Time of political fragmentation in Europe. Western Europe and Kievan Rus in the period of feudal fragmentation

About the Verdun division of 843, when the empire of Charlemagne was divided among his grandsons, however, the title of emperor was preserved.

Compare the first and second information: what question do you have? Compare with the authors' version (p. 273).

Question: Why is the time from the 9th century called the period of fragmentation, if the empire was restored in the 10th century?

Answer: Formally, the empire was restored, but the feudal lords gained more and more power and ceased to obey their lords. At first, this happened with large feudal lords, and then even with many middlemen. Kings and emperors actually controlled only small territories, the rest of the lands were divided among smaller lords who constantly fought with each other.

Prove that a period of state fragmentation has begun in Western Europe. Have there been changes in other areas of society?

In 843, at Verdun, the empire was divided between the grandsons of Charlemagne into three parts. But the new rulers tried to leave the management system and other aspects of life unchanged. All these features of the state underwent changes slowly, being separated by state borders over the centuries of history.

Starting with the grandchildren of Charlemagne, his empire begins to disintegrate. But it was still a division into rather large parts, because it is not quite fragmentation. In addition, the owners of the beneficiaries had not yet turned into feudal lords - the kings or the emperor could still take away their lands for improper service.

What parts did the empire of Charlemagne break up into?

The empire broke up into the possessions of Lothair I, Louis (Ludwig) II of Germany and Charles II the Bald.

Compare with the map on p. 37, what states were formed on the site of the empire?

Considering that Lothair's possessions were soon divided between two other kingdoms, the West Frankish Kingdom (the future France) and the East Frankish Kingdom (the future Holy Roman Empire) arose on the site of the empire of Charlemagne.

Prove that a period of feudal fragmentation has begun in Western Europe.

The feudal lords received full power in their possessions: to judge subject people, to transfer land by inheritance, to transfer it to their own vassals. The right of kings and emperors to take land was usually only a sham. Most importantly, the feudal lords did not openly obey the monarchs and even went to war against them and against each other. In these wars, feudal fragmentation is most manifest.

Name her reasons.

Wars between pretenders to the throne. For example, in the West Frankish kingdom, there was a long struggle between two dynasties that claimed the royal title - the Carolingians and the Capetians. At the same time, the applicants bought the help of the feudal lords with more and more privileges.

Viking and Hungarian raids. The royal army often did not have time to come to repel the raid (and sometimes it was simply not up to the pretenders to the throne). Troops were needed on the ground, which could gather quickly and repel the attack. Gradually more and more rights flowed into the hands of those who could organize such a defense.

Make a conclusion about the problem of the lesson.

The combination of wars for the throne and barbarian raids strengthened the feudal lords so much that they were able to go against the power of the monarchs.

Try to find European country where one could live safely from the raids of barbarian tribes.

Only the Caliphate of Cordoba was safe. The Vikings sometimes attacked its coasts, but received a worthy rebuff, therefore they rarely attacked and did not go deep into the mainland. The lands from which the raids came were not attacked - Scandinavia and Hungary. The map shows that no one attacked Poland, Croatia and Serbia, but information about these countries in the 10th century is so scarce that, perhaps, information about such raids has not been preserved. Otherwise, there is no reason why the Vikings and Hungarians could avoid them. All other countries were subjected to raids, and even conquests, either by the Vikings, or their descendants (I remember, first of all, the campaign of Svyatoslav Igorevich against Bulgaria), or by the Hungarians.

Which parts of Charlemagne's empire became an empire again in 962?

The empire united the lands of many Germanic tribes, as well as the kingdoms of Burgundy and Lombard.

Can the formation of the Holy Roman Empire be considered the re-creation of a single imperial state of the West?

You can't count like that. Firstly, it did not unite all the territories that were part of the empire of Charlemagne. Secondly, it pretty quickly actually broke up into the possessions of large feudal lords, the power of the emperor was weak and weakened even more by rivalry with the popes.

Make a conclusion about the problem of the lesson.

The proclamation of the restoration of the empire did not stop feudal fragmentation even in the empire itself.

Try to describe a dispute between an approximate king and a count - a large landowner, in which one will prove the need for a single state, and the other will object to him.

Such a dispute could be started by a supporter of the king with accusations against the count, who violated the feudal oath. To this, the supporter of the count would begin to say that the king was the first to violate the duties of a sovereign and therefore lost the right to the allegiance of his vassal.

After this, an argument from a supporter of the king about the raids of the Vikings and Hungarians could follow. In his opinion, as long as the kingdom was united, there were no such raids. A supporter of the count could cite many examples of this, when the royal troops went too slowly and it was the local counts who had to repel the raids.

A weak argument for a supporter of the king could be the benefits for trade, which was difficult to conduct when new borders had to be crossed every few kilometers. But he himself had to understand that a truly noble person, as participants in this dispute, did not care about trade, he cared about feats of arms and glory.

At that time, only the first pair of arguments were truly worthwhile. Because feudal law was relevant then. It painted when a vassal has the right to consider himself free from the oath, and when for its violation he is worthy of losing his fief.

Try to explain the difference in the concepts of state and feudal fragmentation. Check yourself in a dictionary.

With state fragmentation, a single state is divided into several, the ruler of each of them becomes a monarch. With feudal fragmentation, the state formally remains united, the feudal lords recognize the power of the monarch over themselves, again, formally, but in reality they do not obey him and even fight against him.

What did the military reform of Charles Martel change in Frankish society?

Why did the empire of Charlemagne collapse? What is feudalism? one.

"There is no war without fires and blood." In

times of feudal fragmentation (IX-XI centuries), the possession of any large feudal lord became, as it were, a state within a state.

The feudal lord collected taxes from the subject population, judged him, could declare war on other feudal lords and make peace with them.

A feast at a noble lord. Medieval miniature

Peasants harvest.

Medieval miniature

2 - E. V. Agibalova

Battle of the Franks led by Roland local residents in the Pyrenees. Miniature of the 14th century.

The gentlemen almost constantly fought among themselves: such wars were called internecine. During civil strife burned

Roland's death. Cathedral stained glass. 13th century On the right, a mortally wounded Roland blows his horn, calling for help. Left - he unsuccessfully tries to break the sword on the rock

villages, cattle were stolen, crops were trampled. The most affected by this

peasants. 2.

Seniors and vassals.

Each large feudal lord distributed part of the land with peasants to small feudal lords as a reward for their service, they also gave him an oath of allegiance. He was considered in relation to these feudal lords

(senior), and the feudal lords, who, as it were, "kept" lands from him, became his vassals (subordinates).

Vassals were required to

the order of the seigneur to go on a campaign and bring a detachment of soldiers with him, to participate in the buzz of the seigneur, to help him with advice, to redeem the seigneur from captivity. The lord defended “my vassals from attacks by other feudal lords and rebellious peasants, rewarded them for their service, and was obliged to take care of their orphaned children.

It happened that the vassals opposed their lords, did not follow their orders, or went over to another lord. And then only force could force them to obey. 3.

Feudal staircase. The king was considered the head of all the feudal lords and the first lord of the country: he was the supreme judge in disputes between them and led the army during the war. The king was a senior for the highest nobility (aristocracy) - dukes and gra-

An excerpt from "The Song of Roland"

In the 11th century, the French epic "Song of Roland" was recorded. In it, pI tells about the heroic death of the detachment of Count Roland during the retreat of Charlemagne from Spain and about the revenge of the King of the Franks for the death of his nephew:

The count felt that death overtook him,

Cold sweat trickles down the forehead.

The count says: “Our Lady, help me,

It's time for us, Durandal6, to say goodbye to you,

I don't need you anymore.

With you, we beat many enemies,

With you, we conquered large lands.

There, Charles the gray-beard rules now ... "

He turned his face to Spain,

So that Charles the King could see,

When he is here again with the army,

That the count died, but won the battle.

What qualities of a vassal were valued in the early Middle Ages?

fov. In their possessions there were usually hundreds of villages, they disposed of large detachments of warriors. Below were barons and viscounts - vassals of dukes and earls. Usually they owned two or three dozen villages and could put up a detachment of warriors. The barons were the lords of the knights, who sometimes no longer had their own vassals, but only dependent peasants. Thus, the same feudal lord was the lord of a smaller feudal lord and a vassal of a larger one. In Germany and France, the rule was: "The vassal of my vassal is not my vassal."

feudal stairs

king! Dukes and Counts Barons Historians call this organization of feudal lords the feudal ladder. Despite the frequent conflicts between the feudal lords, which even the kings themselves could not always cope with, vassal relations united the masters into a single class in terms of value, place in society (although it consisted of different layers and groups). It was the noble class good kind) people who dominated the commoners.

When a war broke out with another state, the king called for the campaign of dukes and counts, and they turned to the barons, who brought detachments of knights with them. This is how the feudal army was created, which is usually called knightly (from the German "ritter" - a rider, an equestrian warrior).

L. The weakness of royal power in France. The power of the last kings of the Carolingian dynasty in France was significantly weakened. Contemporaries gave the kings humiliating nicknames: Charles the Fat, Charles the Simple, Ludovic the Zaika, Ludoik the Lazy.

At the end of the 10th century big feudal lords France was elected king of the rich and powerful Count of Paris - Hugo Capet (the nickname is given by the name of his favorite headdress - the hood). From then until the end of the 18th century, the royal throne remained in the hands of the Capetian dynasty or its side branches - the Valois, the Bourbons.

The French kingdom then consisted of 14 large feudal estates. Many feudal lords had more extensive lands than the king himself. Dukes and counts considered the king only the first among equals and did not always obey his orders.

The king owned a domain (domain) in the northeast of the country with the cities of Paris on the Seine River and Orleans on the Loire River. In the rest of the lands towered the castles of recalcitrant vassals. According to a contemporary, the inhabitants of these "hornet nests"

"devoured the country with their robbery".

Having no power over the whole country, the king did not issue general laws, could not collect taxes from its population.

Therefore, the king had neither a permanent strong army, nor paid officials. His military forces consisted of detachments of vassals who received fiefs in his possession, and he ruled with the help of his courtiers.

Otto I. Image from the chronicle of the XII century. 5.

Formation of the Holy Roman Empire. In Germany, the power of the king was at first stronger than in France. A single state was necessary to protect against external enemies.

Attacks by the Hungarians (Magyars) were very frequent. These tribes of nomadic pastoralists moved at the end of the 9th century from the foothills of the Southern Urals to Europe and occupied the plain between the Danube and Tisza rivers. From there, the light cavalry of the Hungarians raided the countries of Western Europe. She broke through the Rhine, reached Paris. But Germany suffered especially: the Hungarians ravaged and captured many of its inhabitants.

In 955, German and Czech troops led by the German king Otto I utterly defeated the Hungarians in a battle in southern Germany. Soon the Hungarian invasions ceased. At the beginning of the 11th century, the kingdom of Hungary was formed, where King Stephen introduced Christianity.

In 962, taking advantage of the fragmentation of Italy, Otto I marched on Rome, and the pope proclaimed him emperor. In addition to Germany, part of Italy fell under the rule of Otto I. So the Roman Empire was restored once again. Later, this political entity began to be called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.

This became possible because Germany and Italy at that time also did not

2* Dust united states. Like France, they consisted of many separate independent duchies, counties, baronies, principalities, etc., each of which had its own main city, their sovereign, their flag and coat of arms. Feudal fragmentation in these countries existed throughout the Middle Ages.

Crown and hold; emperors of the late Roman Empire

The emperor wanted to be considered the head of all the rulers of Europe. But real power was limited. Even the German dukes gradually gained independence from him. The population of Italy did not stop fighting the invaders. Each new German king, in order to be crowned with the imperial crown, had to make a campaign for the Alps and conquer Italy again.

1. Prove that every major feudal lord had such power in his possessions as the ruler of the state. Why was it possible? 2. What was the weakness of royal power in France in the 9th-11th centuries? 3. How was the Holy Roman Empire formed? 4. Explain why the German emperors sought to be crowned in Rome. 5. Calculate how many years there was not a single empire in Europe (how much time elapsed between the collapse of the empire of Charlemagne and the proclamation of Emperor Otto I).

S1. If the king, under feudal fragmentation, was considered only "first among equals", then why was royal power preserved at all? 2. Can one knight be a vassal of several lords? Justify your answer 3.

The laws of Germany in the 11th century say that a lord cannot take away a fief from you without guilt, but only if the vassal violated his duties: leave the lord in battle, attacked the lord or killed his brother. What role did this law play in the organization of medieval society? 4. Were peasants included in the feudal ladder? Why? 5. Pair up with one-kp. See the dialogue between the lord and his vassal, who are discussing the controversial situation about the breaking of the vassal oath. What arguments will both sides bring in p (asserting their innocence? How will the dispute end?

The states of Western Europe in the Middle Ages were not integral. Each represented several large feudal estates, which, in turn, were divided into smaller ones. For example, in Germany there were about two hundred small states. Most of them were too small, and they were said in jest that the head of the sleeping ruler was on his land, and his outstretched legs were in the possessions of his neighbor. It was an era of feudal fragmentation that captured

This topic will be of great interest not only to students, for whom it is summarized in the textbook “General History. Grade 6, as well as adults, who may have forgotten a little schoolwork.

Definition of the term

Feudalism is politic system, which arose in the Middle Ages and operated on the territory of the then European states. Countries under this order of government were divided into areas called fiefs. These lands were distributed by monarchs-suzerains for long-term use to noble subjects - vassals. The owners, in whose administration the territories fell, were obliged to pay tribute to the state treasury every year, and also to send a certain number of knights and other armed warriors to the ruler's army. And for this, the vassals, in turn, not only received all the rights to use the land, but also could manage the labor and destinies of people who were considered their subjects.

The collapse of the empire

After the death of Charlemagne in 814, his successors failed to save the state he created from disintegration. And all the prerequisites and causes of feudal fragmentation began to appear precisely from the very moment when the Frankish nobles, or rather, the counts who were officials empires began to seize lands. At the same time, they turned the free population living there into their vassals and forced peasants.

The feudal lords owned estates, called seigneuries, which were actually closed farms. All the goods necessary for life were produced on their territories, from food to materials for the construction of castles - well-fortified structures where the owners of these lands themselves lived. It can be said that feudal fragmentation in Europe also arose thanks to such a subsistence economy, which contributes to the complete independence of the nobles.

Over time, the position of the count began to be inherited and was assigned to the largest landowners. They ceased to obey the emperor, and turned medium and small feudal lords into their vassals.

Treaty of Verdun

With the death of Charlemagne, quarrels begin in his family, which lead to real wars. At this time, the largest feudal lords begin to support them. But, finally tired of constant hostilities, in 843 the grandchildren of Charlemagne decided to meet in the city of Verdun, where they signed an agreement according to which the empire was divided into three parts.

In accordance with the agreement, one part of the land passed into the possession of Louis the German. He began to rule over the territory north of the Alps and east of the Rhine. This state was called East Frankish. German dialects were spoken here.

The second part was taken over by Karl, who bore the nickname Bald. These were lands located to the west of the rivers Rhone, Scheldt and Meuse. They became known as the West Frankish Kingdom. Languages ​​were spoken here that later formed the basis of modern French.

The third part of the land, along with the title of emperor, went to the eldest of the brothers - Lothair. He owned the territory located along as well as Italy. But soon the brothers quarreled, and war broke out between them again. Louis and Charles united against Lothair, took away his lands and divided them among themselves. At this time, the title of emperor meant almost nothing.

It was after the division of the former state of Charlemagne in Western Europe that the period of feudal fragmentation began. Subsequently, the possessions of the three brothers turned into countries that exist to this day - these are Italy, Germany and France.

Medieval European states

In addition to the empire of Charlemagne, there was another large European state. In 1066, the Duke of Normandy (a region located in northern France), who subjugated the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, united them and became the king of England. His name was William the Conqueror.

To the east of the German lands, such as the Czech Republic, Poland and Kievan Rus were already formed. And where the nomads who came here dominated, over time, the Kingdom of Hungary appeared. In addition, Sweden, Denmark and Norway emerged in the northern part of Europe. All these states were united for some time.

The collapse of medieval states

So what were the reasons for feudal fragmentation here? The reason for the collapse of the empires of that time was not only the civil strife of the rulers. As you know, the lands that were part of the state of Charlemagne were united by force of arms. Therefore, the reasons for feudal fragmentation also lie in the fact that there was an attempt to gather within the framework of one empire completely different peoples who did not want to live together. For example, the population of the West Frankish kingdom was called French, the East Frankish kingdom was called Germans, and the peoples living in Italy were called Italians. An interesting fact is that the very first documents compiled in the languages ​​​​of the peoples living here appeared precisely during the struggle for power of the grandchildren of Emperor Charlemagne. So, Louis the German signed a treaty, which stated that they vowed to oppose their elder brother Lothair together. These papers were drawn up in French and German.

The power of the nobles

The causes of feudal fragmentation in Europe largely depended on the actions of the counts and dukes, who were a kind of governors in various parts of the country. But over time, when they began to feel almost unlimited power, the feudal lords ceased to obey the main ruler. Now they served only the owners of the lands on whose territory their estates were located. At the same time, they reported directly to the duke or count, and even then only during hostilities, when they went on a campaign at the head of their own troops. When peace came, they were completely independent and ruled their lands and the people who inhabited them as they saw fit.

feudal stairs

In order to create their own army, dukes and earls gave away part of their territories to smaller landowners. Thus, some became seigneurs (chief), while others became their vassals (military servants). Entering into the rights of ownership of the feud, the vassal knelt before his liege and swore allegiance to him. In return, the master gave his subject a branch of a tree and a handful of earth.

The main feudal lord in the state was the king. He was considered a seigneur for counts and dukes. Their possessions included hundreds of villages and a large number of military units. One step below were the barons, who were vassals of counts and dukes. They usually owned no more than three dozen villages and a detachment of warriors. The small feudal lords-knights were subordinate to the barons.

As a result of the resulting hierarchy, a feudal lord with an average income was a lord for a small one, but at the same time he himself was a vassal for a larger noble. Therefore, a rather interesting situation developed. Those nobles who were not vassals of the king were not obliged to obey him and carry out his orders. There was even a special rule. It read: "The vassal of my vassal is not my vassal."

Relations between the estates resembled a ladder, where on the lower steps were small feudal lords, and on the upper steps were larger ones headed by the king. It was this division that later became known as the feudal ladder. The peasants were not included in it, since all the lords and vassals lived off their labor.

Natural economy

The reasons for the feudal fragmentation of Western Europe also consisted in the fact that the inhabitants of not only individual regions, but also villages, practically did not need any connections with others. settlements. They could make all the necessary things, food and tools themselves or simply barter from their neighbors. At that time, there was just the heyday of subsistence farming, when trade itself ceased to exist.

Military policy

Feudal fragmentation, the causes and consequences of which had a significant impact on military power actually the royal army, could not contribute not only to its strengthening, but also to the increase in the authority of the central government in the eyes of large landowners. The feudal lords already by the tenth century managed to acquire their own squads. Therefore, the personal army of the king could not fully resist such vassals. In those days, the ruler of the state was only a conditional head of the entire then hierarchical system. In fact, the country was under the rule of nobles - dukes, barons and princes.

Causes of the collapse of European states

So, all the main causes of feudal fragmentation were identified in the process of studying the cultural and socio-economic development of the countries of Western Europe in the Middle Ages. Such a political system led to an upsurge in terms of material well-being, as well as a flourishing in the spiritual direction. Historians have come to the conclusion that feudal fragmentation was a completely natural and objective process. But this applies only to European countries.

Here are the causes of feudal fragmentation common to all states, without exception, briefly formulated in two paragraphs:

● Presence of subsistence farming. On the one hand, it ensured a rather sharp rise in prosperity and trade, as well as the rapid development of land ownership, and on the other hand, the complete absence of any specialization of individual regions and extremely limited economic ties with other lands.

● Settled image squad life. In other words, the transformation of its members into feudal lords, whose privilege was the right to own land. In addition, their power over the peasant class was unlimited. They had the opportunity to judge people and punish them for various offenses. This caused some weakening of the influence of the policy of the central government on separate territories. There were also prerequisites for the successful solution of military tasks by the forces of the local population.

Feudal fragmentation of Russian lands

The processes taking place in Western Europe since the 10th century could not bypass the principality where East Slavs. But it should be noted that the causes of feudal fragmentation in Russia were of a special nature. This can be explained by other socio-economic trends, as well as local customs of succession to the throne.

The division of the state into principalities was due to the great influence enjoyed by the local nobility, called the boyars. In addition, they owned huge land plots and supported the local princes. And instead of submitting to the Kyiv authorities, they agreed among themselves.

Succession of thrones

As in Europe, feudal fragmentation began with the fact that the numerous heirs of the rulers could not share power. If in Western countries the Salic right of succession to the throne, which required the transfer of the throne from father to eldest son, was in effect, then the Ladder right had effect on the Russian lands. It provided for the transfer of power from an older brother to a younger one, etc.

Numerous offspring of all the brothers grew up, and each of them wanted to rule. Over time, the situation became more complicated, and the pretenders to the throne constantly and tirelessly weaved intrigues against each other.

The first serious contention was a military conflict between the heirs of Prince Svyatoslav, who died in 972. The winner of it was his son Vladimir, who later baptized Russia. The collapse of the state began after the reign of Prince Mstislav Vladimirovich, who died in 1132. After that, feudal fragmentation continued until the lands began to unite around Moscow.

Reasons for the fragmentation of Russian lands

The process of fragmentation of Kievan Rus covers the period from the XII to the beginning of the XIV century. In this era, the princes waged long and bloody internecine wars for the expansion of land ownership.

Here are the most important reasons feudal fragmentation, briefly and clearly formulated in four points, acting only in Russia:

● Strengthening internecine struggle due to two trends that existed in the rules of succession to the throne of Kyiv. One of them is Byzantine law, which allows the transfer of power from father to eldest son, the second is Russian custom, according to which the eldest in the family should become the heir.

● Significant weakening of the role of Kyiv as a central authority. This happened because of the raids of the Polovtsians, who made the journey along the Dnieper dangerous, as a result of which the outflow of the population from Kyiv to the northwest began.

● Significant weakening of the threat from the Pechenegs and Varangians, as well as the defeat and establishment of relations with the rulers of the Byzantine Empire.

● Creation of specific system by Yaroslav the Wise. After his death in 1054, the Russian lands were swallowed up by a whole series of internecine wars. The ancient Russian integral state was transformed from a one-man monarchy into a federal one, which began to be headed by several authoritative princes of Yaroslavich at once.

We hope that this article has helped to supplement the knowledge of not only schoolchildren who are now studying the topic “Causes of feudal fragmentation” in the textbook “General History. 6th grade". It will refresh in the memory of university students the events that took place in the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, such a topic as feudal fragmentation, the causes and consequences of which we have described in sufficient detail, you see, is quite interesting.

Ministry of Sports of the Russian Federation FGBOU VPO "Povolzhskaya GAFKSIT"

ESSAY

in history

TOPIC:Feudal fragmentation in Western

Europe

Completed:

Abdullin Nurzat Almazovich, student 4213z

Accepted:

Shabalina Yulia Vladimirovna

Kazan

1) Feudal fragmentation is a natural process.

2) Feudal fragmentation in Western Europe

a) Feudal fragmentation in England

b) The development of medieval Germany

c) Growth of Byzantine cities

d) a predatory campaign in Italy

e) Reasons for the fragmentation of Western Europe

f) War between feudal lords

g) Feudal staircase

h) Summary

Introduction

With the branching of the ruling dynasty in the early feudal states, the expansion of their territory and the administrative apparatus, whose representatives exercise the power of the monarch over the local population, collecting tribute and troops, the number of contenders for central power increases, peripheral military resources increase, and the control capabilities of the center weaken. The supreme power becomes nominal, and the monarch begins to be elected by large feudal lords from among themselves, while the resources of the elected monarch, as a rule, are limited by the resources of his original principality, and he cannot transfer supreme power by inheritance. In this situation, the rule "the vassal of my vassal is not my vassal" works.

The first exceptions are England in the north-west of Europe (the Salisbury oath of 1085, all feudal lords are direct vassals of the king) and Byzantium in its south-east (at about the same time, Emperor Alexei I Komnenos forced the crusaders who seized the lands in the Middle East, recognize vassal dependence on the empire, thereby including these lands in the empire and preserving its unity). In these cases, all the lands of the state are divided into the domain of the monarch and the lands of his vassals, as in the next historical stage, when the supreme power is assigned to one of the princes, it again begins to be inherited and the process of centralization begins (this stage is often called a patrimonial monarchy).

The full development of feudalism became a prerequisite for the end of feudal fragmentation, since the overwhelming majority of the feudal stratum, its ordinary representatives, were objectively interested in having a single spokesman for their interests:

Feudal fragmentation is natural

process

In the history of the early feudal states of Europe in the X-XII centuries. are a period political fragmentation. By this time, the feudal nobility had already turned into a privileged group, belonging to which was determined by birth. The existing monopoly property of the feudal lords on land was reflected in the rules of law. "There is no land without a lord." The peasants found themselves for the most part in personal and land dependence on the feudal lords. Having received a monopoly on land, the feudal lords also acquired significant political power: the transfer of part of their land to vassals, the right to litigate and mint money, the maintenance of their own military force, etc. In accordance with the new realities, a different hierarchy of feudal society is now taking shape, which has legal consolidation: "The vassal of my vassal is not my vassal." Thus, the internal cohesion of the feudal nobility was achieved, its privileges were protected from encroachments by the central government, which was weakening by this time. For example, in France before the beginning of the XII century. the real power of the king did not extend beyond the domain, which was inferior in size to the possessions of many large feudal lords. The king, in relation to his immediate vassals, had only formal suzerainty, and the big lords behaved completely independently. Thus began to take shape the foundations of feudal fragmentation. It is known that on the territory that collapsed in the middle of the 9th century. In the empire of Charlemagne, three new states arose: French, German and Italian (Northern Italy), each of which became the base of the emerging territorial-ethnic community - nationality. Then the process of political disintegration embraced each of these new formations. So, in the territory of the French kingdom at the end of the 9th century. there were 29 possessions, and at the end of the tenth century. - about 50. But now they were for the most part not ethnic, but patrimonial seigneurial formations

The collapse of the early feudal territorial organization of state power and the triumph of feudal fragmentation represented the completion of the process

the formation of feudal relations and the flourishing of feudalism in Western Europe. In its content, it was a natural and progressive process, due to the rise of internal colonization, the expansion of the area of ​​cultivated land. Thanks to the improvement of labor tools, the use of animal draft power and the transition to three-field cultivation, land cultivation improved, industrial crops began to be cultivated - flax, hemp; new branches of agriculture appeared - viticulture, etc. As a result, the peasants began to have surplus products that they could exchange for handicrafts, and not make them themselves. The labor productivity of artisans increased, and the technique and technology of handicraft production improved. The craftsman turned into a small commodity producer working for trade. Ultimately, these circumstances led to the separation of the craft from Agriculture, the development of commodity-money relations, trade and the emergence of a medieval city. They became centers of crafts and trade. As a rule, cities in Western Europe arose on the land of the feudal lord and therefore inevitably submitted to him. The townspeople, most of whom were mainly former peasants, remained in the land or personal dependence of the feudal lord. The desire of the townspeople to free themselves from such dependence led to a struggle between cities and lords for their rights and independence. This movement, widely developed in Western Europe in the X-XIII centuries. went down in history under the name of "communal movement". All rights and privileges won or acquired for a ransom were recorded in the charter. By the end of the XIII century. many cities achieved self-government, became commune cities. So, about 50% of English cities had their own self-government, city council, mayor and court. The inhabitants of such cities in England, Italy, France, etc. became free from feudal dependence. A fugitive peasant who lived in the cities of these countries for a year and one day became free. Thus, in the XIII century. a new estate appeared - the townspeople - as an independent political force with its own status, privileges and liberties: personal freedom, jurisdiction of the city court, participation in the city militia. The emergence of estates that achieved significant political and legal rights was an important step towards the formation of estate-representative monarchies in the countries of Western Europe. This became possible thanks to the strengthening of the central government, first in England, then in France. The development of commodity-money relations and the involvement of the countryside in this process undermined the subsistence economy and created conditions for the development of the domestic market. The feudal lords, seeking to increase their incomes, began to transfer land to the peasants for hereditary holding, reduced the lord's plowing, encouraged internal colonization, willingly accepted fugitive peasants, settled uncultivated lands with them and provided them with personal freedom. The estates of the feudal lords were also drawn into market relations. These circumstances led to a change in the forms of feudal rent, the weakening, and then the complete elimination of personal feudal dependence. Quite quickly this process took place in England, France, Italy. .

Feudal fragmentation in Western Europe

Feudal fragmentation in England

The process of feudal fragmentation in the X-XII centuries. began to develop in England. This was facilitated by the transfer by the royal power to the nobility of the right to collect feudal duties from the peasants and their lands. As a result of this, the feudal lord (secular or ecclesiastical), who received such an award, becomes the full owner of the land occupied by the peasants and their personal master. The private property of the feudal lords grew, they became economically stronger and sought greater independence from the king. The situation changed after England in 1066 was conquered by the Duke of Normandy William the Conqueror. As a result, the country, moving towards feudal fragmentation, turned into a cohesive state with strong monarchical power. This is the only example on the European continent in this period.

The point was that the conquerors deprived many representatives of the former nobility of their possessions, carrying out mass confiscation of landed property. The king became the actual owner of the land, who transferred part of it as fiefs to his warriors and part of the local feudal lords who expressed their readiness to serve him. But these possessions were now in different parts England. The only exceptions were a few counties, which were located on the outskirts of the country and were intended for the defense of the border areas. The dispersion of feudal estates (130 large vassals had land in 2-5 counties, 29 - in 6-10 counties, 12 - in 10-21 counties), their private return to the king served as an obstacle to turning the barons into independent landowners, as it was, for example in France

Development of medieval Germany

The development of medieval Germany was characterized by a certain originality. Until the 13th century it was one of the most powerful states in Europe. And then the process of internal political fragmentation begins to develop rapidly here, the country breaks up into a number of independent associations, while other Western European countries embarked on the path of state consolidation. The fact is that the German emperors, in order to maintain their power over dependent countries, needed the military assistance of the princes and were forced to make concessions to them. Thus, if in other countries of Europe the royal power deprived the feudal nobility of its political privileges, then in Germany the process of legislative consolidation of the highest state rights for the princes. As a result, the imperial power gradually lost its positions and became dependent on large secular and church feudal lords. . In addition, in Germany, despite the rapid development already in the tenth century. cities (the result of the separation of craft from agriculture), did not develop, as was the case in England, France and other countries, an alliance between the royal power and the cities. Therefore, the German cities were unable to play an active role in the political centralization of the country. And, finally, Germany has not formed, like England or France, a single economic center that could become the core of political unification. Each principality lived separately. As the princely power strengthened, the political and economic fragmentation of Germany intensified.

Growth of Byzantine cities

In Byzantium at the beginning of the XII century. the formation of the main institutions of feudal society was completed, a feudal estate was formed, and the bulk of the peasants were already in land or personal dependence. The imperial power, presenting wide privileges to secular and church feudal lords, contributed to their transformation into all-powerful patrimonials, who had an apparatus of judicial and administrative power and armed squads. It was the payment of the emperors to the feudal lords for their support and service. The development of crafts and trade led at the beginning of the XII century. to the fairly rapid growth of Byzantine cities. But unlike Western Europe, they did not belong to individual feudal lords, but were under the rule of the state, which did not seek an alliance with the townspeople. Byzantine cities did not achieve self-government, like Western European cities. The townspeople, subjected to cruel fiscal exploitation, were thus forced to fight not with the feudal lords, but with the state. Strengthening the positions of feudal lords in the cities, establishing their control over trade and marketing of their products, undermined the well-being of merchants and artisans. With the weakening of imperial power, the feudal lords became sovereign masters in the cities. . Increasing tax oppression led to frequent uprisings that weakened the state. At the end of the XII century. the empire began to fall apart. This process accelerated after the capture of Constantinople in 1204 by the crusaders. The empire fell, and the Latin Empire and several other states were formed on its ruins. And although in 1261 the Byzantine state was restored again (it happened after the fall of the Latin Empire), but the former power was no longer there. This continued until the fall of Byzantium under the blows of the Ottoman Turks in 1453.

Plundering campaign in Italy

In the X century, the German feudal lords, led by their king, began to make predatory campaigns in Italy. Having captured part of Italy with the city of Rome, the German king declared himself Roman emperor. The new state was later called the "Holy Roman Empire". But it was a very weak state. The large feudal lords of Germany did not submit to the emperor. The population of Italy did not stop fighting the invaders. Each new German king had to make a campaign for the Alps in order to conquer the country again. For several centuries in a row, German feudal lords plundered and ravaged Italy.

The states of Western Europe were not united. Each of them broke up into large fiefs, which were divided into many small ones. In Germany, for example, there were about 200 small states. Some of them were so small that they jokingly said: “The head of the ruler, when he goes to bed, lies on his land, and his legs have to be pulled into the possession of a neighbor.” It was a time of feudal fragmentation in Western Europe

Reasons for the fragmentation of Western Europe

Why were the states of Western Europe fragmented? With subsistence farming, there were not and could not be strong trade ties between individual parts of the country, there were no ties even between individual estates. In each estate, the population lived its own isolated life and had little contact with people from other places. People spent most of their lives in their village. Yes, they had no reason to go anywhere: after all, everything necessary was produced on the spot.

Each fief was almost an independent state. The feudal lord had a detachment of warriors, collected taxes from the population, performed judgment and reprisals on them. He himself could declare war on other feudal lords and make peace with them. Whoever owned the land had the power.

Large feudal lords - dukes and counts - had little regard for the king. They claimed that the king was only "first among equals", that is, they considered themselves no less noble than the king. Many large feudal lords themselves were not averse to seizing the royal throne.

The dominance of natural economy led to the fragmentation of the states of Western Europe. Royal power in the IX - X centuries. was very weak.

War between feudal lords

In times of fragmentation, the feudal lords continuously fought among themselves. These wars were called internecine wars
.

Why did internecine wars break out? The feudal lords sought to take away each other's land along with the peasants who lived on it. The more serfs the feudal lord had, the stronger and richer he was, since serfs were liable for the use of land.

Wishing to undermine the strength of his enemy, the feudal lord ruined his peasants: he burned villages, drove cattle, trampled crops.

The peasants suffered the most from internecine wars; the feudal lords could sit behind the strong walls of their castles.

feudal stairs

In order to have his own military detachment, each feudal lord distributed part of the land with serfs to smaller feudal lords. In relation to these feudal lords, the owner of the land was a lord (“senior”), and those who received land from him were his vassals, that is, military servants. Taking possession of the feud, the vassal knelt before the lord and took an oath of allegiance to him. As a sign of the transfer, the feudal lord handed over to the vassal a handful of earth and a tree branch.

The king was considered the head of all feudal lords in the country. He was the lord for dukes and counts.

In their possessions there were usually hundreds of villages, they disposed of large detachments of warriors.

A step below stood barons - vassals of dukes and earls. Usually they owned two or three dozen villages and could put up a detachment of warriors.

Barons were lords of petty feudal lords - knights.

Thus, the same feudal lord was the lord of a smaller feudal lord and a vassal of a larger one. Vassals were to obey only their lords. If they were not vassals of the king, then they were not obliged to follow his orders. This order was fixed by the rule: Vassal of my vassal is not my vassal».

Relations between feudal lords resemble a ladder, on the upper steps of which stand the largest feudal lords, on the lower steps - small ones. These relationships are called feudal stairs

The peasants did not enter the feudal ladder. And seigneurs, vassals were feudal lords. All of them - from the petty knight of the king - lived on the labor of serfs.

The vassal was obliged, by order of his lord, to go on a campaign with him and lead a detachment of soldiers. In addition, he had to help the lord with advice and redeem him from captivity.

The lord defended his vassals from the attacks of other feudal lords and from the rebellious peasants. If the peasants rebelled in the village of the knight, he sent a messenger to the seigneur, and he, with his detachment, hurried to his aid.

When a war broke out with another state, the entire feudal ladder, as it were, began to move. The king called for the campaign of dukes and counts, they turned to the barons, who led the detachments of knights. This is how the feudal army was created. But vassals often did not follow the orders of their lords. In such cases, only force could force them to obey.

During the period of fragmentation, the feudal ladder was the organization of the feudal class. With its help, the feudal lords waged wars and helped each other to keep the peasants in subjection.

Conclusion

Feudal fragmentation is a progressive phenomenon in the development of feudal relations. The collapse of the early feudal empires into independent principalities-kingdoms was an inevitable stage in the development of feudal society, whether it concerned Russia in Eastern Europe, France in Western Europe, or the Golden Horde in the East. Feudal fragmentation was progressive because it was the result of the development of feudal relations, the deepening of the social division of labor, which resulted in the rise of agriculture, the flourishing of handicrafts, and the growth of cities. For the development of feudalism, a different scale and structure of the state was needed, adapted to the needs and aspirations of the feudal lords.

Bibliography

Textbook. History of the Middle Ages. V.A. Vedyushkin. M "Enlightenment" 2009

2. History of the Middle Ages. M. Boytsov, R Shukurov. M.

"Miros", 1995

3.R.Yu.Viller Brief textbook of the history of the Middle Ages

1-2 parts M. School - Press, 1993

In the IX-XI centuries. states are also being formed in other parts of Europe, where the process of the formation of new ethnic groups and nationalities is underway. In the northern mountainous regions of the Iberian Peninsula, from the 8th century, after the conquest of Visigothic Spain by the Arabs (Moors), Asturias retained its independence, which became a kingdom in 718. In the ninth century the kingdom of Navarre was formed, separated from the Spanish brand founded by Charlemagne. The county of Barcelona, ​​which temporarily became part of France, also stood out from it. Asturias was the forerunner of the future unified Spanish state, the territory of which had yet to be conquered over the centuries from the Arabs. In most of the rest of Spain, the Arab state continued to exist - the Emirate of Cordoba, which arose in the middle of the 8th century. and turned into the Caliphate of Cordoba in 929, which in the first half of the 11th century. broke up into a number of small independent emirates.

Formation of the state among the Anglo-Saxons

The Anglo-Saxon kingdoms in Britain united in 829 into one kingdom, England. In the north of Britain there was an independent kingdom of Scotland, and in the west - the Celtic principalities of Wales. The independent Celtic tribes that inhabited Ireland were in the process of uniting clans and forming the supreme royal power.

In the north of Europe in the IX-XI centuries. the Scandinavian countries - Denmark, Norway, Sweden - entered the path of development of the formation of states. In the 8th century the Danish kingdom was formed, at the end of the 9th century. the united Norwegian kingdom began to take shape, and from the 11th century. the Kingdom of Sweden.

In the 9th century, priests throughout Europe offered prayers: “Lord, protect us from the fury of the Normans!”. The Normans are the ancient Scandinavians, the ancestors of modern Danes, Swedes, Norwegians and Icelanders. Normans - "northern people" - they were called by the inhabitants of Western Europe, in Russia they were known as the Vikings. Scandinavia, where they live, has a rather harsh climate. There are few lands suitable for cultivation, so the sea played a huge role in the life of the Scandinavians. The sea provided food, the sea was a road that allowed you to quickly get to other countries.

In the VIII-X centuries in Scandinavia, the influence of leaders increased, strong squads were formed, striving for glory and prey. And as a result - attacks, conquests and resettlement to new lands. The daredevils who dared to risk their lives on long voyages and robberies were called Vikings in Scandinavia. From the end of the 8th century and for almost three centuries, the attacks of the Normans followed one after another. They devastated the coast, penetrated deep into any country along the rivers, ravaged London, Paris, Aachen. Their attacks were so sudden that by the time the army of the local ruler opposed them, they managed to sail back with rich booty leaving smoking ruins in their wake. Where the Normans did not count on an easy victory, they showed caution: putting their swords aside, they pretended to be merchants and began to profitably engage in trade.

Over time, the Normans began to seize the coastal regions of other countries and establish their own states there. So it was in Scotland, Ireland, England. In the 10th century, the French king was forced to cede vast lands in the north of the country to the Normans. Thus the Duchy of Normandy was born. The Scandinavians who settled there adopted Christianity, adopted the local language and customs.

Norman discoveries

The Normans were the best sailors of their time. Their fast ships moved easily along narrow rivers, but they also withstood ocean storms. At the end of the 9th century, the Normans discovered the island, which they called Iceland - "land of ice", and began to populate it. In the 10th century an Icelander Erich the Red discovered big land northwest of Iceland, which he named Greenland - "green country". Around the year 1000, the son of Eirik the Red, Leif, nicknamed the Happy, reached the coast. North America. Leif and his companions named this country Vinland - "country of grapes". They were the first Europeans to visit the New World 500 years before Columbus. Already in our time, archaeologists have unearthed a Norman settlement on the island of Newfoundland. True, the Normans failed to gain a foothold in America for a long time. Stories about the country of Vinland were passed down from generation to generation, but no one outside of Scandinavia ever knew about it.

For those whose lands were ravaged by the Normans, they were pagan barbarians who destroyed Christian culture. However, the Scandinavians have created their own, original culture. They used a special script - runes, passed on from generation to generation epic tales about gods and heroes. Their historical tales - sagas - told about bold voyages and fierce battles. It was from the sagas that historians learned about the voyages to Greenland and Vinland. When Viking ships appeared off the coast of England at the end of the 8th century, there were several kingdoms there, founded back in the 5th-6th centuries by the Germanic tribes of the Angles and Saxons. In the 9th century, the attacks of the Vikings became more and more dangerous. Soon, most of the country was under their rule. It seemed impossible to stop them.

King Alfred the Great (871-900) managed to organize resistance to the Normans. He fortified the border with new fortresses and reformed the army. Previously, the basis of the army was the people's militia. The new army was much smaller than the previous one, because only every sixth Anglo-Saxon fit for service remained in it. But the other five fed and armed him, so that he could diligently engage in military affairs and fight with the Scandinavians on equal terms. Relying on a new army, Alfred achieved a turning point in the fight against the Normans, and his successors completely ousted the enemies from the country.

After the death of the English king Edward the Confessor, so called for his piety, one of the contenders for the throne was the Duke of Normandy William. The English nobility put forward their candidate - Harold. Army Wilhelm crossed the English Channel and in 1066 won the Battle of Hastings. Harold died in battle. The Duke of Normandy became King of England and was nicknamed the Conqueror. By the end of the 11th century, states were formed in Scandinavia, the population of which converted to Christianity. The Vikings, who settled in other countries, also created their own kingdoms. The era of invasions and long-distance voyages is over.

Feudal fragmentation

One of the reasons for the success of the Vikings was the military weakness of their opponents, especially France. There were reasons for that. The early Carolingians retained a certain amount of power over the lands that their ancestors had once granted as beneficiaries. But the owners of the latter, over time, began to freely pass them on by inheritance. These were no longer benefices, but fiefs. The owners of fiefs - the feudal lords - tried in every possible way to reduce the service in favor of the king. This was facilitated by the monarchs themselves, who, in an effort to attract the nobility to their side, granted her more and more privileges: to judge the local population, punish criminals, and collect taxes. Sometimes the representatives of the king could not even enter the feudal lord's possessions without his permission.

The continuous attacks of enemies also contributed to the further strengthening of the feudal lords. The weakened royal power did not have time to establish resistance, and the local population could only rely on the feudal lords, whose power increased accordingly. Since the weakening of royal power was closely connected with the transformation of beneficiaries into fiefs, the fragmentation that triumphed at that time in Western Europe is usually called feudal. In the 9th-10th centuries, the most rapid fragmentation of power occurred in the West Frankish kingdom, which just at that time began to be called France.

The last Carolingians did not have much power in France, and in 987 the feudal lords handed over the crown to the powerful Parisian count Hugh Capet, who became famous for his successful struggle against the Normans. His descendants - Capetians - ruled France until the XIV century, and the side branches of the dynasty (Valois and Bourbons), respectively, until the end of the XVI and until the end of the XVIII century.

The king officially led the French army in big wars with neighbors, acted as an intermediary in disputes between the feudal lords, but otherwise had no power over the country and could only rely on the resources of his domain. This was the territory that belonged to him not as a king, but as the heir to the counts of Paris, a narrow strip of land from the Seine to the Loire with the cities of Paris and Orleans. But even there the king was not a complete master: the feudal lords, having strengthened themselves in the royal fortresses, felt the impotence of power and did not obey it.

The French kingdom was then divided into many large and small feudal estates. Some feudal lords - the dukes of Normandy, the counts of Champagne and others - had more land and wealth than the king himself, and felt independent of the monarch in their possessions, considering him only the first among equals. They collected taxes, minted coins, fought wars. But, having taken power from the king, they also lost it in favor of medium and small feudal lords.

The rise of Germany in the 10th century

The dukes, turning into large landowners, used their position as tribal leaders to strengthen their own power. This led to the preservation of tribal disunity, which hampered the development of Germany. In 911, after the Carolingian dynasty ended in Germany, one of the tribal dukes, Conrad I of Franconia, was elected king, during which an open conflict broke out between the royal power and the tribal dukes, ending in the defeat of the king. After the death of Conrad I, a struggle for power developed between the tribal dukes; as a result, in 919 two kings were elected at once - Henry of Saxony and Arnulf of Bavaria.

However, various social forces were interested in a strong royal power: medium and large landowners, monasteries and bishoprics. Moreover, the political unification of Germany at this time was necessary in the face of external danger; from the end of the ninth century Germany became the scene of Norman raids, and from the beginning of the 10th century. a new danger arose - the raids of the Hungarians who settled in Pannonia. Their cavalry detachments unexpectedly invaded Germany, devastating everything in their path, and just as suddenly disappeared. Attempts to organize an effective rebuff to the Hungarians by the foot militia of individual duchies turned out to be ineffective.

Henry of Saxony, by skillful policy, achieved recognition of his power by all the tribal dukes, including Arnulf of Bavaria , having received the title Henry I (919-936) and becoming the founder Saxon dynasty (919 - 1024). His activities, which consisted in the construction of castles (burghs) and the creation of heavily armed knightly cavalry, were successful in the fight against the Hungarian nomads. In 955, in a decisive battle on the Lech River, near Augsburg, they suffered a crushing defeat. The raids on Germany stopped, and the Hungarians themselves switched to a settled life.

However, the tribal dukes were not inclined to lose their independence. They recognized the royal title of Henry I only after he refused to interfere in the internal affairs of the duchies. But when the son and successor of Henry I, Otto I (936-973), made an attempt to change the situation and suppress the independence of the dukes, this caused an uprising.

In the struggle to strengthen his power, the king began to pursue an active policy of supporting the church, turning it into an ally capable of pursuing the policy he needed on the ground. To do this, he generously endowed her with land holdings. These land holdings, together with the living population, were entirely controlled only by the church authorities. On the other hand, any appointment to the highest church posts could only happen with the approval of the king. The clergy only put forward candidates for these positions, but they were approved and appointed by the king. When the office of bishop or imperial (royal) abbot remained vacant, all income from their land went to the king, who was therefore in no hurry to replace them.

The highest church dignitaries were attracted by the king to carry out administrative, diplomatic, military, and public service. Vassals of bishops and imperial abbots were most troops; often at the head of its divisions was a militant bishop or abbot. Such a system of the imperial church arose even under the Carolingians. The church became the main means of governing Germany, which the rulers used to their advantage. The most important goal of royal policy now became to achieve the subordination of the Pope, as the head of all catholic church.

These plans are closely connected with attempts to reunify Europe, resurrect a semblance of Charlemagne's empire. The intentions of the royal power to expand the state by including new territories found the full support of the landowners. Even under Henry I, Lorraine was annexed, the conquest of the eastern Slavic lands began (the onslaught to the east - the policy of Drang nach Osten). Otto I, having influence in the West Frankish Empire, directed his claims towards Italy, beyond the Alps. His desire to be crowned in Rome is quite understandable.

In Italy, where there was no single center, and various forces fought among themselves, it was not possible to organize a rebuff to the German troops. In 951, as a result of the first campaign, Northern Italy (Lombardy) was captured. Otto I assumed the title of King of the Lombards. He married the heiress of the Italian kingdom, freeing her from imprisonment.

Rise of the Holy Roman Empire

After 10 years, taking advantage of another aggravation of the struggle between the pope and the Italian landowners, the king got his way. Early in 962, the pope crowned Otto I in Rome with the imperial crown. Prior to this, Otto I, under a special agreement, recognized the pope's claims to secular possessions in Italy, but the German emperor was proclaimed the supreme lord of these possessions. The obligatory oath of the pope to the emperor was introduced, which was an expression of the subordination of the papacy to the empire.

So in 962 the Holy Roman Empire arose headed by the German emperor, which included, in addition to Germany, Northern and a significant part of Central Italy, some Slavic lands, as well as part of the South in South-East France. In the first half of the XI century. the Kingdom of Burgundy (Arelat) was annexed to the empire.

An interesting page in the history of the early empire is connected with the grandson of Otto I the Great Otto III . His mother was Byzantine princess Theophano, though she had no rights to the throne. But her son, half Saxon, half Greek, considered himself the heir to both Charlemagne and the rulers of Constantinople. Otto III received a good education and considered it his historical mission to revive the ancient Roman Empire in all its splendor. He became king of Italy, and for the first time under him a German under the name of Gregory V was elevated to the papal throne, who immediately crowned the benefactor with the imperial crown. In his dreams, Otto saw himself as the ruler of a single world Christian power with capitals in Rome, Aachen, and possibly Constantinople. Otto III ordered to build a palace for himself on the site where the Roman emperors lived. He declared a fake document, according to which the popes claimed the rights to secular power, the so-called "Konstantin's gift."

However, the plans of the emperor did not find support either in Germany, which in this case was destined for the fate of a separate part of the general whole, or in Italy, both among the clergy and among the large landowners-nobiles. A revolt arose in Rome, Otto III fled the city and soon died at the age of 22, leaving no heir. Power in the empire passed to Henry II (1002-1024), who became the last representative of the Saxon dynasty.

The Holy Roman Empire of the German nation (this name will be established later) will exist in Europe until the conquests of Napoleon I in early XIX when the Confederation of the Rhine is formed in its place.

This artificial political formation, which had neither a common economic base nor ethnic unity, caused innumerable disasters for Italy throughout many centuries of its history. The German kings and emperors, considering themselves the masters of the Italian lands, constantly organized campaigns to plunder Italy and subjugate it to their power.

The emergence of the Holy Roman Empire, the confrontation with the papacy will have an impact on the further history of the development of Germany. The German emperors will waste their strength on fruitless attempts to conquer Italy, while their absence from the country will enable the great landowners, secular and spiritual, to gain strength, thereby contributing to the development of centrifugal tendencies.

After the suppression of the Saxon dynasty, representatives of Franconian dynasty (1024-1125). The first decades of their reign were not easy. In Italy, at that time, an alliance was finally formed between the papacy and the strong group of Italian large landowners that supported it and a number of Italian cities, on the one hand, and powerful German secular landowners, on the other, which was directed against the strengthening of the emperor's power. under the emperor Henry IV (1056-1106) the conflict resulted in an open confrontation, called by historians fight for investment . Investiture is the act of taking possession of land, the transfer of a fief by a lord to his vassal. As applied to bishops and abbots, investiture included not only the introduction of a new bishop or abbot into the management of the lands and dependent people of the corresponding church institution (bishopric or abbey), but also confirmation in the clergy, as a sign of which a ring and a staff were presented. The right of investiture meant, in essence, the right to appoint and confirm bishops and abbots chosen by the clergy.

Beginning with Otto I, emperors carried out the investiture of bishops and abbots and saw this as one of the most important pillars of their power. The popes, who had previously put up with this order, in the second half of the 11th century, began to challenge the emperor's right to the investiture of higher clerics - bishops and abbots. This struggle engulfed all parts of the empire. During the confrontation, a whole range of important issues was resolved. For example, about the supremacy in church affairs of the emperor or pope, about the fate of the empire in Germany, about the foundations of further political development German society, on the relationship between Germany and the Italian regions of the empire, on the further development of the cities of Northern and Central Italy.

AT 1059 on the Lateran Church Cathedral (in Rome) Was installed new order choice of dads. According to the decision of the council, the pope was to be elected without any outside interference by the cardinals - the highest dignitaries of the church, who received their title from the pope. This decision was directed against the desire of the emperor to interfere in the election of popes. The Lateran Council also spoke out against the secular investiture of bishops and abbots.

Cluniac movement

Having strengthened his possessions in Saxony and suppressed the uprising here (1070-1075), the emperor was ready to fight with the Pope. The papacy saw a way out in the rallying of church forces. It relied on supporting the movement, which originated in the 10th century. in the monastery of Cluny (French Burgundy). The purpose of this movement was the all-round strengthening of the church, raising its moral authority and eradicating all the negative aspects that were widespread in its environment by that time. This includes the sale of church positions, the “secularization” of churchmen, the submission to secular power, etc.

Principles Cluniac movement found a warm response in the monasteries of Germany, which contributed to the spread of centrifugal tendencies within the country. Fourteen years after the Council of the Lateran, in 1073, the monk Hildebrand, a zealous supporter of the demands of Cluniac, was elected pope under the name of Gregory VII and began to put into practice his program of strengthening the church, removing several German bishops, appointed, in his opinion, incorrectly.

Henry IV resolutely opposed the desire of Gregory VII to subjugate the German clergy and weaken their connection with the royal power. In 1076, at a meeting of the highest German clergy, he announced the deposition of Gregory VII. In response to this, the pope used an unprecedented means: he excommunicated Henry IV from the church and deprived him of his royal dignity, and freed the king's subjects from the oath to their sovereign. Immediately, the secular nobility, many bishops and abbots opposed the king.

Henry IV was forced to capitulate to Gregory VII. In January 1077, with a small retinue, he went on a meeting with the pope to Italy. After a difficult passage through the Alps, Henry began to seek a meeting with Gregory VII, who was in the castle of Canossa (in Northern Italy). According to chroniclers, Henry IV, having removed all the signs of royal dignity, barefoot and hungry, stood for three days from morning to evening in front of the castle. Finally, he was admitted to the pope and on his knees begged his forgiveness.

However, Henry's obedience was only a maneuver. Having somewhat strengthened his position in Germany after the removal of the excommunication from him by the pope, he again opposed Gregory VII. Walking still for a long time after that, with varying success, the struggle between the empire and the papacy ended with the signing of the so-called Concordat of Worms (1122) - an agreement concluded by the son and successor of Henry IV, Henry V, and Pope Calixtus II. It regulated the election of bishops by establishing different system elections of bishops in various regions of the empire.

In Germany, bishops were henceforth to be elected by the clergy in the presence of the emperor, who had the final say in the presence of several candidates. The emperor made a secular investiture - the transfer of a scepter, symbolizing power over the lands of the bishopric. After the secular investiture, the spiritual one, carried out by the pope or his legate, followed - the transfer of the ring and staff, symbolizing the spiritual authority of the bishop.

In Italy and in Burgundy, the election of bishops was to take place without the participation of the emperor or his representatives. Only six months after the election and confirmation of the new bishop by the pope, the emperor made an investiture with a scepter, which thus turned into a purely formal act.

The Concordat of Worms destroyed the system of the imperial church in Italy and Burgundy. In Germany, however, a compromise order was established, which was a violation of the fundamental principles of the Ottonian church policy. He strengthened the position of the German princes. And this reduced the possibilities of the central government.

In the XII century. the central state power in Germany is weakening, a long period of political fragmentation begins.

Thus, over the course of several centuries, the most important processes took place in medieval Europe. Huge masses of Germanic, Slavic and nomadic tribes moved across its spaces, their placement further formed the boundaries of future state formations. These formations at first were fragile, short-lived in the period of existence. Under the blows of nomads, powerful neighbors, they went into oblivion.

The first of those that arose were the German barbarian kingdoms, created back in the territory ancient rome. By the end of the 1st millennium AD. states were formed among the Slavs, and in the north of Europe. They were cemented by the Christian religion. The strongest of the barbarian kingdoms had a historical perspective - the Frankish kingdom. It was here that the representative of the Carolingian dynasty, Charlemagne, was able to unite Europe almost within the borders of the Roman Empire by force of arms with the support of the Catholic Church in 800.

However, the empire of Charlemagne was an internally weak formation, uniting territories that were completely different in their level. If in the former Frankish kingdom the strengthening of feudal relations based on the ownership of landed property with a dependent population was in full swing, then in the east in the German and Slavic territories long time there was a powerful stratum of free farmers.

Results

The collapse of the empire of Charlemagne was a matter of time. Not even half a century has passed since its inception, as the descendants of the emperor divided it among themselves. The future France, Germany, Italy are formed on the ruins of the empire. But first, the kings of the East Frankish kingdom (Germany) made another attempt to unite Europe.

The Holy Roman Empire, which arose in 962 thanks to the efforts of Otto I, had a lot of problems. The Italian lands were eager to escape from the power of the emperor, and for many decades, to the detriment of strengthening the German territories, the ruler concentrated his attention on their subjugation. The German princes tried in every possible way to be independent. The powerful influence of the emperor on the papacy and the church was in conflict with their interests. The principle of the imperial church, which, as under the Carolingians, was used by the Saxon dynasty, interfered with the claims of the papacy to the exercise of secular power.

Using the Cluniac movement as a support, the papacy got its way. As a result of the measures of Pope Gregory VII and further development his policies in 1122 concluded between the emperor and the pope Concordat of Worms , which meant the destruction of the principles of the imperial church. In addition, it led to the strengthening of the power of the German princes and the weakening of the power of the emperor.

References:

1. Agibalova E.V., Donskoy G.M. General history. History of the Middle Ages: a textbook for the 6th grade of educational institutions. 14th ed. M.: Education, 2012.
2. Aleksashkina L.N. General history. History of the Middle Ages. (any edition).
3. Boytsov M.A., Shukurov R.M. History of the Middle Ages. Textbook for the VII class of secondary educational institutions. - 4th ed. - Moscow: MIROS; KD "University", 1998.
4. Boytsov M.A., Shukurov R.M. General history. History of the Middle Ages: a textbook for the 6th grade of educational institutions. 15th ed. M.: Russian word, 2012. Brandt M.Yu. General history. History of the Middle Ages. Textbook for grade 6 educational institutions. 8th ed., revised. M.: Bustard, 2008.
5. Bolshakov O. G. History of the Caliphate. M., 2000.
6. World history in six volumes / Ch. ed. A.O. Chubaryan. T. 2. Medieval civilizations of the West and East / Ed. ed. Volumes P. Yu. Uvarov. Moscow, 2012.
7. Vedyushkin V.A. General history. History of the Middle Ages. Textbook for grade 6 educational institutions. 9th ed. M.: Education, 2012.
8. Vedyushkin V.A., Ukolova V.I. Story. Middle Ages. M.: Education, 2011.
9. Danilov D.D., Sizova E.V., Kuznetsov A.V. etc. General history. History of the Middle Ages. 6 cells M.: Balass, 2011.
10. Devyataikina N. I. History of the Middle Ages. Textbook for the 6th grade of a comprehensive school. M., 2002.
11. Dmitrieva O.V. General history. History of the New Age. M.: Russian Word,
12. 2012.
13. Iskrovskaya L.V., Fedorov S.E., Guryanova Yu.V. / Ed. Myasnikova B.C. History of the Middle Ages. 6 cells M.: Ventana-Graf, 2011.
14. History of the East. In 6 volumes. Volume 2. East in the Middle Ages / Ed. L.B. Alaeva, K.Z. Ashrafyan. M., 2002.
15. History of the East. In 6 volumes. Volume 3. East at the turn of the Middle Ages and modern times, XVI - XVIII centuries. / Ed. L.B. Alaeva, K.Z. Ashrafyan, N.I. Ivanova. M., 2002.
16. History of Europe: in 8 volumes. Vol. 2. Medieval Europe. M., 1992.
17. Le Goff J. Civilization of the Medieval West. Various editions.
18. Ponomarev M.V., Abramov A.V., Tyrin S.V. General history. History of the Middle Ages. 6 cells M.: Drofa, 2013.
19. Sukhov V.V., Morozov A.Yu., Abdulaev E.N. General history. History of the Middle Ages. 6 cells Moscow: Mnemosyne, 2012.
20. Khachaturyan V.M. The history of world civilizations from ancient times to the end of the 20th century. – M.: Bustard, 1999.