Conflicts and Reconciliations of Vsevolod the Big Nest and His Sons with Chernigov Princes (1170s–1230s)
Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod
For citation: Kuznetsov, Andrey A. Conflicts and Reconciliations of Vsevolod the Big Nest and His Sons with Chernigov Princes (1170s–1230s) // Drevneishie gosudarstva Vostochnoi Evropy (The Earliest States of Eastern Europe). 2025: Ways and Means of Conflict Resolution / Editor of the volume Т.N. Jackson. Мoscow: GAUGN-Press, 2025. S. 1–1.
DOI: 10.32608/1560-1382-2025-46-1-1
Abstract: The article is devoted to one aspect of the history of Old Rus’ relating to the epoch of political fragmentation. At this time, there were permanent conflicts and clashes between the rulers of the principalities and between the political entities of Old Rus’ – the principalities and the Novgorod Republic. Therefore, the study of political history of fragmented Rus’ through conflicts is promising. It was the conflicts that actualised inter-princely diplomacy (the task of its study was formulated by V.T. Pashuto). Conflicts and reconciliations of the princes of Chernigov and Vladimir principalities in the 1170s–1230s are the subject of this paper. The chronological framework is conditioned by the reigns of Vsevolod the Big Nest and his sons. With the reign of Vsevolod the Big Nest there started the establishment of the dynasty that later gave Moscow princes and tsars. In the article reconstructions of Chernigov–Vladimir conflicts of 1180–1181, 1186, 1194, 1195–1196, 1206–1210, 1224–1225, and 1229–1230 are presented. These conflicts were of varying intensity. Sharp and decisive actions of Vladimir princes, Vsevolod the Big Nest and his son Yaroslav, made those conflicts more acute. These actions included neglect of previous services, seizure of hostages, and deception of trust. Such behavior of Vladimir princes in conflict situations was determined by their personalities, firstly by that of Vsevolod the Big Nest. The subjects of disputes between Chernigov and Vladimir princedoms in different conflicts were the control and influence in Ryazan princedom, in Pereyaslavl princedom in the south of Rus’, in Novgorod. The stability of the conflict line in relations between Vladimir and Chernigov principalities made their relations an important and significant factor in the history of the fragmented Rus’ in 1170s–1230s. This is confirmed by the systematic participation of Russian metropolitans in the resolution of Chernigov-Vladimir disputes. As a rule, Vladimir princes emerged victorious from the conflicts due to their uncompromising attitude and disregard for the norms of the established princely etiquette. Reconciliation was facilitated by the presence of a common opponent, Smolensk princes. The result of the 50-year period of conflicts and reconciliations was the displacement of Chernigov princes from Northern Rus’ by Vladimir princes, as well as the decrease in the political importance and weight of Chernigov princes on the eve and during the Mongol invasion.
References
Архангельский С.И. Локальный метод в исторической науке // Cogito. Альманах истории идей. Вып. 5: Foundation. Ростов-на-Дону, 2011. С. 432–448. [Arkhangel’skij S.I. Lokal’nyy metod v istoricheskoy nauke (The Local Method in Historical Science) // Cogito. Al’manak historii idey. Vyp. 5: Foundation. Rostov-na-Donu, 2011. S. 432–448.]
Бережков Н.Г. Хронология русского летописания. М., 1963. [Berezhkov N.G. Khronologiya russkogo letopisaniya (Chronology of Russian Chronicle Writing). Moscow, 1963.]
Домбровский Д. Генеалогия Мстиславичей (первые поколения до начала XIV в.). СПб., 2015. [Dombrowsky D. Genealogiya Mstislavichey (pervye pokoleniya do nachala XIV v.) (Genealogy of the Mstislavichy. First Generations up to the Beginning of the 14th Century). St. Petersburg, 2015.]
Карпов А.Ю. Всеволод Большое Гнездо. М., 2019. [Karpov A.Ju. Vsevolod Bol’shoe Gnezdo (Vsevolod Big Nest). Moscow, 2019.]
Кузнецов А.А. Новгородская политика владимирских князей // НИС. 2015. Вып. 15 (25). С. 65–87. [Kuznetsov A.A. Novgorodskaya politika vladimirskikh knyazey (Novgorod Policy of the Vladimir Princes) // Novgorodskiy istoricheskiy sbornik. 2015. Vyp. 15 (25). S. 65–87.]
Кузнецов А.А. Великодержавная политика владимирских князей домонгольского времени: историографические тенденции и источниковедение фактов // Северо-Восточная Русь. История, искусство, книжность: новые исследования и материалы. Владимир, 2024. С. 20–35. [Kuznetsov A.A. Velikoderzhavnaya politika vladimirskikh knyazey domongol’skogo vremeni: istoriograficheskie tendentsii i istochnikovedenie faktov (Great-power Policy of the Vladimir Princes in the Pre-Mongolian Time: Historiographical Trends and Source Studies of Facts) // Severo-Vostochnaya Rus’. Istoriya, iskusstvo, knizhnost’: novye issledovaniya i materialy. Vladimir, 2024. S. 20–35.]
Лихачев Д.С. Человек в литературе Древней Руси. СПб., 2015. [Lihachev D.S. Chelovek v literature Drevney Rusi (Man in the Literature of Old Rus’). St. Petersburg, 2015.]
Пашуто В.Т. Опыт периодизации истории русской дипломатии (ранний и развитой феодализм) // Пашуто В.Т. Русь. Прибалтика. Папство. М., 2011. (ДГ, 2008 год). С. 197–221. [Pashuto V.T. Opyt periodizatsii istorii russkoy diplomatii (ranniy i razvitoy feodalizm) (An Attempt at Periodisation of the History of Russian Diplomacy: Early and Developed Feudalism) // Pashuto V.T. Rus’. Pribaltika. Papstvo. Moscow, 2011. (Drevneyshie gosudarstva Vostochnoy Evropy, 2008 god). S. 197–221.]
Щапов Я.Н. Государство и церковь Древней Руси X–XIII вв. М., 1989. [Shchapov Ya.N. Gosudarstvo i tserkov’ Drevney Rusi X–XIII vv. (State and Church in Old Rus’. 10th–13th Centuries.) Moscow, 1989.]
Харди Ђ.Итинерариј Ростислава Михаиловича. Београд, 2019. [Hardi J. Itinerariј Rostislava Mikhailovicha (Itinerary of Rostislav Mihailovich). Beograd, 2019.]
Font M. Rostislav, dominus de Macho // Стефан Првовенчани и његово доба. Историjский институт Београд. Зборник радова. Београд, 2020. Књ. 42. С. 309–326. [Font M. Rostislav, dominus de Macho // Stefan Prvovenchani i negovo doba. Istorijskij institut Beograd. Zbornik radova. Beograd, 2020. Kn. 42. S. 309–326.]