lecture iv-第6章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


He　secured　the　throne　to　his　descendants　and　thus　annulled　one　of
the　most　important　rights　of　the　folkmote；　that　of　choosing　the
ruler　of　the　land。　It　is　not　to　be　wondered　at；　therefore；　that
from　the　middle　of　the　thirteenth　century　no　mention　is　made　of
the　popular　assemblies　of　Sousdal。
　　　　Up　to　this　point　we　have　tried　to　show　that　during　the　Middle
Ages　Russia　was　a　loose　federation　of　principalities；　in　which
the　people　were　wont　to　exercise；　on　a　larger　or　smaller　scale；
legislative；　executive；　judicial；　and　even　political　power。　By
political　power　I　mean　the　right　of　electing　and　dismissing　the
ruler；　of　declaring　war　and　making　peace。　The　people　exercised
their　right　side　by　side　with　the　prince；　the　〃knias；〃　who
gradually　increased　his　own　power　to　the　prejudice　of　the　power
of　the　folkmote　or　veche。　At　the　end　of　the　fifteenth　century
Novgorod　and　Pscov　alone　maintained　the　primitive　relations
between　the　prince　and　the　popular　assembly；　for　they　still　kept
the　power　of　electing　and　dismissing　the　chief　magistrate　of　the
state；　as　well　as　the　highest　officials；　the　posadnik；　and　the
〃head　of　thousands。〃　In　the　south…western　part　of　Russia　the
popular　assembly　became；　during　the　fifteenth　and　sixteenth
centuries；　a　local　administrative；　financial；　and　judicial　body；
but　it　lost　all　political　power。　In　the　northern　principalities；
and　especially　in　Vladimir　and　Moscow；　the　folkmotes　totally
ceased　to　exist。　The　growth　first　of　Vladimir　and　then　of　Moscow
was　followed　by　the　complete　annihilation　of　the　political　rights
of　the　people；　and　this　seems　to　have　been　recognised　by　the
writers　of　the　day。　Describing　the　proceedings　by　which　the
republic　of　Novgorod　was　subjected　by　the　Tzar；　Ivan　the　Third；
the　chronicle；　known　under　the　name　of　the　Patriarch　Nikon；　says：
〃In　the　year　1478　the　Tzar　declared　to　the　republic　〃that　he
wanted　Novgorod　to　be　in　the　exercise　of　the　same　power　as　that
which　he　possessed　at　Moscow。〃　The　inhabitants　agreed　to　comply
with　his　wishes　on　certain　terms；　whereby　his　autocracy　would　be
limited。　The　Tzar　immediately　sent　the　following　reply：　〃I　told
you　that　I　wanted　in　Novgorod　a　state　similar　to　that　of　Moscow；
and　instead　of　that　I　hear　you　teaching　me　how　I　ought　to
organise　my　state　in　a　way　different　from　what　it　is　at　present。〃
On　hearing　this；　the　citizens　sent　another　embassy　to　ask　what
the　Tzar　meant　by　saying　that　he　wanted　in　Novgorod　a　government
like　that　of　Moscow。　He　answered：　〃No　popular　assembly；　veche；　no
elected　magistrate；　and　the　whole　state　in　the　power　of　the
Tzar。〃（2*）　This　answer　left　no　doubt　as　to　his　autocratic
intentions　and　their　accomplishment　in　the　Moscovite　state。
　　　　Let　us　now　inquire　into　the　causes　which　produced　this
increase　of　monarchical　power。　The　first　seems　to　have　been　the
great　change　which　had　been　brought　about　in　the　relations
between　the　prince　and　the　popular　assembly　by　the　subjection　of
the　prince　to　the　power　of　the　Khans。　It　is　well　known　that　the
Tartars；　after　having　established　the　centre　of　their　European
empire　on　the　shores　of　the　Volga；　not　far　from　where　it　joins
the　Caspian　Sea；　in　the　neighbourhood　of　the　modern　city　of
Astrachan；　reduced　the　different　principalities　of　Russia　to　the
condition　of　vassal　states。　Leaving　the　government　in　the　hands
of　the　dynasty　of　Rurik　they　forced　the　Russian　princes　to
receive　investiture　at　the　hands　of　their　khans。　In　such　a　state
of　things　the　prince　had　no　longer　any　need　to　trouble　himself
about　his　acceptation　by　the　popular　assembly　of　the　principality
that　he　intended　to　govern　In　order　to　secure　the　throne　to
himself　and　his　heirs；　all　that　he　had　to　do　was　to　undertake　a
journey　to　the　southern　parts　of　the　Volga　and　make　his
appearance　at　the　court　of　his　suzerain　　the　Khan。　Here　he　had
to　lay　out　large　sums　of　money　in　presents　and　bribes；　until　at
last　the　Khan　was　induced　to　grant　a　charter；　〃jarlik；〃
acknowledging　the　right　of　the　claimant　to　occupy　the　throne　of
his　ancestors。　From　the　beginning　of　the　fourteenth　century　the
Moscovite　princes　had　no　longer。　to　undertake　the　journey　in
person；　as　the　khans　had　consented　to　forward　the　charter　of
confirmation　direct　to　Moscow　on　condition　that　they　first
received　large　sums　of　money　from　the　prince　who　claimed　the
throne。　The　succession　was　settled　at　each　vacancy　by　an
agreement　between　the　suzerain　and　the　vassal；　and　the　popular
assembly　had　no　opportunity　of　interfering。
　　　　Foreign　events；　especially　the　rise　of　the　Florentine　Union
and　the　capture　of　Constantinople　by　the　Turks；　also　largely
contributed　to　the　increase　of　the　Moscovite　autocracy。
　　　　During　the　period　which　began　with　the　acceptance　of　the
tenets　of　the　Greek　Church　by　the　Russian　duke；　Vladimir；　at　the
end　of　the　eleventh　century；　and　which　ended　with　the　decision　of
the　Byzantine　Emperor　to　subscribe　the　act　of　union　with　the
Roman　Church；　the　Russian　State　as　well　as　the　Russian　Church
remained　to　a　certain　extent　dependent　on　the　Greek　Patriarch　and
Emperor　at　Constantinople。　In　ecclesiastical　matters　this
dependence　was　manifested　in　the　direct　nomination　of　the　Russian
Metropolitan　by　the　Byzantine　Patriarch；　very　often　not　without
interference　on　the　part　of　the　Emperor。　In　secular　matters　it
was　rather　theoretical　than　practical。　The　Russian　clergy　more
than　once　advised　the　Grand　Duke　of　Moscovy　to　recognise　the
〃Tzar　of　the　Greeks〃　as　his　lord　paramount；　and　each　time　they
repeated　the　popular　theory　that　the　Byzantine　Emperor　was　the
chief　of　the　whole　Christian　world　and　therefore　the　sovereign
lord　of　all　Christian　kings　and　potentates。　This　theory　had　been
first　brought　forward　by　Byzantine　writers；　who　actually　declared
that　Constantine　the　Great　had　conferred　the　title　of　Tabularius
on　the　ruler　of　Russia　as　a　recompense　for　his　allegiance　to　the
Greek　Empire。　Up　to　the　end　of　the　fourteenth　century　the　title
of　〃Tzar〃　was　exclusively　applied　in　Russia　to　the　Emperor　of
Constantinople；　and　no　Russian　prince　was　allowed　to　dignify
himself　with　it。　The　Russian　clergy；　in　offering　public　prayer
for　the　health　of　the　Emperor　at　Constantinople；　spoke　of　him　as
of　〃the　Emperor　of　the　Romans　and　Ruler　of　the　Universe。〃（3*）
　　　　The　attitude　of　Basileus　III；　Grand　Duke　of　Russia；　during
the　time　of　the　Florentine　Union；　his　bold　opposition　to　the
Patriarch　Photius　and　to　any　compromise　with　the　Romish　Church；
led　the　Russian　clergy　to　look　upon　him　and　his　heirs　as　the
champions　of　orthodoxy　in　religion。　While　the　Duke　of　Moscovy　was
considered　the　sole　protector　of　the　Greek　Church；　the　Emperor　at
Constantinople　had　become；　in　the　eyes　of　the　Russians；　a
schismatic。　It　was　in　order　to　free　Moscovy　from　all　dependence
on　a　schismatic　Emperor　that　the　account　of　the　conversion　of　the
Eastern　Slavs　to　Christianity　was　altered。　The　apostle　St。
Andrew；　who；　according　to　Armenian　and　Georgian　traditions　had
been　the　first　to　preach　the　Gospel　in　the　Caucasus；　was
officially　declared　to　have　been　the　St。　John　the　Baptist　of　the
Russians；　Constantinople；　being　thus　deprived　of　the　honour　of
being　the　birthplace　of　Russian　Christianity；　was　accordingly
dispossessed　of　any　right　to　exercise　ecclesiastical　supremacy
over　the　Russian　Church。
　　　　The　fall　of　Constantinople；　which　closely　followed　the
Florentine　Union；　settled　the　question　of　the　ecclesiastical
autonomy　of　Russia；　and　contributed　at　the　same　time　to
strengthen　the　power　of　the　Moscovite　Duke。　The　Greek　Church　had
lost　her　secular　head　in　the　person　of　the　last　Emperor　of
Constantinople；　and　the　Slavonic　principalities　of　the　Balkan
Peninsula；　as　well　as　the　subjugated　Greeks；　naturally　turned
their　eyes　towards　the　most　powerful　of　the　Orthodox　rulers。　This
was　the　Grand　Duke　of　Moscovy；　whose　firm　allegiance　to　the
ancient　creed；　and　uncompromising　attitude　towards　the　Florentine
Union；　contrasted　favourably　with　the　attitude　of　the　last
Emperors　towards　the　Popes　of　Rome。　People　were　led　to
acknowledge　that　the　fall　of　Constantinople　was　a　well…deserved
punishment　on　a　schismatic　ruler；　and　they　were　also　induced　to
believe　that　the　conquest　of　that　city　by　the　Turk