Professional Documents
Culture Documents
After The Beautiful Hegel and The Philosophy of Pictorial Modernism Robert B Pippin Full Chapter
After The Beautiful Hegel and The Philosophy of Pictorial Modernism Robert B Pippin Full Chapter
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-culmination-heidegger-german-
idealism-and-the-fate-of-philosophy-first-edition-robert-b-
pippin/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/lectures-on-the-philosophy-of-
religion-the-lectures-of-1827-georg-wilhelm-friedrich-hegel-
editor/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/hegel-and-modern-philosophy-1st-
edition-david-lamb/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/after-debussy-music-language-and-
the-margins-of-philosophy-johnson/
Understanding Foucault Understanding Modernism
Understanding Philosophy Understanding Modernism 1st
Edition David Scott
https://ebookmeta.com/product/understanding-foucault-
understanding-modernism-understanding-philosophy-understanding-
modernism-1st-edition-david-scott/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/hegel-on-pseudo-philosophy-reading-
the-preface-to-the-phenomenology-of-spirit-1st-edition-andrew-
alexander-davis/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/political-philosophy-of-kautilya-
the-arthashastra-and-after-1st-edition-rajvir-sharma/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-future-of-the-presidency-
journalism-and-democracy-after-trump-1st-edition-robert-e-
gutsche/
https://ebookmeta.com/product/robert-motherwell-abstraction-and-
philosophy-1st-edition-robert-hobbs/
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Ivan and his son, young Ivan, gospodá and not lords,[25] as had
always been previously done, and the grand prince sent
ambassadors to Novgorod to demand the confirmation of this title.
Tumults, brawls, and even murder took place in Novgorod, and the
ambassador was sent away with an insulting message. Then Ivan
assembled his troops to go against Novgorod; he called upon Tver
and Pskov for aid, ordered his brothers to assemble, and sending
before him the Tatar prince, Daniar Kasimovitch, he set out himself.
The people of Novgorod began to negotiate while the grand prince
was still on the way; they had even tried to do so before, but Ivan,
properly calculating that a satisfactory result could only be obtained
by a warlike demonstration, avoided negotiations. All December,
1477, and the beginning of January, 1478, passed in negotiations;
finally Novgorod submitted when her defender, Prince Vasili Shuiski,
bent his knee[26] before Ivan and refused to serve Novgorod any
longer. Novgorod submitted to the “entire will” of Ivan; the vetché
was abolished and its great bell taken to Moscow to ring with other
bells; estates were taken from the monasteries, and allotted to the
grand prince, the first example of secularisation: till then the princes
had not possessed estates in Novgorod. When he left, Ivan took with
him the boyars and Martha Boretski, who is said to have died at
Staritza.
It is reported that in 1479 Novgorod again tried to enter into
relations with Casimir, and taking advantage of threatening danger
from the Golden Horde, re-established the ancient form of
government, and that the grand prince came to the town, ordered the
gates to be opened, frustrated the attempt at the very beginning, and
took away many of the inhabitants with him. This account is
confirmed by the fact that other chronicles speak of the arrival of the
grand prince at Novgorod, and of the imprisonment of the archbishop
Theophilus. The loss of their independence was a heavy blow to the
people, and as a consolation legends were composed of the
foolishness of the first bishop sent from Moscow, Sergius by name,
and of the flame that came out of the tomb of St. Bartholomew of
Khoutinski and burned the feet of the grand prince.
Viatka, whose inhabitants refused to help the Moscow troops in
the war against Kazan in 1469, was definitively subdued in 1489.
The policy of the transfer of the natives to the ancient provinces and
of sending others to take their places, was also applied to Viatka.
Pskov remained submissive and thereby preserved a shadow of
independence; but the grand prince kept a zealous watch over all
that was done there and did not allow any aspirations to greater
independence. Although consenting that the inhabitants might ask
for any prince they wished, he did not approve of any wilful change
of princes, and strongly took the part of Prince Iaroslav Obolenski,
who had had a quarrel with Pskov and whom the people wished to
get rid of; it was only the desire to have done with Novgorod that
induced the grand prince to give way to Pskov and give them a new
lieutenant—Prince Vasili Shuiski (1477). When, later, Ivan named his
son Vasili grand prince of Novgorod and Pskov, the inhabitants sent
an envoy begging that they might be separated, but the grand prince
replied wrathfully that he would give the principality to whomsoever
he liked; Pskov also endeavoured in vain to get its province
separated from the rule of the bishop of Novgorod.
Towards the appanaged princes Ivan pursued
[1482-1485 a.d.] the same policy as towards the townships.
Vasili, prince of Riazan, had already been taken
by Vasili the Dark to be educated in Moscow; in 1464 he was sent
back to Riazan, returned to Moscow, married a sister of the grand
prince and went back to Riazan. He died in 1483, leaving two sons:
Ivan and Theodore. Ivan, as grand prince, concluded a treaty with
Moscow by which he was placed on a level with the brother of the
grand prince of Moscow, Andrew Vasilievitch. In 1496 a treaty was
concluded between the brothers, by which the younger was bound,
in case he were to die childless, to leave his share to his elder
brother; but Prince Theodore survived his brother and bequeathed
his share to the grand prince of Moscow. In the year 1500 Ivan,
grand prince of Riazan, died, leaving a young son under the
guardianship of his mother and grandmother, who were entirely
subservient to the prince of Moscow.
Since 1461 the prince of Tver, Michael Borisovitch, was Ivan’s
brother-in-law. When he came to the throne Ivan concluded a treaty
with him, but although Michael helped Ivan against Novgorod, yet in
their mutual relations the signs that usually preceded the fall of a
separate principality might be observed. In 1476 certain boyars of
Tver went over to Moscow. In 1484 it became known in Moscow that
the prince of Tver had concluded a treaty with Casimir and married
his granddaughter. Ivan sent troops to lay waste the districts around
Tver; Michael hastened to appease him and concluded a new treaty
with him, by which the prince of Tver was placed on a level with the
second brother of the Moscow grand prince and bound himself not to
appeal to Lithuania without his consent. Meanwhile the departure of
the boyars from Tver continued and Ivan encouraged them by his
policy; in the event of frontier disputes, if the men of Tver were
injured they could not obtain justice, but if those of Moscow were
injured, Ivan rigorously demanded satisfaction. Michael entered into
relations with Casimir, but the envoy was seized, and Ivan sent his
troops to Tver; the town surrendered, and Michael fled to Lithuania.
In 1463 the princes of Iaroslav ceded their domain to the Muscovite
monarch, and in 1474 the princes of Rostov, who ruled over only half
of Rostov, for the other half had already been acquired by Kalita,
sold their half to the grand prince. Equally slowly and gradually did
the grand prince also crush the appanaged princes of Moscow; all
these princes were his brothers, with the exception of Michael
Andreevitch Vereiski (the son of Andrew Dmitrievitch, brother of Ivan
of Mozhaisk). With Michael Ivan concluded several treaties that
gradually cut down his rights; finally by the treaty of 1482 Michael
ceded, after his death, Belozero to the grand prince. There was no
pretext for this annexation, but one was soon found; desiring to
make a present to his daughter-in-law Helen[27] (upon the occasion
of the birth of his grandson Dmitri) of the ornaments that had
belonged to his first wife, Ivan learned that the grand princess
Sophia had given away much to her niece, who was married to a son
of Michael named Vasili; the irritated grand prince then ordered Vasili
to be seized, but he fled to Lithuania; whereupon Ivan took Vereia
from Michael and only returned it to him as a possession for life.
Michael Andreevitch died in 1485, leaving his domains by will to the
grand prince. The appanages of the brothers also little by little, for
one reason or another, were joined to the grand principality; in 1472
Iuri Vasilievitch, of Dmitriev, died, without leaving any testamentary
disposition of his territory; the grand prince took possession of it; the
brothers were angered, but satisfying them with some provinces, the
grand prince concluded a treaty with two of them, Andrew of Uglitch
and Boris of Volotsk, by which they recognised the priority of their
nephew Ivan the Younger and renounced the succession after their
brother.
In 1480 the younger brothers again rose against the elder, and
Prince Obolenski Liko went from Moscow to enter the service of
Boris; Ivan, probably learning of his brother’s relations with the
people of Novgorod, ordered Prince Obolenski to be seized at the
court of Boris. The princes went to Rzhev, thence to the boundary of
Lithuania, and entered into relations with Casimir, who however did
not help them. Until then they had rejected negotiations, but seeing
Casimir’s inaction, they asked for the intercession of their mother,
but Ivan refused them; they also sought support in Pskov, but were
unsuccessful. The invasion of Ahmed induced Ivan to make peace
with his brothers, and Andrew received a part of the appanage of
Iuriev. Andrew the younger died in 1481, leaving his domain to the
grand prince. In 1484 the mother of the grand prince, who had in
some degree restrained the dissensions of the brothers, died, and in
1486 Ivan bound his brothers by a new treaty to renounce their rights
of inheritance in regard to appanages. In 1491 Andrew was seized
and thrown into prison, where he died in 1494; his sons were
imprisoned with him. Boris also died soon after, leaving his domains
to his sons Theodore and Ivan: the latter, dying in 1504, left his part
by will to the grand prince, whom he calls “gossudar”[28] (sovereign
or sire).
AFFAIRS OF LITHUANIA
“He sits at home and sleeps, and his dominions augment, while I
fight every day and yet can hardly defend my frontiers.” Such were
the words, it is said, with which Stephen of Moldavia frequently
characterised his daughter’s father-in-law, the grand prince Ivan
Vasilievitch.
The observation is a remarkable one, for it represents the first and
most salient feature in the policy of the famous Russian monarch,
who in himself concludes one period of Russian history and opens
another. Under him Russia passes out of its condition of
exclusiveness; the west learns that besides that Russia which is
subject to Lithuania, there is already another Russia, independent,
powerful, and self-sufficing; it is even possible that at first this power
was somewhat exaggerated, but it struck contemporaries because it
had, so to say, grown imperceptibly. It would seem that all around it,
as if submitting to some fatal influence, hastened to yield to this
newborn power, while Russia herself did not hasten to announce
herself, but only manifested herself at the last moment when
everything was already prepared for this manifestation, and when it
only remained to gather the fully ripened fruits.
S. M. Soloviovh compares Ivan to the fortunate heir of a long line
of careful merchants who, having amassed a considerable capital,
provided their heir with the means for carrying on vast enterprises.
N. I. Kostomarov’sc judgment is still more severe; he denies any
merit in Ivan, judges his activity by the requirements of other times
and circumstances, and does not recognise in him and his
descendants anything beyond their own ambitious and self-
interested motives. Such views were probably called forth as a
contradiction to Karamzin, who on his part, carried away by his
dislike of the violence which—according to him—characterised the
reform of Peter, placed Ivan above Peter. The question “Lithuania or
Moscow” was raised with entire firmness and determination by Ivan,
for by the defence of Helen’s orthodoxy and by receiving into his
service the Lithuanian princes who expatriated themselves because
of the persecution of orthodoxy, he became the protector of the
Greek church in Lithuania and thus strove to gain influence in its
internal affairs. The secular policy of Russia was thus marked out; it
was also marked out by his insistence on the recognition of his title
grand prince of all Russia and by his demand for the restoration of
Kiev; intercourse with the west also begins with him.b
In war Ivan showed a caution which his enemies called cowardice.
As behooved a prince, he conducted everything of importance
himself. He exacted strict obedience, and was indefatigable in
studying the thoughts and private circumstances of all important men
in his kingdom, and even in foreign lands. The whole court and
people trembled before his spirit and will; shy women are said to
have fainted before his angry and fiery look; seldom, if ever, did a
petitioner dare to approach his throne, and none of the nobles at the
princely table ventured to say a word to another, or to leave his
place, if the ruler, overcome by eating or drinking, happened to fall
asleep and remained so for many hours. All the guests sat there
dumb until Ivan awoke and gave them further orders, either to
amuse or to leave him.
He was by no means prodigal of the life of his warriors; in fact, he
expected to gain more from the mistakes of his enemies than others
do from battles; and he knew how to incite his enemies into
committing mistakes, as well as to make use of them. He had the
enlargement of his kingdom as much at heart as his absolute power.
He boldly projected many far-seeing plans, and sought with
indefatigable zeal to realise them. After he had broken the pride of
Novgorod he considered nothing impossible, and regarded his own
will as the supreme command. We find no trace of his having been
accessible to the petitions of his subjects, or of his granting public
audience days for the hearing of their requests and complaints.
Arbitrary power over the common people became stronger and
prevailed, and officials abused their power unpunished, for
complainants and helpers were wanting. To enlighten the minds of
his people through the study of science was not a part of his plans,
perhaps because he may have thought that it is easier for the tyrant
to rule over rude slaves than over a free-thinking and enlightened
people. He must not be denied the merit of having raised great
edifices at Moscow by means of foreign, especially Italian, architects;
but vanity and love of show probably had more to do with this than
artistic sense and taste. The wide and majestic walls of the
venerable Kremlin with its battlements and towers, secret
underground passages, and fortified gates, were to serve less as
objects of beauty than as means of protection against domestic and
foreign enemies. Amongst the useful arts he especially favoured
those of the cannon founder and silversmith; with the former he
desired to terrify his enemies, and with the latter to spread the
renown of his power and glory. His greatest services to the Russian
state include, besides the regulation of the law code, the increase of
the state revenues, partly through the conquest of new provinces,
and partly through a better system of taxation, so that the
government could collect a treasure for unforeseen emergencies and
would become less dependent upon chance.
Thus there can be no doubt that as a prince Ivan ranks high and
belongs to the number of those regents who decide the fate of their
people and land for many years, and are a blessed or a cursed
remembrance to posterity: but neither can it be denied that his
greatness and fame lose much when we come to consider him as a
man, and see the harshness of his character, his unlimited pride, his
contempt of all human rights, his wild and passionate nature, and his
greed of power. That he was the founder of autocracy, as modern
writers assert, is not altogether his own exclusive merit, although it
cannot be denied that he contributed much towards it by his
shrewdness and wise moderation. When in the early days of his
youth he seized the reins of government, he found much that had
been prepared towards the future greatness of Russia; but Russia
was still in a chaotic condition, and its forces were scattered and
sunk as it were in a lethargy; they required an awakening and
regulating hand, and this was principally Ivan’s work. Owing to the
unfortunate system of appanages, which had been the ruin of Russia
for many centuries, by destroying all unity in course of time, sowing
the seeds of discord, and making the Russian state an easy prey to
its enemies, the idea of a common fatherland had quite disappeared;
and the internal dissensions among the princes, as well as the
despotic pressure of the foreign barbarians, had so deranged and
disjointed it, that the praiseworthy attempts of individual grand
princes could meet with no brilliant success, and it seemed as if
Russia were fated to play a deeply subordinate part in the hierarchy
of states.
Nevertheless those attempts were not quite lost, and the prudent
might surmise that the time would yet come when they would bear
fruit, once the hydra of discord had been conquered and the
scattered forces had been reunited. Ivan’s proceedings in this
respect were certainly of a macchiavellian nature. We have seen that
for twenty-three years he patiently acknowledged the rights of other
Russian princes and even their independence, and that by keeping
his conquests to himself and not sharing them with his brothers and
the other princes, and by taking his brother’s inheritance and giving
none to his other brothers, he first began to consider himself as
autocrat and ruler of all Russia, and thus gradually prepared the
princes for a recognition of his undivided sway and their own
impotency and subordination.
We do not inquire as to whether the means he used for the
attainment of his end deserve our approval; we will only remark that
great conquerors and founders of new empires, or such as
reorganise and rejuvenate old and decaying states, cannot be
judged with the same standard by which wise regents are judged in
regulated states. The resort to violent measures is often their highest
duty, if they are to persist in their work and arrive at the aim they
have imposed on themselves. From a political point of view, Ivan’s
harsh proceedings therefore deserve some exculpation, all the more
so when we consider that he lived at a time when revolutions of
every kind were taking place in the states and their institutions, in the
modes of thinking and in the religion of men, in the arts and
sciences, the new forms often seeking to supplant the old in a violent
manner; and when this change also began in Russia, where
intellectual enlightenment was so rare, we should not be surprised to
see the forces of brutality often gaining the upper hand over the
forces of reason.
We now find ourselves at one of the most important turning points
of Russian political history, when by a regulated system of
succession and by the incorporation of the independent principalities
with the grand principality, the Russian monarchy began to establish
itself firmly and to extend its bounds; when the hitherto terrible
defiance of over-powerful nobles and of princes who claimed equal
rank with the grand prince submits to the restraints of a common
obedience; when no more dangers threaten Russia from the side of
Novgorod and the Tatars; when a regulated system of taxation, a
treasury and an organised army protect the throne; and finally when
science and art, the administration of justice, personal safety on the
roads and in the towns, besides other blessings of peace and order,
also begin to attract attention, protection, and cultivation in Russia.d