HANDOUT: ]HIGHLY RECOMMENDED READING:
(1) B. Netanyahu, The Origins of the Inquisition in Fifteen Century Spain, 2nd edition (New York Review Books, published by the New York Review of Books,reprinted by arrangement with Random House, Inc.), 1995, 2001
(2) George H Sabine, A History of Political Theory (Holt, Rhinehart and Winston: New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Toronto, and London), 1937, 1950, 1961
(3) Gustavus Myers, History of Bigotry in the United States (Random House: New York), 1943
(4) Robert Reed, The Ohio State University, Anthropology 597.01: Cultural Conflict and Developing Nations – Robert Chirot, The University of Washington, “The Rise of the West”: Max Weber’s explanation of the rise of western progress becomes the best available. It needs to be blended with an awareness that geographic coincidence and medieval class conflict were instrumental in allowing strong bourgeois-dominated towns to emerge from feudalism. This and the very long-lasting political stalemate between contending forces in the Middle Ages and early modern Europe were the key elements in the development of Western nationality. Proof comes from comparing Europe to other major agrarian civilizations, particularly China. Twentieth century historical scholarship confirms Weber more than it supports some recent fashionable sociological theories about the rise of the Westsuch as “world system theory.” “The most important question historical sociology can ask is: Why did the West take such an enormous economical and political lead over the rest of the world. This question is at the heart of Max Weber’s work and it is central to Karl Marx and his followers. Even today the issue dominates historical sociology as well as much as economic history, anthropology, and comparative political science. After almost 150 years of work on this problem, is it possible to provide a reasonably succinct answer? A coherent answer cannot be elegant and it is unlikely to generate theoretical propositions about the future. Rather a combination of narrative reference to basic geographical facts, and a few assumptions about the relationship between politics and economics contains the best possible solution. Those look for the simplicity of a few equations and universal theories about social change can only be disappointed . Nevertheless , the answer is available for those who want to know it. … “
(5) Harry G. Good, A History of Western Education (The Macmillan Company: Collier, Macmillan Limited: London), 1947, 1960 – Part II: Education and the Church: Decline After Charlemagne – In Medieval England – The Crusades
(6) The American Heritage: Book of the American Revolution, By the Editors of The American Heritage, The Magazine of History, Editor in Charge, Richard M Ketchum, Narrative by Bruce Lancaster with a Chapter by J. H. Plume, Introduction by Bruce Catton – The World Beyond America: “The temper and character which prevail in our colonies, are, I am afraid, unalterable by any human art. An Englishman is the unfittest person on earth to argue another Englishman into slavery.” Edmund Burke, March 22, 1775 – : “The sovereignty of the Crown I understand;the sovereignty of Britain I do not understand. We have the same King but not the same legislature.” Benjamin Franklin,
THE RUSSIAN ROMANOFF FAMILY:
The House of Romanov (Russian: Рома́нов, IPA: [rɐˈmanəf], ro-mahn-off) was the second imperial dynasty, after the Rurik dynasty, to rule over Russia, reigning from 1613 until the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II on March 15, 1917, as a result of the February Revolution.
The direct male line of the Romanovs had however already ended with Peter II in 1730. After an era of dynastic crisis, the House of Holstein-Gottorp, a cadet branch of the House of Oldenburg, ascended the throne in 1762 with Peter III, a grandson of Peter I. All rulers from the middle of the 18th century to therevolution of 1917 were descended from that branch. Though officially known as the House of Romanov, these descendants of the Romanov and Oldenburg Houses are sometimes referred to as Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov.
Emperor Nicholas II and many members of his extended family were executed by Bolsheviks in 1918 and it is believed that no member survived, ending the main line definitively. In 1924, Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich, the direct male-line patrilineal descendant of Alexander II of Russia, claimed the headship of the defunct Imperial House of Russia. His granddaughter, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna of Russia, is the current pretender, her only child George Mikhailovich is her heir apparent.”
[Excerpts – Rough Draft: Harold L Carter, The Human Odyssey: The African Odyssey: The African Heritage in World History and Human Biological and Cultural History: From Prehistoric Times: 4.6 Billion Years Ago and the Earliest Civilizations: 5,000 Years Ago to the 21st Century (Winter, 2014)]:
Chapter 20: …
From the 11th Century (1000 A.D. – 1100 A.D.) to the 15th Century A.D. (1400 A.D. – 1500 A.D.):
1066 A.D. – England:
“Rise of Parliament in England: The ancient Witen of the Anglo-Saxon kings, an advisory council of the chief (“wise”) men of the kingdom replaced by the Great Council composed of all who held land by feudal tenure directly from the king after the Norman conquest in 1066..
The Roman Catholic Church:
“The Inquistion was organized as part of the justice systemof the Roman Catholic Church in the 12th century with the introduction of torture in the persecution of heresy and other offences against canon law. Prior to the 12th century the Roman Catholic Church had suppressed heresy through a system of ecclesiastical proscriptions or imprisonments but without using torture and seldom resorting to executions although some countries through overzealous populace actions did punish heresy with the death penalty. [Footnotes: Foxe’s Book of Martyrs (http://www.jesus.org.uk/vault/library/foxes_book_of_martyrs.pdf ) Chapter V and Blotzer, J. (1910). “Inquisition” (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/p8026a.htm ). The Catholic Encyclopedia. Robert Appleton Company.]
Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241 A.D.) assigned the duty of carrying out inquisitions to the Dominican Order who judged heresy using the local authorities to establish a tribunal and to prosecute heretics. After 1200 a Grand Inquisitor headed each Inquisition.
To combat the heresy and then schism of the Protestant Reformation Paul III (Pope from 1534 to 1549 A.D.) established a system of tribunals, administered by the “Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Universal Inquisition staffed by cardinals and other Church officials. In 1908 Pope Saint Pius X renamed the organization and it became the “Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office” which in turn became the “Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1965 which name continues to this day. Sentences were not pronounced by the Inquisition but convicted heretics were turned over to secular authorities. [Footnote: Lea, Henry Charles, “Chaptr VII. The Inquisition Founded” (http://bulfinch.englishatheist.org/mm/inquisition/Chapter7.htm ).
“A History of the Inquisition In the Middle Ages. I. ISBN 1-152-29621-3. “Obstinate heretics, refusing to abjure and return to the Church with due penance, and those who after abjuration relapsed, were to be abandoned to the secular arm for fitting punishment.” ]
The Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition – The Spanish Inquisition:
“:The Roman Catholic monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile established The Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, commonly known as the Spanish Inquisition in 1480 A.D. It was intended to maintain Roman Catholic orthodoxy in their kingdoms and replace the Medieval Inquisition which was under Papal control by ensuring the orthodoxy of those who were newly converted from Judaism and Islam. Royal decrees issued in 1492 and 1501 ordered Jews and Muslims to convert or leave Spain. Among the reasons for funding the Spanish Inquisition were increase political authority and weaken the opposition, suppression of conversos profiting from confiscation of the property of convicted heretics, reduce social tensions and protect the kingdom from the danger of a secret uprising. It was under the direct control of the Spanish monarchy and was not abolished until 1834 during the reign of Isabella II.
1215 A.D.: England – The Great Charter:
“A group of barons thoroughly reactionary and in their own self interest rose in rebellion against King John and forced the king to sign the agreement called the Great Charter or Magna Carta which placed restrictionson his powers. Though its original intention was reactionary and in the self interest of the barons its historical importance is not its original intention but its ultimate result. Reinterpreted to suit changing times, the Magna Carta was appealed to in in later years as the bulwark of the rights of Englishmen and served as a reminder of when armed rebellion against the monarch had occurred and it became the most imprtant landmark in the tradition of the supremacy of the law as opposed to the king’s arbitrary will.
1350-1200 A.D. – England – George H Sabine, A History of Political Theory (Holt, Rhinehart and Winston: New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Toronto, and London), 1937, 1950, 1961:
“In the middle of the thirteenth century (1350 A.D. – 1200 A.D.) England’s King Henry III, King John’s successor, aroused great opposition by his subservience to the financial demands of the Pope and through the resistance of the barons consequently there was then establishment in
Parliament as an elective and representative body containing commoners as well as the great feudal lords.
“Early in the fourteenth century (1400 A.D. – 1300 A.D.) there was a formal separation of Parliament into two houses, Lords and Commons. In the European continent countries during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries A.D. (1300 A.D. – 1400 A.D. – 1400 A.D. – 1500 A.D.) kings and princes ruled by decree.
Gustavus Myers, History of Bigotry in the United States (Random House: New York), 1943
,p. 73 – France:
1297 A.D. – “King Louis IX of France – burned the Talmud – Jews were compelled to wear a f
+blue infamy cloth – canonized as a Saint by Pope Boniface VIII in 1297 A.D.
p. 74 – Germany
Pope Innocent IV: Germany:
1243-1254 A.D. – Germany – “Pope Innocent IV in a bull to the archbishops, bishops and nobles of Germany treated with incredulity and denounced with scorn the murders attributed to Jews and branded as crimes the systematic cruelties inflicted on them … Germany had been rift with fantastic stories of ritual human sacrifice made by Jews and mob uprisings were frequent and bloody [Footnote 17: Milman, History of the Jews, Vol. 3, p. 207
p. 75 – France:
1394 – “Pedro de Luna, Benedict XIII – intensely anti-Jewish – burned the Talmud
The Roman Catholic Church: 1300 A.D. – 1564 A.D.
The Spanish Inquisition:
Gustavus Myers, History of Bigotry in the United States (Random House: New York), 1943: p. 226
End Of Chapter 20: Rise Of Christianity
The Book of Jewish Knowledge: an Encyclopedia of Judaism and the Jewish People, Covering All Elements of Jewish Life from Biblical Times to the Present by Nathan Ausubel (Crown Publishers, Inc: New York), 1964, Nathan Ausubel
THE AMSTERDAM JEWISH CONGREGATION AT THE TIME OF THE SPANISH INQUISITION – SPANISH JEWISH “CONVERSOS” IN HOLLAND:
“The Gentle philosopher of Amsterdam, Spinoza, himself driven out of the Jewish Community …
“Spinoza – Expulsion from the Jewish Community:
“On July 27, 1656, the Talmud Torah congregation of Amsterdam issued a writ of cherem (Hebrew …, a kind of ban, shunning, ostracism, expulsion, or excommunication) against the 23 year old Spinoza. The following document translates the official record of the cherem.
‘The Lords of the ma’amad, having long known of the evil opinions and acts of Baruch de Espinoza, have endeavored by various means and promises to turn him from his evil ways.
‘But having failed to make him mend his wicked ways and on the contrary, daily receiving more and more serious information about the abominable heresies which he practiced and taught and about his monstrous deeds, and having for this numerous trustworthy witnesses who have deposed and born witness to this effect in the presence of the said Espinoza, they became convinced of the truth of the matter, and after all of this has been investigated in the presence of the honorable chachamin, they have decided, with their consent, that the said Espinoza should be excommunicated and expelled from the people of Israel. By the decree of the angels, and by the command of the holy men, we excommunicate, expel, curse and damn Baruch de Espinoza, with the consent of God, Blessed be He, and with the consent of all of the Holy Congregation, in front of these holy Scrolls with the six-hundred-and-thirteen precepts which are written therein, wih the excommunication with which Joshua banned Jerico, with the curse with which Elisha cursed the boys, and with all the curses which are written in the Book of the Law. Cursed be he by day and cursed be he by night, cursed be he when he lies down, and cursed be he when he rises up, cursed be he when he goes out, and cursed be he when he comes in. The Lord will not spare him, the anger and wrath of the Lord will rage against this man and bring upon him all the curses which are written in this book, and the Lord will blot out his name from under heaven, and the Lord will separate him to his injury from all the tribes of Israel with all the curses of the covenant, which are written in the Book of the Law. But you who cleave unto the Lord God are all alive this day. We order that no one should communicate with him orally or in writing or show him any favor, or stay with him under the same roof, or within four ells of him, or read anything composed or written by him.’
“The Talmud Torah congregation issued cherem routinely, on matters great and small, so such an edict was not unusual. The language of Spinoza’s cherem is unusually harsh, however, and does not appear in any other cherem known to have been issued by the Portuguese Jewish community in Amsterdam. The exact reason for expelling Spinoza is not stated. The cherem refers only to the ‘abominable heresies that he practiced and taught,’ to his ‘monstrous deeds,’ and to the testimony of witnesses ‘in the presence of the aid Espinoza.’ There is no record of such testimonhy, but there appear to have been several likely reasons for the issuance of the cherem.
First, there were Spinoza’s radical theological views that he was apparently expressing in public. As philosopher and Spinoza’s biographer Steven Nadler puts it: ‘No doubt he was giving utterance to just those ideas that would soon appear in his philosophical tretises. In those works, Spinoza denies the immortality of the soul, strongly rejects the notion of a providential God—the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob , and claims that the Law was neither literally given by God nor any longer binding on Jews. Can there be any mystery as to why one of history’s boldest and most radical thinkers was sanctioned by an orthodox Jewish community?
“Second, there is ample basis to assume that the Amsterdam Jewish community, largely comprising former ‘conversos’ having within the last century fled from the Portuguese Inquisition (and their children and grandchildren) must have been concerned to protect its reputation from any association with Spinoza lest his controversial views provide the basis for their own possible persecution or expulsion. There is little evidence that the Amsterdam municipal auhorities were directly involved in Spinoza’s cherem itself. But in 1619, the town council expressly ordered [the Portuguese Jewish community] to regulate their conduct and ensure that the members of the community kept to a strict observance of Jewish law,’ and other evidence such as bans adopted by the synagogue itself on public wedding or funeral processions and on discussing religious matters with Christians, lest such activity might ‘disturb the liberty we enjoy,’ makes clear that the danger of upsetting the civil authorities was never far from mind. Thus, the issuance of Spinoza’s cherem was almost certainly, in part, an exercise in self censorship by the Portuguese Jewish community in Amsterdam.
“Third, it appears likely that Spinoza himself ha already taken the initiative to separate himself from the Talmud Torah congregation and was vocally expressing his hostility to Judaism itself. He had probably stopped attending services at the synagogue either after the lawsuit with his sister or after the knife attack on its steps. He might already have been voicing the view expressed later in his “Theological Political Treatise,” that the civil authorities should suppress Judaism as harmful to the Jews themselves. Either for financial or other reasons, he had in any case effectively stopped contributing to the synagogue by March 1656. And he had committed the ‘monstrous deed,’ contrary the regulations of the synagogue and the views of certain rabbinical authorities (including Maimonides), of filing suit in a civil court rather than with the synagogue authorities to renounce his father’s heritage, no less Upon being notified of the issuance of the cherem, he is reported to have said: ‘Very well; this does not force me to do anything that I would not have done of my own accord, had I not been afraid of a scandal. Thus, unlike most of the cherem issued routinely by the Amsterdam congregation to discipline its members, the cherem issued against Spinoza did not lead to repentence and so was never withdrawn.
“After the cherem, Spinoza is said to have addressed an “Apology” (defense) written in Spanish to the elders of the synagogue, ‘in which he defended his views as orthodox, and condemned the rabbis for accusing him of ‘horrible practices and other enormities’ merely because he had neglected ceremonial observances. This “Apology” does not survive, but some of its contents may later have been included in his “Theological Political Treatise.” …
IVAN I OF MOSCOW:
After the prince of TVER JOINED A REBELLION AGAINST THE MONGOLS IN 1327, HIS RIVAL PRINCE IVAN I OF MOSCOW JOINED THE MONGOLS in crushing Tver and devastating its lands. By doing so he eliminated his rival, ALLOWED THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH TO MOVE ITS HEADQUARTERS TO MOSCOW, AND WAS GRANTED THE TITLE OF GRAND PRINCE BY THE MONGOLS. As such, the MUSCOVITE PRINCE BECAME THE CHIEF INTERMEDIARY BETWEEN THE MONGOL OVERLORDS AND THE RUS’ LANDS, which PAID FURTHER DIVIDENDS FOR MOSCOW’S RULERS. While the Mongols often raided other areas of Rus’, they tended to RESPECT THE LANDS CONTROLLED BY THEIR PRINCIPAL COLLABORATOR. This, in turn, ATTRACTED NOBLES AND THEIR SERVANTS who sought to settle in the relatively secure and peaceful MOSCOW LANDS.
MONGOL DOMINANCE OF RUS’ TERRITORIES – 1380 A.D. – 1480 A.D. – PAVED THE WAY FOR THE TZARDOM OF RUSSIA AND THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE AND THE RISE OF MODERN RUSSIA, UKRAINE, AND BELARUS:
Although Russian forces defeated the Golden Horde at the Battle of Kulikovo in 1380, MONGOL DOMINATION of parts of Rus’ territories, with the requisite demands of tribute, CONTINUED UNTIL THE GREAT STAND ON THE UGRA RIVER IN 1480.
It has been argued[by whom?] that without THE MONGOL DESTRUCTION OF KIEVAN RUS’, the TSARDOM OF RUSSIA AND SUBSEQUENTLY THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE WOULD NOT HAVE RISEN.
TRADE ROUTES WITH THE EAST came through the Rus’ lands, making them a center for trade from both worlds. Mongol influence, while destructive to their enemies, HAD A SIGNIFICANT LONG TERM EFFECT ON THE RISE OF MODERN RUSSIA, UKRAINE, AND BELARUS.
Influence on Rus’ society
Historians have debated THE LONG-TERM INFLUENCE OF MONGOL RULE ON RUS’ SOCIETY. The Mongols have been blamed for the destruction of Kievan Rus’, THE BREAKUP OF THE ANCIENT RUS’ NATIONALITY INTO THREE COMPONENTS, and the introduction of the CONCEPT OF “ORIENTAL DESPOTISM” INTO RUSSIA. Historians also credit the Mongol regime with AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUSCOVY AS A STATE.
UNDER MONGOL OCCUPATION, FOR EXAMPLE, MUSCOVY DEVELOPED ITS MESTNICHESTVOHIERARCHY, POSTAL ROAD NETWORK (based on Mongolian ortoo system, known in Russian as “yam”, hence the terms yamshchik, Yamskoy Prikaz, etc.), CENSUS, FISCAL SYSTEM, AND MILITARY ORGANIZATION.
RUSSIAN AND MONGOLIAN RULING CLASSES: THE PERIOD OF MONGOL RULE OVER RUSSIS AND THE SIGNIFICANT CULTURAL AND INTERPERSONAL CONTACTS BETWEEN THE RUSSIAN AND MONGOLIAN RULING CLASSES:
The period of Mongol rule over Russia included SIGNIFICANT CULTURAL AND INTERPERSONAL CONTACTS BETWEEN THE RUSSIAN AND MONGOLIAN RULING CLASSES.
17TH CENTURY (1600 A.D. – 1700 A.D.) – RUSSIAN BOYAR (NOBLES) ADOPT TATAR LANGUAGE AND MONGON NAMES:
By 1450, THE TATAR LANGUAGE had become fashionable in THE COURT OF THE GRAND PRINCE OF MOSCOW, VASILY II, who was accused of excessive love of the Tatars and their speech, and many Russian noblemen adopted Tatar surnames (for example, a member of the Veliamanov family adopted the Turkic name “Aksak” and his descendents were the Aksakovs) Many RUSSIAN BOYAR (NOBLE) families traced their descent from the Mongols or Tatars, including Veliaminov-Zernov, Godunov, Arseniev, Bakhmetev, Bulgakov (descendents of Bulgak), and Chaadaev (DESCENDENTS OF GENGHIS KHAN’S SON Jagatay). In a survey of RUSSIAN NOBLE FAMILIES OF THE 17TH CENTURY, over 15% of the Russian noble families had TATAR OR ORIENTAL ORIGINS.
The Mongols brought about changes in the ECONOMIC POWER OF STATES AND OVERALL TRADE.
RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH, ST PAPHNUTIUS OF BOROVSK WAS THE GRANDSON OF A MONGOL TAX COLLECTOR – NEPHEW OF A MONGOL CONVERTED TO CHRISTIANITY AND BECAME A MONK:
In the religious sphere, St. Paphnutius of Borovsk was the grandson of a Mongol baskak, or tax collector, while a nephew of Khan Bergai of the Golden Horde converted to Christianity and became known as the monk St. Peter Tsarevich of the Horde
MONGOL INFLUENCE ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, TORTURE AS PART OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, BEHEADING OF ALLEGED TRAITORS AND BRANDING OF THIEVES WITH EXCECUTION FOR A THIRD ARREST:
In the judicial sphere, under Mongol influence capital punishment, which during the times of Kievan Rus’ had only been applied to slaves, became widespread, and the use of torture became a regular part of criminal procedure. Specific punishments introduced in Moscow included beheading for alleged traitors and branding of thieves (with execution for a third arrest). ”
Timeline of Russian history
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is a timeline of Russian history, comprising important legal and territorial changes and political events in Russia and its predecessor states. To read about the background to these events, see History of Russia. See also the list of leaders of Russia.
Dates before 31 January 1918, when the Bolshevik government adopted the Gregorian calendar, are given in the Old Style.
This is an incomplete list that may never be able to satisfy particular standards for completeness. You can help by expanding it with entries that are reliably sourced.
Centuries: 13th •14th •15th •16th •17th •18th •19th •20th •21st
Year Date Event
1223 Battle of the Kalka River: The warriors of Rus’ first encountered the Mongol armies of Genghis Khan.
1227 Boyar intrigues forced Mstislav, the prince of Novgorod, to give the throne to his son-in-law Andrew II of Hungary.
1236 Alexander Nevsky was summoned by the Novgorodians to become Grand Prince of Novgorod and, as their military leader, to defend their northwest lands from Swedish and German invaders.
1237 December Mongol invasion of Rus: Batu Khan set fire to Moscow and slaughtered and enslaved its civilian inhabitants.
1240 15 July Battle of the Neva: The Novgorodian army defeated a Swedish invasion force at the confluence of the Izhora and Neva Rivers.
1242 5 April Battle of the Ice: The army of Novgorod defeated the invading Teutonic Knights on the frozen surface of Lake Peipus.
1263 14 November Nevsky died. His appanages were divided within his family; his youngest son Daniel became the first Prince of Moscow. His younger brother Yaroslav of Tver had become the Grand Prince of Tver and of Vladimir and had appointed deputies to run the Principality of Moscow during Daniel’s minority.
Year Date Event
1303 5 March 14TH CENTURY (1300 A.D. – 1400 A.D.) – DANIEL, PRINCE OF MOSCOW YURY, OLDEST SON OF DANIEL – YURY ARRIED THE SIS OF A MONGOL, UZBEG HAN – UZBEG KHAN DEPOSED THE GRAND PRINCE OF VLADIMIR AND APPOINTED YURY TO THAT OFFICE:
DMITRIV THE TERRIBE EYES, THE SON OF THE LAST GRAND PRINCE OF VLADIMIR CONVINCED UZBEG KHAN THAT YURY HAD BEEN STEALING FROM THE “KHAN’S TRIBUTE MONEY AND HE DMITRIV THE TERIBLE EYES WAS REAPPOINTED TO THE PRINCEDOM OF VLADIMIR
DMITRIV MURDERED YURY – HIS YOUNGER BROTHER, IVAN I KALITASUCEEDED RURY
IVAN I KALITA LED MONGOLS AGAINST AN UPRISING IN THE GRAND DUCHY OF TVER AND THE GRAND PRINCE OF VLADIMIR AND REPLACED HIM
AFTER ANUMBER OF SUCCESSIONS, IVAN THE GREAT, GRAND PRINCEOF VLADIMIR IVAN THE GREAT ESTAB LISHED A LEGAL CODE THAT PREVENTED SERFS FROM LEAVING THEIR MASTER
MORE SUCCESSIONS THEN IVAN IV THE TERRIBLE WAS CROWNED TSAR IN 1547 A.D.
Daniel died. His oldest son Yury succeeded him as Prince of Moscow.
1317 Yury married the sister of Uzbeg Khan. Uzbeg deposed the Grand Prince of Vladimir and appointed Yury to that office.
1322 Dmitriy the Terrible Eyes, the son of the last Grand Prince of Vladimir, convinced Uzbeg Khan that Yury had been stealing from the khan’s tribute money. He was reappointed to the princedom of Vladimir.
1325 21 November Yury was murdered by Dmitriy. His younger brother Ivan I Kalita succeeded him.
1327 15 August AMBASSADOR OF THE MONGOLS WAS TRAPPED AND BURNED ALIVE IN THE GRAND DUCHYOF IVER
The ambassador of the Golden Horde was trapped and burned alive during an uprising in the Grand Duchy of Tver.
1328 Ivan led a Horde army against the Grand Prince of Tver, also the Grand Prince of Vladimir. Ivan was allowed to replace him in the latter office.
1340 31 March Ivan died. His son Simeon succeeded him both as Grand Prince of Moscow and as Grand Prince of Vladimir
1353 Simeon died. His younger brother Ivan II, The Fair, succeeded him as Grand Prince of Moscow.
1359 13 November Ivan died. His son, Dmitri Donskoi, succeeded him.
1380 8 September Battle of Kulikovo: A Muscovite force defeated a significantly larger Blue Horde army at Kulikovo Field.
1382 The Mongol khan Tokhtamysh reasserted his power by looting and burning Moscow.
1389 19 May Dmitri died. The throne fell to his son, Vasili I.
Year Date Event
1425 February Vasili died. His son Vasili II, The Blind, succeeded him as Grand Prince of Moscow; his wife Sophia became regent. His younger brother, Yury Dmitrievich, also issued a claim to the throne.
1430 Dmitrievich appealed to the khan of the Golden Horde to support his claim to the throne. Vasili II retained the Duchy of Moscow, but Dmitrievich was given the Duchy of Dmitrov.
1432 Vasili II led an army to capture Dmitrov. His army was defeated and he was forced to flee to Kolomna. Dmitrievich arrived in Moscow and declared himself the Grand Prince. Vasili II was pardoned and made mayor of Kolomna.
1433 The exodus of Muscovite boyars to Vasili II’s court in Kolomna persuaded Dmitrievich to return Moscow to his nephew and move to Galich.
1434 Vasily II burned Galich.
16 March The army of Yury Dmitrievich defeated the army of Vasily II. The latter fled to Nizhny Novgorod.
1 April Dmitrievich arrived in Moscow and again declared himself the Grand Prince.
5 July Dmitrievich died. His oldest son Vasili Kosoy, the Cross-Eyed, succeeded him as Grand Prince.
1435 Dmitrievich’s second son, Dmitry Shemyaka, allied himself with Vasili II. Vasili the Cross-Eyed was expelled from the Kremlin and blinded. Vasili II returned to the throne of the Grand Prince.
1438 Russo-Kazan Wars: The khan of the recently established Khanate of Kazan led an army towards Moscow.
1445 7 July Battle of Suzdal: The Russian army suffered a great defeat at the hands of the Tatars of Kazan. Vasili II was taken prisoner; operation of the government fell to Dmitry Shemyaka.
December Vasili II was ransomed back to Muscovy.
1446 Shemyaka had Vasili II blinded and exiled to Uglich, and had himself declared the Grand Prince.
1450 The boyars of Moscow expelled Shemyaka from the Kremlin and recalled Vasili II to the throne.
1452 Shemyaka was forced to flee to the Novgorod Republic.
1453 Shemyaka was poisoned by Muscovite agents.
1462 27 March Vasili II died. His son Ivan III, The Great, succeeded him as Grand Prince.
1463 Russia annexed the Duchy of Yaroslavl.
1471 14 July Battle of Shelon: A Muscovite army defeated a numerically superior Novgorodian force.
1474 Russia annexed the Rostov Duchy.
1476 Ivan stopped paying tribute to the Great Horde.
1478 14 January The Novgorod Republic surrendered to the authority of Moscow.
1480 11 November Great stand on the Ugra river: Ivan’s forces deterred Akhmat Khan of the Great Horde from invading Muscovy.
1485 Ivan annexed the Grand Duchy of Tver.
1497 Ivan issued a legal code, the Sudebnik, which standardized the Muscovite law, expanded the role of the criminal justice system, and limited the ability of the serfs to leave their masters.
Year Date Event
1505 27 October Ivan died. He was succeeded as Grand Duke of Muscovy by his son, Vasili III.
1507 Russo-Crimean Wars: The Crimean Khanate raided the Muscovite towns of Belyov and Kozelsk.
1510 With the approval of most of the local nobility, Vasili arrived in the Pskov Republic and declared it dissolved.
1517 The last Grand Prince of the Ryazan Principality was captured and imprisoned in Moscow.
1533 3 December Vasili died; his son Ivan IV, The Terrible, succeeded him. His wife Elena Glinskaya became regent.
1538 4 April Glinskaya died. She was succeeded as regent by Prince Vasily Nemoy.
1547 16 January An elaborate ceremony crowned Ivan the first tsar of Muscovy.
1552 22 August Siege of Kazan (1552): Muscovite armed forces arrived at Kazan.
2 October Siege of Kazan (1552): The Muscovite army breached the walls of Kazan.
13 October Siege of Kazan (1552): The civilian population of Kazan was massacred, the city occupied.
1553–1554 First book printed in Russia, the Narrow-typed Gospel Book.
1556 Muscovy conquered and annexed the Astrakhan Khanate.
1558 Livonian War: Ivan demanded a back-breaking tribute from the Bishopric of Dorpat. The Bishop sent diplomats to Muscovy to renegotiate the amount; Ivan expelled them and invaded and occupied the Bishopric.
1560 2 August Battle of Ergeme: Ivan’s army crushed the forces of the Livonian Order.
1561 28 November The Livonian Order agreed to the Union of Wilno, under which the Livonian Confederation was partitioned between Lithuania, Sweden and Denmark. Lithuania and Sweden sent troops to liberate their new territories from Russian possession.
1565 February Ivan established the Oprichnina, a Muscovite territory ruled directly by the tsar.
1569 1 July The Union of Lublin was signed. Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were merged into the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth; Poland began aiding Lithuania in its war against Muscovy.
1572 The Oprichnina was abolished.
1581 16 November Ivan killed his oldest son.
1582 15 January Livonian War: The Peace of Jam Zapolski ended Polish–Lithuanian participation in the war. Muscovy gave up its claims to Livonia and the city of Polatsk.
23 October Battle of Chuvash Cape: Muscovite soldiers dispersed the armed forces of the Siberia Khanate from its capital, Qashliq.
1583 Livonian War: The war was ended with the Treaty of Plussa. Narva and the Gulf of Finland coast went to Sweden.
1584 18 March Ivan died of mercury poisoning. The throne fell to his mentally retarded son Feodor I; his son-in-law Boris Godunov took de facto charge of government.
1590 18 January Russo-Swedish War (1590–1595): The Treaty of Plussa expired. Muscovite troops laid siege to Narva.
25 February Russo-S
wedish War (1590–1595): A Swedish governor on the disputed territory surrendered to the Muscovites.
1591 15 May Dimitriy Ivanovich, Ivan the Terrible’s third and youngest son, died in exile from a stab wound to the throat. Long-regarded as murdered by agents of Boris Godunov, more recently scholars have begun to defend the theory that Dimitriy’s death was self-inflicted during an epileptic seizure.