Gathering of the Russian lands

In historiography

In historiography on the Principality of Moscow

The concept arose in Russian tsarist-era historiography of the 19th century, and the term could be found in works of several historians such as Dmitry Ilovaysky, Kazimierz Waliszewski, and many others. The concept has been used to justify the liquidation of feudal fragmentation in the post-Golden Horde period.

Several historians of Muscovy/Russia have written that the process of "gathering" culminated during the reign of Ivan III (r. 1462–1505), in which he established a unified monarchy. Although various semi-independent princes still claimed certain territories during his reign, Ivan's overlordship was acknowledged by the princes. By the 16th century, Ivan IV (r. 1533–1584) became the undisputed autocratic ruler of Russia and the policy of "gathering" Russian lands helped pave the way for Russian eastward expansion, including non-Russian territories.

According to Marc Raeff, this process became indistinguishable from imperial expansion with the annexation of the Astrakhan and Kazan khanates as well as the movements of the peasants into new territories. Raeff says that "Indigenous groups mingled with Russians that had moved in, and transfers of population resulted in linguistic and cultural mixtures within the same administrative unit". As a result, "Russian society remained largely unaware of the state’s having become a multinational empire".

In historiography on the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

In Soviet historiography in the 1980s, there were disputes between scholars over which polities had a "right" to gather the lands of Rus'. The pre-1917 tradition, as represented by Igor Grekhov, argued that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was predominantly populated by Eastern Slavs, and was therefore a legitimate gatherer. On the other hand, the Soviet-era doctrine, as expressed by Vladimir Pashuto, regarded Moscow as the only legitimate gatherer, while Lithuania's expansion was considered to be outright aggression. Pelenski (1982, 1998) reasoned that "the claim of the Lithuanian grand princes to "all of Rus'" and their program of "gathering of all the Rus' lands," advanced even before Muscovite Rus' had developed an equivalent program of her own, promoted the Lithuanian grand principality into the role of successor state to Kievan Rus', and this represented a direct challenge to the Golden Horde."

Ukrainian historian Serhii Plokhy (2006) cited the 1338 Lithuanian–Livonian Treaty as evidence that grand duke Gediminas of Lithuania was in effect a "gatherer of the Rus' lands", as the Middle Low German text distinguished Lettowen ("Lithuania") and Rusce ("Rus'"), Ruslande or Ruscelande ("Rus' Land" or "Ruthenia") as the two parts of the realm, inhabited by Lettowen ("Lithuanians") and Ruscen ("Rus'" or "Ruthenians"), both under the ret ("authority") of the koningh van Lettowen ("king of Lithuania"), where any visiting Dudesche kopman ("German merchant") and their goods would be under his legal protection. Halperin (2022) questioned whether the 1338 Treaty described political rather than purely geographical dimensions of the Rus' Land. On the other hand, he confirmed that in many sources such as the Hypatian Codex (including the Kievan Chronicle and Galician–Volhynian Chronicle), the Belarusian–Lithuanian Chronicles (including the Bychowiec Chronicle), the Praise to Vytautas, and the Hustyn Chronicle, the term "Rus' Land" is variously used as either comprising all the Ruthenian territories of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, or only its Belarusian territories, or (more rarely) only its Ukrainian territories, instead of Suzdalia and later Muscovy.

A passage in the Livonian Chronicle of Hermann von Wartberge (died c. 1380) suggests that from 1358 onwards, Grand Duke Algirdas was the first secular ruler who claimed to reign all of Rus', which the Lithuanians were to defend from the intrusions of the Tatars. Raffensperger & Ostrowski interpreted this as Algirdas "formulat[ing] the goals of Lithuanian policy in the east and the south".

In historiography on the Golden Horde

According to Jaroslaw Pelenski (1982, 1998), the Golden Horde should be considered as a gatherer of Rus' lands in its own right, in which Muscovy long functioned as its mere vassal, rather than the main rival of Lithuania: "In comparison, the relationship between Lithuania-Rus' and the Golden Horde, in whose system Muscovy was integrated, has received very little attention. This comparative neglect appears unjustified since Lithuania, or Lithuania-Rus', and the Golden Horde were the two principal contestants in the struggle for supremacy in Eastern Europe, specifically for the lands of Old Rus', in the fourteenth century. Lithuania-Rus' and Muscovy were also competing for the succession to Old Rus'. However, their conflicts and confrontations cannot be analyzed outside the larger scope of the relations between Lithuania and the Golden Horde. Muscovy, a vassal state of the Golden Horde, played a significant, albeit secondary, role in this peculiar triangular relationship."

Christian Raffensperger and Donald Ostrowski (2023) presented and followed Pelenski's view of these 'three major interrelated conflicts', concurring that "in the fourteenth century, a gambling person would most likely have placed their bets on either the Lithuanian rulers or Tatar khans to win these power struggles, because the rulers of Vladimir-Suzdal were still vassals of the latter."