sometimes hostile. There was brisk trade between them, and the population communicated widely in the border areas. Russian princes and Polovtsian khans began to enter into dynastic marriages among themselves.

But as soon as the central government in Rus' weakened or strife began between the princes, the Polovtsians began their raids. They took part in the internecine struggle on the side of one prince or another, and at the same time robbed everyone. During their strife, the princes increasingly began to invite the Polovtsians to Rus'.

In the absence of a leader. In 1093, the last of the sons of Yaroslav the Wise, Vsevolod, died. The time has come for Yaroslav's grandchildren. There were no big state affairs behind them, no deep reforms, no major military campaigns. But there was a lot of ambition, pride, envy, and scores against each other. And there was no leader among them who could calm this chaos.

Formally, Izyaslav’s son Svyatopolk became the eldest in the family. He laid claim to the grand-ducal throne. But he was an indecisive, lightweight person, distinguished by petty intrigue and a feeling of envy of his capable and bright cousins Vladimir and Oleg. However, the Kiev veche proclaimed him Grand Duke. The second most important prince in Rus' remained, who continued to own Chernigov. And the third cousin Oleg Svyatoslavich was in Tmutarakan. Oleg, quite rightly, due to his seniority, now laid claim to the second table in Rus' - the Principality of Chernigov.

Oleg was a brave knight, but an extremely ambitious and touchy person. In anger, he destroyed everything left and right. If his honor, his right to primacy were hurt, he stopped at nothing. Wisdom, prudence, and the interests of the homeland receded into the background.

In Rus', with external unity and in the presence of the great Kyiv prince Svyatopolk, three groups of rival princes emerged: one - Kiev, led by Svyatopolk; the second - Chernigov-Pereyaslav, headed by Vladimir Monomakh; the third is Tmutarakan, led by Oleg. And behind each prince there was a squad, there were strengthened, rich, populous cities, supporters throughout Rus'. This situation threatened new strife, new civil strife.

The beginning of the military activities of Vladimir Monomakh. From a young age, Vladimir Vsevolodovich Monomakh showed himself to be a brave warrior, a talented commander and a skilled diplomat. For many years he reigned in different cities of Rus' - Rostov, Vladimir-Volynsky, Smolensk, but most of all in Pereyaslavl, next to the Polovtsian steppe. Already in those years he acquired extensive military experience.

Back in 1076, Svyatoslav Yaroslavich placed Monomakh, together with his son Oleg, at the head of his army, sent to help the Poles in their war with the Czechs and Germans. The army under his command fought through the Czech Republic, won a number of victories over the united Czech-German forces and returned to their homeland with glory and great booty.

Vladimir Monomakh became especially famous in the 80s. 9th century in the fight against the Polovtsians. Vsevolod, who sat on the Kiev throne, essentially entrusted his son with the defense of the entire steppe border of Rus'. At that time, Monomakh, fighting with the nomads, did not hesitate for an hour. He acted boldly and decisively. Monomakh himself more than once went deep into the Polovtsian steppe and crushed the Polovtsian hordes there. Essentially, he became the first Russian prince who sought to beat the nomads on their territory. This was a new military tactic for Rus'. Already at that time, in Polovtsian tents and wagons, mothers frightened children with the name of Vladimir Monomakh.

By the beginning of the 90s. XI century he became the strongest and most influential prince in Rus', who did not know defeat on the battlefield. He was known among the people as a patriotic prince who spared neither strength nor life for the defense of Russian lands.

The Battle of Trepol and Oleg's campaign. In 1093 the Polovtsians undertook a great campaign. Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, who had just ascended the throne, was eager to fight. He turned to Vladimir Monomakh for help, but the cautious prince advised this time to pay off his enemies, because Rus' was not ready for a big war. However, Svyatopolk insisted on the campaign. The united Kiev, Chernigov and Pereyaslav army set out on a campaign. The Pereyaslavl team was commanded by Vladimir's young brother Rostislav.

The troops converged near the city of Trepol, on the banks of the Stugna River, a tributary of the Dnieper. A thunderstorm was approaching. Monomakh persuaded them to wait out the bad weather. He did not want the river to remain in the rear of the Russian army during a thunderstorm. But Svyatopolk and his warriors were eager to fight.

The Russian army barely crossed the river, swollen from the flood, and prepared for battle. At this time a thunderstorm broke out. The water in Stugna was rising before our eyes. The Polovtsy struck the first blow against Svyatopolk’s squad. The Kievans could not withstand the onslaught and fled. Then the entire mass of the Polovtsy swept away the left wing of Monomakh. The Russian army disintegrated. The warriors rushed back to the river. During the crossing, Rostislav was blown off his horse and drowned. Only a small part of the Russian army made it to the opposite bank of the river and escaped. This was Monomakh's first and last defeat.

That year the Polovtsians inflicted enormous damage on Rus'. They plundered many cities and villages, took large booty, and took away hundreds of captives. Oleg Svyatoslavich chose this time to regain Chernigov.
Oleg and his allied Polovtsians approached this city, behind whose walls Monomakh took refuge with a small number of warriors. The Polovtsians carried out robbery of the area. Monomakh's warriors repulsed all the assaults, but the situation was hopeless. And then Vladimir Monomakh agreed to give Oleg his family nest - Chernigov. He himself was returning to Pereyaslavl, orphaned after the death of his brother. And so a bunch of people leave the city and move through the ranks of the enemy army. Monomakh later recalled that the Polovtsy, like wolves, licked their lips at the prince and his family, but Oleg kept his word and did not allow them to attack their sworn enemy.

Invasion of the Cumans

The fight against the Polovtsians and the strife of the princes. In 1095, the Polovtsians again came to Rus' and besieged Pereyaslavl, knowing that Vladimir had not yet managed to gather a new army and could not fight them in an open field. Having entered into negotiations with the enemy, Monomakh then managed to strike them. After this, he sent messengers to Kyiv and Chernigov, calling on his brothers to send squads and finish off the Polovtsians. Svyatopolk sent soldiers, but Oleg, an old friend of the steppes, refused. The Kiev-Pereyaslav army went deep into the steppe and destroyed several Polovtsian camps, capturing rich booty.

In 1096, the Russian princes decided with united forces to again strike at the Polovtsians in the depths of the steppes. But Oleg again refused to join his brothers, and then the Kiev-Pereyaslav army, instead of marching to the steppe, moved to Chernigov. The princes took this city from Oleg and assigned him to live in the forest Murom, away from the Polovtsian steppe. But while Vladimir Monomakh’s son Izyaslav reigned in Murom, this meant that Oleg was left without any possessions at all. This was unbearable for the ambitious prince, and he was only waiting for an opportunity to achieve his rights by force.

And such an opportunity presented itself in the same year: two large Polovtsian hordes moved towards Rus'. While Vladimir and Svyatopolk were repelling one horde from Pereyaslavl, the other besieged Kyiv, took and plundered the Kiev Pechersky Monastery. The princes rushed to the rescue of Kyiv, but the Polovtsy, loaded with booty, left before the Russian squads appeared here.

At this time, Oleg headed towards Murom. The young and inexperienced prince Izyaslav Vladimirovich came out to meet him. Oleg defeated his squad, and the Murom prince himself fell in battle. The news of his son's death shocked Vladimir, but instead of taking up the sword and taking revenge on the offender, he took up the pen.

Monomakh wrote a letter to Oleg. He proposed not to destroy the Russian land, but he himself promised not to avenge his son, noting that the death of a warrior in battle is a natural thing. Monomakh called on Oleg to put an end to the bloodshed and reach a peace agreement. He admitted that he was wrong in many ways, but at the same time wrote about Oleg’s injustices and cruelties. But this time the cousin refused. And then the entire Monomakh tribe set out to attack him. He himself did not take part in the campaign, but instructed his sons to crush Oleg. In the decisive battle, they defeated Oleg's squad, who soon asked for peace, swearing on the cross that he would carry out any order of the other princes.

Lyubech Congress

Lyubech Congress. In 1097 The Russian princes decided to put an end to civil strife and rally their forces in the fight against the Polovtsians. The meeting place was chosen as the ancestral castle of Monomakh in the city of Lyubech. This fact alone can tell who initiated the congress.

Illustration. Lyubechsky Congress of Princes.

Svyatopolk Izyaslavich, brothers Oleg and David Svyatoslavich, Vladimir Monomakh, David Igorevich from Vladimir-Volynsky and his opponent Vasilko Rostislavich from the neighboring city of Terebovlya, the great-grandson of Yaroslav the Wise, a brave and enterprising young prince, gathered in Lyubech. They all came with their boyars and squads. The princes and their closest associates sat down at a common table in the huge castle hall.

As the chronicle tells, the princes said at the congress: “Why are we destroying the Russian land, bringing quarrels upon ourselves? And the Polovtsians are plundering our land and rejoicing that we are torn apart by internecine wars. From now on, let us unite wholeheartedly and preserve the Russian land, and let everyone own his homeland.”. So, the princes agreed that each of them would retain the lands of their fathers. And for violating this order, the renegade princes were threatened with punishment from other princes. Thus, the congress once again confirmed the covenant of Yaroslav the Wise to preserve for the princes their "father". This indicated that the united state began to disintegrate, because even the Kiev prince could not enter into other people's possessions. At the same time, the congress confirmed that the Kiev prince is still the main prince of Rus'. The princes also agreed on joint actions against the Polovtsians.

The reason for this increased independence of individual lands of Rus' was the strengthening of their economic and military power, the growth of cities, and the increase in their population. And Chernigov, and Pereyaslavl, and Smolensk, and Novgorod, and Rostov, and Vladimir-Volynsky, and other cities did not need protection from the central government to the same extent as before: they had their own numerous boyars, squads, fortresses, temples, bishops, monasteries, strong merchants, artisans. And most importantly, at that time, at the head of Rus' there was a weak ruler who did not have the will and strength to subjugate the entire country. The only thing that still united all the lands was their fear of Polovtsian invasions. The church also spoke out for the unity of Rus'.

Several days passed after the Lyubech Congress, and it became clear that no amount of oaths could appease the princes fighting for power and wealth.

The meeting participants had not yet reached their cities, and terrible news came from Kyiv: Svyatopolk of Kiev and Davyd of Vladimir-Volynsky captured Prince Vasilko of Terebovlsky, who stopped by the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery to pray. Davyd ordered the prisoner's eyes to be gouged out and thrown into prison.

This angered the rest of the princes, and first of all Monomakh, who had done so much to gather the princes in Lyubech. The united army of many princes approached Kyiv. This time Oleg Chernigovsky also brought his squad. The princes forced Svyatopolk to obey and join them in the campaign against David. Davyd, frightened, asked for mercy, released the blinded Vasilko and returned his possessions to him.

The fragile peace in Rus' was restored, which made it possible to intensify the fight against the Polovtsians.

Being offended is nothing if you don't remember it.
Confucius

After the death of the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav, three sons remained: the eldest Yaropolk, the middle Oleg, and the youngest Vladimir. The first two were of noble birth. Vladimir was the son of Svyatopolk from Olga’s slave, Malusha. Even during Svyatopolk’s life, his children were endowed with power. The Grand Duke divided his lands between his sons, and they ruled the country while Svyatoslav was on campaign. Yaropolk ruled Kyiv. Oleg - the territory of the Drevlyans. The youngest son ruled Novgorod. Moreover, the Novgorodians themselves elected this young man as their prince. This example of the division of power between sons was new for Kievan Rus. Svyatoslav was the first to introduce such an order. But It is precisely this division of inheritance between sons that will be a real disaster for the country in the future.

The first internecine war in Rus'

As a result of the premature death of Prince Svyatoslav, as well as because of his attempt to divide power between his sons, the first internecine war between the princes began. The reason for the war was the following event. While hunting in his domain, Oleg met the son of Sveneld, the governor of Yaropolk. Dissatisfied with this fact, Oleg orders to kill the uninvited guest. Having received the news of the death of the son of his governor, and also under the pressure of the latter, Prince Yaropolk Svyatoslavovich decides to go to war against his brother. This happened in 977.

After the first battle, Oleg could not withstand the onslaught of the army, led by his older brother, and retreated to the city of Ovruch. The essence of this retreat was quite clear: Oleg wanted to get a respite after the defeat and hide his army behind the walls of the city. This is where the saddest thing happened. Hastily retreating into the city, the army created a real stampede on the bridge leading into the city. In this crush, Oleg Svyatoslavovich fell into a deep ditch. The crush continued after that. Many people and horses then fell into this ditch. Prince Oleg died crushed by the bodies of people and horses that fell on top of him. Thus, the Kiev ruler prevailed over his brother. Entering the conquered city, he gives the order to deliver Oleg’s corpse to him. This order was carried out. Seeing the lifeless body of his brother in front of him, the Kiev prince fell into despair. Brotherly feelings triumphed.

At this time, Vladimir, while in Novgorod, received news that his brother had been murdered, and decided to flee overseas, fearing that his older brother might now want to rule alone. Having learned about the flight of his younger brother, Prince Yaropolk Svyatoslavich sent his representatives, governors, who were to rule the city, to Novgorod. As a result of the first Russian internecine war, Oleg was killed, Vladimir fled, and Yaropolk became the sole ruler of Kievan Rus.

End of reign

Until 980, Vladimir was in flight. However, this year, having gathered a powerful army from the Varangians, he returns to Novgorod, removes the governors of Yaropolk and sends them to his brother with a message that Vladimir is gathering an army and going to war against Kyiv. In 980 this military campaign begins. Prince Yaropolk, seeing the numerical strength of his brother, decided to avoid an open battle and with his army took up defense in the city. And then Vladimir resorted to a cunning trick. Secretly, he entered into an alliance with the Kyiv governor, who managed to convince Yaropolk that the people of Kiev were dissatisfied with the siege of the city and demanded Vladimir to reign in Kyiv. Prince Yaropolk succumbed to these persuasion and decided to flee from the capital to the small town of Rotnya. Vladimir’s troops also went there after him. Having besieged the city, they forced Yaropolk to surrender and go to Kyiv to his brother. In Kyiv, he was sent to his brother’s home and the door was closed behind him. There were two Varangians in the room, who killed Yaropolk.

So in 980 Vladimir Svyatoslavovich became the sole prince of Kievan Rus.

From the school history course we know that civil strife and civil wars are bad for any state. They bring destruction, weaken powers, which, as a rule, leads to their destruction by various external forces.

This was the case everywhere and at all times: in the ancient period in Greece and Rome, in the medieval period in Europe and Rus', etc. What wars are called internecine? Why did they weaken the states in which they occurred? We will try to answer these questions in our article.

Concept

Civil war is a war that occurs between cities and lands. This concept refers to the feudal period in the history of any state. However, sometimes the term “internecine war” is used in the study of the history of the ancient and ancient periods as a synonym for the term “civil war”.

Is feudal fragmentation a tragedy?

It is believed that feudal fragmentation and, as a consequence, internecine war is a tragedy for any state. This is how it is presented to us in school courses and cinema. But if you look at it, feudal fragmentation, on the contrary, is beneficial for the state as a whole, although it is sometimes accompanied by armed conflicts between lands and cities.

During a period of fragmentation, economic prosperity always occurs, the development of all lands on the territory of a once united state while maintaining cultural and religious ties. It is the latter factors that prevent the lands from completely separating from each other.

Let us remember our history: each appanage prince sought in his city to build something like the “mother of Russian cities” with powerful walls, churches, and estates. Also, fragmentation made it possible not to send all resources to the center, but to keep them for their own development. Therefore, the collapse of the state before the emergence of capitalist market relations always brings only benefits. However, it is always accompanied by two negative factors:

Constant wars between cities and lands.
The risk of being captured and enslaved by external forces.

Thus, we can conclude: internecine war is a normal process in the natural historical development of any state. The only tragedy is that sometimes this is taken advantage of by peoples who are experiencing a lower stage of cultural and socio-economic development - the stage of “military democracy”. So, we have said which wars are called internecine. Let's move on to some real examples from history.

Greece

The policies of Hellas have always been independent and independent, despite constant civil strife. They united only when Hellas was in mortal danger of being captured. The rest of the time, each policy developed independently, sometimes united into unions, and became either a metropolis or a colony, depending on the situation. This did not particularly affect the lives of ordinary citizens.

On the territory of Hellas there were two political centers on which peace in the region depended: Athens and Sparta. Peace between them was impossible by definition, since they adhered to diametrically opposed ideologies. Athens was supporters of democracy, engaged in trade, crafts, and art. Sparta was a harsh totalitarian state. The policy had strict discipline, complete hierarchical subordination of some group members to others. It was believed that the only necessary occupation of real Spartans was war and preparation for it. A wound in the back was regarded as a real shame for the men of this policy, which was punishable by humiliating death.

Athens dominated the sea; no one could defeat Sparta on land. A certain parity developed: some established their protectorate over the island cities, others captured those that could be reached without ships. However, in the 5th century BC. A long internecine war broke out, lasting about 30 years (431-404 BC).

Most of the Greek city-states were drawn into the war, divided into two camps. Some supported Athens, others - Sparta. This war was distinguished by the fact that it aimed to completely destroy the enemy, without thinking about future consequences: women and children were exterminated, olive trees and vineyards were cut down, workshops were destroyed, etc. Sparta won the war. However, over the course of 30 years, the Spartan ideology, based on asceticism and total submission, was undermined: gold coins began to be minted, public land began to be given and sold, and social stratification of Spartan society occurred.

Why did internecine wars weaken Greece? Firstly, almost the entire economic power of Hellas was destroyed, and secondly, processes began in Sparta that dealt an irreparable blow to the centuries-old ideology of the polis. The Spartans understood what wealth, entertainment, delicious food, and pleasure were. They no longer wanted to return back to the rigid confines of the police state. As a result, Hellas immediately lost both the economic power of Athens and the military power of Sparta. The northern tribes of nomadic shepherds from Macedonia took advantage of this, completely subjugating all of Hellas.

The first civil strife in Rus'

Internecine wars in Rus' also broke out quite often. It is believed that the first occurred between the sons of Svyatoslav - Yaropolk and Vladimir in the 10th century. As a result, Vladimir came to power and later baptized Rus'.

Second civil strife in Rus'

The second civil strife occurred after the death of Vladimir (from 1015 to 1019) - between his sons. Many worthy people died in it, including the first holy martyrs - Boris and Gleb - the sons of Vladimir from the Byzantine princess Anna. As a result of the second civil strife, Yaroslav the Wise came to power. Under him, Rus' reached its greatest power.

Final fragmentation in Rus'. Invasion of the Mongol-Tatars

The most active period of internecine princely wars begins with the death of Prince Yaroslav the Wise (1054). Formally, the state was still united, but it was already becoming clear that the processes of feudal fragmentation had actively begun. Not only Russians, but also Cumans, Lithuanians, Torques, Kosogi and other unfriendly tribes took part in the constant princely squabbles.

The Gentiles did not spare the Orthodox Russian population, and the princes did not spare each other. One of the most influential princes, Vladimir Monomakh, formally extended the unity of Rus'. His son, Mstislav the Great, was able to achieve this. However, after the death of the latter in 1132, Rus' completely plunged into endless internecine wars and feudal fragmentation. And here, too, there were external enemies: in the 13th century, hordes of Mongol-Tatars came to Rus', who captured most of our state.