Sort-of, I think? I know that Kievan-Rus basically moved further north-east, but that's about it.
Nope,Kiev -Russia was destroyed by mongols,who later decide to let prince of small city collect taxes for them.
That city was Moscov - they were mongol slaves,not vassals.When Moscov prince come to mongols,their leader used him to get on his horse.
But,since they keep taking territories of other princes,they eventually refused to pay mongols in 1480 and become independent.
In 1380 they win one battle - but mongols still burned Moscov to the ground,and made them servants again.
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
Incredibly stupid take. The first princes of Moscow were rurikids who were from Novgorod and the Kievan Rus. Bacle you talk a lot about things you don’t know the history of and it’s funny to see you hate those who are against the modern globohomo west like Russia and China and Arabs as much as I hate on the British and no one calls you out on it.
Yes,they were ruriks.And mongol slaves,too.
When they refused to pay mongols,only thing that changed was that people on their territories become slaves of moscov prince,not mongols.And only free man in Moscov was prince,everybody else were slaves.
That is why people of Novogrod,who was normal russians,were first send to Siberia as exiles,and later tortured to death by Ivan terrible coward.