The campaign of Muhammad Giray I to Moscow in 1521 in the light of a critical analysis of Russian historical sources

M. E. Shalak
{"title":"The campaign of Muhammad Giray I to Moscow in 1521 in the light of a critical analysis of Russian historical sources","authors":"M. E. Shalak","doi":"10.22378/kio.2023.1.21-32","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A little more than 500 years ago, in the summer of 1521, the Crimean Khan Muhammad-Giray made a campaign against Moscow, thus marking the beginning of almost 250 years of confrontation between Russia and Crimea. This confrontation ended with the defeat of the Crimean Khanate and its incorporation into the Russian Empire. However, there is still no consensus among historians about the assessments of this event. Especially in light of the political events of recent years. Even more broadly, this topic concerns the building of Russian-Tatar cultural interaction in terms of developing their attitude to the common history of Eastern Europe. In the article presented, we will try to understand this through a comprehensive analysis of Russian historical sources of a chronicle nature. To achieve this goal, it will be necessary to establish the main circle of chronicle sources, dividing it into independent groups according to the degree of informativeness. It will also be necessary to identify the main narrative traditions, from the point of view of objectivity, in which the assessments and interpretations of the Tatars’ march on Moscow in 1521 may differ from each other. As a result, 3 main traditions in the coverage of the events of the summer of 1521 will be highlighted. in Russian historical sources of a chronicle nature. The most important chronicle sources in terms of reliability and objectivity include the Vologda-Perm and Resurrection chronicles, Postnikovsky and Vladimir chroniclers. The least reliable and tendentious are the Nikon Chronicle and the Power Book. An intermediate position between the providentialist and rationalist historiosophical position is occupied by the Lviv Chronicle and the Chronograph of the edition of 1512.","PeriodicalId":34588,"journal":{"name":"Krymskoe istoricheskoe obozrenie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Krymskoe istoricheskoe obozrenie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22378/kio.2023.1.21-32","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A little more than 500 years ago, in the summer of 1521, the Crimean Khan Muhammad-Giray made a campaign against Moscow, thus marking the beginning of almost 250 years of confrontation between Russia and Crimea. This confrontation ended with the defeat of the Crimean Khanate and its incorporation into the Russian Empire. However, there is still no consensus among historians about the assessments of this event. Especially in light of the political events of recent years. Even more broadly, this topic concerns the building of Russian-Tatar cultural interaction in terms of developing their attitude to the common history of Eastern Europe. In the article presented, we will try to understand this through a comprehensive analysis of Russian historical sources of a chronicle nature. To achieve this goal, it will be necessary to establish the main circle of chronicle sources, dividing it into independent groups according to the degree of informativeness. It will also be necessary to identify the main narrative traditions, from the point of view of objectivity, in which the assessments and interpretations of the Tatars’ march on Moscow in 1521 may differ from each other. As a result, 3 main traditions in the coverage of the events of the summer of 1521 will be highlighted. in Russian historical sources of a chronicle nature. The most important chronicle sources in terms of reliability and objectivity include the Vologda-Perm and Resurrection chronicles, Postnikovsky and Vladimir chroniclers. The least reliable and tendentious are the Nikon Chronicle and the Power Book. An intermediate position between the providentialist and rationalist historiosophical position is occupied by the Lviv Chronicle and the Chronograph of the edition of 1512.
穆罕默德·吉拉伊一世1521年的莫斯科战役根据对俄国历史资料的批判性分析
500多年前的1521年夏天,克里米亚汗穆罕默德-吉拉伊(Khan Muhammad-Giray)向莫斯科发起了一场战役,从而标志着俄罗斯与克里米亚之间近250年对抗的开始。这场对抗以克里米亚汗国战败并被并入俄罗斯帝国而告终然而,历史学家对这一事件的评价仍然没有达成共识。尤其是考虑到近年来的政治事件。更广泛地说,这个话题涉及俄罗斯-鞑靼文化互动的建立,以发展他们对东欧共同历史的态度。在本文中,我们将试图通过对俄罗斯编年史性质的史料的综合分析来理解这一点。要实现这一目标,就必须建立编年史信息源的主体圈,并根据信息性程度将其划分为独立的群组。从客观的角度来看,也有必要确定主要的叙事传统,其中对1521年鞑靼人进军莫斯科的评估和解释可能彼此不同。因此,在1521年夏天的事件报道中,将重点介绍三个主要传统。俄国的编年史性质的史料。就可靠性和客观性而言,最重要的编年史来源包括沃洛格达-彼尔姆编年史和复活编年史,波斯特尼科夫斯基编年史和弗拉基米尔编年史。最不可靠和有偏见的是尼康编年史和Power Book。在天意主义和理性主义的历史哲学立场之间的中间位置是由利沃夫编年史和1512年版的编年史占据的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信