At that time it was one of the largest cities in Europe.dextra
At that time it was one of the largest cities in Europe.
In the postwar period, authoritarian-command methods of governing totalitarianism hindered the free will of the Soviet people and hampered the development of their political initiative. Every citizen was threatened with repressions, provocations, accusations of malicious mistakes, etc. The atmosphere of fear and suspicion in society was fueled by ominous noisy campaigns to expose countless “enemies of the people.”
Complicating the situation in the field of socio-political relations and personnel problems, especially in the western regions of Ukraine, where many specialists were sent, intellectuals from the eastern regions, and all these people did not know the local specifics 123helpme.me, language. In addition, there was a fratricidal war (1945-1950), in which nearly half a million people died.
Both the local Ukrainian and Polish populations were affected. The situation in the region was complicated by the Beria repressive apparatus, which brutally persecuted local residents for supporting the OUN-UPA and tried to intimidate them. From May 1947, UPA fighters and OUN members were considered members of a single underground system, which meant an ideological merger of these organizations. After the death in March 1950 of UPA Commander R. Shukhevych (General Taras Chuprynka), the organization began to rapidly lose its combat effectiveness. Although some small UPA units continued to operate until the mid-1950s, the UPA and the OUN in Ukraine ceased to exist as organizations.
In April 1947, the Politburo of the Polish United Workers’ Party (PWP) carried out an operation codenamed “Vistula”, which had both military and civilian dimensions. Almost all Lemkos (about 150,000) were resettled without warning from the land of their ancestors throughout Poland to prevent the revival of the UPA in the region. To this end, a concentration camp was set up in Jaworzno (near Krakow) for “suspicious Ukrainians”. The action also aimed to gain support among Polish nationalists.
One of the first objects of attack by the Soviet authorities in Western Ukraine was the Greek Catholic Church, as it was the strongest link between Western Ukrainians and the West and acted mainly as a national one. On March 8-10, 1946, the Council of Lviv, prepared by the Soviet state security bodies, proclaimed the abolition of the Brest Union of 1569, the break with Rome, and the reunification of the Greek Catholic Church with the Russian Orthodox Church.
Somewhat later, a similar procedure, accompanied by the alleged accidental death of Bishop Theodore Romzhi, was carried out in Transcarpathia, and by 1951 the Greek Catholic Church in the region had also been destroyed. To win the sympathy of Western Ukrainians, the Soviet government intensified Ukrainian primary education.
Higher education also developed rapidly: in 1950, about 24,000 full-time students and 9,000 part-time students at 24 universities in Western Ukraine. However, the increase in the level of education led to more active Russification. In 1953, education in all universities in Western Ukraine was conducted in Russian, which clearly indicated that Soviet modernization was also intended to promote Russification.
In 1954, the republic celebrated the 300th anniversary of the reunification of Ukraine with Russia. The Supreme Soviet of the USSR by its decree in February 1954 included the Crimean region in Ukraine as “evidence of the friendship of the Russian people.” However, complex problems remained unresolved. Despite the territorial and ethnic kinship of Ukraine and Crimea, the peninsula was also the historical homeland of the Crimean Tatars, who were deported from here by the Stalinist regime in 1944.
In addition, according to the 1959 census, about 860,000 Russians and only 260,000 Ukrainians lived in Crimea. This circumstance over time has greatly complicated the political situation in Crimea, which has been used by various political forces and parties in Russia and Ukraine.
These and other problems made the socio-political life of those years contradictory and complex.
Boyko OD History of Ukraine. – K., 1999. Doroshenko D. Essays on the history of Ukraine. – Kyiv, 1991. – Vol. 1-2. History of Ukraine / SV Kulchytsky (head) and others. – K, 1998.
Formation of separate principalities in the ancient n state. Abstract
The abstract provides information about the collapse of the ancient n state into separate principalities – lands
Kievan Rus lasted almost three centuries. It played an important role in the history of Europe, blocking the way to the West for countless hordes of nomads. The Eastern Slavs, united in a single strong state, managed to repel their onslaught and preserve independence. However, the strengthening of feudal relations led to the collapse of the ancient state, and in the twelfth – thirteenth centuries. came the period of feudal fragmentation of.
For the lands of the Old Russian state in the XII – XIII centuries. was characterized by the development of feudal relations, which affected the growth of feudal land tenure and feudal dependence on the stench. The main form of feudal land ownership was the patrimony (princely, boyar and ecclesiastical). At the same time, conditional land tenure appeared, when princes gave their military servants (warriors, servant boyars) land and peasants on the condition that they would serve them.
The main population of Russia – peasants-smirks – was divided into two groups: free and dependent on princes, boyars, churches. Dependence manifested itself in several forms: from a simple “belonging” to the prince with the periodic payment of tribute to the position of slaves, ie complete dependence. The main form of exploitation of the peasants were natural dues, but there was also serfdom.
As a result, in Russia there were large land holdings of the boyars. their economy was natural. Everything necessary for the boyar was produced by peasants dependent on him. Economic and trade ties between the individual lands of Russia collapsed due to the natural, closed nature of the feudal economy. Local economic interests in the conditions of subsistence farming gave rise to the desire for separation: having become patrimonial farmers, warriors – the former support of the Grand Duke of Kiev – were more concerned with the affairs of their own lands. Demanding material costs, the Kyiv authorities became a burden for landowners.
Large cities, centers of crafts and trade that competed with Kyiv, grew and strengthened. In the middle of the XIII century. there were more than 300 of them, 60 of handicraft specialties. Some artisans had their own professional organizations, similar to Western European workshops. Many city dwellers supported the strong princely power on the ground.
The cities became the political and cultural centers of the principalities, which were gradually separated from Kyiv, in particular Novgorod, Volodymyr-na-Klyazmi, Halych, Smolensk, Przemysl, Chernihiv, Polotsk, Volodymyr-Volynsky, Pereyaslav, Novgorod-Siversky, and Turov. Kyiv also grew and developed. Its population reached 50 thousand people. At that time it was one of the largest cities in Europe.
It was difficult for the Grand Duke of Kiev to rule a large country. In conditions when social life in some lands of Russia became more difficult, he was no longer able to ensure the interests of the feudal lords throughout the state. Local feudal lords needed a closer government capable of actively helping them manage the peasants and townspeople. Local princes and boyars created the power apparatus as close as possible to their patrimony. The role of the center of regional political forces began to play the main cities of individual lands.
The great Kyivan princes gave their sons allotments with towns and villages in hereditary possession. As a result, the family of Kievan princes greatly increased and within Kievan Rus there were many separate principalities. Descendants of Volodymyr Sviatoslavych, Yaroslav the Wise, and Volodymyr Monomakh created local princely dynasties that sought to separate from Kyiv. By the middle of the XII century. The ancient n state finally disintegrated.
Thus, fragmentation was a natural consequence of the development of the feudal system. It also had a certain progressive significance, as it was accompanied by the development of the economy and social life in some lands. However, the loss of state unity, as well as princely strife undermined the power of the ancient n state. This was taken advantage of by external enemies – the Polovtsians, the Crusaders, the feudal lords of Poland and Hungary, and others – and began to attack Russia much more frequently.
The following lands-principalities were separated from the Old Russian state:
Kyiv, Novgorod, Volodymyr-Suzdal, Halych-Volyn, Smolensk, Chernihiv, Ryazan, Polotsk, Turovo-Pinsk, Pereyaslav.
Their rulers did not obey Kyiv. They independently managed their own lands, had wives, issued laws, established relations with other states. The land was headed by a prince, often called the Great.
In turn, the principalities-lands were divided into smaller principalities, or parishes, in which the Grand Duke appointed administrators: mayors, thousands, tiuns. Separate lands – estates – were ruled by smaller princes – vassals of the Grand Duke. The prince had a boyar council to resolve important issues, and convened land princely congresses. The role of the chamber was significantly reduced, although it was still active in Novgorod and Kyiv. However, despite such a fragmentation of Russia, the monarchy and the only Orthodox church with a nominal center in Kiev remained.
On the territory of Ukraine there were Kyiv, Chernihiv, Pereyaslav, Turovo-Pinsk and Halych-Volyn lands.
Kyiv from the capital of Russia became the capital city of Kyiv land, which covered the territory of the Middle Dnieper region and bordered on the Polovtsian steppe, which, of course, did not provide it with a peaceful life. Kyiv had to constantly defend itself against the attacks of the Polovtsians, who invaded the territory of Kyiv land. But despite the difficult internal and external situation, Kyiv remained a symbol of the integrity of Russia, for which the princes fought.
The most prominent Grand Dukes of Kiev in the period of feudal fragmentation were:
Yaropolk Volodymyrovych (1132-1139), Vsevolod Olhovych (1139-1146), Izyaslav Mstislavych (1146-1154), Yuriy Dolgoruky (1155-1157), Rostislav Mstislavych (1159-1167), Mstislav Izyaslavych (1167-1169), Glurich (1169-1170), Sviatoslav Vsevolodovych and Rurik Rostyslavych (1177-1194).
In 1183 the Kyivan prince Sviatoslav managed to involve some Ukrainian princes in the struggle against the Polovtsians.