The role of personality in history. Time of Troubles.
(author Mustafin Rustam Nailevich)
Before the Great October Revolution, the events of the late 16th - early 17th centuries were called "Troubles". In the science of the Soviet Union, the term "Troubles" was replaced by "The Peasant War and Foreign Intervention in Russia." Nowadays, after the split of the Soviet Union, the term "Troubles" is increasingly used as the most accurate interpretation of the historical events of that time.
The Time of Troubles is the thirty years from the end of the 16th to the 20s of the 17th century, which became a turning point in the fate of the country: the end of the Muscovy and the beginning of the formation of the Russian Empire. More precisely, the Time of Troubles can be designated from 1598 to 1613, characterized by natural disasters, the Polish-Swedish intervention, an extremely difficult political, economic, state and social crisis.
Historians have differently explained the causes and essence of the turmoil. This is due to the inconsistency of the data obtained from the documents of the witnesses of that time. For example, in relation to the son of Ivan the Terrible, Fyodor Ivanovich, there may be a double impression depending on the source. Foreign contemporaries of that time described Fyodor Ivanovich as feeble-minded. Russian authors, on the other hand, described Fedor as "equal to ancient tsars" and defined that the Russian state under him "flourished in silence and splendor." The same can be attributed to all other events of the Time of Troubles. Some historical sources give very contradictory data.
The cause and essence of the Troubles can be found already from its very definition as a term. According to V.I. Dalia of Smoot is an uprising, rebellion ... general disobedience, discord between the people and the authorities. "
There are many reasons for the Troubles. One of the first reasons or prerequisites is the death of Ivan the Terrible, a despot who, at the expense of his cruelty, kept everyone in fear - both the boyars and the people. It was the bloody cruelty, public executions, and inhuman reprisals against the "objectionable" and "suspicious" Ivan IV that kept the Russians of that time "in check." All subsequent events unfolded the possibilities of the Russian people that had flared up after long years of uncomplaining servility. Boris Godunov, who rose to power under Fedor, tried to retain power not by cruelty, but by political literacy, but for the Russian people such a transition turned out to be fatal. Despite the description by many historians of Boris Godunov as a "crafty slave" and the like, in reality this politician tried with all his might to pull Russia out of the abyss into which it fell as a result of the brutal autocracy of Ivan IV. Even the attributed involvement of Godunov in the death of Tsarevich Dmitry, according to historical data, was most likely the result of an accident - in fact, the prince died in an accident - during an epileptic seizure he had a knife in his hand, with which he pierced his throat - similar cases in relation to the death of epilepsy sufferers many people can be brought. It should be noted that under Boris Fyodor reigned for fourteen years largely due to the political acumen of Godunov. But it was precisely the absence of cruelty and the hope for humanity in relation to the boyars that led Boris Godunov to fatal events.
Another reason is the approval of serfdom in Russia by Boris Godunov. Natural conditions had a particular impact - the crop failure in 1601 - 1602 caused famine in the country. The inability of Boris Godunov as a tsar to force the boyars to help in the current situation (according to historical data, many boyars had huge reserves of grain, but they took advantage of the convenient situation and, instead of helping the state, speculated, as a result of which the price of bread increased hundreds of times).
According to some historians, the reasons for the Troubles as an era of anarchy are rooted in the suppression of the Rurik dynasty and the interference of neighboring states (Lithuania and Poland) in the affairs of the Moscow kingdom. As a result, adventurers (Boris Godunov) and impostors (False Dmitry) appeared on the Russian throne.
According to church historians, the cause of the Troubles can be considered the spiritual crisis of society, the distortion of moral and moral values.
In my opinion, the Time of Troubles is characterized by a change in the political system of the whole country, associated with the influence of the individual. The personality of a tyrant with a capital letter, which was Ivan the Terrible. It is possible to draw some analogy of that time with the XX century - the personality of Stalin. However, despite all the horror of what was happening during the time of Stalin, the tyranny and cruelty of Ivan IV surpasses those of Joseph Vissarionovich. It can be said that the personality of the tyrant, which fettered all of Russia with fear, led it to inevitable chaos after the death of the autocratic despot. For me, this period is of interest from this point of view - one might say - social psychology was broken by Ivan IV, and after liberation from oppression, it could not return to normal for many years. It is possible that if an even more power-hungry and cruel tyrant had come to power after Ivan IV, the Troubles in the history of Russia would have occurred after the death of this tyrant and could bear even more catastrophic consequences for the whole country.
Many works have been written about the role of personality in history. There are many facts about the critical role of this or that personality in the development of an entire country. And in the development of the Troubles in Russia, in my opinion, the personality of Ivan IV played a huge role. Despite the opinion of some historians that the oprichnina led to the undermining of the authority of the authorities, I believe that it aggravated the chilling fear on the psychology of the people in relation to the authorities. If any of us became an eyewitness of the time of Grozny's reign, there is no doubt that a contemporary would succumb to universal fear in the next few hours. Especially when you consider the role of word of mouth in the development of the ideological perceptions of Russians at that time. The inhuman executions of often innocent people had a great influence. The matter reached such extreme cruelty and absurd inhumanity that the governor, Prince Mikhail Ivanovich Vorotynsky, for the great feat of arms and victory in the Battle of Molodya, Ivan IV "repaid" with torture and torment. Here is how Vorotynsky's misadventures are described by A. M. Kurbsky in his "History of the Grand Duke of Moscow": "And that glorified victor, tortured without fault and burnt in the fire, half-dead and barely breathing, he ordered to be taken to the dungeon on Beloozero. They took him three miles and he departed from this cruel path on the path of a pleasant and joyful ascent to heaven to his Christ. " Suffice it to say that Ivan IV personally killed his first-born son, Ivan Ivanovich, to show how effectively his despotic cruelty influenced, sometimes incomparable with anything in the world, in order to substantiate the influence of his personality on the subconscious and consciousness of the people.
It is no coincidence that Ivan the Terrible is the most famous tsar of Russia from young to old - and this is only the remnants of that psychological effect on the "universal subconscious" of the people.
The periodization of the Time of Troubles differs in various historical works.
According to one version, the Troubles is divided into three main periods:
I period. Boyar Troubles - the period of Boris Godunov's reign - from 1598 to 1605. It was characterized by the struggle of Boris Godunov with his opponents, who dealt with them with the help of executions, hard labor and exile. But, unlike Ivan the Terrible, he carried out the massacres quietly, without holding ceremonial executions and spectacles. During this period, there was a large popular uprising led by Cotton in 1603, which Boris suppresses with difficulty. In May 1605, False Dmitry with an army approached Moscow.
II period. People's distemper. It begins with the death of Boris Godunov and the rise to power of False Dmitry. This period lasts from 1605 to 1609. In 1606, False Dmitry was killed, and Vasily Shuisky was called out as tsar. During this period, the popular uprising develops into a peasant war led by Ivan Bolotnikov in 1606. Unlike the popular uprising of Khlopok, Bolotnikov was the initiator and leader of the peasant war of 1606 - 1607. Bolotnikov's army approached Moscow, but they failed to take Moscow, and the army retreated to Kaluga, where it split.
In 1608, the army of False Dmitry II approached Moscow, but also unsuccessfully stormed it, retreating to the village of Tushino.
III period. Polish-Swedish intervention. It begins with the conclusion of an agreement by Vasily Shuisky with Sweden. This period lasts from 1610 to 1613. Shuisky was overthrown from the throne, the seven-boyars began under the leadership of Miloslavsky. Vladislav Vaza, the son of the Polish king Sigismund III, was proclaimed the new king. As a result, at the beginning of 1612, a people's militia was created, led by Minin and Pozharsky. In October 1612, after bloody battles, Moscow was liberated from the Poles.
In January 1613, at the Zemsky Sobor, Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov was elected as a new tsar, with the coming to power of which the period of Troubles ends.
Other authors share the main stages of the Troubles as follows:
The first stage is associated with the murder of his son Ivan by Ivan the Terrible, the rise to power of Fyodor Ivanovich and the death of his younger brother Dmitry. The coming to power of False Dmitry and the beginning of the peasant movement under the leadership of Ivan Bolotnikov. Bolotnikov himself was captured in the summer of 1607 and exiled to Kargopol, where he was killed. The siege of Moscow by False Dmitry II ("Tushinsky thief"), who, having failed to take Moscow, in 1608, settled in the village of Tushino near Moscow, is also related to this stage.
The second stage is associated with the split of the country in 1609. In Muscovy, two tsars were formed, two Boyar Dumas, two patriarchs (Hermogenes in Moscow and Filaret in Tushino), territories that recognize the power of False Dmitry II, and territories that remain loyal to Shuisky. The successes of the Tushins forced Shuisky to conclude an agreement with Sweden in February 1609. Having given the Russian fortress Korela to the Swedes, Shuisky received military assistance and liberated the cities in northern Russia. As a result, Polish troops besieged Smolensk. False Dmitry II fled from Tushino, the Tushin people who left him at the beginning of 1610 concluded an agreement with Sigismund III on the election of his son Vladislav the prince to the Russian throne. In July 1610 Shuisky was overthrown by the boyars and tonsured a monk. Vladislav, the son of the Polish king, was elected tsar in Russia.
The third stage is associated with the desire to overcome the conciliatory position of the Seven Boyars, which had no real power and failed to force Vladislav to comply with the terms of the agreement, to accept Orthodoxy. Patriotic militias were formed. The first militia, in which the noble detachments of Lyapunov and the Cossacks of Zarutsky participated, disintegrated in the summer of 1611 - it failed to liberate Moscow. The second militia, led by K. Minin and D. Pozharsky, approached Moscow in August 1612 and liberated Moscow on October 26, 1612.
According to another periodization, three periods were distinguished in the development of the Troubles:
I period. Dynastic. Struggle for the Moscow throne between various contenders. He ended with the forcible tonsure of Vasily Shuisky as a monk.
II period. Social. The internecine struggle of social classes and interference in the struggle of foreign governments.
III period. National. The struggle of the Russian people against foreign invaders before the election of Tsar Mikhail Romanov.
According to other historical studies, the Time of Troubles is divided into the following periods:
The first is the period of the reign of False Dmitry.
The second was the uprising led by Ivan Bolotnikov.
The third is intervention.
The fourth is the end of the Troubles.
When characterizing these periods, one can draw attention to the rebellion led by Ivan Bolotnikov, which grew into a whole peasant war. Ivan Bolotnikov, a former military servant, raised a rebellion against the central government - while the army of the rebels numbered up to one hundred thousand people (!!!), which was a very impressive figure for that time. Before the siege of Moscow, this army inflicted a number of defeats on the troops of Tsar Vasily Shuisky. Bolotnikov's rebellion continued the civil war of that time in Russia. The main slogan of the popular movement was: “Beat the boyars! Take their lands, ranks, property, wives! " In this slogan, one can define not the overthrow of the existing social order, but the replacement of some holders of power by others. The peasants made up a small part of Bolotnikov's troops.
The fourth period - the end of the Troubles is associated with the coming to power of the Romanovs - Mikhail Fedorovich - the son of Filaret.
Russia emerged from the Troubles extremely exhausted - with enormous territorial and human losses. Only Tsar Peter I was able to compensate and restore the territorial losses of Russia almost a century later.
Russia's international position has changed dramatically for the worse. The country found itself in political isolation. The military potential of Russia was greatly weakened, the southern borders of the country remained defenseless for a long time.
The economic devastation was overcome only by strengthening serfdom.
Despite the "civilization" of the country by Boris Goudnov, who, like Peter I, tried to bring the culture of Russia closer to the West, introduced Western Europeans to the development of the country, after the Troubles, anti-Western sentiments in the country intensified. As a result, this led to the cultural isolation of Russia. This change occurred as a result of the desire to substantiate the inviolability of the Orthodox faith and the inadmissibility of deviations from the values of the national religion and ideology.
The consequence of the Time of Troubles was the weakening of the boyars, the rise of the nobility, who received estates and the possibility of legislative assignment of peasants to them. Russia gradually evolved towards absolutism.
To get out of the Troubles and the crisis, the changes in Russia were far from the best - the main ones are the revival of autocracy and serfdom.
Critical events of the end of the XVI $ - $ the beginning of the XVII century. went down in history as the Time of Troubles. This is the era of the crisis of statehood in Russia, which was accompanied by the struggle of boyar groups for power, popular uprisings, riots, the rule of impostors, foreign intervention, and the decline of the country's economy. Some historians call the Troubles the first civil war in Russia.
The causes of the Troubles were the termination of the Rurik dynasty, the struggle of the boyars with the supreme power, the severe consequences of the oprichnina and the Livonian War (1558–1583), the famine of 1601–1603. $ - $ ruin of the economy, growth of social tension.
After the death of Ivan IV the Terrible in 1584, the throne passed to his son Fedor(1584-1598). The new king, due to his weak health and mind, was not capable of running the state. In the last years of his life, Ivan IV formed a regency council of boyars to govern the state on behalf of Fedor.
Fedor I Ivanovich. Reconstruction by M. Gerasimov
Soon the hardships of ruling Russia were entrusted to his brother-in-law Boris Fedorovich Godunov (1552-1605). Fyodor did not have children, and when in 1591, under unclear circumstances in Uglich, he died (according to the official version, $ - $ due to the "negligence" of the Naked, piercing his throat with a knife during an epileptic seizure while playing "poke") the last son of Ivan IV Dmitry, the Rurik dynasty was cut short.
Dmitry Uglitsky
From the document (S.M.Soloviev.The end of the reign of Fyodor Ioannovich. History of Russia since ancient times):
"The council blamed the Naked; but the people blamed Boris, and the people remember and love to combine all other important events with the event, which especially struck them. It is easy to understand the impression that Demetrius's death should have made: appanages perished in dungeons before, but were against they were accused of sedition, they were punished by the sovereign; now an innocent child died, did not die in strife, not for the fault of his father, not by order of the sovereign, died from a subject. Soon, in June, a terrible fire broke out in Moscow, the entire Bely Godunov wasted favors and privileges to the burned out: but there were rumors that he deliberately ordered to light up Moscow in order to bind its inhabitants to himself and make them forget about Demetrius, or, as others said, in order to force the Tsar, who was with the Trinity, to return to Moscow , and not to go to Uglich for the search; the people thought that the tsar would not leave such a great cause without personal research, the people were waiting for the truth. "
During the reign of Fyodor Ivanovich in 1589 was established patriarchate. The first Russian patriarch was Job, a close associate of Godunov. The establishment of the patriarchate was of great importance, testifying to the increased prestige of the country. B 1590-1595 biennium as a result Russian-Swedish war under the terms Tyavzinsky peace Russia returned the Yam, Ivangorod, Koporye, Korela, lost during the Livonian War. Measures were taken to further enslave the peasants. In 1597... for the first time, a five-year statute of limitations was introduced, before the expiration of which the owners of serfs had the right in court to demand the return of the departed peasants to them, $ - $ the so-called lesson summer. These measures were carried out by the government headed by Godunov.
B. F. Godunov
The beginning of a troubled time
B. F. Godunov was the guardian of Tsar Fyodor until his death in 1598. This year the Zemsky Sobor elected Godunov to the kingdom. His reign (1598–1605) began with rapprochement with the West and boyar opals. Soon natural disasters struck Russia (cold in summer, grain crop failure), in 1601–1603. famine swept the country. Bread prices skyrocketed, money depreciated. The owners drove out the slaves, whom it was not profitable to maintain. The tsar took a series of emergency measures to combat hunger, allowed a partial peasant exit.
From document (A.Kuzmin.The beginning of the Time of Troubles):
"Let's pay tribute to Boris Godunov: he fought hunger as best he could. The poor were given money, paid construction work was organized for them. But the money received was instantly depreciated: after all, this did not add to the bread in the market. Then Boris ordered to distribute bread for free from state storages. I hoped to set a good example for the feudal lords, but the granaries of the boyars, monasteries and even the patriarch remained closed. Meanwhile, starving people rushed to free bread from all sides to Moscow and to large cities. It was said that some rich people did not hesitate to dress in rags and receive free bread in order to sell it at exorbitant prices. A contemporary says that in those years the most well-fed were dogs and crows: they ate unburied corpses. peasants in the cities died in vain waiting for food, their fields remained uncultivated and uncultivated. This laid the foundations for the continuation of the famine. "
The discontent of the peasants resulted in uprising 1603-1604 under the leadership of Cotton Clubfoot, a fighting slave. The rebels captured Vladimir, Vyazma, Volokolamsk, Mozhaisk, Rzhev, Kolomna. In September 1603, when the rioters approached Moscow, Godunov promised to forgive the participants in the uprising. Then, taking advantage of the fact that many peasants decided to go home, he sent troops to the rebels. In the decisive battle with the rebels, voivode I.F. Basmanov died, which testifies to the high military organization of the rebels. The cotton was captured and executed. Meanwhile, there was bread in the country, but the boyars hiding it in their bins were in no hurry to sell it.
False Dmitry I
Rumors spread among the people that misfortunes were sent down to Russia by the will of God as punishment for the sins of the unrighteous Tsar Boris. The Rzeczpospolita took advantage of the difficult situation in the country, supporting the impostor who appeared in the Russian lands, posing as the miraculously saved Tsarevich Dmitry and received the name False Dmitry I. According to one of the widespread versions, the monk of the Chudov Monastery, Grigory Otrepiev, was the impostor, whose protectors were Prince A. Vishnevetsky and the Sandomierz governor Y. Mnishek. The Polish king Sigismund III Vasa supported him in his claims to the Russian throne in exchange for a promise to transfer Smolensk and part of the Seversk land to Poland, to promote the spread of the Catholic faith in Russia.
At the end of 1604, having converted to Catholicism, False Dmitry I entered the territory of Russia with a small detachment of Poles and Cossacks. After the battle with the tsarist army, many Poles, including Y. Mniszek, left the impostor near Novgorod-Seversky. He fled to Putivl, where he learned that the call to rise to the "illegal" Tsar Boris had been heard, and many border towns of the south-west of Russia, suburban Cossacks, service people, peasants went over to his side. At Kromy, the impostor was detained by the tsarist army. In April 1605 Boris Godunov died suddenly, his son became his heir Fedor(April 13 $ - $ 1 June 1605). In May 1605, Godunov's army rebelled and went over to the side of the impostor. In June the townspeople went on strike. Fedor II and his mother were killed, and False Dmitry I enthroned in June 1605
False Dmitry I
Thus, False Dmitry (June 1, 1605 $ - May 17, 1606) came to power thanks to a popular uprising. He generously endowed the Cossacks, Russian nobles and Polish mercenaries who supported him. However, slaves, townspeople and peasants began to gradually be expelled from the army of False Dmitry. In Yelets, the impostor began to create a base for a campaign either against Turkey with the aim of capturing Constantinople, or against the Commonwealth, which refused to recognize him as emperor. In May 1606, he married a Catholic woman, M. Mnishek, which aroused the outrage of the Orthodox community. The feudal lords were frightened by the demagogic promises of False Dmitry to restore St. George's Day and the master's behavior of the Polish nobility in Moscow. False Dmitry promised the Poles for the support of the Seversk and Smolensk lands, Russia's participation in the anti-Turkish alliance, the spread of Catholicism. However, after accession, he did not fulfill his promises. In an effort to rely on the provincial nobility, he increased monetary and land salaries, confiscating funds from monasteries, tried to reorganize the army, make concessions to the peasants and slaves (decrees of January 7 and February 1, 1606); the southern regions of Russia were exempted from taxes for 10 years.
The domestic and foreign policy of the tsar-adventurer aroused the fears of the boyar elite, who was preparing a conspiracy headed by the boyar Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky. On May 17, 1606, an uprising of Muscovites overthrew False Dmitry I from the throne.
From the document (V.Kobrin.Time of Troubles $ - $ lost opportunities):
"Finally, on Saturday, May 27 (here, as in other places, the new style is meant, although the Russians consider it according to the old style), at six o'clock in the morning, when they least thought about it, the fateful day came when Emperor Dmitry Ivanovich was inhumanly killed and it is believed that one thousand seven hundred and five Poles were brutally killed because they lived far from each other. The head of the conspirators was Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky. Pyotr Fedorovich Basmanov was killed in a gallery against the emperor's chambers and received the first blow from Mikhail Tatishchev, whom he shortly before this asked for freedom, and several shooters from the bodyguards were killed.The Empress $ - $ the wife of Emperor Dmitry, her father, brother, son-in-law and many others who escaped the popular fury, were imprisoned, each in a separate house. The late Dmitry, dead and naked , dragged past the monastery of the Empress $ - $ his mother $ - $ to the square where Vasily Shuisky was supposed to have his head cut off, and put Dmitry on a table about an arshin long, so that bare va hung on one side and $ - $ legs on the other, and Pyotr Basmanov was put under the table. They remained a spectacle for everyone for three days, while the head of the conspiracy, Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky ... ordered Dmitry to be buried outside the city by the high road. "
Two days later, the king was "shouted out" V.I.Shuisky(1606–1610), who gave the crucifixion record to rule with the Boyar Duma, not to impose disgrace and not to execute without trial. This was the first attempt to limit the autocratic power of the monarch.
From the document (Cross-kissing record of Tsar Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky, June 1, 1606):
"And you have allowed Yaz, Tsar and Grand Duke Vasily Ivanovich of All Russia, to kiss the cross on the fact that I, the great sovereign, every person, without condemning by true judgment from my boyars, do not betray death, and estates, and households, and their brethren, and from their wives and children, do not take away, who will not be in thought with them, also from guests, and from merchants, and from black people, although by court and by search it will endure mortal guilt, and after they will not be taken away from the wives and children of the households and shops, and their bellies will not be taken away, they will be innocent with them in that fault; and I, the great sovereign, will not listen to false arguments, but seek all sorts of detectives firmly and put them from eye to eye, so that Orthodox Christianity did not perish without guilt; but whoever lies about whom, and, having found, execute him, depending on the fault of the fact: that he was not guilty, he himself will be condemned.
And on everything that is written in this entry, the Tsar and Grand Duke Vasily Ivanovich of All Russia, kiss the cross to all Orthodox Christians, that I, while favoring them, judge them by a true righteous judgment and without guilt against anyone I have fallen from lay it, and don’t give it to anyone in falsehood, and protect it from all violence. "
The accession of the boyar tsar began with repressions against the supporters of False Dmitry. Having dispersed the Polish friends of the impostor, Shuisky did not take any measures to alleviate the situation of the common people.
V.I.Shuisky
The uprising of I. I. Bolotnikov
The focus of the struggle against the new tsar was the southern Russian outskirts of the Russian state, which supported the impostor. In the summer of 1606, there were rumors about a new miraculous rescue of Tsarevich Dmitry. In the wake of these rumors Ivan Isaevich Bolotnikov, a slave of Prince A. Telyatevsky, in Putivl raised a new uprising in July 1606 g. 70 cities took part in the riots. Servicemen led by P. Lyapunov, archers led by I. Pashkov joined the rebellious serfs and peasants. From Putivl, the insurgent army reached Moscow. On October 28, the five-week siege of Moscow by the rebels began. Bolotnikov's army, characterized by social heterogeneity, lack of combat experience, weak weapons, settled in the village. Kolomenskoye.
In November 1606, a detachment of Ryazan nobles led by G. Sumbulov and P. Lyapunov went over to the side of Shuisky. Taking advantage of this help, Shuisky's troops struck at Bolotnikov's camp. On December 2, at the height of the general battle, the detachment of I. Pashkov went over to the side of Shuisky. The tsarist troops defeated the insurgents near Moscow. Bolotnikov retreated to Kaluga, where he defeated the troops of the tsar's brother I.I. Shuisky. To mobilize forces and prepare a new campaign against Moscow, Bolotnikov retreated to the well-fortified Tula, the defense of which he led in June-October 1607. Realizing the futility of the siege of Tula, Shuisky gave the order to flood the city, blocking the river with a dam. Upa. The rebels laid down their arms and opened the gates on October 10, 1607, believing in the promise of royal favor. Bolotnikov was exiled to Kargopol, blinded and drowned in an ice hole. The reasons for the defeat of the uprising were the heterogeneity of the composition, the disunity of individual centers of the uprising, the absence of clear requirements, a unified social program.
Unknown artist. I. I. Bolotnikov confesses to Tsar Vasily Shuisky
False Dmitry II
Having suppressed the Bolotnikov uprising, Shuisky sent punitive detachments to the southern Russian cities, accused of aiding the rebels. Sweden and Poland took advantage of Russia's difficult position in the hope of seizing its border territories. New impostor False Dmitry II with the support of Polish magnates and gentry, he gathered the surviving participants in the Bolotnikov uprising, detachments of the Cossacks led by I. Zarutsky. In June 1608 he settled in the village of Tushino near Moscow, which is why he later received the nickname "Tushinsky thief".
False Dmitry II
The Tushintsy tried to establish a blockade of Moscow, but the connection between the capital and Ryazan could not be interrupted: there was not enough strength. In September 1608, the Tushins began a 16-month siege of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery.
Protection of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra by monks from the Poles. Rice. M.P. Klodta, engraver Baranovsky
Since that time, the Russian state split in two $ - $ one part of the land was under the control of False Dmitry II, the other recognized the power of V. Shuisky. Each tsar had his own Boyar Duma, patriarchs (Hermogenes in Moscow and Filaret in Tushino), armies. Some boyar and noble families ("Tushino flights") got used to visiting both courts, receiving money and estates both there and there. The people of Tushin were guided by the support of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. On the advice of Sigismund III, M. Mnishek appeared in the camp, “recognizing” False Dmitry II and secretly married to him.
S. V. Ivanov, In Time of Troubles (Impostor's Camp)
Their successes forced Shuisky in February 1609 to agree to an alliance with Sweden, hostile to Poland. Having given the Russian fortress Korela to the Swedes, the tsar received military support, and with the help of the Swedes, the Russian army liberated a number of cities in the north of the country. However, the entry of Swedish troops into Russian territory was the reason for Sigismund III to intervene. In autumn 1609 Polish-Lithuanian troops besieged Smolensk, the defense of which was led by the voivode M. B. Shein, occupied a number of Russian cities.
Defense of Smolensk
Under the onslaught of the troops of the king's nephew M.V. Skopin-Shuisky supported by the Swedes, the Tushino camp disintegrated, False Dmitry II fled from Tushino. However, soon the young commander Skopin-Shuisky died unexpectedly. Russian troops, rushing to help Smolensk, were defeated at Klushino. At the beginning of 1610, part of the Tushins concluded an agreement with Sigismund III on the election of his son Vladislav to the Russian throne. False Dmitry II again approached Moscow with his troops. In July 1610, the nobles overthrew Vasily Shuisky from the throne. The Tsar was forcibly tonsured a monk.
Semboyarshina
Power passed to the government Seven Boyars, which agreed to sign in August 1610 an agreement with Sigismund III on the election of Vladislav as tsar, provided that he would accept Orthodoxy. After that, the Polish-Lithuanian troops entered Moscow. The policy of the Seven Boyars was contrary to the interests of Russian society and aroused indignation. The Seven Boyars, which had no real power, could not force the Catholic Vladislav to accept Orthodoxy. Meanwhile, in Kaluga, in the camp of False Dmitry II, detachments of Cossacks, serfs and peasants were gathering. In December 1610 the impostor died, soon M. Mnishek gave birth to a son, Ivan, nicknamed "Vorenk". The remnants of the Tushino detachments were headed by I. Zarutsky.
P. Chistyakov. Patriarch Hermogenes in dungeon refuses to sign the letter of Poles
first militia
Since 1611 In Russia, patriotic sentiments were growing, the expression of which was the patriarch Hermogenes, who called for an end to strife and the restoration of the country's unity. Formed in Ryazan against the Poles First militia the detachments of the former Tushin people were united, led by the prince D. T. Trubetskoy, noble troops P. Lyapunova, Cossacks I. Zarutsky. However, they failed to drive the Poles out of Moscow. On March 19, 1611, Moscow was devastated by the invaders. The main forces of the First Militia entered Moscow after it was burned. The leaders of the militia created a provisional government $ - $ "Council of All Lands". However, disagreements soon arose between the leaders of the militia. In the summer of 1611, after the murder of Lyapunov at the Cossack circle, the First militia broke up. Almost simultaneously with the collapse of the militia, the Poles succeeded in capturing Smolensk after a two-year siege. The Swedes occupied Novgorod, a new impostor appeared in Pskov False Dmitry III, which on December 4, 1611 was "announced" there by the king.
second militia
In the fall of 1611 on the initiative Kuzma Minin-Sukhoruk in Nizhny Novgorod led by the prince Dmitry Mikhailovich Pozharsky formation began Second militia... To attract military men to the militia, a forced collection of "fifth money" from commercial and industrial people was announced. In March 1612, the militia set out on a campaign against Moscow through Kostroma and Yaroslavl to rule out a surprise attack. In Yaroslavl, the "Council of the Whole Land" and government agencies $ - $ orders were created.
M. I. Scotti. Minin and Pozharsky
From the document (J.Margeret.State of the Russian Empire and the Grand Duchy of Muscovy):
“We know very little about Kuzma Minin before he started collecting the treasury for the people's militia. He was born on the Volga, in the town of Balakhna, not far from Nizhny Novgorod. to his son his patronymic, which for ordinary people served as a substitute for the surname.Mina passed on his business to his eldest sons, and the youngest Kuzma, having received no inheritance, had to look for food himself.He moved to Nizhny, bought a yard and began to trade in meat. went well, and Kuzma married a posad resident Tatyana Semyonovna. How many children he had $ - $ is unknown, only one of them survived Nefed. Sociability, honesty, business acumen earned Minin a high reputation among merchants who elected him as a posad head. This is almost all that is known about Kuzma Minin before his participation in the Second Militia. "
In August 1612 it approached Moscow and October 26 freed her from the Poles. Hetman Chodkevich, hurrying to help the interventionists, was defeated near Moscow.
E. Lissner. Expulsion of Poles from the Kremlin in 1612
In 1613 Zemsky Cathedral elected sixteen-year-old king Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov(1613-1645). For the first time, the black-haired peasants were present as part of this council, which was a concession to those circles of the population who provided assistance to the militia. Mikhail's father, Metropolitan Filaret of Rostov, was in Polish captivity. Mikhail stayed with his mother at the Ipatiev Monastery near Kostroma. The Polish-Lithuanian detachment, according to legend, tried to find a way to the village in order to capture the young Romanov, who had been proclaimed tsar. Rescuing him, the Kostroma peasant Ivan Susanin led the Polish detachment into an impenetrable swamp.
From the doc (Diploma of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich ):
"By God's mercy, we are the great sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke Mikhailo Feodorovich, autocrat of all Russia, according to our royal mercy, and on the advice and request of the mother of our sovereign, the great old lady, the monks Marfa Ivanovna, have granted me the Kostroma district of our village Domnina Sobinina, a peasant Za Bogdashka service to us both for the blood and for the patience of his father-in-law Ivan Susanin: how we were the great sovereign, the tsar and the grand duke Mikhailo Fedorovich of all Russia in the past in 121 (1612/1613 $ - $ author's note) were in Kostroma, and At that time, Polish and Lithuanian people came to the Kostroma district, and his father-in-law Ivan Susanin, Bogdashkov, at that time, the Lithuanian people seized and tortured him with great unmeasured tortures, and tortured him, where at that time we, the great sovereign, the tsar and the grand duke Mikhailo Fedorovich of all Russia, there were; and he is Ivan, knowing about us the great sovereign, where we were at that time, suffering from those Polish and Lithuanian people unmeasured torture, about us the great sovereign to those Polish and Lithuanian people where we were in those days. ry was, did not say, and the Polish and Lithuanian people tortured him to death. "
A. Kivshenko. Election of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov to the kingdom
During the first six years of the reign of M. Romanov, the Rzeczpospolita continued its attempts to establish its control over the Russian lands. Gradually, the new government managed to restore order and the functioning of the state apparatus in the Russian state. In 1617 G. was signed Stolbovsky peace with Sweden, which received the Korelu fortress and the coast of the Gulf of Finland. Peace was not profitable for Russia, but it provided the necessary respite. In 1618... was concluded Deulinskoe truce with the Commonwealth: Russia ceded Smolensk and Chernigov lands to her, under the terms of the armistice, the exchange of prisoners was carried out. In 1619 he returned to Russia from Polish captivity Filaret$ - $ father of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich. In Moscow, he was elevated to the patriarchate and, in fact, ruled the state until his death. The end of the Time of Troubles is usually associated with the accession of the Romanovs.
Consequences of the Troubles
The economic consequences of the Troubles were the ruin and desolation of a huge territory, especially in the west and south-west of Russia, the death of a significant part of the country's population. These effects have persisted over the years. As a result of the Time of Troubles, the boyar families weakened, and the position of the nobility strengthened. The nobles became the pillars of the new dynasty and were given the opportunity to legally secure their land and the peasants living on them. Under the new conditions, the tendency of the evolution of the estate-representative monarchy towards absolutism was indicated. During the Troubles, the negative aspects of boyar participation in governing the country, the need for the inviolability of the Orthodox faith and the inadmissibility of deviating from the values of national religion and ideology were clearly revealed. Anti-Western sentiments, exacerbated during the struggle against Catholic Poland and Protestant Sweden, exacerbated the cultural and civilizational isolation of Russia.
Historians about the Troubles:
In pre-revolutionary historiography at the beginning of the 17th century. firmly entrenched the name "Troubles", which meant "general disobedience, discord between the people and the government." However, the origin and causes of this phenomenon were determined in different ways. Contemporaries of events, church leaders were looking for the root causes of these tests in the spiritual sphere, the sin of pride, which was the temptation of autocracy that seduced the Orthodox people. According to this point of view, Troubles is a punishment for a godless life and, at the same time, a martyr's crown, which gave the people the opportunity to understand the power of the Orthodox faith.
CM. Soloviev considered the Troubles to be the result of the fall of popular morality and the struggle of the Cossacks as an anti-state force against the progressive state order. K.S. Aksakov viewed the Troubles as an accidental phenomenon that affected the interests of influential people who fought for power after the suppression of the Rurik dynasty.
N.I. Kostomarov drew attention to the social causes of the Troubles, showing that all strata of Russian society were to blame for it, but he considered the main reason to be the intrigues of the papacy, the Jesuits and the Polish intervention. IN. Klyuchevsky studied mainly the social aspects of the Troubles. In his opinion, society was in a state of social instability due to the struggle of all its strata for the best balance between responsibilities and privileges. S.F. Platonov also did not consider the social crisis as the cause and essence of the Troubles. He did not consider the struggle within the ruling class of Russian society to be decisive for understanding these phenomena.
In Soviet historiography, the term "Troubles" was not used. This period was defined as a social conflict, the central place in which was the peasant war led by I. Bolotnikov and foreign intervention.
In modern historical literature, the term "Troubles" is used quite widely, but almost nothing new has been introduced into the interpretation of these events, except for an attempt to connect the events of the early 17th century. with the idea of the first systemic crisis of Russian society, in its development similar to the civil war.
| Key dates and events | |
|---|---|
| 1589 g. | Establishment of the patriarchate. First Patriarch Job |
| 1590-1593 | War with Sweden. Tyazvin world. Returned Yam, Ivangorod, Koporye and Korela |
| 1591 g. | Dmitry Ivanovich (son of Ivan the Terrible) dies in Uglich under strange circumstances. V. Shuisky's commission calls the cause of death that "the youth stabbed himself with a knife" during an epileptic seizure |
| 1597 g. | Ordinance on class years (five-year investigation of fugitive peasants) |
| 1597 g. | Bonded slaves cannot leave their master by paying the debt |
| 1598 g. | Childless Fyodor Ivanovich dies. Zemsky Sobor elects Boris Godunov as Tsar |
| 1601 g. | The head of the Romanov clan Filaret tonsured a monk |
| 1601-1603 | Hunger |
| 1603-1604 | Rise of the Cotton |
| 1603 g. | Galich nobleman Grigory Otrepiev goes to Sigismund III to become False Dmitry I |
| 1605 g. | False Dmitry I in Moscow |
| 1606 g. | Wedding of False Dmitry I and Marina Mnishek |
| 1606 g. | False Dmitry I was killed, Marina Mnishek was expelled from Moscow, Vasily Shuisky will be “shouted out” at the Zemsky Cathedral |
| 1606 g. | The uprising led by Ivan Bolotnikov (A. Telyatevsky's military servant). The uprising is joined by various segments of the population of the border counties and the former commanders of False Dmitry I |
| 1608 g. | The False Dmitry II ("Tushino thief"), recognized by Marina Mnishek, appears. The beginning of the dual power |
| 1609 g. | The Swedes, in exchange for Korela, provide military support to Shuisky |
| 1609 g. | Smolensk, led by voivode M. B. Shein, besieged by Sigismund III |
| February 1610 | Russian Tushins call Vladislav, son of Sigismund III to the throne |
| March 1610 | Death in Moscow M.V.Skopin-Shuisky |
| July 1610 | Vasily Shuisky was forcibly tonsured a monk. Power passes to the Semboyarshchina |
| August 1610 | Seven Boyars is ready to swear allegiance to Vladislav on the terms of his adoption of Orthodoxy |
| December 1610 | The death of False Dmitry II. Formation of the First militia headed by I. Zarutsky and D. Trubetskoy |
| spring 1611 | The militia laid siege to Moscow. The "Council of All the Earth" is being created |
| July 1611 | The Cossacks kill Lyapunov for creating the "Verdict of All the Earth", calling for the return of the old order. Disintegration of the First Militia |
| June-July 1611 | Smolensk fell. The Swedes take Novgorod |
| autumn 1611 | Dm. Pozharsky and K. Minin create the Second Militia |
| October 26, 1612 | Moscow liberated from the Poles |
| 1613 g. | Zemsky Sobor elects Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov as new Tsar |
| 1617 g. | Stolbovsky peace with Sweden. Gulf of Finland and Korela are lost |
| 1618 g. | Deulinskoe truce with the Commonwealth. Lost Smolensk, Chernigov and Seversk land |
| 1619 g. | Filaret elected patriarch |
The Lyapunovs, Procopius and Zakhar Petrovich are prominent figures of the Time of Troubles. The Lyapunov family, the descendants of the Ryazan boyars and large landowners in Ryazan, held a leading position in the group of the local nobility. Not content with this, the ambitious Lyapunovs tried to break through to the top, to play a role in Moscow. Since the end of the 16th century, the names of representatives of this family are quite often found in sources. Under Grozny, the brother of Procopius and Zakhar, Alexander, helped one of the tsar's favorites, the "courtyard clerk" A. Sherefedinov, to seize lands and people in Ryazan. In 1595 Zakhar Lyapunov was punished by prison for refusing to go headlong with Kikin, motivated by parochialism; the Lyapunovs and "all kind" with the princes Zasekin also had a parish. In 1603 the same Zakhar was beaten with a whip for selling "reserved" potions (gunpowder), lead and wine to the Don Cossacks. There was a rumor that the boyars, dissatisfied with Tsar Boris, sent their nephew Prokopy Lyapunov to Poland with a request to help the Pretender. The Lyapunovs, who were hostile to Boris, did not want to serve his son and, near Kromy, were among the first to agree with Basmanov and Golitsyns to go over to the side of the applicant, dragging along the Ryazanites and nobles from other southern cities. When Vasily Shuisky ascended the throne, fear of the boyar-princely reaction, with the closure of access to the Duma for the "new" people, threw the Lyapunovs into opposition to the new government. Procopius, at the head of the Ryazanites, joined Bolotnikov, who was marching in the name of Demetrius to Moscow (see VII, 403-404). However, a month's standing near the capital next to the slaves and peasants who had gathered under the banner of Bolotnikov was enough to convince the large landowners of Ryazan that the desire of their allies for a social upheaval was more dangerous for them than the possibility of Tsar Vasily's princely policy. On November 15, 1606, the Ryazan people "drove away from those thieves and came to Moscow with hail," and this time also served as an example for others. The king gladly "gave them their guilt." Since then, Procopius, who soon became a tsarist governor in Ryazan and was granted a Duma nobleman (1608), tirelessly fights against "thieves", guided not by love for the tsar, but by the desire to defend the noble way of life. As soon as Skopin-Shuisky came forward, the Lyapunovs at the end of 1609 turned to him with a proposal to reign in Moscow, which Skopin indignantly rejected. When Skopin died suddenly, Lyapunov declared Tsar Vasily the culprit for his death and began organizing an uprising against him in Ryazan. In Moscow, the campaign against Shuisky was led by Zakhar Lyapunov. On July 17, a gathering of Muscovites, in which Zakhar Lyapunov played a prominent role, decided to depose Shuisky, and on the 19th, with the participation of Zakhar, he was tonsured a monk. The Lyapunovs prepared the throne for Prince V. Golitsyn, but the arrival of Zholkevsky with an army near Moscow gave it to Prince Vladislav. Procopius Lyapunov kissed him on the cross, and Zakhar, as part of the "great embassy", went to Sigismund near Smolensk. Senior ambassadors complained that Zakhar, having left the embassy, fumbled with the gentlemen and laughed at the ambassadors. In fact, he scouted the king's plans and informed his brother about them. Sigismund's intention to reign in Moscow in place of his son soon echoed in Ryazan with the beginning of organizing an uprising against the Poles. In Moscow, the steward V. Buturlin was arrested, accused of providing information to Lyapunov and of conspiring the Germans to beat the Poles. The boyars-rulers reported to the king about the role of Zakhar Lyapunov, from whom they did not look for the good of Nikakov's troubles, and asked to find out about his betrayal. Probably, as a result of this search, Zakhar died; there is no further information about him. The death of the Kaluga Thief (December 1610), which opened the possibility of unity among the diverse and rapidly growing groups of opponents of the Poles, and the blessing of Patriarch Hermogenes to fight for faith and patronymic gave wings to Procopius Lyapunov. Throughout the country went openly his letters calling for an uprising and a march to Moscow; close ties were established between Ryazan and other centers of the national movement (Nizhny and others). Feeling the strength behind him, Lyapunov imperiously demanded from the boyar rulers to ease the position of the imprisoned patriarch and managed to achieve his goal for a while. The forward armies of the militia took part in the battles of Muscovites with the Poles on March 19 and 20, 1611, and soon the main forces appeared near Moscow and settled on the ruins of the White City and Zamoskvorechye burned by the Poles. The military operations against the Poles were successful, but very soon a stratification was revealed in the militia. In concern about the number of troops, Lyapunov did not pay due attention to its composition. He teamed up with Thief's recent supporters, summoned the Cossacks to him with broad promises, and the strength of these two groups, closer to each other, had such an effect that "three leaders" were put at the head of the government that needed to be created for the country: Lyapunov - the support and the leader of the zemstvo people, Trubetskoy - the well-born head of the Tushinites and Zarutsky - the leader of the Cossacks. The energetic and domineering Lyapunov, relying on the majority of the militia and sympathy in the country, took a dominant position and tried to curb the willfulness of the Cossacks, stop their violence and robberies, not stopping before harsh punishments. In his worries about restoring order, he met with opposition from co-rulers and caused the weakening of the Cossacks. He already had to make subscripts to government orders so that they would not believe the letters that "learn to come" not by his hand (signature). The verdict of the rati on June 30, which outlined a program of government activities with a clear preference for the interests of the service people and to the detriment of the Cossacks and their hopes, further increased internal friction. Lyapunov's foreign policy, his desire to conclude an alliance with the Swedes in order to suspend their movement to Novgorod, to use their help against the Poles, in particular his intention to plant a Swedish prince on the throne of Moscow, supported by the Council of All Lands and expressed in negotiations with the Swedish commander De la Gardie , were also not shared by Zarutsky, Trubetskoy and their associates. On the soil prepared in this way, Lyapunov's abrupt reprisal against a detachment of marauding Cossacks aroused strong excitement against Lyapunov. He left, saving his life, from the militia and returned only at the insistence of the zemstvo army. This moment was used by the leader of the besieged, Gonsevsky, who sent to the Cossack camps a letter forged in Moscow on behalf of Lyapunov with a plan for the extermination of the Cossacks. Summoned to the Cossack circle to explain this document, Lyapunov died under the sabers of his enraged enemies (July 22, 1611). The servicemen, deprived of the leader, were unable to resist the Cossacks, who grew bolder after the death of Lyapunov, and, unable to endure their violence, began to scatter from near Moscow. Created to a large extent by the energy of Lyapunov and his holding on, the militia quickly disintegrated, and the task of Lyapunov was carried out by another zemstvo militia. - See general works on the history of the Time of Troubles, especially "Essays on the history of the Time of Troubles" by S.F. Platonov; general description of Prokopy Lyapunov by Kostomarov, in "Russian history in biographies"; article by A.E. Presnyakov in the collection "People of the Time of Troubles" (St. Petersburg, 1905); on relations with the Swedes, the newest works of H. Almquist "Die Zarenwahl des Jahres 1613" in "Zeitschr. fur Osteurop. Gesch." (volume III, part 2), and G.A. Zamyatin "On the question of the election of Karl-Philip to the Russian throne" (Yuriev, 1913). The letters important for the history of the first militia were published by S. B. Veselovsky: "New acts of the Time of Troubles. Acts of the Moscow Region militias and the Zemsky Sobor of 1611 - 1613" (Moscow, 1911). P. L.
- - Russian noble family, descended from Lyapun Borisovich Osinin, a descendant of Rurik, in the twentieth tribe ...
Biographical Dictionary
- - biobibliographic. dictionary, publication of the "All-Union Society of Political Prisoners and Exiled Settlers under the editorship of F. Ya. Kon, B. P. Kozmin, V. I. Nevsky, I. A. Teodorovich and others. Contains basic information about ...
Soviet Historical Encyclopedia
-
Big biographical encyclopedia
- - Blumenfeld - two Russian musical figures, brothers Sigismund and Felix Mikhailovich ...
Biographical Dictionary
- - The Naryshkins are statesmen. Alexander Lvovich, nephew of Tsarina Natalia Kirillovna, cousin of Peter the Great, who loved him very much and often called him simply Lvovich ...
Biographical Dictionary
- - the name of several musical figures. Gustav W. wrote the symphonic poem "Zur Iliade" ...
- - 1) John-Christopher K., pastor in Livonia, follower of the Hernguthers. His correspondence with C. Gr. Staden in I. P. Fresenius, "Nachrichten von herruhutschen Sachen" ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- - 1) John-Christian K., pastor in Livonia, an adherent of the Hernguthers. His correspondence with C. Gr. Staden in I. P. Fresenius, "Nachrichten von herruhutschen Sachen" ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- - the son of the famous Roman woman Theodora the Younger, after the death of Emperor Otto I and Pope John XIII approved by him, an uprising against Benedict VI, elevated Boniface VII and Benedict VII to Pope, but had to flee from ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- - a noble family, which, without sufficient evidence, is considered to be descended from the princes of Galician. About Zakhara and Prokofy Petrovich L. see acc. article ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- - figures of the Time of Troubles, distinguished by courage and enterprise, but at the same time by the precariousness of convictions ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- - The Lyapunovs Zakhar and Prokofiy Petrovich are leaders of the Time of Troubles, distinguished by their courage and enterprise, but at the same time by the precariousness of their convictions ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- - a noble family, which, without sufficient evidence, is considered to be descended from the princes of Galician ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- - 1) Richard F., Baron, Saxon politician ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
- -: 1) Richard F., Baron, Saxon politician ...
Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Euphron
"Lyapunovs (figures of the Time of Troubles)" in books
PEOPLE OF A TIME OF TIME
From the book Heroes of Troubles the author Kozlyakov Vyacheslav NikolaevichPEOPLE OF A TIME OF TIME
THE SECRETS OF A TIME OF TIME
From the book Secrets of the Time of Troubles [with illustrations] the author Bushkov AlexanderSECRETS OF A TIME OF DISCUSSION I must admit honestly and right away: I have erred somewhat against the truth by giving this chapter such an enticing title. Partially speaking, in the events later called the Troubles, or the Time of Troubles, there are no special secrets - at least
Hero of the Time of Troubles
From the book Katyn. Lies made history the author Elena A. PrudnikovaHero of the Time of Troubles Before you - two people. Both of them are from Vilna, lived several kilometers from each other, studied at the same gymnasium. Just try to guess which of them will become a Bolshevik and which will become a Polish nationalist? So, the first one was born in 1877. A son
Secrets of the Time of Troubles
From the book Russia, which did not exist [Riddles, versions, hypotheses] the author Bushkov AlexanderSecrets of the Time of Troubles Forewarning I confess honestly and right away: I have erred somewhat against the truth by giving this chapter such an enticing title. Partially speaking, in the events later called the Troubles, or the Time of Troubles, there are no special secrets - at least
THE END OF A TIME OF EMERGENCY
From the book Secrets of Troubled Ages the author Mironov SergeyEND OF TIME OF TIME After the split between the zemstvo militia and the Cossacks, which led to the murder of Lyapunov, most servicemen lost faith in the ability to resist the invaders and went home. Mostly the Cossacks and those who remained near Moscow
1.3. MYTH-Makers of a Troubled Time
the author Reznikov Kirill Yurievich1.3. MYTH-Makers of a Troubled Time Source bias. Numerous records of contemporaries - Russians and foreigners - remained about the Time of Troubles. It seemed that it would not be difficult for historians to recreate a picture of events, but the deeper the analysis, the more doubts arise in
3.7. RESULTS OF A TIME OF DISCUSSION
From the book Myths and facts of Russian history [From the hard times of Troubles to the empire of Peter I] the author Reznikov Kirill Yurievich3.7. RESULTS OF THE TIME OF TIME Losses to Russia. Long-term civil war, invasions of Poles, Cossacks, Swedes, Crimeans, and Russian Cossacks led to the terrible devastation of Russia. It is estimated that during the Time of Troubles (including the famine of 1601-1603), between a third and a half died
Faces of the Time of Troubles
From the book Pre-Petrine Rus. Historical portraits. the author Fedorova Olga PetrovnaFaces of the Time of Troubles The first chosen Tsar Boris Godunov (1552-1605) did not belong to the Russian nobility. He was a descendant of the baptized Tatar Murza Chet, who came sometime in the XIV century. to serve the Moscow prince Ivan Kalita. Boris Godunov began his service from the position
THE EPOCH OF "TIME OF DISCUSSION"
From the book Passionary Russia the author Mironov Georgy EfimovichTHE EPOCH OF "TIME OF DISCUSSION" The era in which you, my dear reader, have to immerse yourself in this section, is extremely interesting and in many respects mysterious. In general, in my opinion, there are no uninteresting epochs in our national history, because each absorbs, along with falls and
The beginning of the Time of Troubles
the author Levkina EkaterinaThe beginning of the Time of Troubles The rumor that the last son of Ivan the Terrible, Dmitry, is still alive, appeared in 1603, shocked the Russians. Soon they learned that the name of the false prince was Yuri Otrepiev. This was the son of the poor Galich boyar Bogdan-Yakov, a streltsy centurion,
What is the reason for the Time of Troubles?
From the book of the Godunovs. Disappeared clan the author Levkina EkaterinaWhat is the reason for the Time of Troubles? Emelyanov-Luk'yanchikov believes that the characteristic of Russian society before the Time of Troubles is the characterization given by Doctor of Historical Sciences S.V. Perevezentsev to the consciousness of Ivan the Terrible during the oprichnina era.
Chronicle of a Time of Troubles
From the book Freedom - a starting point [About life, art and about yourself] author Weill PeterChronicle of the Time of Troubles Against the background of the social unrest of all, the mental turmoil of everyone is even more vividly manifested. And if the chaotic fermentation of the masses arouses fear and respect, if only by virtue of its scale, then personal chaos is noticeable above all by its ridiculous and ridiculous side. So, the elephant in
Time of Troubles crime
From the book of the Special Zone for the former the author Naumov Alexander ViktorovichCrime of the Time of Troubles - Everyone walks hunched over the zone, - complains convict R. - Because the sweatshirts for the zone are so poorly sewn ... when you put it on, it humps you. We have a punitive system. He will have to spend ten years in a strict regime.
Bards of a troubled time
From the book The Honor and Dishonor of a Nation the author Bushin Vladimir SergeevichBards of a troubled time
"Cops" of the Time of Troubles
The Brigade returns from the book. Triumph of gangster romance author Razzakov Fedor“Cops” of the Time of Troubles After the collapse of the USSR, the new authorities, marching in one team with organized crime, were interested in weakening the country's law enforcement system. To this end, Yeltsin deliberately struck both the KGB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
Wives of Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich.
Collegiate YouTube
-
1 / 5
The reign of Boris Godunov was accompanied by great upheavals for Russia. In 1601-1603, the country was struck by a severe famine due to a three-year crop failure. Due to the eruption of the Huaynaputin volcano, the summer of 1601 turned out to be extremely damp. It rained so often that according to the monk-writer of everyday life Avraamy Palitsyn, all "people fell into horror." In mid-August, there was a sharp cold snap, which destroyed all the vegetation. The old stocks of grain were only enough for a meager food until spring and for a new sowing. But the seeds did not sprout, drenched in heavy rains. A new crop failure brought "great glory ... people are scanty, just as in the pestilence the pestilence is not scanty ..." Tsar Boris Godunov took a number of measures to reduce hunger. He issued a decree, which set the maximum price for the grain for sale, and ordered the district governors to give out bread to the poor people from the city siege reserves. Hungry people rushed to the county towns. But there was not enough bread for everyone. Especially many walkers rushed to the capital for bread. Tsar Boris ordered that the hungry people be provided with "money" per day, which could buy a third of a pound of bread in Moscow. But even in Moscow there was not enough bread for all the arrivals. The bodies of those who died of hunger were strewn in the streets by the hundreds. In two years and four months, 127,000 dead were buried in Moscow.
The famine of 1601-1603, memorable in the Russian people, did not pass without leaving a trace for the people's consciousness. "To be in trouble" - said the people. And she came. In 1603, an uprising of the poor broke out near Moscow, led by Kholopko. Godunov's troops managed to suppress it with difficulty
Fedor II Godunov
The reign of Fyodor is the second shortest in the history of Russia. After the death of his father, Boris Godunov, he continued the war with False Dmitry I and relied on the Basmanov family, but could not stop the impostor. Soon the people of False Dmitry entered Moscow and killed Fyodor and his mother.
During his reign he created the first map of Russia.
Pretender (Dmitry)
At the end of 1604, a pretender to the royal throne appeared in Russia - the Pretender, a former monk of the Chudov Monastery in Moscow, Grigory Otrepiev. Declaring himself the escaped Tsarevich Dmitry, he, with the assistance of the Polish king Sigismund III, entered the Russian land. False Dmitry I with a support detachment freely reached Novgorod Seversky, but was stopped by the troops of Tsar Boris under the command of princes Trubetskoy and Peter Basmanov. On January 21, 1605, a bloody battle took place and the Pretender's detachment was defeated, and he himself went to Putivl, who sided with him.
On April 13, 1605, Boris Godunov died, and Moscow swore allegiance to his son Fedor. Many cities in Russia followed her example. But Peter Basmanov and his like-minded people embarked on the path of treason and, arriving in Putivl, swore allegiance to False Dmitry I, calling him tsar. Feeling such strong support, the Pretender sent a letter to the inhabitants of Moscow, in which he assured them of his mercy. Moscow, and with it other cities, recognized Grigory Otrepiev as the son of Ivan the Terrible and swore allegiance to the new tsar. At the same time, the Moscow mob invaded the Godunovs' palace, killed Fyodor Godunov and his mother, Maria Grigorievna. The daughter of Boris Godunov, Xenia, was forced by the boyars to leave for a monastery. The body of Boris Godunov was removed from the grave in the church of St. Michael and buried together with the bodies of his wife and son in the monastery of St. Barsanuphius on Sretenka (now the Sretensky monastery).
Semboyarshina
The Polish king Sigismund III decided to change the tactics of capturing Moscow and Russia. In the spring of 1610, he sent the hetmans Zholkevsky and Sapieha with troops to Moscow, which they surrounded. Skopin-Shuisky could not prevent them, as he was poisoned in April 1610 at a feast by his envious people. Before that, the Swedes abandoned the Russian troops and, having robbed Ladoga, left for Sweden. The hetmans secretly sent a letter to the Moscow boyars, in which they wrote that they had come with the intention of stopping the unnecessary bloodshed. And they suggested that the boyars, instead of Tsar Shuisky, elect to the Russian throne the son of Sigismund III, the prince Vladislav, who, according to them, would willingly accept the Orthodox faith. The same letter was sent to the boyars by King Sigismund III. Most of the Moscow boyars and some of the Muscovites wavered in loyalty to Tsar Shuisky, and in July 1610 he was deposed, forcibly tonsured a monk and sent to the Chudov Monastery.
In September 1610, the Muscovites allowed the army of Hetman Zholkevsky into the capital, who, having established his power in Moscow in the person of the Seven Boyars, took possession of the Moscow treasury and the tsar's treasures. After the deposition of Tsar Shuisky to the Russian throne, several contenders had views at once: False Dmitry II, who, although he lost many of his supporters, did not lose hope for the throne; the Polish prince Vladislav, who was called out to the kingdom by the Boyar Duma and part of the Muscovites; Polish king Sigismund III, who had a secret idea to become the Russian tsar himself.
Militias
Initially, Patriarch Hermogenes himself was inclined to agree to the election of Vladislav as Tsar of Moscow, on condition that the prince accepted the Orthodox faith and observed all Russian customs. However, discovering the plans of Sigismund and seeing in this the danger of the enslavement of Russia and the destruction of the Orthodox faith, Hermogenes, ignoring either the convictions of the Boyar Duma or the threats of the Poles, freed Muscovites from the oath to Vladislav and cursed him and the king. From that time on, he began to write and make appeals to the faithful sons of Russia, urging them to stand up for Orthodoxy and the Fatherland.
The second militia to free it from foreign invaders; convocation of the Zemsky Sobor 1612-1613 and the huge organizational work carried out on it by Prince Pozharsky on the choice of a new Russian tsar.
According to the 19th century historian V.O. Klyuchevsky, the Time of Troubles revealed two fundamental shortcomings that the Moscow state order suffered from. First, it was revealed that the political aspirations and claims of the Moscow boyars did not correspond to the nature of the supreme power and the people's view of it. The boyars wanted to limit the supreme power, but according to the popular view, it should have been unlimited. Secondly, a difficult and uneven distribution of state responsibilities between the classes of society was revealed, which left no room for either personal or class rights and sacrificed all private interests to the state.
Under the influence of these shortcomings, the unrest in its development from the solution of the dynastic question passed into the socio-political struggle of the lower classes of society against the higher ones. However, this socio-political struggle did not lead to the disintegration of society even under the conditions of the country's intervention by foreign invaders and the Cossack "freemen" who joined them. The invasion of the Polish-Lithuanian and Cossack hordes awakened a sense of national and religious unity in all social strata of society. The Time of Troubles ended with the struggle and victory of the entire Russian zemstvo community over foreign invaders and their supporters.
Notes (edit)
Sources of
- Chronicle of many revolts. Second edition. - M .: 1788.
- Malinovsky A.F. Biographical information about Prince Pozharsky. - M .: 1817.
- Glukharev I. N. Prince Pozharsky and Nizhny Novgorod citizen Minin, or the liberation of Moscow in 1612. Historical legend of the 17th century. - M .: 1848.
- Smirnov S.K.Biography of Prince Dmitry Mikhailovich Pozharsky. - M .: 1852.
- Zabelin I.E. Minin and Pozharsky. Straight lines and curves in the Time of Troubles. - M .: 1883.
- Klyuchevsky V.O. A short guide to Russian history. - M .: 1906.
- Shmatov V.E. PUREKH. Historical study of local lore. - Kirov: 2004.
The pseudonym under which the politician Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov writes. ... In 1907 he acted without success as a candidate for the 2nd State Duma in St. Petersburg.
Alyabyev, Alexander Alexandrovich, Russian amateur composer. ... The spirit of the times was reflected in A.'s romances. As then-Russian literature, they are sentimental, sometimes corny. Most of them are written in a minor key. They almost do not differ from the first romances of Glinka, but the latter has stepped far ahead, and A. remained in place and is now outdated.
Filthy Idolische (Odolische) - an epic hero ...
Pedrillo (Pietro-Mira Pedrillo) is a famous jester, a Neapolitan, at the beginning of the reign of Anna Ioannovna, who arrived in St. Petersburg to sing the roles of buffa and play the violin at the Italian court opera.
Dal, Vladimir Ivanovich
Numerous stories and stories of him suffer from the absence of real artistic creativity, deep feeling and a broad outlook on the people and life. Dahl did not go further than everyday pictures, anecdotes captured on the fly, told in a peculiar language, smartly, lively, with a well-known humor, sometimes falling into mannerisms and jokes.Varlamov, Alexander Egorovich
On the theory of musical composition, Varlamov, apparently, did not work at all and remained with the meager knowledge that he could have taken out of the chapel, which at that time did not care at all about the general musical development of his pupils.Nekrasov Nikolay Alekseevich
None of our great poets have so many verses that are directly bad from all points of view; he himself bequeathed many poems not to be included in his collected works. Nekrasov is not sustained even in his masterpieces: and in them a prosaic, sluggish verse suddenly stabs the ear.Gorky, Maxim
By his origin, Gorky does not at all belong to those scum of society, which he sang in literature.Zhikharev Stepan Petrovich
His tragedy "Artaban" did not see either a print or a scene, since, in the opinion of Prince Shakhovsky and the author's frank response, it was a mixture of nonsense and nonsense.Sherwood-Verny Ivan Vasilievich
“Sherwood,” writes one contemporary, “in society, even in St. Petersburg, was not called anything other than the nasty Sherwood ... his comrades in military service shunned him and called him the dog's name“ fidelka ”.Obolyaninov Petr Khrisanfovich
... Field Marshal Kamenskiy publicly called him "a state thief, a bribe-taker, a stupid fool."Popular biographies
Peter I Tolstoy Lev Nikolaevich Catherine II Romanovs Dostoevsky Fyodor Mikhailovich Lomonosov Mikhail Vasilievich Alexander III Suvorov Alexander Vasilievich
Loading ...