UDC

94(47+57)

Authors

Yuriy V. Seleznev
Voronezh State University; Universitetskaya pl. 1, Voronezh, 394018, Russian Federation;
e-mail: orda1359@mail.ru

Abstract

Mongol conquests in the 13th century raised the question of jurisdiction and sovereignty of the supreme ruler over the tributary areas. Among the victims of these invasions in the 1230s – 1240s were Russian principalities. In the course of the raids led by Batu Khan, the Mongol hordes conquered those Russian principalities that at that time were fragmented. The capture of the largest cities and the capital, Kiev, as well as the death of the leaders of major principalities significantly weakened Rus’. Upon returning from his invasion into Poland and Hungary, Batu Khan summoned the Russian princes of the conquered principalities to his headquarters, intending to set the terms of their subjection. This paper dwells on the establishment of sovereignty and jurisdiction rights in the Mongol Empire and the Ulus of Jochi (the Golden Horde), as well as on the perception of these rights by the neighbouring and conquered peoples. The available sources indicate that the main factors legitimizing the rule of the Mongol Khagan and regional Khan are the following: a sacred mandate of Tengri (sky) and the approval of this mandate by the elite of the Mongolian state. Moreover, these factors were determined at the ontological and axiological levels of the nomadic worldview of that time. In the course of his research, the author identified similar opinions about and characteristics of the sources of jurisdiction during the establishment of the Mongol Empire. According to the analysis, the Mongol military and political doctrine rested upon the assumption that, as a rule, there existed either subjects or enemies. Thus, it is quite natural that the Empire’s neighbours had either to recognize the authority of the Khagan/Khan or rise in arms against the invaders.

Keywords

Mongol Empire, Ulus of Jochi, Batu Khan, Burundai, Mongol-Tatar Yoke, Mongol Khagan

References

1. Kayumova A.R. Suverenitet i yurisdiktsiya gosudarstva: problemy sootnosheniya [Sovereignty and State Jurisdiction: Correlation Problems]. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal’noe pravo, 2008, no. 9, pp. 12–15.
2. Nazipov I.I. Vnutrenniy suverenitet nad zemlyami Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi XIII–XV vv. kak priznak ordynsko-russkogo gosudarstvennogo edinstva [Internal Sovereignty over North-Eastern Russian Lands in the 13th – 15th Centuries as an Attribute of the Horde–Russian State Unity]. Global’nyy nauchnyy potentsial, 2015, no. 2, pp. 26–29.
3. Nazipov I.I. Vneshniy suverenitet nad zemlyami Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi XIII–XV vv. kak priznak ordynskorusskogo gosudarstvennogo edinstva [External Sovereignty over North-Eastern Russian Lands in the 13th – 15th Centuries as an Attribute of the Horde–Russian State Unity]. Perspektivy nauki, 2015, no. 2, pp. 67–70.
4. Nazipov I.I. Formal’nyy suverenitet Ordy nad zemlyami Severo-Vostochnoy Rusi XIII–XV vv. kak priznak ordynsko-russkogo gosudarstvennogo edinstva [Horde Formal Sovereignty over North-Eastern Russian Lands in the 13th – 15th Centuries as an Attribute of the Horde–Russian State Unity]. Global’nyy nauchnyy potentsial, 2012, no. 8, pp. 38–40.
5. Seleznev Yu.V. Severo-Vostochnaya Rus’ i Orda i “osobennosti prostranstvennogo rasshireniya predmeta issledovaniya” (analiticheskiy ocherk) [North-Eastern Rus’ and the Horde and the “Peculiarities of Spatial Expansion of the Subject of Research” (Analytical Essay)]. ROSSICA ANTIQUA, 2015, no. 2, pp. 88–117.
6. Banzarov D. Sobranie sochineniy [Selected Works]. Ulan-Ude, 1997. 240 p.
7. Uzelac A. “Khan” Nogai, King Milutin and Serbian-Tatar Conflicts at the End of the Thirteenth Century. Military History Review, 2009, no. 1, pp. 9–31.
8. Amel’kin A.O., Seleznev Yu.V. Nashestvie Batyya i ustanovlenie ordynskogo iga v obshchestvennom soznanii Rusi XIII–XVII vv. [The Invasion of Batu Khan and the Establishment of the Horde’s Yoke in Russian Public Consciousness in the 13th Through 17th Centuries]. Voronezh, 2004. 143 p.
9. Seleznev Yu.V. Proiskhozhdenie ponyatiya “mongolo-tatarskoe igo” (terminologicheskaya zametka) [The Origin of the Concept of the “Mongol-Tatar Yoke” (Terminological Note)]. Rossiyskaya istoriya, 2012, no. 4, pp. 107–110.
10. Rudakov V.N. “Igo” mongolo-tatar: chto stoit za istoriograficheskim terminom? [The Mongol-Tatar “Yoke”: What’s Behind This Historiographic Term?]. Drevnyaya Rus’. Voprosy medievistiki, 2011, no. 3, pp. 99–100.