Acta of the Congress Held at Hernen Castle in May 1997 / ed. K. Ciggaar, H. Teule. Leuven, 1999. P. 29–105. 107. Willemi Tyrensis Archiepiscopi Chronicon / ed. R. B. C. Huygens. Turnhout , 1986. 1171 p. 108. William of Tyre. A History of Deeds Done beyond the Sea: in 2 vols. / trans., annot. E. A. Babcock, A. C. Krey. New York, 1943. 109. Youtie H. C. A Gothenburg Papyrus and the Letter to Abgar // The Harvard Theological Review. 1930. Vol. XXIII. № 4. P. 299–302. 110. Matt‘eos Uṙhayetsi. Zhamanakagrut‘iwn / grabar bnagirə M. Melik‘- Adamyani ev N. Ter-Mik‘ayelyani, ashkh. t‘argm. ev neratz. H. Bart‘ikyani. Yerevan, 1991. 540 ēǰ: [Matthew of Edessa. The Chronography / ed. M. Melik‘-Adamyan, N. Ter-Mik‘ayelyan, trans. in modern Armenian and annot. H. Bart‘ikyan. Yerevan, 1991. 540 p.].

Doctor of Science (History), professor, State University of , Faculty of History, Communication and Tourism, Professor of the Department of the History of , Archeology and Special Historical Sciences phone: +375 29 589 09 49

Sviatlana Marozava

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GRAND DUCHY OF (MID XIII – THIRD QUARTER OF XIV CENTURIES): A VIEW FROM BELARUS

ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ ВЕЛИКОГО КНЯЖЕСТВА ЛИТОВСКОГО (СЕРЕДИНА ХІІІ – ТРЕТЬЯ ЧЕТВЕРТЬ XIV ВЕКА): ВЗГЛЯД ИЗ БЕЛАРУСИ

Summary. The change of the conceptual approaches of the East Slavic historiography of the ХХ century to the problem of the establishment of the Grand , the role of this state in the fate of the Belarusian people and the current state of this problem are shown in the article. The prerequisites, internal and external causes of the formation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania are considered. It is traced the activity of the frst great princes Mindaug, Voishelk, Vyten to create and strengthen a new state, its growth in the geographical and political space of under Gedymin and Algierd and the value of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the . Key words: the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, formation, basic concepts, reasons of formation, growth, importance, Belarus.

Basic concepts of establishment of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania is a large and strong European state, that was established in the middle XIII – third quarter of the XIV centuries as a union of

114 Baltic and Slavic peoples and existed more than 500 years. The structure of the Great Duchy of Lithuania included the territory of modern Belarus and Lithuania (until 1795), (until 1569), some lands of (up to the 30th of the XVI century) and , , and . Until the 1990th the interpretation of the history of the Great Duchy of Lithuania (GDL) in the Belarusian science was determined, as a rule, not by the Belarusian historians. Historians of the neighboring countries treat the history of the GDL, based on the national and state priorities of their countries and peoples. Russian and Polish historiography ignored the GDL as an independent subject of the history. For the Polish science it was a major peripheral province of Poland. Russian historians wrote the history of Belarus as a regional version of the , proved “unfaithful” stay of Belarus in the GDL and, accordingly, the correct of its inclusion into the in the late XVIII century. Lithuanian historians argued that the GDL is the Lithuanian state, subjugated the lands of Belarus, Ukraine and part of Russia [1, p. 37–38; 2, p. 174–175]. In the 1910th–1920th Belarusian national historiography built its own concept of the past of Belarus (the works of V. Lastovsky, M. Dovnar-Zapolsky, V. Picheta etc.). It drew attention to the signifcant role of in establishment and development of the GDL, claimed the fact of voluntary recognition of the power of Grand Dukes of Lithuania by the Belarusian land, considered the GDL as the state-federation, which arose as a result of a contractual union of the territories, stated the quantitative and qualitative preference of Belarusians in the GDL [1, p. 48; 3]. But the beginning of a study in the BSSR the problems of the history of the GDL were dashed by the extension of authoritarian tendencies in the USSR. In the1930th the affrmations about the voluntary unifcation of Belarus and Lithuania in the GDL, about the state status of the in the GDL, about the rise of the economy and in the XVI century, about the progressive infuence of the countries of Central and on the Belarusian culture were announced nationalist and anti-scientifc. Several researchers of Belarusian history of the XIII–XVIII centuries were unreasonably persecuted and their works were banned. The Soviet historiography of the 30-50th the past of non-Russian peoples of the USSR explained from the position of Russian centrism, from the idea of Russian guardianship over their political and cultural development. The imperative of their developing was proclaimed their thirst for “reunifcation” with Moscow, the ideals of their own statehood were proclaimed “reactionary” and “bourgeois”. Russian annexation of non-Russian lands was presented as “progressive” phenomenon; their political leaders were evaluated on their sympathies or antipathies towards Russia [4]. The defnition of the GDL as “the Lithuanian-Belarusian state”, which previously has been considered the norm, disappeared from the historical science. The GDL began to interpret as the Lithuanian state.

115 The Soviet concept of the GDL, set out in 1959 in the monograph of V. Pashuta “The formation of the Lithuanian State” [5], approved, that the territory of the chronicle Lithuania practically coincided with the territory of the Lithuanian SSR. There was created a strong state of , that gradually took control of much part of the East Slavic lands, malnourished by the struggle with the and the Crusaders. This version made the greatest infuence on the Belarusian historiography of genesis of the GDL. Prior to 1990th Belarusian historians used this scheme of formation of the GDL, even if did not recognized it [1, p. 49]. The Soviet, including the Belarusian historiography of the 30-80th justifed the leading role of the medieval Russia in the history the . The Grand Duchy of Moscow was usually considered the only legal successor and the center of “gathering” of the political heritage of the ancient Rus. The activities of the Lithuanian Grand Dukes of collecting land around and Vilno seemed destructive, aggressive. This prevented an objective study of the problem of the status of East Slavic lands in the GDL [2, p. 176]. In the fact the postulates of pre-revolutionary Russian historiography were reborn in the Belarusian science of 30-80th: about the seizure of the Belarusian lands by the Lithuanian feudal lords; about the GDL as the state, foreign for Belarusians; about primordial thrust of the working population of Belarus to the “reunifcation” with Russia; about liberation character of tsarist foreign policy actions in Belarus and others. Although the sector of the Belarusian history of the era of was established at the academic Institute of History in the 1980th, actually the history of the GDL was not studied. Only some questions of the socio-economic and cultural history of Belarus of this era were usually dealt in different historical periods, without their connection with the history of the GDL state. GDL was not even mentioned in scientifc texts as if there was not such a state, and Belarus simply independently existed in space and time, waiting for its accession to the Russian Empire [6, p. 19]. Changes in the Soviet society, which began in the second half of 1980th – the restructuring and , the collapse of the USSR and receive sovereignty by Belarus extremely intensifed interest in the history of the GDL and the role therein of the Belarusians. The central theme of scientifc debates of the 1990th – the beginning of the XXI century in the Belarusian historiography was the problem of the origin and formation of the GDL and the role of the Belarusian factor in this process. During discussions this problem has been subjected to a radical conceptual revision [7]. A large role in shaping of the modern Belarusian concept of the establishment and early history of the GDL played the works of M. Yermalovich [8–11], V. Nasevich [12] and A. Krautsevich [13–16]. The frst, who spoke against the Soviet historiography’s stereotype that the GDL was a foreign state for Belarusians and they did not have any relation to it, was M. Yermalovich [1, p. 49] in the works “On the trail of one myth” (,

116 1989) [8], “Ancient Belarus. and Novogorod periods” (Minsk, 1990) [9], “The Belarusian State Grand Duchy of Lithuania” (Minsk, 2003) [11]. The works of V. Nasevich [12] and A. Krautsevich [13–16] are representing in the modern Belarusian historiography two main approaches to the history of establishment of the GDL and the role of Belarusian lands and their people in the process. V. Nasevich believes that in the early stages of statebuilding processes of the GDL the priority belonged to the Lithuanian political elite. According to A. Krautsevich, the GDL was originally biethnical state formation with the dominance of East Slavic element [1, p. 49-50]. He proves that the formation of the GDL was caused by close and not hostile Baltic-Slavic contacts – military and political Lithuanian-Belarusian cooperation and interaction with the dominant political and economic role of the Belarusian lands. The frst ethnic contact zone – the territory along the upper and middle course of the Neman, inhabited by mixed Baltic-Slavic population, – became the historical core of the GDL. Baltic-Slavic interaction didn’t stop in the new state – although the ruling dynasty had Baltic origin, it representatives took East Slavic system of state organization and the old Belarusian language as the state. Among the most important recent works of Belarusian scientists, devoted to the problem of establishment n and the early history of the GDL, are encyclopedia “The Grand Duchy of Lithuania” [17], the multivolume generalizing edition “The history of Belarus” (Vol. 2) [18], the collection of scientifc articles “The Grand Duchy of Lithuania: politics, economy, culture” [19], the frst volume of the multivolume “The history of Belarusian statehood” [1]. These works, as well as the current generation of school and university textbooks on the history of Belarus [20–22] and popular science publications [23–25], are gradually destroying the stereotypies about the Lithuanian character of the GDL and Lithuanian conquest of the Belarusian lands in the XIII–XIV centuries, remained to the Republic of Belarus from the Soviet era. The GDL is seen in our modern science as an important part of the history of Belarusian statehood. Background and reasons for the formation of the new state. A new period in the history of Belarus began in the late 30th – 40th of the XIII century. Its main content was the establishment of a new state on the own and the neighboring areas – the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The full name of the state is the Great principality of Lithuania, Russia and Jemoit. Name “Lithuania” was frst mentioned in the foreign chronicles under the 1009, in East Slavic chronicle “The Tale of Bygone Years” – in 1040. The etymology of the name “Lithuania” is derived from the words “Lietauka” (the name of the river in the modern Lithuania), “Litaon” (the name of the leader, under whose leadership a group of Roman nobles left their homeland and settled in the Neman river basin, having reached there by sea), “litus tubus” (these migrants called the coast of the , where they landed from the ships). Finally, in accordance with the chronicle legend, the name was formed as a result of the transformation of the name of Italy according to the following scheme: Italy – Litaliya – Lituaniya – Lithuania.

117 Historical Lithuania (the one, about that chronicles say) differed from the present-day Lithuania. There exist several versions of the localization of historical Lithuania: 1) the modern Lithuania, 2) the historical region of Lithuania (Aukshtaitiya), 3) east of present-day Lithuania (Aukshaitiya) and adjacent western lands of Belarus. The formation of the GDL was a natural result of the socio-economic and political development of Belarusian and Lithuanian lands in the XII-XIII centuries. Relationship of East Slavic principalities with the Lithuanian tribes were not easy. In X–XII centuries the land of historical Lithuania was a subject to the conquest of the neighboring Slavic states. Princes of Polotsk used Lithuanian squads in their strife. In turn, the Lithuanian squad made predatory raids on the Slavic principalities. The socio-economic and political system of Balt Lithuania until the middle of the XIII century was characterized by the following features: 1) the absence of developed administrative centers – cities, 2) the absence of writing and literacy, 3) the presence of own dynasty of princes – kunigases, 4) the proto(before)state stage of development, 5) the social differentiation of the society. In the frst half of the XIII century Lithuania, which was late in development in comparison with the East Slavic lands (on 2–4 centuries), approached the protostate stage because the formation of classes was completed there. The consolidation of the tribes on this territory was hurried by the external factor – the aggression of the Crusaders, who at the end of the XII century began to colonize the Baltic states. Political reasons of the establishment of the GDL dominated above the social and economic reasons. The most infuential and powerful kunigasies gradually allocated from the Lithuanian nobility. One of them, Mindaug, began to struggle for the subjection of historical Lithuania and until 1236 combined its lands under his rule. The situation on the Belarusian lands at the end XII - frst half XIII century was characterized by the desire to replace the centrifugal tendencies by the consolidation, increased by the threat of invasion of Crusaders and Mongol- . In these diffcult international conditions the feud of East Slavic princes with each other and their quarrels with old neighbors – “the pagan Lithuania” receded on the second plan. Thus, there were two main reasons of the establishment of the new state: 1) the internal – a natural result of the objective socio-economic and political development of the Belarusian and Lithuanian lands in X – frst half of XIII centuries; 2) the external – the aggression of the Crusaders, who began colonizing the Baltics at the end of the XII century. Begining of the new state. The beginning of the new state was put by the union of Novogrudok, the most important city of Ponemanyje (in the Neman river basin), with the strongest of the Lithuanian kunigas Mindaug (1235/1236–1263). It is unknown, whether Mindaug sent to Novogrudok his proposal to unite their forces or he was invited to reign by it. Thus, the frst

118 steps the state was doing in Novogrudok, where the center of political life of Belarus moved in the middle of the XIII century from Polotsk, and the frst brick in its foundation laid Mindaug. In 1246 Mindaug adopted Orthodoxy, which, apparently, was a condition of his election as prince of Novogrudok. In 1248 he joined around Novogrudok the lands of the upper and middle Ponemanyje – “caugth all the land of Lithuania”, what can be taken as the beginning of the GDL. The young state was in a hostile surrounding: in the north – the Crusaders, in the south – the Galich-Volynian principality. They threatened to strangle or to suspend the process of the statecreation in the very beginning. Mindaug’s diplomatic maneuver saved – he had drawn Livonian Order on his side by the agreement to accept the Western version of Christianity. ’s gratitude for this step was the recognition of the new state and the coronation of Mindaug in Novogrudok in 1253. In 1254 a peace treaty with Danila Galitsky was signed. Murder of Mindaug in 1263 marked the beginning of the struggle for the role of head of state. Tranyata (1263–1264), who organized the killing of his predecessor, captured the power in Lithuania and Samogitia. But the usurper was killed himself soon. The head of state became Mindaug’s son Voishelk (1264–1267), who entered the political arena in 1254, but then became a monk and founded a monastery in Lavrishev near Novogrudok. In 1265 Voishelk attached Nalshany (northwest of present-day Belarus) and Devoltva (eastern part of modern Lithuania) to Novogrudok. His life was interrupted by the hand of Galician Prince Lev. All frst Grand Dukes of Lithuania did not die a natural death. The foundations of the new state, laid by Mindaug and Voishelk, were defended by prince Trayden (1270–1282). At his time the GDL became the state, able to lead an active independent foreign policy. Trayden much fought with the Crusaders, the , have beaten off desire of Galich-Volynian princes to make military trips on Novogrudok lands. Overcaming the most diffcult times, the state since the beginning of the XIV century slowly but surely began to ascend to the height of its power. Vyten (1293–1316) had included into the GDL Polotsk land (in 1307 on the basis of agreement, which guaranteed the autonomy to Polock) and Brest’s land (1315). Centripetal important step was the introduction by Vyten of his princely coat of arms and the common state stamp with the image of Pogonya. From that time the documents acquired legal force only by being embodied by this seal. The personal emblem of prince, as it was at frst, Pogonya with the passage of time has become the emblem of the dynasty of the great Lithuanian princes, and since the end of the ХIV century – the state emblem of the GDL. The reign of Vyten passed in the wars with the Crusaders. Since the late XIII century, after conquering , the object of aggression of Teutonic (Prussian) Order became the territory of the GDL. From 1284 till 1402 the Teutons made about 20 military trips to the land of . Vyten appointed the commander David the headman in Grodno and he successfully defended the

119 country against the Crusader’s conquest during a quarter of a century (1299– 1326). Vyten was killed in 1315 returning from a campaign in Prussia. Growth of the GDL in geographical and political space of Europe. While the great duke was Gedymin (1316–1341), the process of GDL becoming became irreversible, began its rapid growth in the geographic and political space in Europe. Gedymin pushed the boundaries and the infuence of the state far on the East Slavic south and east. Gedymin founded separate for GDL Lithuanian-Nowogrodek mitropolia (mitropolit residence was in Novogrudok) in 1316. In 1320 he built a castle on an island in the lake in Trakai and peranns to it his residence. Novogrudok, robbed and destroyed by Galitch-Volynian troops and Mongol-Tatars in 1274, 1277 and by the Teutons in 1314, had fallen into disrepair. In 1323 Gedymin moved the capital into Vilno, which was founded on the site of ancient Slavic settlement. In the 1320th Gedymin joined to the GDL (through marriage of his son Algierd on Vitebsk princess Mary), Minsk and also Turov land, which wanted to get rid of dependence from the . Thus, when Gedymin most of modern Belarusian lands had been a part of the GDL. Podlasie (now part of Poland) and Volyn became part of the GDL. The infuence of the Grand Duchy has spread to the northern Rus. Moscow prince Ivan Kalita (1325–1340) also could consider with the infuence of the GDL. During the centenary of rapid growth, from Mindaug to Gedymin, a small principality in Ponemanie became a Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Rus. The term “Lithuania” belonged then to the upper and middle Ponemanyje, under the “Rus” is meant the average of Dvina and Dnepr region. It is the “Russian” (Belarusian and Ukrainian) lands did this principality great. To close Ponemanyje against the invasion of the Crusaders, Gedymin built a band of frst-class for that time castles in Troki, Vilno, Medniki, , Krevo. In 1341 the prince was killed during the storming of the princely castle Baerburg (maybe he became one of the frst victims of frearms). The GDL achieved the international recognition and began to play a prominent role in Eastern Europe during the rule of Gedymin. Algierd (1345–1377) carried out a political program of association under the power of Vilno of all East Slavic lands of the former Kievan Rus. He has more than doubled the territory of his state, has widened its boundaries far to the south and east. He completed the unifcation of the Belarusian lands in the GDL (the last, included into the GDL in the 50-60th years of the XIV century, were the lands on the Dnieper and Sozh) Algierd subdued most of the Ukraine, the western part of the lands of modern Russia. He strengthened the positions of the GDL in Novgorod the Great and Pskov, tried to win Moscow. Smolensk was proved in the orbit of political attraction of Lithuania. In 1362 Algierd wun a famous victory over the Mongols at the Blue Waters (river Siniucha in Ukraine, an infow of the Southern Bug) and freed Ukraine from the Tartar yoke. His authority acknowledged the prince of Kiev. At the

120 same time the last from the Belarusian lands - Bragin and Mozyr parishies, subordinated Kiev, came into the GDL. Algierd conducted an elaborate and consistent “east” policy. He maintained a close alliance with Tver, fxed by marriage to Ulyana, princess of Tver, and helped Tver in it struggle with Moscow. Algierd united under his rule most of the historical Kievan Rus and actually claimed the completion of this process in the east. In 1368, 1370 and 1372 he organized military trips to Moscow, but failed to subdue it. The border between the states was then installed on the line of Mozhaisk and Kolomna. Algierd had to admit patrimonial rights of the descendants of Kalita at the Vladimir principality, it means that he shared Rus with them. The modern historical science recognizes that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Grand Duchy of Moscow were fulflling equivalent program – the program of uniting all East Slavic lands. Thus, during the middle of the XIII – the third quarter of the XIV century the small and fragile principality in Ponemanyje grew into the powerful European state, which had to be considered by the , the Mongol-Tatar horde and other powerful neighbors. The capital of ancient Rus – Kyev city – and most of its former territories became a part of the GDL. Up to the 70th of the XIV century all Belarusian lands came into the GDL. Most of its cities and principalities became a part of the new state voluntarily, guided frst and foremost by the military-political expediency. The value of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the history of the Belarusian people. The created state was the federation of the peoples of Baltic, Belarus, Ukraine and Russia. It was stressed in its title – the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Russia and Jemoit. It rized as Balto-Slavic state with a signifcant advantage of the East Slavic territory, population, social, economic and cultural traditions. Higher level of development of feudal relations, the rich cultural traditions have allowed the Eastern – , Rusyns – not only to fully preserve their identity, but also have a signifcant impact on the , who were taking the Slavic customs, language, writing, the Christian religion. Slavization of Baltic lands was hold for several centuries. In the times of Gedymin and Algierd the GDL had a well-defned proslavic direction. It was formed on 9/10 from the East Slavic territories and 8/10 of the East Slavic population. Joining into one state helped to the lands and peoples, that came into the constituent of the GDL, to survive in the struggle against aggression of Crusaders and Mongol-Tatar invasion and not to fall under the power of foreigners, as it was with their neighbors – peoples of modern Latvia, Estonia, northern Poland, Russia. In the XV century, with the victory over the Teutonic Order, the GDL has become a political leader in the Eastern Europe. Conclusions. Thus, the main concepts of formation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, that had the greatest impact on the Belarusian historiography of the history of the establishment of the GDL, are the following: 1) pre-revolutionary Russian imperial, 2) Soviet confrontational concept (formation of the GDL began from the capture of the Belarusian lands in the Neman basin by the Lithuanian

121 feudal lords), 3) concept of Baltic-Slavic synthesis – Lithuanian-Belarusian military and political cooperation with the dominant political and economic role of the Belarusian lands. Modern Belarusian historiography recognizes the GDL as a historical form of Belarusian statehood and interprets its formation as follows. The GDL is a feudal state that emerged in Eastern Europe in the XIII–XIV centuries in a tough fght against the Crusaders aggression and the threat of Mongol invasion. The core of the state became the lands of the upper and middle of the Neman river, the so-called “historical Lithuania”. The gathering of the lands into the GDL was going by voluntarily contract, marriage and military ways. Association of Belarusian lands was voluntary. The founder of the state is considered to be Mindaug, who until 1236 subdued the lands of Aukshtaytiya and Zhmud (Samogitia). About 1248 he combined them with Novogrudok, which became the capital. Adoption of Orthodoxy, apparently, was a condition of his acceptance on the throne in Novogrudok. To save the new state, which appiered in a hostile surrounding, Mindaug went into an alliance with the Livonian Order, agreeing to convert to Catholicism. In gratitude the Pope gave him a royal title. The coronation took place in Novogrudok in 1253. Voishelk kept the foundations of the state, laid by Mindaug. Trayden strengthened it. Vyten began to spread its territory. The conversion of the GDL to a stable state is Gedymin’s merit. He moved the capital in Vilno (1323), founded the Lithuanian-Nowogrodek metropolis. Gedymin and Algierd defended the state borders in the north and south and extended them to the east and south. Algierd almost doubled the area of the GDL. At the end of the XIV century as part of the GDL was the whole territory of Belarus and most of Ukraine, Under the political infuence of GDL appeared Tver, Pskov, Novgorod, Smolensk and Seversk lands.

Bibliography (references) 1. История белорусской государственности. В 5 т. Т. 1: Белорусская государственность от истоков до конца XVIII в. / А. А. Коваленя [и др.]; отв. ред. тома: О. Н. Левко, В. Ф. Голубев; Нац. акад. наук Беларуси, Ин-т истории. Мінск: Беларуская наука, 2018. 598 с. 2. Галенчанка Г., Бохан Ю. Гістарыяграфія // Вялікае Княства Літоўскае: Энцыклапедыя. У 2 т. Т. 1. Мінск: БелЭн, 2007. C. 167–195. 3. Доўнар-Запольскі М. В. Асновы дзяржаўнасці Беларусі. Городно [Гродна]: Выданне Міністэрства беларускіх спраў, 1919. 16 с. 4. Партноў А. Саветызацыя гістарычнай навукі ў Украіне і Беларусі (некаторыя канцэптуальныя меркаванні) // Беларускі Гістарычны Агляд. 2000. Т. 7. Сш. 2 [Electronic resource] http://www.belhistory.eu/andrej-partno%D1%9E- savetyzacyya-gistarychnaj-navuki-%D1%9E-ukraine-i-belarusi/. 30.06.2019. 5. Пашуто В. Т. Образование Литовского государства. М.: Изд-во АН СССР, 1959. 536 с.

122 6. Голубеў В. Ф. Найноўшая беларуская гістарыяграфія гісторыі Вялікага Княства Літоўскага (канец ХХ – пачатак ХХІ ст.) // Вялікае Княства Літоўскае: палітыка, эканоміка, культура: зб. навук. арт. У 2 ч. Ч. 1. Мінск: Беларуская навука, 2017. С. 18–42. 7. Беларусь у Вялікім Княстве Літоўскім: стэнаграма пасяджэнняў Міжнароднага круглага стала, якія адбыліся в Мінску 6–7 красавіка 1992 г. / [рэдактары: І. Бродка і інш.]. Мінск, 1992. 124 с. 8. Ермаловіч М. Па слядах аднаго міфа. Мінск: Навука і тэхніка, 1989. 94 с. 9. Ермаловіч М. Старажытная Беларусь: Полацкі і Новагародскі перыяды. Мінск: Мастацкая літаратура, 1990. 366 с. 10. Ермаловіч М. Старажытная Беларусь: Віленскі перыяд. Мінск: Бацькаўшчына; Бесядзь, 1994. 91 с. 11. Ермаловіч М. Беларуская дзяржава Вялікае княства Літоўскае. Мінск: Белілтфонд, 2003. 450 с. 12. Насевіч В. Л. Пачаткі Вялікага княства Літоўскага: Падзеі і асобы. Мінск: Полымя, 1993. 160 с. 13. Краўцэвіч А. К. Стварэнне Вялікага Княства Літоўскага. Мінск: Беларуская навука, 1998. 208 с. 14. Краўцэвіч А. К. Стварэнне Вялікага Княства Літоўскага. Rzeszów, 2000. 238 с. 15. Краўцэвіч А. Міндаўг. Пачатак вялікага гаспадарства. Мінск: Мастацкая літаратура, 2005. 163 с. 16. Краўцэвіч А. Гісторыя Вялікага Княства Літоўскага 1248-1377 г.; навук. рэд. В. Голубеў. Уроцлаў, 2015. 304 с. 17. Вялікае Княства Літоўскае: Энцыклапедыя. У 3 т. Т. 1–3. Мінск: БелЭн, 2006–2008. 18. Гісторыя Беларусі: У 6 т. Т. 2. Беларусь у перыяд Вялікага Княства Літоўскага / Ю. Бохан [і інш.]; рэдкал: М. Касцюк (гал. рэд.) [і інш.]. Мiнск: Экаперспектыва, 2008. 688 с. 19. Вялікае Княства Літоўскае: палітыка, эканоміка, культура: зб. навук. арт. У 2 ч. Ч. 1. Мінск: Беларуская навука, 2017. 20. Гісторыя Беларусі: У 2 ч. Ч. 1. Са старажытных часоў да канца XVІІІ ст.: Курс лекцый / І. П. Крэнь, І. І. Коўкель, С. В. Марозава [і інш.]. Мінск: РІВШ БДУ, 2000. 656 с. 21. Бохан Ю. М., Цемушаў С. М. Гісторыя Беларусі са старажытных часоў да канца XV ст. Частка 2: Вучэбны дапаможнік для 6 класа ўстаноў агульнай сярэдняй адукацыі з беларускай мовай навучання. Минск: Выдавецкі цэнтр БДУ, 2016. 146 с. 22. Гісторыя Беларусі: дапаможнік. У 4 ч. Ч. 1. Ад старажытных чсаоў да сярэдзіны XV ст. / П. І. Брыгадзін [і інш.]; пад рэд. П. І. Брыгадзіна, А. Г. Каханоўскага. С. М .Ходзіна. Мінск : БДУ, 2018. 351 с. 23. Чаропка В. Уладары Вялікага княства. 2-е выд., папр. Мінск: Беларусь, 2007. 608 с. 24. Чаропко В. К. Великие князья Великого Княжества Литовского. 2-е изд., испр. Минск: Беларусь, 2013. 264 с. 25. Арлоў У., Герасімовіч З. Ілюстраваная гісторыя. Краіна Беларусь. Вялікае Княства Літоўскае. Браціслава: Kalligram, 2012. 402 с.

123 References (transliterated) 1. Istorija bielorusskoj hosudarstviennosti. V 5 t. T. 1: Bielorusskaja hosudarstviennost´ ot istokov do konca XVIII v. / A. A. Kovalienia [i dr.]; otv. ried. toma: O. N. Lievko, V. F. Holubiev; Nac. akad. nauk Bielarusi, In-t istorii. Minsk: Bielaruskaja nauka, 2018. 598 s. 2. Halienčanka H., Bochan JU. Histaryjahrafja // Vialikaje Kniastva Litoŭskaje: Encyklapiedyja. U 2 t. T. 1. Minsk: BielEn, 2007. C. 167–195. 3. Doŭnar-Zapoĺski M. V. Asnovy dziaržaŭnasci Bielarusi. Horodno [Hrodna]: Vydannie Ministerstva bielaruskich spraŭ, 1919. 16 s. 4. Partnoŭ A. Savietyzacyja histaryčnaj navuki ŭ Ukrainie i Bielarusi (niekatoryja kanceptuaĺnyja mierkavanni) // Bielaruski Histaryčny Ahliad. 2000. T. 7. Sš. 2 [Electronic resource] http://www.belhistory.eu/andrej-partno%D1%9E-savetyzacyya-gistarychnaj- navuki-%D1%9E-ukraine-i-belarusi/. 30.06.2019. 5. Pašuto V. T. Obrazovanije Litovskoho hosudarstva. M.: Izd-vo AN SSSR, 1959. 536 s. 6. Holubieŭ V. F. Najnoŭšaja bielaruskaja histaryjahrafja historyi Vialikaha Kniastva Litoŭskaha (kaniec ХХ – pačatak ХХІ st.) // Vialikaje Kniastva Litoŭskaje: palityka, ekanomika, kuĺtura: zb. navuk. art. U 2 č. Č. 1. Minsk: Bielaruskaja navuka, 2017. S. 18–42. 7. Bielaruś u Vialikim Kniastvie Litoŭskim: stenahrama pasiadženniaŭ Mižnarodnaha kruhlaha stala, jakija adbylisia v Minsku 6–7 krasavika 1992 h. / [redaktary: I. Brodka i inš.]. Minsk, 1992. 124 s. 8. Jermalovič M. Pa sliadach adnaho mifa. Minsk: Navuka i technika, 1989. 94 s. 9. Jermalovič M. Staražytnaja Bielaruś: Polacki i Novaharodski pieryjady. Minsk: Mastackaja litaratura, 1990. 366 s. 10. Jermalovič M. Staražytnaja Bielaruś: Vilienski pieryjad. Minsk: Baćkaŭščyna; Biesiadź, 1994. 91 s. 11. Jermalovič M. Bielaruskaja dziaržava Vialikaje kniastva Litoŭskaje. Minsk: Bieliltfond, 2003. 450 s. 12. Nasievič V. L. Pačatki Vialikaha kniastva Litoŭskaha: Padziei i asoby. Minsk: Polymia, 1993. 160 s. 13. Kraŭcevič A. K. Stvarennie Vialikaha Kniastva Litoŭskaha. Minsk: Bielaruskaja navuka, 1998. 208 s. 14. Kraŭcevič A. K. Stvarennie Vialikaha Kniastva Litoŭskaha. Rzeszów, 2000. 238 s. 15. Kraŭcevič A. Mindaŭh. Pačatak vialikaha haspadarstva. Minsk: Mastackaja litaratura, 2005. 163 s. 16. Kraŭcevič A. Historyja Vialikaha Kniastva Litoŭskaha 1248-1377 h.; navuk. red. V. Holubieŭ. Uroclaŭ, 2015. 304 s. 17. Vialikaje Kniastva Litoŭskaje: Encyklapiedyja. U 3 t. T. 1–3. Minsk: BielEn, 2006–2008. 18. Historyja Bielarusi: U 6 t. T. 2. Bielaruś u pieryjad Vialikaha Kniastva Litoŭskaha / JU. Bochan [i inš.]; redkal: M. Kasciuk (hal. red.) [i inš.]. Minsk: Ekapierspiektyva, 2008. 688 s. 19. Vialikaje Kniastva Litoŭskaje: palityka, ekanomika, kuĺtura: zb. navuk. art. U 2 č. Č. 1. Minsk: Bielaruskaja navuka, 2017. 20. Historyja Bielarusi: U 2 č. Č. 1. Sa staražytnych časoŭ da kanca XVIII st.: Kurs liekcyj / I. P. Kreń, I. I. Koŭkieĺ, S. V. Marozava [i inš.]. Minsk: RIVŠ BDU, 2000. 656 s.

124 21. Bochan JU. M., Ciemušaŭ S. M. Historyja Bielarusi sa staražytnych časoŭ da kanca XV st. Častka 2: Vučebny dapamožnik dlia 6 klasa ŭstanoŭ ahuĺnaj siaredniaj adukacyi z bielaruskaj movaj navučannia. Minsk: Vydaviecki centr BDU, 2016. 146 s. 22. Historyja Bielarusi: dapamožnik. U 4 č. Č. 1. Ad staražytnych čsaoŭ da siaredziny XV st. / P. I. Bryhadzin [i inš.]; pad red. P. I. Bryhadzina, A. H. Kachanoŭskaha. S. M .Chodzina. Minsk : BDU, 2018. 351 s. 23. Čaropka V. Uladary Vialikaha kniastva. 2-je vyd., papr. Minsk: Bielaruś, 2007. 608 s. 24. Čaropko V. K. Vielikije kniaźja Vielikoho Kniažjestva Litovskoho. 2-je izd., ispr. Minsk: Bielaruś, 2013. 264 s. 25. Arloŭ U., Hierasimovič Z. Iliustravanaja historyja. Kraina Bielaruś. Vialikaje Kniastva Litoŭskaje. Bracislava: Kalligram, 2012. 402 s.

PhD, Lehrbeauftragte State University named after A. Kuleshov Mogilev, Belarus [email protected]

Yanina Ryier

THE RULER AND THE SOCIETY IN MEDIEVAL EASTERN EUROPE IN 10TH–14TH CC.: ABOUT THE MECHANISMS OF POWER LEGITIMIZATION AND SACRALIZATION

ПРАВИТЕЛЬ И ОБЩЕСТВО В СРЕДНЕВЕКОВОЙ ВОСТОЧНОЙ ЕВРОПЕ В 10–14 ВВ.: О МЕХАНИЗМАХ ЛЕГИТИМИЗАЦИИ И САКРАЛИЗАЦИИ ВЛАСТИ

Summary: The article deals with the main mechanisms of power legitimization and sacralization in Medieval states of Eastern Europe. The analysis of a ruler`s power based on personal qualities and sacrality is given. The author pays the great attention to administrative, political, military abilities of the Princes of Rus` and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the process of power institutionalization in comparison with the same processes in Medieval Western Europe. Theoretical aspects of power legitimacy are analyzed. Key words: ruler, society, power, legitimization, duke, king, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Belarusian lands.

Nowadays a lot of scientists pay great attention to the problem of state formation. And if such processes in Western Europe were learnt enough during the 20th century, the development of states in Eastern Europe, including lands of former Rus` and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, are still the subject of proper interest.

125