home Cosmetology How to write an essay on history. Writing an essay on history

How to write an essay on history. Writing an essay on history

In accordance with the requirements for the essay, let's start with the characteristics of the period (criterion K1).

"1645–1676 - this is the period of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov. This tsar carried out many practical reforms in all spheres of the country's public life, which prepared the basis for the future reforms of Peter I. Let's name some of them. The country's legislative system was improved, a new set of laws was adopted - the Council Code (1649). This document established the legal formalization of serfdom. According to it, the search for fugitive peasants became indefinite, the peasants became the property of the owner forever, and fixed-term summers were eliminated. In addition, the Code reflected the process of formation of absolutism. It included a chapter regulating the attitude towards the sovereign and proclaiming the most severe punishments for the slightest offenses against the sovereign and the state. Thus, the adoption of the Council Code significantly strengthened the power of the tsar, strengthened the role of the nobles, and preserved and confirmed the significant role of the church in the state.”

In accordance with the evaluation criteria, this part of the essay provides a description of the first of the required two events (phenomena, processes) and sums up the development of this event (phenomenon, process) (criterion 1).

In accordance with criterion 2, it is necessary to talk about a historical figure associated with the event (phenomenon, process) described earlier, and show the role of this person in this event.

“Alexey Mikhailovich himself took an active part in the preparation of the Council Code. The Tsar observed the work of the cathedral and made his own adjustments to the legislation. A major role in the work of the cathedral and in the drafting of legislation was played by the educator, the tsar’s “uncle”, the head of government, and boyar B.I., who was close to the tsar. Morozov. Despite the fact that after the Salt Riot of 1648 he was removed from official participation in government, he secretly continued to play a huge role at the court of Alexei Mikhailovich, including leading the preparation of the Council Code.”

In the essay it is necessary to mention at least two events (phenomena, processes), so let’s consider one more event.

“This historical period also went down in history under the name “schism of the Russian Orthodox Church.” The beginning of the schism dates back to 1654, when Patriarch Nikon began reforming the church. Nikon sought to unify church rituals, books, holidays, etc. But not all believers were ready to accept the new rules, and the so-called Old Believers, or schismatics, arose. Its essence was expressed in disagreement with the new church orders and the desire to adhere to the old, pre-reform rituals.

Despite the schism, church reforms led to the unification of the Russian Orthodox Church, strengthening the power and role of the church in the country. However, we must not forget that another consequence of the reforms was the separation of believers, which persisted for many centuries.”

In accordance with criterion 2, it is necessary to write about a historical figure associated with the second event (phenomenon, process) described earlier, and show the role of this person in this event, therefore it is necessary to talk about church figures who participated in the preparation and implementation of reforms.

“The central figures during the period of church schism were Patriarch Nikon and Archpriest Avvakum. Both were prominent spiritual figures in Russia, both were members of Alexei Mikhailovich’s inner circle, both enjoyed enormous authority among believers. However, Avvakum did not accept Nikon’s desire to take Byzantine books and rituals as a model for the unification of books and rituals, but advocated that Rus' also had its own, Slavic Christian roots, which should have been taken as a model in the reform. Habakkuk demonstrated by personal example loyalty to his principles, defended adherence to antiquity, and laid the foundation for a schismatic movement.

Nikon first established himself as an active reformer, a supporter of the new, union of church and state. But later, his desire to put church power above secular power led to the fact that Alexei Mikhailovich stopped supporting him and even actively spoke out for Nikon’s resignation from the patriarchal throne, which happened in 1667. After which Nikon was sent into northern exile, where he spent the rest of my days."

In accordance with the requirements of criterion 3, cause-and-effect relationships between events should be established.

“There are undoubtedly cause-and-effect relationships between these events. Both events - the adoption of the Council Code and church reform - were dictated by common reasons: the aggravation of social contradictions in the country, the interest of the population in creating clear and precise laws, the need to strengthen the authority of secular and ecclesiastical authorities.

The consequence of these events was the strengthening of the central government, the strengthening of the influence of the church in the state, and the strengthening of the authority of Russia as a whole.”

In accordance with criterion 4, a historical assessment of the period should be made based on facts and the opinions of historians.

“Alexey Mikhailovich ruled for a long period - 31 years. During his reign, many reforms were carried out in almost all spheres of public life. But his reign cannot be assessed unambiguously.

On the one hand, a significant step forward has been made in economic development. Elements of capitalist relations began to develop faster in the country, foreign specialists began to be attracted more often, the tax system changed, and a policy of protectionism was pursued. The Council Code became the main legislation of the country for many decades. Significant successes were achieved in foreign policy: peace treaties were signed with many countries (for example, the Treaty of Kardis in 1661 with Sweden, the Truce of Andrusovo with Poland in 1667), the reunification of Russia and Ukraine took place in 1654, and Russia’s territories in the East were significantly expanded (exploration of Eastern Siberia by Russian pioneers and traders).

But, on the other hand, it was under Alexei Mikhailovich that serfdom was finally formalized (1649), and the tax burden on the country’s population increased significantly. Many social protests took place (for example, the Salt Riot of 1648, the Copper Riot of 1662, the first peasant war led by Stepan Razin of 1670–1671, etc.).

The figure of Alexei Mikhailovich itself is also ambiguously assessed by domestic and foreign historians, both past and present.

The image of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in historiography is quite contradictory. In addition, assessing the personality of Alexei Mikhailovich often becomes an attempt to justify the nickname “the quietest” assigned to him. This characteristic quickly became almost the only indisputable assessment of the ruler’s personal qualities.

In the study by S.M. Solovyov’s “History from Ancient Times”, almost three volumes are devoted to the reign of the Tsar, but the author did not consider the personality of the ruler himself to be fateful for Russian history. If we talk about how Solovyov himself evaluates Alexei Mikhailovich, then the tsar, from his point of view, was distinguished by “kindness” and “gentleness,” like his father, Mikhail Fedorovich.

A more detailed description of the king is given by V.O. Klyuchevsky: “I am ready to see in him the best man of Ancient Rus', at least I don’t know another ancient Russian person who would make a more pleasant impression - but not on the throne.” This “best” person, according to Klyuchevsky, was passive and unstable, little able to “defend or carry out anything,” “easily lost his composure and gave excessive scope to his tongue and hands.”

From the point of view of S.F. Platonova, Alexey Mikhailovich “was a wonderful and noble, but too soft and indecisive person.”

Modern historian Igor Andreev uses this epithet in his research on almost every page and several times. “Undoubtedly, heroic tragedy is not his genre. The Quiet One, he is the Quiet One,” he states on the first pages of the monograph dedicated to the Tsar. This epithet turned out to be capable of displacing even the name of the king and taking his place. There is a well-known historical novel about Tsar V. Bakhrevsky called “The Quietest”, a novel by V.Ya. Svetlova “At the Court of the Quiet Emperor”.

In general, the era of Alexei Mikhailovich is a period of strengthening absolutism, creating the preconditions for the reforms of Peter the Great.”

Sequencing

To conclude our brief overview of the features of working on the new task 25, we would like to recommend a short template, using which it is easier to build a certain sequence of actions for yourself.

Writing a history essay is actually very simple. Here are a few little tricks:

1. Say NO to dates.

Do not overuse dates in essays. Why? Yes, because the requirements do not say anything about dates, but 2 points can be deducted for an error. Therefore, before you write down the year-month-day-hour-minute of the events that you so meticulously studied, think - are you sure of its correctness? Of course, such significant dates as, for example, the Battle of Kulikovo (1380) or the Baptism of Rus' (988) should still be indicated, but you must answer for their correctness with your head.

2. You are not Pushkin. There is no need to write TO BE BEAUTIFUL.

Leave beauty for literature essays. There must be a beginning, a climax, and a disclosure of the theme. In a history essay, you WILL NOT get points for beauty. Therefore, we write clearly, informatively, it’s okay if the text seems clumsy and if it contains tautologies. The main thing is that the essay meets all the requirements for which points are awarded. But the expert will not appreciate your “beauty” - he will have more of these essays per day than you will write during the entire period of preparation.

3. You are not Tolstoy. There is no need to write SO MUCH.

Think about an expert: do you think he wants to read your opus? No, I don't want to. Therefore, we strictly write only what is specified in the requirements: 2 personalities, 2 events, 2 consequences and an assessment of the period. If possible, you can add one event and one consequence to each person - just in case, if suddenly the main events you indicated do not seem important enough. But no more. Have pity on the expert.

Task 25 (11 points)

You need to write a historical essay about ONE of the periods of Russian history:

1) 1325–1462;

2) 1682–1725;

3) 1924–1953

The essay must:

- indicate at least two events (phenomena, processes) relating to a given period of history;

- name two historical figures whose activities are connected with these events (phenomena, processes), and, using knowledge of historical facts, characterize the role of these personalities in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period in Russian history;

- indicate at least two cause-and-effect relationships that existed between events (phenomena, processes) within a given period of history.

Using knowledge of historical facts and (or) the opinions of historians, give one historical assessment of the significance of this period for the history of Russia. During the presentation, it is necessary to use historical terms and concepts related to a given period.

In the case when historical events (phenomena, processes) are not indicated or all specified historical events (phenomena, processes) do not relate to the selected period, the answer is scored 0 points (for each of the criteria K1–K7 0 points are given

Criterion 1. Indication of events (phenomena, processes).

In the case where two events (phenomena, processes) are correctly indicated, 2 points are awarded.

If one event (phenomenon, process) is correctly indicated - 1 point.

If events (phenomena, processes) are not specified or are specified incorrectly, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 2. Mention of historical figures and their role in a given period of Russian history.

Scored from 2 to 0 points. In the case when two historical figures are correctly indicated, the role of these personalities in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history is correctly indicated, 2 points are awarded.

If one or two historical figures are correctly indicated, the role of only one person in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history is correctly indicated, 1 point is given.

If one or two historical figures are correctly indicated, but their role in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history is indicated incorrectly, OR one or two historical figures are correctly indicated, but their role in the events (phenomena, processes) of a given period of Russian history is not is indicated, OR historical figures are indicated incorrectly, OR historical figures are not indicated, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 3. Causal relationships.

Scored from 0 to 2 points.

In the case where two cause-and-effect relationships that existed between events (phenomena, processes) are correctly indicated, 2 points are awarded.

If one cause-and-effect relationship that existed between events (phenomena, processes) is correctly indicated, then 1 point is given.

If the cause-and-effect relationships are indicated incorrectly, OR the cause-and-effect relationships are not indicated, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 4. Historical assessment of events .

Scored from 0 to 1 point.

If a historical assessment of the significance of the period is given based on historical facts and (or) the opinions of historians, then 1 point is given.

If the historical assessment is formulated in a general form or at the level of everyday ideas, without involving historical facts and (or) the opinions of historians, OR the historical assessment is not given, then 0 points are given.

Criterion 5. Use of historical terms and concepts .

Scored from 0 to 1 point.

If historical terms and concepts are used correctly in the presentation, then you can give 1 point.

If during the presentation there is an incorrect use of historical terms and concepts, OR historical terms and concepts are not used, then 0 points will be given.

Criterion 6. Presence of factual errors .

Scored from 0 to 2 points.

According to this criterion, positive points will be given only if at least 4 points are given according to criteria K1–K4.

When assessing according to criterion K6, errors taken into account when assigning points according to criteria K1–K5 are not counted.

If there are no factual errors in the historical essay, then 2 points are given.

If one factual error is made - 1 point. If two or more factual errors are made - 0 points.

Criterion 7. Form of presentation.

1 point according to criterion K7 can be given only if according to criteria K1–K4 a total of at least 4 points is given.

If the answer is presented in the form of a historical essay (a consistent, coherent presentation of the material), then it is given 1 point.

If the answer is presented in the form of separate fragmentary provisions - only 0 points.

In total, you can get up to 11 points for your essay.

Historical essay example

Let us give an example of a historical essay on the period 1645–1676.

In accordance with the requirements for the essay, let's start with the characteristics of the period (criterion K1).

In accordance with criterion 2, it is necessary to talk about a historical figure associated with the event (phenomenon, process) described earlier, and show the role of this person in this event.

“Alexey Mikhailovich himself took an active part in the preparation of the Council Code. The Tsar observed the work of the cathedral and made his own adjustments to the legislation.

A major role in the work of the cathedral and in the drafting of legislation was played by the educator, the tsar’s “uncle”, the head of government, and boyar B.I., who was close to the tsar. Morozov. Despite the fact that after the Salt Riot of 1648 he was removed from official participation in government, he secretly continued to play a huge role at the court of Alexei Mikhailovich, including leading the preparation of the Council Code.”

In the essay it is necessary to mention at least two events (phenomena, processes), so let’s consider one more event.

In accordance with the requirements of criterion 3, cause-and-effect relationships between events should be established.

In accordance with criterion 4, a historical assessment of the period should be made based on facts and the opinions of historians.

“Alexey Mikhailovich ruled for a long period - 31 years. During his reign, many reforms were carried out in almost all spheres of public life. But his reign cannot be assessed unambiguously.

The figure of Alexei Mikhailovich itself is also ambiguously assessed by domestic and foreign historians, both past and present.

The image of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in historiography is quite contradictory. In addition, assessing the personality of Alexei Mikhailovich often becomes an attempt to justify the nickname “the quietest” attributed to him. This characteristic quickly became almost the only indisputable assessment of the ruler’s personal qualities.

From the point of view of S.F. Platonova, Alexey Mikhailovich “was a wonderful and noble, but too soft and indecisive person.”

In general, the era of Alexei Mikhailovich is a period of strengthening absolutism, creating the preconditions for the reforms of Peter the Great.”

Sequencing

___ (required period) is the period of ___'s reign. This king (prince, ruler) carried out many transformations ___. I will name the most important of them.

Event (phenomenon, process) No. 1 + result.

Event (phenomenon, process) No. 2 + result.

A historical figure associated with this event (phenomenon, process), and her role.

Let's consider what cause-and-effect relationships exist between these events (phenomena, processes) during the reign of ___. Both events - ___ and ___ - were dictated by common reasons: ___.

The results of these events (that is, their consequences) were ___, ___, ___.

Ruled for a long time - ___ years. His reign cannot be assessed unambiguously.

On the one side, ___.

But in other way, ___.

The figure of ___ itself is also ambiguously assessed by domestic and foreign historians, both past and present. The image of ___ in historiography is quite contradictory.

The reign of ___ as a whole became a period of ___.

Hello, friends. Ivan Nekrasov is in touch, the same one who hasn’t written a blog for a week. Where have I gone? Nowhere. We are preparing bomb material for a school preparing for the Unified State Exam in history and society. There are only a few weeks left until enrollment closes. All your energy and time go there, so you don’t have time to write regular articles, sorry. We are also already waiting for the start of the main stage of the Unified State Exam 2017 and the results of my graduates.

Sign up for history courses

Sign up for social studies courses

In this article, I will debunk all your doubts about task 25 in history, tell you about the updated criteria for writing a historical essay, teach you how to deceive an expert when writing your work and fulfilling criterion K4, and so on. Interesting? Then read the article further!

Has historical writing changed?

So, just yesterday, a draft of an essay of this type for the period 1125-1132 was sent to me in a personal message on VKontakte:

1125-1132
The period of Russian history is 1125-1132. called the period of feudal fragmentation.
The main reasons for feudal fragmentation:
- princely civil strife, the desire of princes to strengthen and expand their possessions;
— formation of local princely dynasties;
- growth of cities, their transformation into centers of individual territories;
- strengthening of the local boyars, the desire of the boyars and local princes to strengthen and expand their possessions.
Years 1125-1132 - fall during the reign of Mstislav the Great, the son of the famous Vladimir Monomakh, whose activities were associated with the cessation of princely strife and the protection of Russian borders from raids by nomads.

Let's check your historical essay online

Let's figure it out, because... Five of the six essays contained similar questions and errors. What needs to be done? To begin with, download demo versions of the FIPI Unified State Exam in history 2017 and refer to the wording of the task itself:

1) 1125–1132; 2) 1825-1855; 3) 1945-1953

The essay must:
to a given period of history;
and using knowledge
stories.

Let's check this work and identify all the errors + give an answer to the question about the form of writing the work.

Working with criteria

We look at K1 - everything is fine, more than two phenomena and processes are indicated. Checking this criterion has always been very simple - you just need to find two historical dates in the work. If they are, you give two points.

K2 - Monomakh and Mstislav are in place. Last year, this criterion would have been taken into account, but now there is an amendment to the criteria stating that figures must have a commentary containing their role in the history of Russia. How to write and highlight a role? For this, a verb is used, for example issued, commanded, led, led, etc.

There is no role of a figure in this work - 0 points.

Cause and effect example

K3 - There are simply no cause-and-effect relationships in the work. What it is?

Cause-and-effect relationships are generally a situation where the influence of a period on subsequent years of the development of the state is shown. That is, you take the results and continue the thought, looking beyond the year 1132. The key question is: what did it lead to? In my courses, I recommend using a crossover model of writing cause-and-effect relationships using CAUSE-EFFECT keys.

An example of a cause-and-effect relationship. The role of Vasily Golitsyn is highlighted in blue:

Vasily Golitsyn, who was Sophia’s favorite, played a special role in the country’s foreign policy. In 1686 Golitsyn initiated the conclusion"Eternal peace" between Poland and Russia. The reason for this event there was a need for the final division of Ukraine between the spheres of influence of Russia and Poland. Consequence of this world final recognition of Left Bank Ukraine and Kyiv by Russia. In addition, Russia entered into an anti-Turkish coalition with Poland, Austria and Hungary. In this coalition, Russia was assigned a secondary role: the fight against the Crimean Khanate.

Result: 0 points

K4 - Consequence of the period on future history. Last year, the historical essay required knowledge of historiography for the graduate. This is a historical assessment on behalf of a famous historian, for example Karamzin. This year there is no such requirement. It is necessary to write what the period in the future influenced

An example of a correctly opened K4:

This period is assessed very controversially in domestic historiography. For example, L. Katsva believes that this period was favorable for the state, but at the same time, in these years the will of the people was not taken into account. It seems to me that this period is a period of very bold transformations that should have happened sooner or later. “Perestroika” subsequently led to the collapse of such a state as the Soviet Union and the creation of the Russia in which we live today.

As you can see - also 0 points.

K5 - Use of a historical term. In this case, it is civil strife. Plus one point.

K6 implies the absence of factual errors, as does criterion K7 - the form of work, like an essay. Thus, when answering a question, you need to write the answer to task 25 as an essay on Russian language and literature without using points and subparagraphs.

This is not observed here: 0 points.

Artasov's speech - video from courses for Unified State Examination experts

Thus, this essay can be assessed with a minimum number of points, but this is very easy to fix. Now I propose to complete a similar task for you and send it to me at personal messages on VKontakte. In addition, I strongly advise you to look at the commentary of the compiler of the Unified State Exam 2017 for changes in the historical essay - consolidate the material you have studied.

Practice on your own!

You need to write a historical essay about ONE of the periods of Russian history:

1) 1237–1240; 2) 1881-1894; 3) 1953-1964

The essay must:
– indicate at least two events (phenomena, processes) related toto a given period of history;
– name two historical figures whose activities are connectedwith the specified events (phenomena, processes),and using knowledgehistorical facts, characterize the role of these individuals in events(phenomena, processes) of this period of Russian history;
– indicate at least two cause-and-effect relationships that existedbetween events (phenomena, processes) within a given periodstories.
Using knowledge of historical factsand (or) the opinions of historians, giveone historical assessment of the significance of this period for the history of Russia.
During the presentation, it is necessary to use historical terms and concepts related to a given period.

Comment, like and subscribe to blog updates. This is where I end the article.

Want to understand all the topics in your history course? Sign up to study at Ivan Nekrasov’s school with a legal guarantee of passing the exam with 80+ points!

Best regards, Ivan Nekrasov

Similar materials

An essay is a mini-composition on a specific topic. But very often writing it causes some difficulties for children, so I decided to put a little teaching material to help teachers and students how to write an essay on history

when writing essays I used websites

Download:

Preview:

To facilitate the work of preparing students for writing an essay, we offer various options for cliches that are appropriate to use in the exam paper.

http://www. edu. ru/ - Federal portal "Russian Education". Contains an overview of Internet educational resources, regulatory documents, educational standards and much more.

http://www. rusolymp. ru – federal portal of Russian Olympiads for schoolchildren

http://ecsocman. edu. ru/ - federal educational portal “Economics, Sociology, Management”. Materials on the social and economic history of Russia have been collected, including journal articles and materials from round tables devoted to the problems of the historical path of Russia.

http://www. mospat. ru/index. html is the official Web server of the Moscow Patriarchate.

http://his.1september. ru/index. php - electronic version of the newspaper "History" - a supplement to the newspaper "First of September".

http://www. historia. ru/ - Russian electronic magazine "World of History".

http://www. shm. ru/ - the website of the State Historical Museum presents materials from the main exhibition dedicated to the history of Russia, including those covering its initial period.

http://hermitage. museum. ru/ - the website of one of the largest museums in the world - the Hermitage - offers a virtual tour of its halls, including seeing exhibits illustrating the initial period of world and Russian history.

http://archaeology. kiev. ua/cultures/ - a multimedia portal containing comprehensive information about archaeological sites in Eastern Europe, materials for reconstructing the stages and nature of Russian-Scandinavian ties.

http://www. master. msk. ru/library/history/history1.htm - the site contains basic materials for studying Russian history. Here you can find the following texts: N. M. Karamzin. History of Russian Goverment; V. O. Klyuchevsky. Russian history course; N. I. Kostomarov. Russian history in the biographies of its main figures; S. M. Soloviev. History of Russia from ancient times; V. N. Tatishchev. Russian history; Metropolitan Macarius. History of the Russian Church; S. F. Platonov. A complete course of lectures on Russian history.

http://www. sib. net/n_russia/ - the site presents materials about the Scythians who inhabited the steppe part of Eurasia in the Greco-Roman era: dates; names; titles; description of dwellings, clothing, customs.

http://oldslav. chat. ru - the history of the settlement of Slavic agricultural tribes and their relationships with nomadic tribes from Asia.

http://paganism. ru/a-cloth. htm - history of ancient Russian costume: outerwear, headdresses, neck hryvnias. Illustrations.

http://lants. tellur. ru/history/danilevsky/ - lectures by the famous historian I. N. Danilevsky on the origin of the Eastern Slavs and the formation of the feudal state (including Kievan Rus, paganism, the adoption of Christianity, etc.).

http://his.1september. ru/2002/23/1.htm - materials from the new textbook by S. N. Bledny, I. V. Lebedev “History of Russia”. Presented are excerpts from the works of Herodotus, Procopius of Caesarea; fragments of the works of Russian historians - Klyuchevsky, Solovyov, Platonov.

http://lants. tellur. ru/history/ - library of links to informational articles and historical materials. Family tree of Russian princes IX – XI centuries, short biographies of the Rurik princes, chronological table (IX – XVII centuries), maps of Ancient Rus'. Several lectures from the course by I. N. Danilevsky “Ancient Rus' through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (IX – XII centuries).” Handbook on the history of Rus', etc.

http://lib. userline. ru/689?secid=8324&num=1 – electronic version of “The Tale of Bygone Years”.

http://www. chrono. ru/libris/lib_p/index. html - electronic version of the course of lectures on Russian history by S. F. Platonov.

http://www. chrono. ru/libris/lib_s/skr00.html - the site contains an electronic version of the book by R. G. Skrynnikov “The Old Russian State”.

http://www. chrono. ru/dokum/pravda72.html - the site contains two texts: “Russian Truth” in a short and lengthy version.

http://oldru. people ru/ - electronic library: monograph by K. Egorov “Education of Kievan Rus”, historical sources, articles. Collection of cards. Bibliography.

http://www. master. msk. ru/library/history/makary/makary. htm - a complete electronic version of the multi-volume work of Metropolitan Macarius “History of the Russian Church”, written by him in 1866 – 1883. (covers the period from the 10th to the 18th centuries).

http://his.1september. ru/2001/42/no42_01.htm - domestic historians about the era of Ivan the Terrible.

http://ou. tsu. ru/hischool/his_JuF/ - the main stages in the history of the formation of the Russian state in the XIV – XVII centuries. Tables, diagrams, dictionary.

http://klio. webservis. ru/lec7_1.htm - lecture notes on the history of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. The formation of the autocratic system in Russia. Fragments of memoirs of contemporaries, as well as assessments of this period in the works of Russian historians. Dictionary hyperlinks to personalities, terms, etc.

http://www. chrono. ru/libris/lib_s/skrynn00.html - the site contains an electronic version of R. G. Skrynnikov’s book “The Third Rome”, dedicated to the history of Russia in the 15th – 16th centuries.

http://kursy. rsuh. ru/istoria/moskva/moskva. asp - a site dedicated to the history of Moscow. The website provides information on the history of the city in the 17th century.

http://old-rus. people ru/paper. html - this section of the site contains articles and studies that examine various periods of Russian history and ancient Russian literature, including those dedicated to the Time of Troubles.

http://sscadm. nsu. ru/deps/hum/readerhist10/smuta. html - electronic version of the anthology on the history of Russia (grade 10). Time of Troubles in Russia at the beginning of the 17th century. through the eyes of contemporaries.

http://www. moscowkremlin. ru/romanovs. html - a virtual tour telling about the Romanov dynasty. Chronology. Personalities, contemporaries, important events, regalia and personal belongings. Collection of images and photographs. Created on the basis of the CD-ROM “The Romanov Dynasty” by the Kominfo company.

http://www. hronos. km. ru/1700ru_lit. html - chronological table of the main cultural events in Russia in the 18th century.

http://grandwar. kulichki. net/books/dubov01.html - Russia's war with France, Suvorov's campaign in Italy, Russian policy in Europe. Map of Europe in 1799

http://rels. obninsk. com/Rels/Limited/Nsub/ml/9801/hist-1.htm - Catherine II: Charter to the cities of 1785

http://lichm. people ru/Part4/411.htm - the era of Peter's reforms.

http://syw-cwg. people ru/ - Seven Years' War.

http://fstanitsa. ru/gla_pugachev. shtml - biography of Emelyan Pugachev - leader of the peasant war of 1773 - 1775. Illustrations (reproductions of paintings).

http://his.1september. ru/2000/no09.htm - stories from Russian history of the 18th century. Fragments from a book of entertaining stories. Material for lessons in grades 6 – 9. Texts about the events of the 18th century: transformations of Peter I, palace coups, etc.

http://dinastya. people ru/ - the reign of Alexander III (1881 – 1894): coming to power, domestic and foreign policy, Russian nation-building, peacemaker tsar.

http://www. fictionbook. ru/author/lyashenko_leonid_mihayilovich/aleksandr_ii_ili_istoriya_trehodinochestv/lyashenko_aleksandr_ii_ili_istoriya_treh_odinochestv. html - book by L. M. Lyashenko “Alexander II”, a comprehensive description of the life of a man who occupies an exceptional place among Russian autocrats.

http://old-map. people ru/all-17.html - map of Russia and the tribes inhabiting it (1866).

http://www. hist. msu. ru/ER/Etext/PICT/russia. htm - library of electronic resources of Moscow State University.

http://www. nsu. ru/vk/info/d_205.htm#Heading - the website presents the material “Military reform of the 60s – 70s” in lecture form. XIX century."

http://dinastya. people ru/ - a site dedicated to the personality of Alexander III. The website presents materials from N. D. Talberg’s monograph “Alexander III”.

http://hronos. km. ru/biograf/alexand3.html - the “Chronos” project, which presents the biography of Alexander III. Here you can also get acquainted with the letters of K. P. Pobedonostsev to Alexander I.

http://www. arthistory. ru/peredvizh. htm is a site dedicated to the history of fine arts. This page contains information about Russian Peredvizhniki artists.

http://rusart. nm. ru/ - a site dedicated to the Itinerant artists.

http://www. altai. fio. ru/projects/group3/potok69/site/moguchaya. htm - the site tells about the work of the musicians who were part of the Mighty Handful.

http://www. encspb. ru/ - the site “Encyclopedia of St. Petersburg” talks about the architectural styles used by the city’s architects, including the styles of the second half of the 19th century.

http://www. alhimik. ru/great/mendel. html - the site “Great Chemists” talks about the outstanding discovery of D. A. Mendeleev. The biography of the great chemist is also presented here.

http://www. gramma. ru; http://www. krugosvet. ru – on these sites you can find interesting material about essays.

“History teaches nothing, but only punishes for ignorance of the lessons.”
(V.O. Klyuchevsky)

At first glance, it may seem that the outstanding Russian historian V. O. Klyuchevsky could not say that history teaches nothing. In my opinion, Klyuchevsky wanted to emphasize that if we do not know history, then we will be punished for it in life. And I agree with him.

History is one of the most ancient sciences. It arose with the appearance of man on earth. When studying history, we look at the path of humanity over thousands of years, i.e. we study the historical process. The historical process is a consistent series of successive events in which the activities of many generations of people were manifested.

There are events behind the story; certain past or passing phenomena, facts of social life. And each historical event has specific, inherent only to it features, and the clarification of these features makes it possible to more fully, more colorfully imagine this or that event. Moreover, every historical event is important.

It is necessary to study historical events to learn the right lesson. Of course, history never repeats itself twice. After all, social sciences differ from natural sciences, where some physical phenomenon can be reproduced any number of times. But history also has its own patterns. Knowing them, it is easier to predict modern social development and prevent disaster. They say that the French king Louis XUI, before his execution, read a book about the English king Charles I, who was also executed by the revolutionaries. And if he had read the book earlier, he might not have made the mistakes that provoked the revolution in France.

I would like to give examples from the history of Russia. Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Russian territory with the aim of capturing it. And it even seemed to him that with the capture of Moscow, Russia would be in his hands. And how shameful was his escape from Russia! In his memoirs, he warned others not to fight with Russia. But the ambitious fascist leader Adolf Hitler decided to attack Russia again. How did it end?! The defeat of Nazi Germany in Berlin. This is the punishment for ignorance of history and inability to draw appropriate conclusions. The same thing happens in everyday life.

So, we can conclude that history does not forgive her ignorance.

“World history represents the course of development of a principle, the content of which is the consciousness of freedom” (G. Hegel).

What is the historical development? What is the essence of social progress? These questions have worried humanity for a long time and continue to worry us to this day. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, a German philosopher, one of the founders of German classical philosophy and the philosophy of romanticism, gives his answer to them. He believes that the entire course of history is a movement towards the recognition and protection of individual rights and freedoms, and this movement is progress. And I completely agree with this point of view.

If you look back at history, such a movement becomes obvious. Antiquity, with its republican institutions and the cult of the free citizen, was based on slavery. The Middle Ages “distributed” freedom more evenly: the difference between the feudal lord and the dependent peasant was great, but incomparable with the difference between master and slave; it should also be remembered that in the Middle Ages the path from one class to another was difficult, but open (small example: minister Philip the Handsome, Nogare, came from a merchant family). In addition, there were free cities, guilds, communes, autonomous universities, and royal power already in the mature Middle Ages was limited to popular representations. Yes, the individual was squeezed within the framework of his corporation, but within this framework he also received a certain freedom, but human freedom is always limited within some framework, the only question is which one. The framework of the Middle Ages was expanded by new times. The class system is being destroyed, the spiritual dictatorship of the church is coming to an end, restrictions continue, and in some countries the royal power is being overthrown and the rights and freedoms of citizens are being expanded. And finally, these days, people are becoming the most important thing.

You might think. that this process is taking place only in Europe, but in fact such changes are characteristic of the whole world: in most countries today there is a republican system, in many Muslim states women are successfully fighting for their rights.

And the question of whether individual freedom, the possibility of choosing one’s own path, fighting for one’s happiness is progress, does not need proof. These are like the axioms of geometry on which all theorems rest. Although personal freedom, like everything in this world, has its downsides. Squeezed within his group, a person always had protection and support at the same time. Having gained greater freedom, he simultaneously found its frequent companion - loneliness.

Thus, I came to the conclusion that the history of mankind is a development that consists of a movement towards freedom.

“A nation is a society of people who, through a common destiny, acquire a common character.” (O. Power)

In addition to classes and other social groups, the social structure of society is made up of historically established communities of people: tribes, nationalities, nations. We will try to answer the question of what a nation means and what definitions science gives to this concept. A nation is the most developed historical and cultural community of people. It develops over a long period of time as a result of the connection and interweaving of various tribes and nationalities. Among the properties of a nation, we can highlight the community of territory of residence, the national economy, self-government, and cultural characteristics. Usually representatives of one nation speak and write the same language. But language is not an undoubted sign of a nation.

For example, the British and Americans speak English, but they are different nations. The unity of the nation is facilitated by the commonality of their historical path. Each nation has its own roots in history and has traveled its own unique path.
I agree with the author’s statement and would like to cite as an example the basic values of Russian culture. In Russia, unlike the West, nature did not give people the hope that it would one day be possible to “tame” and “domesticate” it. Nature has accustomed man to excessive short-term exertion of his strength, to work quickly and quickly. No people in Europe were capable of such intense labor for a short time as the Russians.

It seems that there was no such unaccustomment to even, moderate and measured constant work as in Russia. Until now, Russian people hope for “maybe” and put off until tomorrow.

Or take another people - the Japanese. The situation after World War II forced them to give up days off in order to get their economy back on its feet. Today they do not need this, but hard work is in their blood. It is interesting to see how historical fate can divide a single people. The South Slavs in the Middle Ages found themselves in different historical conditions. Croatia, which became part of the German Empire, was influenced by Western civilization; the Bosnians became Muslims, becoming part of the Turkish Empire. Now these are different peoples, although they have a common origin and language. Likewise, the differences between Western and Eastern Ukraine are explained by the difference in their historical destinies.

The list of examples could be continued, going into detail for each nation. However, we believe that all of them will only confirm the correctness of the statement.

Preview:

To use the preview, create a Google account and log in to it: https://accounts.google.com

Preview:

SECOND ROUND

FIRST PART

HISTORICAL ESSAY

Preview:

SECOND ROUND,

Time to prepare the first and second parts is 3 hours.

FIRST PART

HISTORICAL ESSAY

Grade 11

Maximum score –50 points

You will have to work with statements by historians and contemporaries about events and figures in Russian history. Choose one of them that will become the topic of your essay. Your task is to formulate your own attitude to this statement and justify it with arguments that seem to you the most significant. When choosing a topic, assume that you:

Clearly understand the meaning of the statement (it is not necessary to completely or even partially agree with the author, but you need to understand what exactly he is saying).
You can express your attitude to the statement (reasonably agree with the author or completely or partially refute his statement).
Have specific knowledge (facts, statistics, examples) on the topic.
You know the terms necessary to correctly express your point of view.

When writing your work, try to assume that the Jury, when evaluating your essay, will be guided by the following criteria:

The validity of the choice of topic (an explanation of the choice of topic and the tasks that the participant sets for himself in his work).
The creative nature of the perception of the topic, its comprehension.
Competency in the use of historical facts and terms.
Clarity and evidence of the main provisions of the work.
Knowledge of different points of view on a selected issue.

Preview:

SECOND ROUND

RESEARCH PROJECT

The most important thing in the profession of a historian is the analysis of a source, the ability to extract the necessary information from it. Before you is one of the Statutory Charters, the most important documents of the peasant reform of 1861. Based on it, write a short paper on the topic:“Regulation of relations between peasant and landowner during the peasant reform of 1861.”

STATUTORY CHARTER OF NIZHNY NOVGOROD PROVINCE, GORBATOV DISTRICT, VILLAGE OF BARKIN, LANDLORD LIEUTENANT GENERAL ADVOTYA SEMENOVNA ERSHOVA. COMPLETED FEBRUARY 15, 1862.

I. 1) In the village of Barkin, according to the 10th national census, there are 44 male souls of peasants.

None of them were released after the audit.

2) Among those listed as peasants, they are not subject to allocation of land as those who refused it on the basis of Article 8. Local position - 5 souls.

3) Then, on the basis of the Regulations, they must receive for use a land plot of thirty-nine revision male souls.

II. 1) All the land was for the use of peasants before the promulgation of the Regulations on Peasants: 214 dessiatinas 1212 sazhens.

2) Of these, actually under peasant estate settlement there are five dessiatines, three hundred and sixty-six fathoms (which includes 1 dessiatine, 266 fathoms of pasture, which is for the use of peasants). (...)

3) For the area where the village is located, the highest per capita allotment is determined by the Local Regulations on the Land System of Peasants - 4 dessiatinas, and the lowest - 1 dessiatine 800 fathoms; and according to the number of souls in the village: the highest size of the allotment for the entire peasant society would be 156 dessiatines, and the lowest 52 dessiatines.

4) Although, based on the figures for the highest size of a per capita plot determined by the Local Regulations on Peasants, 156 dessiatines should remain for the use of the peasants of the village of Barkina, but as all the land convenient to the estate with forest is listed according to the plan as 214 dessiatines 1212 fathoms, then according to the right granted to the owners on the basis 20 tbsp. The local situation is to retain at its disposal up to one third of the total amount - one hundred and forty-three dessiatines 8 fathoms are left for permanent use by the peasants, while the rest of the land must be cut off and placed at the disposal of the landowner. (...)

III. 1) A peasant building with a settled estate cannot be moved to other places.

2) The watering hole located near the village remains for the common use of the landowner and peasants.

3) The drive of cattle to the watering hole from the land remaining at the disposal of the landowner to the pond should be along a country road going to the village of Barkinu.

4) The pasture located near the village remains for the use of the peasants.

IV. 1) For the land provided for the use of peasants in the amount of 3 dessiatinas 1600 fathoms per capita, on the basis of the quitrent regulations, from each per capita allotment eight rubles sixty-two and a half kopecks per year are due, and from all 39 per capita allotments - three hundred thirty-six rubles thirty-seven with half a kopeck in silver per year. But since the peasants, before the promulgation of the Regulations, paid a quitrent of two hundred seventy-four rubles and thirty-four kopecks from the entire society, then on the basis of Art. 170. Locally, they must remain with the existing quitrent, which will amount to seven rubles, three and a half kopecks per year for each revisionist soul.

2) Peasants are required to pay the quitrent on two dates: March 1 and October 1, 137 rubles each. 17 kopecks. (...)

4) The entire community of peasants is jointly responsible for the proper performance of duties on the basis of the rules established by the Local Regulations.

Lieutenant General Avdotya Semenovna Ershova had a hand in the original charter.

On October 20, 1862, the charter of the village of Barkina was verified by the mediator of the 1st section of Gorbatovsky district. Signed by the peace mediator Babkin, November 1862, 24 days.

The charter charter was approved by the Gorbatovsky district congress.

Signed by: global mediator of the 2nd section Beklemishev, global mediator of the 3rd section Astafiev and global mediator of the 4th section Gutyar.

It is true with the original charter: peace mediator Babkin.

1. Statement of the problem, characteristics of the historical moment described in the source

2. Characteristics of the source and the opportunities it provides for illuminating the problem

3. Analysis of the situation of the peasants and the essence of how the relationship between the landowner and the peasants is defined in the document.

4. Conclusions. Assessing their significance for understanding the implementation of peasant reform.

We ask you to indicate with numbers the parts of the work that correspond to the points of this plan.

Keep in mind that the jury will focus on the ability to clearly formulate your points and argue them with the help of a source - pay special attention to the third point of the plan.

THIRD ROUND

HISTORICAL ESSAY

Maximum score – 50 points

Here are statements from historians and contemporaries about events and figures in Russian history. Choose one of them that will become the topic of your essay. Your task is to formulate your own attitude to this statement and justify it with arguments that seem to you the most significant. When choosing a topic, assume that you:

Clearly understand the meaning of the statement (it is not necessary to completely or even partially agree with the author, but you need to understand what exactly he is saying).
You can express your attitude to the statement (reasonably agree with the author or completely or partially refute his statement).
Have specific knowledge (facts, statistics, examples) on the topic.
You know the terms necessary to correctly express your point of view.

Please keep in mind that the Jury will evaluate your work based on the following criteria:

The validity of the choice of topic (an explanation of the choice of topic and the tasks that the participant sets for himself in his work).
The creative nature of the perception of the topic, its comprehension.
Competency in the use of historical facts and terms.
Clarity and evidence of the main provisions of the work.
Knowledge of different points of view on a selected issue.

ESSAY TOPICS

SECOND ROUND

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE JURY

Time to prepare the project and essay – 3 hours

Both tasks - the project and the essay - are given to the participants at the same time; they can independently allocate the time assigned for their completion.

Research project

The maximum total number of points for the project is 50. In accordance with the recommended work plan, paragraphs. 1, 2, 4 are assessed with a maximum of 10 points, item 3 (the main part of the work) - with a maximum of 20 points. When assessing each of the necessary elements of an essay, the jury should pay attention to the clarity and literariness of the presentation, the ability to formulate one’s thoughts and use facts and excerpts from the source to prove it. Gross speech and grammatical errors that make it difficult to understand what is written can also be considered grounds for deducting points.

Statement of the problem, characterization of the historical moment (up to 10 points)

It is important that this part represents precisely a statement of the problem, and not a presentation of the corresponding sections of the textbook. In the latter case, the score for the entire first part of the work is no higher than 4.

The question must be clearly raised that, according to the Regulations on Peasants Emerging from Serfdom, the land was recognized as landowner land, while the peasants were legally assigned the right to buy out part of it. The size of the land to be redeemed was determined depending on the pre-reform peasant allotment, but if the pre-reform allotment exceeded the highest norm, cuts were made, and if it was less than the lowest, cuts were made. The amount of land was calculated based on the number of men taken into account by the audit; women and children born after the audit were not taken into account. Household people were also not subject to allotment of land. It is also important that the participant knows the term “temporarily obligated” and can explain its essence: until the peasants complete the redemption operation, they have the right to use the allotment land, but must bear feudal duties for this - corvee or quitrent. The size of the duties was calculated based on their pre-reform size, with adjustments up or down if it went beyond the higher or lower norms specified in the law for a given area.

Characteristics of the source and the opportunities it provides for highlighting the problem (up to 10 points).

The participant must understand that the Statutory Charters determined the boundaries of peasant plots and the amount of duties and were drawn up by agreement of the landowner with the peasants with the participation of an amicable mediator. They recorded the relations between peasants and landowners for the entire period of temporary obligation. It is good if the participant knows that it was the signing of charters that caused the greatest difficulties in the first years of the reform: on January 1, 1863, peasants refused to sign about 60% of charters.

Analysis of the situation of the peasants and the essence of how the relationship between the landowner and the peasants is defined in the document (up to 20 points).

The participant's reflections may contain the following ideas:

About the situation of peasants (up to 10 points). The village of Barkino, according to the Charter, appears as a small quitrent estate, in which there was no lordly economy before the reform. Judging by the fact that all the land was in the use of the peasants, there was no estate. At the same time, the village, apparently, was relatively poor, because the previously paid quitrent turned out to be lower than that established by law. The participant must say very clearly that as a result of the reform, the economic situation of the peasants has worsened, because the size of the plots was reduced by a third, but the size of the quitrent remained the same. It is also good if he knows that such a situation is not typical for the Nizhny Novgorod province, where extensions slightly prevailed over segments. At the same time, the author can note that the final sizes of plots in the village of Barkino are still close to the maximum norm.

About the essence of the relationship between the landowner and the peasants (up to 10 points). Works that at least attempt to determine the characteristics of the area in which the village under study is located should be highly appreciated. It would be ideal if the author is able to formulate the idea that in the Non-Black Earth Region, where the size of quitrents depended not so much on the size of the peasants’ field farming, but on the profitability of peasant crafts, calculating payments for the use of plots based on quitrents meant, in essence, the obligation of the peasants to redeem personal freedom . Judging by the fact that the charter was not signed by the peasants, this state of affairs caused their dissatisfaction.

It is very important that each of the points made is formulated clearly and supported by quotes from the source. Points should be deducted for unclear formulations or weak arguments.

If participants propose original ideas not covered by these instructions, the commission should make a collective decision in each specific case. In this case, the number of experts reading the work cannot be less than four, and their decision must be approved by a general vote of the jury.

Conclusions. Assessing their significance for understanding the Peasant Reform (up to 10 points).

The jury must evaluate the depth of the conclusions reached and the clarity of their formulation. When assessing the significance of his results for understanding the implementation of the peasant reform, the participant must clearly understand that the document studied does not allow one to characterize this process as a whole and can only be used as an illustration, a special case.

Essay on history for All-Russian Olympiads

year 2013

1. “Cruelly dealing with his opponents from among other Russian princes,

not disdaining Tatar help for this, Kalita achieved significant strengthening

the power of the Moscow principality"

(L.V. Cherepnin).

I never thought that the idea expressed by the famous historian L.V. could touch me to the quick. Cherepnin that Ivan Kalita is a kind of “policeman”, a traitor to the entire Russian people, a protege of the Mongol Khan Uzbek. On the one hand, we can agree with this point of view, because in 1237, when the Mongol Khan Uzbek decided to create a puppet state in the Russian lands occupied by the Horde, he needed people who could control the situation in such vast spaces. They could suppress the constant Russian anti-Mongol uprisings, which threatened to result in the expulsion of the invaders from Rus'. And such traitors, according to L.V. Cherepnin. found - they were led by the prince of the then provincial city of Moscow - Ivan Kalita. He decided, relying on Mongolian spears and bows, to expand his possessions at the cost of betraying the Russian liberation struggle. And for this he received a label (the powers of a governor) and military assistance from Uzbek. In exchange, Ivan Kalita had to suppress all Russian anti-Mongol protests, which he did with sophisticated cruelty, as is typical of all traitors to his people.In 1960, the major work of L. V. Cherepnin was published, dedicated to the history of Rus' in the XIV – XV centuries. It contains and has given a characterization of the personality of Ivan Kalita. “Kalita does not need to be idealized. (What didn’t happen, didn’t happen! - N.B.) He was the son of his time and class, a cruel, cunning, hypocritical ruler, but smart, stubborn and purposeful.” ... “This prince (Kalita) cruelly suppressed those spontaneous popular movements that undermined the foundations of the Horde’s dominance over Russia... Cruelly dealing with his opponents from among other Russian princes, not disdaining Tatar help for this, Kalita achieved a significant increase in the power of the Moscow principality” .

Ivan Kalita, what can you say about the person who bore this name and this nickname? The first Moscow ruler... A hoarding prince, nicknamed the “money bag” for his tight-fistedness... A cunning and unprincipled hypocrite who managed to gain the trust of the Khan of the Golden Horde and led the Tatars into Russian cities in the name of his personal interests... Well, it seems , and that's it. This is the usual image of Ivan Kalita. But this image is nothing more than a myth, created for the needs of simple-minded curiosity. We will not find any unconditional confirmation of this in the sources. However, we will not find a complete denial of it. As is often the case, brief historical documents leave room for a wide variety of interpretations. In such cases, much depends on the historian, on what he wants to see when peering into the foggy mirror of the past.

Although, indeed, there are some paradoxes here that even the first Russian historian N.M. Karamzin noticed. “A miracle happened. The town, barely known before the 14th century, raised its head and saved the fatherland.” The ancient chronicler would have stopped there, bowing his head before the incomprehensibility of God's Providence. But Karamzin was a man of new times. The miracle as such no longer suited him. He wanted to find a rational explanation for it. And therefore he was the first to create the scientific myth about Kalita.

Based on sources, Karamzin defined Prince Ivan with the words that one ancient Russian author found for him - “Gatherer of the Russian Land.” However, this was clearly not enough, because all the Russian princes of that time collected land and power as best they could.

Then Karamzin offered additional explanations. Kalita was “cunning”. With this cunning he “gained the special favor of Uzbek and, with it, the dignity of the Grand Duke.” Using the same “cunning”, Ivan “lulled” the khan’s vigilance with caresses and convinced him, firstly, not to send his Baskaks to Rus' anymore, but to transfer the collection of tribute to the Russian princes, and secondly, to turn a blind eye to the annexation of many new territories to region of the great reign of Vladimir. Following Kalita’s behests, his descendants gradually “assembled Rus'.” As a result, the power of Moscow, which allowed it to gain independence from the Tatars at the end of the 15th century, is “a force trained by cunning.”

Another classic of Russian historiography, S. M. Solovyov, in contrast to Karamzin, was very restrained in his characterizations of historical figures in general and Ivan Kalita in particular. He only repeated the definition of Prince Ivan found by Karamzin as “The Gatherer of the Russian Land” and noted, following the chronicle, that Kalita “saved the Russian land from thieves.”
Some new thoughts about Kalita were expressed by N. I. Kostomarov in his famous work “Russian history in the biographies of its main figures.” He noted the unusually strong friendship between Yuri and Ivan Danilovich for the princes of that time, and said about Kalita himself: “Eighteen years of his reign were the era of the first lasting strengthening of Moscow and its rise above the Russian lands.” At the same time, Kostomarov could not resist repeating the stereotype created by Karamzin: Kalita was “a man of non-military character, although cunning.”

The famous student of Solovyov, V. O. Klyuchevsky, was a great lover of historical paradoxes. In essence, the entire history of Russia seemed to them as a long chain of large and small paradoxes. “Life conditions,” said Klyuchevsky, “often develop so capriciously that large people are exchanged for small things, like Prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, and small people have to do big things, like the princes of Moscow.” This premise about “small people” predetermined his characterization of Kalita. According to Klyuchevsky, all Moscow princes, starting with Kalita, are cunning pragmatists who “diligently courted the khan and made him an instrument of their plans».

So, to the portrait of a flatterer and cunning created by Karamzin, Klyuchevsky added a couple more dark strokes - hoarding and mediocrity. The resulting unattractive image became widely known due to its artistic expressiveness and psychological authenticity. It was imprinted in the memory of several generations of Russian people who studied according to the gymnasium history textbook of D. I. Ilovaisky.

The debunking and blasphemy of Ivan Kalita ultimately raised a legitimate question: could such a base person have accomplished such a great historical task as the founding of the Moscow state? The answer was twofold: either he was not the founder, or the image of Kalita created by historians is unreliable.

Nine-tenths of all the information we have about Ivan Kalita comes from chronicles. These strange literary works, where there are only two characters - God and man, never ended. Each generation, by the hand of a scribe-monk, wrote new pages into them. The chronicle miraculously combines opposite principles: the wisdom of centuries - and almost childish naivety; the crushing flow of time - and the indestructibility of fact; the insignificance of man in the face of Eternity - and his immeasurable greatness as “the image and likeness of God.” At first glance, the chronicle is simple and unpretentious. The weather presentation of events in the form of short messages is sometimes interrupted by inserts - independent literary works, diplomatic documents, legal acts. But behind this external simplicity lies an abyss of contradictions. Firstly, the chronicler sees events and depicts them “from his own bell tower”: from the point of view of the interests and “truth” of his prince, his city, his monastery. Beneath this layer of unconscious distortion of the truth is another: distortions that arose when compiling new chronicles based on old ones. Usually, new chronicles (more precisely, chronicle “codes”) were compiled on the occasion of some important events. The compiler of the new chronicle (“compiler”) edited and arranged in his own way the contents of several chronicles at his disposal, and created new text combinations. Therefore, the order of events in the text of the chronicle annual article does not always correspond to their real sequence. Finally, the chroniclers were always very brief in their reports and, when describing the event, did not report its reasons.

Summing up the losses and problems, let us note the main thing: our knowledge about Ivan Kalita and his time is fragmentary and fragmentary. His portrait is like an ancient fresco, scarred by time and hidden under a thick layer of late oil painting. The path of knowledge of Ivan Kalita is the path of painstaking restoration. But at the same time, this is a path of self-knowledge. After all, we are dealing with the builder of the Moscow state, whose hand forever left its mark on its facade.

Ivan Kalita cannot be assessed only from a negative point of view, because at the end of his life he took monastic vows and wrote a will, after analyzing which, one can draw a conclusion about the moral qualities of the ruler: humility, kindness. It was Kalita who became the founder of Moscow “big politics”, determined its principles, goals and means. He gave a political order to his sons - to preserve by any means that “great silence”, under the cover of which the slow “gathering of Rus'” around Moscow took place. Two components of this “great silence” are peace with the Horde and peace with Lithuania.

In the chronicle account of the death of Prince Ivan, a sincere feeling of orphanhood breaks through the usual rhetoric of the obituary. “...And the crying, frightened Moscow people, who had lost their protector and leader, crowded into the square near the temple.”