Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T18:58:50.697Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Muscovy and Kazan: Some Introductory Remarks on the Patterns of Steppe Diplomacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Edward Louis Keenan Jr.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

“Patterns” is a term infrequently used in our historical writing; many historians associate it with certain more modern sciences. I have chosen it here in order to stress the need for a somewhat more highly elaborated methodology in the study of the matters discussed below. We are so far from adequate understanding of many of these subjects that we cannot be squeamish about borrowing any applicable method from the faster-moving sciences—whether these devices are to be called “matrices,” “models,” or “patterns” will be a matter of taste. I have, for present purposes, chosen the last, for what I should like to do is to suggest a comparative approach to the history of Muscovite-Tatar relations based upon systems, or patterns, of phenomena so arranged that the logic of the arrangment provides information concerning phenomena about which there is no direct evidence.

Type
Discussion
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , December 1967 , pp. 548 - 558
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 This treatment is set forth in the following recent works : Bazilevich, K. V., Vneshniaia politika russkogo tsentralizovannogo gosudarstva : Vtoraia polovina XV veka (Moscow, 1952)Google Scholar; Ocherki istorii SSSR : Period feodalizma (konets XV—nachalo XVII v.) (Moscow, 1955). Some original although not altogether convincing hypotheses have been advanced by Grekov, I. B. in his Ocherki po istorii mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenii Vostochnoi Evropy XIVXVI w. (Moscow, 1963).Google Scholar

2 See, for example, the comments of Smirnov, V. D., Krymskoe khanstvo pod verkhovenstvom Otomanskoi porty do nachala XVII veka (St. Petersburg, 1887), pp. xxvi–xxvii.Google Scholar

3 Some preliminary observations on the nature of the posol'skie dela may be found in my “The Jarlyk of Axmad-Xan to Ivan III : A New Reading,” International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics, Vol. XI (1967). I have attempted to indicate the necessity for a reconsideration of the Kazanskaia istoriia in “The Paradoxes of the Kazanskaia istoriia,” to appear in the Annals of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences in the U.S., Vol. XXXI-XXXII (1967)-

4 Russko-indiiskie otnosheniia v XVII veke, comp. T. D. Lavrentsova, R. V. Ovchinnikov, and V. N. Shumilov (Moscow, 1958), pp. 363 ff.

5 This text, which has served as the basis for a number of erroneous conclusions concerning the so-called Vigil on the Ugra in 1480, is apparently a rhymed ballad. See note 3, above.

6 “My u kureti nogi neizlamim, i vy u zherebiati nogi ne izlomite.” See letter of Kasiirimirza to Ivan IV, Oct. 1548, in Prodolzhenie Drevnei rossiiskoi vivliofiki, VIII (St. Petersburg, 1793), 94.

7 M. V. Fekhner, Torgovlia Russkogo gosudarstva so stranami Vostoka v XV veke (21I ed.; Moscow, 1956), p. 19.

8 See S. O. Shmidt, ed., Opisi tsarskogo arkhiva XVI veka i arkhiva posol'skogo prikaza 1614 goda (Moscow, 1960), p. 42 : “Iashchik 218 : Avnem … kuran tatarskoi, na chom privodiat tatar ksherti …“

9 Prodolzhenie Drevnei rossiiskoi vivliofiki, VIII (1793), 205.

10 Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisei, XXV (Moscow and Leningrad, 1949), 249.

11 Ibid., p. 260.

12 ibid., p. 279.

13 See Prodolzhenie Drevnei rossiiskoi vivliofiki, VIII, 144 ff.

14 Polnoe sobranie russkikh letopisei, XX, 490.

15 Ibid., XXIX, 255.

16 G. Barbieri, Milano e Mosca nella politica del Rinascimento (Bari, 1957), p. 82.