The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 17 : $b Switzerland (concluded), Russia and Poland
History
The historians' history of the world in twenty-five volumes, volume 17 : $b Switzerland (concluded), Russia and Poland
World history
The tactics of the Tatars in this war consisted in first encompassing
each region as hunters do, and then joining forces at one centre, thus
devastating all. In the years 1239-1240 the Tatars ravaged southern
Russia, and in 1240 they took and laid waste Kiev. All Europe trembled
at the horrors of the Tatar invasion; the emperor Frederick II called
for a general arming, but his calls were in vain. Meanwhile the Tatars
advanced to Hungary (1241) and Poland, and defeated the Polish princes
at Liegnitz in Silesia; and it was only the courageous defence of
Olmütz in Moravia, by the Czech voyevod Iaroslav, and the gathering of
armies under the command of the Czech king and the dukes of Austria and
Carinthia, that finally caused the Tatars to turn back. They then founded
their chief dwelling place on the Volga, where near the present town of
Tsareva (government of Astrakhan) they established a wintering place
for the horde--Sarai. There the Russian princes began to arrive with
tribute. At first, however, they were obliged to go to the great khan in
Mongolia; for the first khans, Okkodai, Kuiuk, and Mangku, were lawfully
chosen by the princes, and maintained their authority over all the
empire of Jenghiz Khan; and it was only from the time of Kublai (1260),
who arbitrarily took possession of the throne and removed the seat of
government to China, that the bond was definitively severed.
INFLUENCES OF TATAR DOMINATION
The domination of the Tatars over Russia is regarded by historians from
various points of view: some (such as Karamzin and especially N. I.
Kostomarov) ascribe a decided influence to the Tatars in the development
of Russian life. S. M. Soloviov, on the contrary, is of the opinion that
the influence of the Tatars was not greater than that of the Polovtsi.
Both these opinions are extreme: it is senseless to deny the influence
of the Tatars, for the reason that Russia was long associated with
them, and that, since in her intercourse with the east, Moscow employed
Tatar services, much that was eastern entered into the administration,
notably the financial system; traces of eastern custom may also be
found in the military organisation. These are direct consequences; the
indirect ones are hardly less important, because a considerable share in
the interruption of civilisation and the roughening of the manners and
customs of the people may be ascribed to the separation of eastern Russia
from western. On the other hand, it is impossible to regard the corporal
punishments as entirely Tatar, for they were known in Byzantium, and came
to Russia in the manuals of church statutes; they were known also in the
west, and are to be met with in places which were but little under Tatar
domination, such as Pskov. The opinion that the autocratic power had its
origin in the domination of the Tatars must, it would seem, be entirely
rejected, especially when we call to mind the constant preaching of the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account