Московские каникулы. Исторические записки
 Скачать 65.98 Kb.
|
|
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ Алексеев, С. В., Плотникова, О. А. (2012) Мечты о Новом Иерусалиме. Христианское обос% нование власти: Византия, Болгария, Русь // Родина. №5. С. 51–52. Борисов, С. Н. (1999) Политика московских князей (конец XIII — первая половина XIV века). М. : Изд%во МГУ. 391 с. Веселовский, С. Б. (2008) Московское государство: XV–XVII вв. Из научного наследия. М. : АИРО%XXI. 379, [2] с. Гумилев, Л. Н. (2002) От Руси к России. М. : АСТ. 392 с. Данилевский, И. Н. (2001) Русские земли глазами современников и потомков (XII–XIV вв.) : Курс лекций. М. : Аспект Пресс. 389 с. Ковин, В. Н. (2006) Социально%политический контекст титулатуры Ивана IV : дис. … канд. ист. наук. Челябинск. 249 с. Медведев, А. А. (2006) Русская Православная Церковь в процессе формирования Москов% ского княжества (1283–1453 гг.) : дис. … канд. ист. наук. М. 361 с. Поляков, Ю. А. (1999) Историческая наука: люди и проблемы : в 3 кн. М. : РОССПЭН. Кн. 1. 455 с. Рогожин, Н. М. (2008) Царь, дума и опричнина // Государственность России: идеи, люди, символы / сост., науч. ред. Р. Г. Пихоя. М. : РОССПЭН. 444 с. С. 111–140. Русская социально%политическая мысль. XI–XVII вв. (2011) : хрестоматия / сост. С. В. Пере% везенцев, подг. текстов С. В. Перевезенцев, Г. В. Талина, Д. В. Ермашов, А. С. Ермолина, В. С. Зу% бова ; под ред. А. А. Ширинянца, С. В. Перевезенцева. М. : Изд%во Моск. ун%та. 728 с. Русская социально%политическая мысль X — начала XX века (2005) : учеб.%метод. пособие М. : Ихтиос ; Социально%политическая мысль. Ч. 1. История политических учений России X–XVII вв. : От Киевской Руси до Московского царства. 156 с. Синелобов, А. П. (2003) Эволюция крупного феодального землевладения в Московском княжестве как фактор политического объединения Северо%Восточных русских земель (60%е гг. XIV в. — 70%е гг. XV в.) : дис. … канд. ист. наук. М. 224 с. Станкевич, Н. В. (1834a) О причинах постепенного возвышения Москвы до смерти Иоан% на III // Ученые записки императорского Московского университета. Ч. 5. №1. С. 29–55. Станкевич, Н. В. (1834b) О причинах постепенного возвышения Москвы до смерти Иоан% на III // Ученые записки императорского Московского университета. Ч. 5. №2. С. 247–279. Датапоступления:24.02.2015г. MOSCOWRUS’FROMAPANAGEPRINCIPALITYTOKINGDOM: THEEVOLUTIONOFSTATEHOODTHROUGHTHEEYESOFITSCONTEMPORARIES G.V.TALINA (MOSCOW STATE PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY) The article analyzes the evolution of monarchical power in Moscow Rus’ from the 14th to the first half of the 16th centuries. The first stage of the process began when Moscow entered the struggle for the yarlyk and title of Grand Prince. The final stage happened when Moscow princes acquired the title of tsar. We pay special attention to the understanding and interpretation of the monarch’s power by both public thinkers and official ideology. The rise of Moscow has been interpreted in the light of various approaches and trends in histori% ography. We stress the role of church and its leaders in obtaining the yarlyk by the grand princes of Moscow. The 14th and 15th centuries were the time of transitioning from compromise to direct oppo% sition between Rus’ and the Horde. In the middle of the 16th century the evolution of power was hotly debated by such thinkers as Fyodor Karpov, Maxim Grek and Ivan Peresvetov. The subject of the debate was the historical mis% sion of Russia, as well as the nature and role of the samoderzhaviye (autocratic rule of the sovereign). Where and how did this power find support — through royal grace, good advisors, army and other instruments of power? Each of the thinkers came up with an answer of his own. Originally, the power of the khans had been regarded legitimate, and the khan himself as a tsar. Military confrontation between Rus’ and the Horde during the reign of Dmitry Ivanovich (Donskoy) was mainly due to the usurpation of the Chingizids’ power by Mamai. Mamai’s status in Rus’ was equaled to that of the Grand Prince, no higher; the legality of his power was generally doubted. By the mid%15th century the title of tsar had been increasingly often unofficially applied to Russian princes. It marked the start of the transformation of the power of Grand Princes into that of the tsars, which completed in the mid%16th century with the coronation of Ivan IV. By the start of the century, the concept of Moscow as ‘the third Rome’ had become dominant in the general understanding of the royal power. The idea of Russian rulers’ descent from those of Roman Empire and Byzantium was actively promoted as the foundation of the tsar status. The title “sovereign” first appeared under Ivan III and proved to mark an interim stage of power growth. It could never be equaled to that of the tsar or king. Overall, the concepts developed by official ideologists and public thinkers went through several stages, each linked to a new step in the evolution of royal power. We will be only slightly inaccurate if we assert that every century of our period (14th, 15th and 16th) had its own dominant concept of power shaped by both official ideology and public thought. Keywords: Moscow Russia, Russian history, Grand Prince, Tsar of Russia, autocratic sovereign, khan, the Horde period, land unification, centralization of power. |