Time of Troubles(Troubles) - a deep spiritual, economic, social, and foreign policy crisis that befell Russia at the end of the 16th - beginning of the 17th century. The Troubles coincided with a dynastic crisis and the struggle of boyar groups for power.
Causes of the Troubles:
1. A severe systemic crisis of the Moscow state, largely associated with the reign of Ivan the Terrible. Conflicting domestic and foreign policies led to the destruction of many economic structures. Weakened key institutions and led to loss of life.
2. Important western lands were lost (Yam, Ivan-gorod, Korela)
3. Social conflicts within the Moscow state sharply escalated, affecting all societies.
4. Intervention of foreign states (Poland, Sweden, England, etc. regarding land issues, territory, etc.)
Dynastic crisis:
1584 After the death of Ivan the Terrible, the throne was taken by his son Fedor. The de facto ruler of the state was the brother of his wife Irina, boyar Boris Fedorovich Godunov. In 1591, under mysterious circumstances, he died in Uglich. youngest son Grozny, Dmitry. In 1598, Fedor dies, the dynasty of Ivan Kalita is suppressed.
Course of events:
1. 1598-1605 The key figure of this period is Boris Godunov. He was an energetic, ambitious, capable statesman. In difficult conditions - economic devastation, a difficult international situation - he continued the policies of Ivan the Terrible, but with less brutal measures. Godunov pursued a successful foreign policy. Under him, further advancement into Siberia took place, and the southern regions of the country were developed. Russian positions in the Caucasus strengthened. After a long war with Sweden, the Peace of Tyavzin was concluded in 1595 (near Ivan-Gorod).
Russia regained its lost lands on the Baltic coast - Ivan-Gorod, Yam, Koporye, Korelu. An attack by the Crimean Tatars on Moscow was prevented. In 1598, Godunov, with a 40,000-strong noble militia, personally led a campaign against Khan Kazy-Girey, who did not dare to enter Russian lands. Construction of fortifications was carried out in Moscow ( White City, Zemlyanoy Gorod), in border towns in the south and west of the country. With his active participation, the patriarchate was established in Moscow in 1598. The Russian Church became equal in rights in relation to other Orthodox churches.
To overcome economic devastation, B. Godunov provided some benefits to the nobility and townspeople, while at the same time taking further steps to strengthen the feudal exploitation of the broad masses of the peasantry. For this, in the late 1580s - early 1590s. The government of B. Godunov conducted a census of peasant households. After the census, the peasants finally lost the right to move from one landowner to another. Scribe books, in which all peasants were recorded, became the legal basis for their serfdom from the feudal lords. A bonded slave was obliged to serve his master throughout his entire life.
In 1597, a decree was issued to search for fugitive peasants. This law introduced “prescribed summers” - a five-year period for the search and return of fugitive peasants, along with their wives and children, to their masters, whom they were listed in the scribe books.
In February 1597, a decree on indentured servants was issued, according to which anyone who served as a free agent for more than six months became an indentured servant and could be freed only after the death of the master. These measures could not but aggravate class contradictions in the country. The popular masses were dissatisfied with the policies of the Godunov government.
In 1601-1603 There was a crop failure in the country, famine and food riots began. Every day in Russia hundreds of people died in the city and in the countryside. As a result of two lean years, bread prices rose 100 times. According to contemporaries, almost a third of the population died in Russia during these years.
Boris Godunov, in search of a way out of the current situation, allowed the distribution of bread from state bins, allowed slaves to leave their masters and look for opportunities to feed themselves. But all these measures were unsuccessful. Rumors spread among the population that punishment had been extended to people for violating the order of succession to the throne, for the sins of Godunov, who had seized power. Mass uprisings began. The peasants united together with the urban poor into armed detachments and attacked the boyars and landowners' farms.
In 1603, an uprising of serfs and peasants broke out in the center of the country, led by Cotton Kosolap. He managed to gather significant forces and moved with them to Moscow. The uprising was brutally suppressed, and Khlopko was executed in Moscow. Thus began the first peasant war. In the peasant war of the early 17th century. three large periods can be distinguished: the first (1603 - 1605), the most important event of which was the Cotton rebellion; the second (1606 - 1607) - a peasant uprising under the leadership of I. Bolotnikov; third (1608-1615) - the decline of the peasant war, accompanied by a number of powerful uprisings of peasants, townspeople, and Cossacks
During this period, False Dmitry I appeared in Poland, who received the support of the Polish gentry and entered the territory of the Russian state in 1604. He was supported by many Russian boyars, as well as the masses, who hoped to ease their situation after the “legitimate tsar” came to power. After the unexpected death of B. Godunov (April 13, 1605), False Dmitry, at the head of the army that had come over to his side, solemnly entered Moscow on June 20, 1605 and was proclaimed tsar.
Once in Moscow, False Dmitry was in no hurry to fulfill the obligations given to the Polish magnates, since this could hasten his overthrow. Having ascended the throne, he confirmed the legislative acts adopted before him that enslaved the peasants. By making a concession to the nobles, he displeased the boyar nobility. Faith in the “good king” also disappeared among the masses. Discontent intensified in May 1606, when two thousand Poles arrived in Moscow for the wedding of the impostor with the daughter of the Polish governor Marina Mniszech. In the Russian capital, they behaved as if they were in a conquered city: they drank, rioted, raped, and robbed.
On May 17, 1606, the boyars, led by Prince Vasily Shuisky, hatched a conspiracy, raising the population of the capital to revolt. False Dmitry I was killed.
2. 1606-1610 This stage is associated with the reign of Vasily Shuisky, the first “boyar tsar”. He ascended the throne immediately after the death of False Dmitry I by decision of Red Square, giving the cross-kissing record good attitude to the boyars. On the throne, Vasily Shuisky faced many problems (Bolotnikov's uprising, False Dmitry I, Polish troops, famine).
Meanwhile, seeing that the idea with impostors had failed, and using the conclusion of an alliance between Russia and Sweden as an excuse, Poland, which was at war with Sweden, declared war on Russia. In September 1609, King Sigismund III besieged Smolensk, then, having defeated the Russian troops, moved to Moscow. Instead of helping, Swedish troops captured Novgorod lands. This is how the Swedish intervention began in northwestern Russia.
Under these conditions, a revolution took place in Moscow. Power passed into the hands of a government of seven boyars (“Seven Boyars”). When the Polish troops of Hetman Zholkiewski approached Moscow in August 1610, the boyar rulers, fearing a popular uprising in the capital itself, in an effort to preserve their power and privileges, committed treason to their homeland. They invited 15-year-old Vladislav, the son of the Polish king, to the Russian throne. A month later, the boyars secretly allowed Polish troops into Moscow at night. This was a direct betrayal of national interests. The threat of foreign enslavement loomed over Russia.
3. 1611-1613 Patriarch Hermogenes in 1611 initiated the creation of a zemstvo militia near Ryazan. In March it besieged Moscow, but failed due to internal divisions. The second militia was created in the fall, in Novgorod. It was headed by K. Minin and D. Pozharsky. Letters were sent to cities calling for support for the militia, whose task was to liberate Moscow from the invaders and create a new government. The militia called themselves free people, headed by the zemstvo council and temporary orders. On October 26, 1612, the militia managed to take the Moscow Kremlin. By decision of the boyar duma, it was dissolved.
Results of the Troubles:
1. Total number deaths equal to one third of the country's population.
2. Economic catastrophe, the financial system and transport communications were destroyed, vast territories were taken out of agricultural use.
3. Territorial losses (Chernigov land, Smolensk land, Novgorod-Seversk land, Baltic territories).
4. Weakening the position of domestic merchants and entrepreneurs and strengthening foreign merchants.
5. The emergence of a new royal dynasty on February 7, 1613. Zemsky Sobor elected 16-year-old Mikhail Romanov. He had to solve three main problems - restoring the unity of the territories, restoring the state mechanism and economy.
As a result of peace negotiations in Stolbov in 1617, Sweden returned the Novgorod land to Russia, but retained the Izhora land with the banks of the Neva and the Gulf of Finland. Russia has lost its only access to the Baltic Sea.
In 1617 - 1618 Another attempt by Poland to seize Moscow and elevate Prince Vladislav to the Russian throne failed. In 1618, in the village of Deulino, a truce with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was signed for 14.5 years. Vladislav did not renounce his claims to the Russian throne, citing the treaty of 1610. The Smolensk and Seversky lands remained behind the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Despite the difficult conditions of peace with Sweden and the truce with Poland, a long-awaited respite came for Russia. The Russian people defended the independence of their Motherland.
FGOUVPO "Chelyabinsk State Academy Culture and Art"
Institute Distance Learning
Department of History
"The Troubles of the early 17th century: prerequisites, stages and consequences"
Completed by: student gr. 150, BID,
Balaeva N.Yu.
Checked by: Associate Professor, Candidate of Historical Sciences
Ustyantseva N.F.
Chelyabinsk - 2011
Introduction. Goals and objectives of the work
Chapter 2. Stages of the Time of Troubles
1 Board of Boris Godunov
4 "Seven Boyars"
Chapter 3. Consequences of the Troubles
Conclusion
Introduction
Troubles Godunov False Dmitry Seven Boyars
By the beginning of the 17th century, the process of formation Russian statehood did not have complete completion; contradictions accumulated in it, resulting in a severe crisis. Covering the economy, the socio-political sphere, and public morality, this crisis was called “The Troubles.” The Time of Troubles is a period of virtual anarchy, chaos and unprecedented social upheaval.
The concept of “Troubles” came into historiography from the popular vocabulary, meaning, first of all, anarchy and extreme disorder in public life. Contemporaries of the Troubles assessed it as a punishment that befell people for their sins. This understanding of events was significantly reflected in the position of S. M. Solovyov, who understood the crisis of the early 17th century as “general moral decay” (11, p. 246).
"Great Famine" 1601-1603 doomed the country to immeasurable suffering, armed groups of “robberies” appeared. Unstable state power, armed uprisings, the appearance of impostors - all this foreshadowed and gave rise to the Troubles in Russia.
We can talk about a variety of social, political or other factors, each of which in itself brought the catastrophe of statehood closer. But, most importantly, in my opinion, the Troubles begin, first of all, in the thoughts of the people of that time. People have stopped believing in state power, and the concept of a national Russian state is gradually eroding in their minds. When a split occurs within the people themselves, the state begins to decompose. Monarchical power loses its flavor, its true character, with such a scrupulous attitude towards the inheritance of power, suddenly a stranger, an impostor, easily finds itself on the throne. The people greet him and recognize him as king. People plunged into strife lose their spiritual guidelines, and grave vices come to the fore. It is clear that in troubled times, when the usual way of life breaks down, it is very difficult to preserve the human image, to find the strength to help others, to restrain oneself from crime, when permissiveness occurs all around (primarily among government authorities). Thirst for profit, neglect of the sacred gift human life, immorality - all this leads to the degeneration of the nation as such.
In our time, there are also opponents to strengthening the state and its independence. Remembering the events of the distant 17th century and applying them to the present, it is necessary to learn from the mistakes of our ancestors, to learn from history, so that this does not happen again on Russian soil.
The first attempts to explain the events of the Time of Troubles were compiled in a literary review of the events “The Tale of How to Revenge all seeing eye Christ to Boris Godunov" in May-June 1606. “The Tale” debunked the Pretender and exalted Vasily Shuisky. The fall of Shuisky and Polish claims to the Russian throne gave rise to a whole wave of “flying” literature; the practical effect of these writings was such that the Polish king Sigismund in 1611 complained to the Moscow boyars about the offensive leaflets written by the Russians about him and widely addressed to Russia.
The major historian S. F. Platonov denied the reliability and completeness of the “factual material” to the monuments of literary battles contemporary with the Troubles, and believed that “more objective and meaningful descriptions of the Troubles appeared in our writing later, in those legends that were compiled or accepted the final form during the reign of Mikhail Romanov" (10, p. 22). V. O. Klyuchevsky, objecting to Platonov, wrote: “ Historical facts- not just incidents; ideas, views, feelings, impressions of people of a certain time - the same facts and very important ... "(10, p. 22)
With the accession of Romanov, the need arose for a new understanding of the Troubles. In the 20s of the 17th century, surrounded by Patriarch Philaret, the official chronicle “The New Chronicler” was written (concluded in 1630). During these same years, “Another Legend” was compiled.
“Another Legend” is a remarkable piece of evidence of the historical self-awareness of the 20s of the 17th century. Made up of once independent literary works and documents of the Troubles, i.e. combining the advantages of early reflections of the Troubles (ideas, views, feelings, impressions) with the advantages of later works (completeness of “factual material”).
About 30 Russian works about the Troubles of the early 17th century and more than 50 foreign ones have survived. Among them are “The Tale of a Vision to a Certain Spiritual Man”, “The Tale of a Certain War”, “Vremennik” by Ivan Semenov, “Notes” by Jerome Horsey, “Reliable and Truthful Report” by Peter Petrei, etc.
The history of the Troubles has given rise to extensive historiography. Almost all famous historians wrote about this period and expressed different points of view.
S. F. Platonov considered the Troubles as a complex social and political crisis prepared by the entire course of development of Russia in the second half of the 16th century (11, p. 247).
The historian I.E. Zabelin viewed the Troubles “as a struggle between herd and national principles” (11, p. 248). The representative of the herd principle was the boyars, who sacrificed national interests for the sake of their own privileges. Such an idea was not alien to Klyuchevsky.
A. I. Pliguzov writes in the article “Historical Lessons of the Time of Troubles” that “having confused the old order and hastily built a new one, the Time of Troubles did not abolish the previous contradictions in the development of the country, but cast a different light on these contradictions, awakening consciousness and calling for historical life the entire mass of the population without exception. The Time of Troubles was the first national movement, equal in scale to the beginning of the development of Siberia and the southern outskirts and the future church schism. All these upheavals came from one root and were fed by the eternal conflicts of Russian history... The Time of Troubles was the threshold over which Russia needed to cross in order to enter a new time” (10, p. 411).
N.M. Karamzin called the Troubles “a terrible and absurd thing” (11, p. 246), the result of “depravity”, gradually prepared by the tyranny of Ivan the Terrible and the lust for power of Boris, guilty of the murder of Dmitry and the suppression of the legitimate dynasty. During the Time of Troubles, wrote N.M. Karamzin, the people realized their strength and “played kings, having learned that they could be elected and overthrown by his power. Internal barbarians raged in the depths of Russia, but they were directed by the Poles, N.M. Karamzin argued, so the king was “the culprit and nourisher of our rebellions” (11, p. 246).
V. O. Klyuchevsky developed that the basis of the Troubles was a social struggle, that “the very tax system of the Moscow state gave rise to social discord; arising from the difficult situation of the oppressed lower classes: when “the social lower classes rose, the Troubles turned into a social struggle, into the extermination of the upper classes by the lower classes” (11, p. 247).
L. A. Stanislavsky and a number of other researchers of historical events showed that the Time of Troubles gave birth to another subject of political struggle, namely the free Cossacks. “This phenomenon, previously unprecedented in the main territory of the country, became one of the main components of the entire Troubles. The digestion of this emerging class, which objectively laid claim to replacing the nobility, continued until the mid-17th century” (8, p. 10).
The Troubles taught an important lesson to the Russian people. Kozma Minin’s call - not to seek personal benefits, but to give everything to the common cause - resonated with the majority ordinary people, symbolizing the turn of society towards a moral civic principle. The people, having suffered from the unrest, used their last money to gather a militia to restore calm in the country, taking the fate of the state into their own hands. What happened was what S. M. Solovyov called a “feat of purification,” when “the people, not seeing any external help, delved into their inner, spiritual world in order to extract the means of salvation from there” (11, p. 246). During the Time of Troubles, the ruling elite went bankrupt, and the people, saving the state, discovered, in the words of I. E. Zabelin, “such a wealth of moral forces and such strength of their historical and civil foundations that it was impossible to imagine in them” (2, p. 47).
Goals and objectives of the work.
· Reveal the essence of the current situation in Russia at the beginning of the 17th century;
· Define the prerequisites and give the concept of “time of troubles”;
· Outline the role of government officials during the Time of Troubles;
· Show the role of national unity in overcoming the Troubles and protecting the country’s national independence;
· Give a general idea of the consequences of the Time of Troubles for Russia.
Chapter 1. Social and political crisis at the beginning of the 17th century. Background of the Troubles
The events of the late 16th - early 17th centuries, called the “Time of Troubles,” became for the Russian state, according to V. O. Klyuchevsky, “a terrible shock that shook its deepest foundations” (7, p. 285).
The preconditions for the Troubles originated during the reign of Ivan the Terrible, whose policies were carried out at great expense. The government's efforts to strengthen the state and ensure border security were perceived by the people as necessary. The people were ready to sacrifice themselves for national construction. However, the cruel will of the king “pushed” him into the background. The unbridled behavior of the guardsmen and their extreme unceremoniousness in choosing political means dealt a heavy blow to public morality and instilled doubts and instability in the minds of people. The situation was aggravated by economic difficulties resulting from the depletion of the country's forces in the Livonian War and DC voltage on the southern borders, created by the Crimean Khanate.
The causes of the Troubles were the aggravation of social, class, dynastic and international relations at the end of the reign of Ivan 4 and under his successors.
By the beginning of the 17th century, a crisis in economic and political life had matured in the Russian state, which put the country on the brink of destruction of state principles and actual collapse. What was the expression of the political crisis, which then unfolded more strongly during the Time of Troubles? What were the first manifestations of the crisis?
Since the middle of the 15th century, the question of the principle of inheritance of supreme power was no longer a subject of political struggle. After dynastic war in the Moscow princely house of Rurikovich, the problem was solved by the co-government of the ruling great sovereign by his heir, the eldest son.
On March 1584, Tsar Ivan IV (the Terrible) died. His father killed his eldest son, Ivan, in a fit of anger in 1581; the youngest, Dmitry, was only two years old, and he lived with his mother, the seventh wife of the king, Maria Naga in Uglich, which was given to the prince as an inheritance. Grozny's successor was his second son Fedor. Fyodor was, as his contemporaries called him, a “sanctified king,” who avoided worldly vanity and thought only about heavenly things. In a word, “in a cell or in a cave - as Karamzin put it - Tsar Fedor would have been more in place than on the throne” (6, p. 204).
Ivan the Terrible, realizing during his lifetime that the throne would pass after him to the “blessed”, created a kind of regency council under his son. At first, Nikita Romanovich Yuryev, the Tsar’s uncle, enjoyed the greatest power in him. But he died, and the influence of another guardian, Boris Godunov, who was the Tsar's brother-in-law, grew. Taking advantage of his higher position and the support of his sister-tsarina, Boris, gradually pushing aside other guardians, actually began to rule the state alone. And he ruled wisely and carefully throughout the 14 years of Fyodor’s reign. It was a time of rest for the state and the people, who had experienced the recent fears and horrors of the pogroms of the oprichnina.
During the actual reign of Godunov, the accelerated construction of stone kremlins began in Smolensk, Astrakhan, and Kazan. Moscow received strong walls of the White and Zemlyanoy cities, and new fort cities arose on the outskirts of the state. He took care of the serving people, partially freeing them from paying taxes, and established good relations with foreign countries.
And, nevertheless, the people did not have complete trust in Godunov: he was suspected of duplicity and deceit. After the tragic death of Tsarevich Dmitry in Uglich (1591), few doubted: who, if not Godunov, benefited from the death of a possible contender for the throne? And although an investigative commission headed by Godunov’s secret enemy, Prince Vasily Shuisky, sent to Uglich, confirmed that the prince was not killed, but that he himself stabbed himself to death in a fit of illness (the prince suffered from epilepsy).
Through the lips of Patriarch Job, the work of the commission was approved, and he completely agreed with the conclusion about the accidental death of the prince. But the patriarch pursued a different goal. He needed to destroy possible heirs to the throne from the Nagi family. He made a speech before the highest spiritual ranks, devoting it to accusing the Nagi of treason to the state and power, i.e. directly authorizing reprisals against them. On the basis of the patriarchal verdict, Tsar Fedor ordered the capture of Nagikh and the Uglichites, “who showed up in the case.” An investigation into Nagikh’s “treason” has begun. Having completed the investigation, the government carried out mass executions of Uglich residents (up to 200 people), many exiles were taken to Siberia, others were sent to prison. Queen Maria Nagoya (mother of Tsarevich Dmitry) and her brothers had their property confiscated and imprisoned. But the clergy found it necessary to forcibly tonsure Maria Nagaya into a nun and send her into exile.
In January 1598, the childless Tsar Fyodor died, Fyodor's widow Irina entered a monastery. Thus, the end of the Rurik dynasty comes. The generally accepted position of supreme power was destroyed. At that time, politics was absolutely inaccessible to more than 90% of the country's population. She was inaccessible practically, but most importantly - in consciousness. Society considered only one position, according to which the only legitimate sovereign is the king by birth. This was quite enough. Therefore, after the death of Tsar Fedor and the death of Tsarevich Dmitry, a significant question arises in the state: who will be the tsar? There is confusion in society about what will happen in the country now? A dynastic crisis ensues.
At this time, Godunov, using the support of Patriarch Job, managed to rally devoted people around himself - and... the electoral Zemsky Sobor (even during the coronation of Feodor, the Zemsky Sobor was assembled with elected representatives from the localities, primarily the provincial nobility) elects him tsar. In the texts of that time, the election of Boris was justified, first of all, by preference higher powers, but also with very real motives: the results of his activities in governing the country under Tsar Fedor and his kinship (through his sister, Tsar Fedor’s wife) with the bygone dynasty.
Here it is worth noting another factor that, by the time of the Time of Troubles, an excessive number of people of anti-state consciousness had accumulated - these were the free Cossacks. Historian Sergei Solovyov characterizes them emotionally: “Enemies of every outfit, people who lived in turmoil” (10, p. 246). The Cossacks really were the striking force of the Troubles. But they are only her vanguard. They were joined not only by the boyars with their selfish interests, but also by the common people.
Historian R. G. Skrynnikov also notes that “the attraction of Cossack freemen to the sovereign service, the distribution of estates to the “old” Cossacks accelerated the process of their inclusion in the federal structure. But for the most part, the free Cossacks resisted the advance of the serfdom state. During the Time of Troubles, the state had to reap the fruits of the policy of subjugating the Cossack outskirts” (10, p. 8).
Chapter 2. Stages of the Troubles
1 Board of Boris Godunov
The accession of Godunov, who did not belong to any of the dynasties by origin, unlike his competitors - the Mstislavskys and Shuiskys, further intensified the strife among the highest nobility. He aroused the indignation and anger of the well-born nobles, who had suffered a lot under Ivan the Terrible and now wanted to limit the omnipotence of the elected tsar. The new tsar was not distinguished by state farsightedness. He turned out to be the first “bookless” tsar in Russia, i.e. practically illiterate. Lack of education, despite having common sense, and mind, narrowed the circle of his views, and selfishness and extreme selfishness prevented him from becoming a truly significant figure of his time.
However, some development trends have emerged in the country. It was planned to improve the economy of military landowners. A whole series of events was designed to put an end to the desolation of the center of the state. For example, the so-called posad settlement was carried out - a census of the population of towns' settlements and hundreds, the purpose of which was to return people who had gone to privately owned yards and settlements to the cities. Godunov’s foreign policy activities contributed to some easing of social tension in the country; it favored the development of the south and southeast of the country and advancement into Siberia. In the Volga region, in the southern and Siberian lands, a stream of peasants, serfs and artisans poured in, fleeing hunger and oppression. Fortresses and cities were built on new frontiers, and uninhabited lands were developed. In implementing his political program, Godunov relied on a well-coordinated state apparatus. He attracted many outstanding administrators to government activities and streamlined the activities of orders. A major success was the establishment of the patriarchate in Russia. The first Russian patriarch was Job, a supporter of Godunov. The rank and prestige of the Russian Church increased, it finally became equal in rights in relation to other Orthodox churches.
But Boris Godunov made a big strategic mistake. Having been elected to the kingdom by the Zemsky Sobor, he, according to V. O. Klyuchevsky, “should have held on most tightly to his significance as a zemstvo chosen one, and he tried to join the old dynasty...” (7, p. 246) This contributed to the growth of discontent among the nobles boyars and high nobility. In addition, the nobility and the boyars were outraged by the fact that Boris sought to destroy the tribal principle of forming the Boyar Duma, replacing it with a family-corporate one, when proximity to the ruler played a decisive role in appointments to the Duma. The serving nobility was not satisfied with the policy of Godunov’s government, which was unable to stop the flight of peasants, which significantly reduced the profitability of their estates; the townspeople opposed increased tax oppression; The Orthodox clergy were dissatisfied with the reduction of their privileges and strict subordination to autocratic power. Thus, the achievements of Boris Godunov’s policy were fragile, since they were based on the overstrain of the country’s socio-economic potential, which inevitably led to a social explosion.
Boris, feeling the discontent of the boyars and fearing for his power, created a network of police surveillance, the support of which was denunciations and slander. Disgraces, torture, and executions began. The king himself now spent all his time in the palace, rarely went out to the people and did not accept petitions, as previous kings did.
The beginning of the 17th century (1601-1603) turned out to be an unusually disastrous time for the people: crop failures followed year after year, and prices increased accordingly (more than 100 times). The people became embittered. Discontent spread across all sectors of society. Hunger riots, robberies, theft, pestilence began...
“The Troubles began with the “great innocent blood” of the boy Dmitry and was the payment of the earth for this blood; but the blood of the prince is also an atoning sacrifice for the Russian land, ensuring salvation for those who go through repentance,” writes historian A. Pliguzov (10, p. 409).
Trying to ease social tension, Godunov's government in 1601 temporarily allowed the transfer of peasants from one landowner to another. Government work was organized in Moscow, including the completion of the construction of the Ivan the Great Bell Tower in the Kremlin. Bread from the royal granaries was distributed free of charge. But this could not save the country's population from extinction. In the capital alone, 127 thousand people died in two years. Usury and rampant speculation flourished. Large landowners, boyars, monasteries, and even Patriarch Job himself kept huge reserves in their storerooms, expecting a new rise in price. Thus, 250 thousand pounds of grain were concentrated in the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery, which would be enough to feed 10 thousand people for a year. Mass escapes of peasants and slaves, refusals to pay duties continued even more intensely. Especially a lot went to the Don and Volga, where the free Cossacks lived.
In 1603, a wave of numerous uprisings of the starving common people grew, especially in the south of the country. A large detachment of rebels under the command of Cotton Kosolap operated (1603-1604) near Moscow itself. The uprising was brutally suppressed, and Khlopok was executed in Moscow. But this did not improve the situation in the state. The difficult economic situation within the country led to a decline in the authority of the government of Boris Godunov. The people became convinced that all this was happening because of Tsar Boris, because “his kingdom is not blessed by heaven”; If the Godunov family establishes itself on the throne, then the Russian land will perish.
So, the first attempt of Russian society to overcome the Troubles ended in failure. Godunov became a victim of taking the risk of being the first chosen tsar. The people could not come to terms with the idea of a chosen king. Neither the people nor Godunov himself believed in his being chosen by God, i.e. in the fact that the Lord God himself entrusted Godunov with the Russian land for management.
2 Accession and reign of False Dmitry 1
The country has long been ripening the idea that the “true tsar” should come, and then the troubles and misfortunes in Russia will stop. In conditions of economic and social crisis, a three-year famine, such ideas received massive development, and the legend of the prince-savior became a victorious banner during the Time of Troubles. In terms of content, this is nothing more than a restoration of the monarchical principle, according to which the only legitimate king, as mentioned earlier, is the king by birth. The real king had to return - for the good of his subjects - the throne that had been illegally taken from him.
In 1604, talk began to circulate in Moscow that Tsarevich Dmitry, the son of Ivan the Terrible, miraculously survived and did not die in Uglich in 1591, but was coming from Lithuania to claim his parental throne. This is how the main figure of the Time of Troubles, False Dmitry 1, appears. Who this person really was is still not known exactly. Although there has long been an opinion, dating back to Godunov, that the impostor was the son of a Galician petty nobleman, Yuri Otrepiev, monk Gregory, later a monk of the Chudov Monastery, who fled to Lithuania.
The named Dmitry was supported by the Polish king Sigismund, however, on strict conditions: having ascended the throne, Dmitry would return Smolensk and the Seversk land to the Polish crown, allow the construction of churches, assist Sigismund in acquiring the Swedish crown, and would promote the unification of the Moscow state with Poland. The Polish governor Yuri Mniszek also demanded his conditions from Dmitry - to marry his daughter Marina, give her possession of Novgorod and Pskov, and pay Mniszek’s debts. Dmitry made promises to both the king and Mnishek, but subsequently fulfilled only one thing - he married Marina, with whom he was madly in love.
The Poles needed False Dmitry in order to begin aggression against Russia, disguising it with the appearance of a struggle to return the throne to the rightful heir. V. O. Klyuchevsky rightly wrote that False Dmitry was “baked in a Polish oven, and leavened in Moscow” (3, p. 94).
Having received 40 thousand zlotys from the Polish king and taking advantage of the people's dissatisfaction with Tsar Boris, Dmitry writes letters to the Moscow people and Cossacks, in which he calls himself the legitimate heir to the Russian throne. In October 1604, False Dmitry entered the southern outskirts of Russia, engulfed in unrest and uprisings. As he approaches the Moscow borders, his strength increases, Russians arrive at him from different directions and swear allegiance. By the beginning of 1605, more than 20 thousand people gathered under the banner of the “prince”. In January 1605, in the vicinity of the village of Dobrynichi, Kamaritsa volost, a battle took place between the troops of the impostor and the royal prince Mstislavsky. The defeat was complete: False Dietrios 1 miraculously escaped to Putivl.
In the midst of the struggle against False Dmitry, on April 13, 1605, at the age of 53, Tsar Boris Godunov unexpectedly died. The people, it would seem, swore allegiance to 16-year-old Fyodor Godunov without a murmur, but everywhere they heard: “Boris’s children will not reign for long! Dmitry will come to Moscow.” And indeed, Fedor did not reign for even two months. The boyars also did not recognize the new king.
In May 1605, the tsar's army, led by the governors Pyotr Basmanov and the princes Golitsyn, went over to the side of False Dmitry. Knowing about the approach of False Dmitry 1, the Moscow boyars organized a coup d'etat and provoked popular indignation in the capital. The boyars brutally dealt with Godunov’s family: they strangled the Queen Mother Maria, strangled the desperately resisting Tsar Fyodor Borisovich, and imprisoned his beautiful sister Ksenia in a monastery. The body of Boris Godunov was thrown out of the royal tomb and, together with the bodies of his widow and son, was buried in the courtyard of the poorest Varsonofevsky Monastery (only after the Time of Troubles were their bodies reburied in the Trinity-Sergei Lavra).
June 1605 Moscow swore allegiance to the impostor who settled in the Kremlin. And on July 18, the queen, nun Marfa (the widow of Ivan the Terrible), arrived in Moscow. She, of course, recognized her son as a “miracle” who survived. Now no one doubted that the “true king” was on the throne. Easy to use, with a cheerful, gentle character, willing and able to delve into state affairs, he quickly gained affection among the people.
And yet the new king made mistakes that cost him his life and doomed the country to more worst times. The Russians were offended by the preference he gave to foreigners, emphasizing their superiority and despising Russian prejudices and customs. Particular irritation was caused by Dmitry's wedding with Maria Mniszech and her coronation. The nobles and servants, who settled in the houses of Moscow residents, behaved impudently and arrogantly, like conquerors. All over the country it was openly said that a Polish protege had sat on the Russian throne. But, despite everything that was happening, the Moscow people loved their tsar and were unlikely to rise up against him.
The death of Dmitry was predetermined by a new boyar conspiracy. The reason for the performance was the wedding of False Dmitry with Marina Mnishek - the Catholic woman was crowned royal crown Orthodox state. The Russians were very scrupulous in matters of succession to the throne and the religion of their sovereigns. And now there were two reigning persons on the throne - an impostor, no one doubted this, and a foreigner - a Catholic. The son of a Catholic woman could become the Russian Tsar. The boyars did not want to tolerate this. On the night of May 17, 1606, an uprising of the townspeople began. The conspirators broke into the Kremlin and killed False Dmitry 1. Thus, after eleven months, the reign of this mysterious person ended.
The second attempt to overcome the Troubles also ended in failure. False Dmitry I did not fit into the traditional Russian ideas about God's chosen sovereign, and did not find support and understanding in Russian society.
3 The reign of Vasily Shuisky. False Dmitry 2
During the popular indignation against False Dmitry I, Vasily Shuisky, who was at the head of the boyar conspiracy against the impostor, was “called out” by the tsar from Lobnoye Mesto on Red Square. Vasily Shuisky was a representative of the most noble and noble boyar family, which was in very close kinship with the Rurikovichs. But formally power passed into the hands of the Boyar Duma.
The internal political situation of the state continued to deteriorate. The country was agitated by rumors about the rescue of Tsarevich Dmitry. A mass uprising began in the south, the center of which was the city of Putivl.
The rebellious Cossacks, peasants and townspeople elected Ivan Bolotnikov, a former military servant of Prince A.A., as the “great governor” in Putivl, who arrived with a detachment of Cossacks. Telyatevsky from Chernihiv region.
In the summer of 1606, Bolotnikov, at the head of a 10,000-strong rebel army, began a campaign against Moscow. The fortresses of Kromy and Yelets were taken, under which the regiments of Vasily Shuisky were defeated. By October 1606, Bolotnikov was joined by large detachments of serving nobles, the Streltsy centurion Istomy Pashkov and the Ryazan governor Prokopiy Lyapunov, as well as Grigory Sumbulov, who opposed the boyar tsar. The Putivl governor, Prince G.P. Shakhovsky, also provided assistance to the rebels.
Despite their considerable forces, the rebels were unable to capture the capital. Tsarist troops near the village of Kolomenskoye defeated the rebels, which was facilitated by the transition of noble detachments to Vasily’s side. In May 1607, Bolotnikov retreated to Tula, where he was besieged. At the same time, Vasily Shuisky promised to save the lives of all those who surrendered. However, the boyar government did not keep its promise; a cruel reprisal was carried out against the participants in the peasant-noble unrest. Ivan Bolotnikov himself was exiled to distant Kargopol, where he was soon secretly blinded and drowned.
And at this time, a new impostor appeared in Poland, who also pretended to be the son of Ivan the Terrible. He entered Russian history under the name False Dmitry 2. Contemporaries made many guesses about his origin. “In the Barnulab Chronicle, the Belarusian chronicler most reliably calls him Bogdanka, the priest’s teacher of children in Shklov,” writes V. O. Klyuchevsky (7, p. 302.
The troops of False Dmitry 2 at the border intercepted Marina Mnishek, who was exiled to Poland after the death of False Dmitry 1. Marina Mnishek “recognized” her husband in the new impostor. After that, they began to call her “the wife of all impostors” (3, p. 94). Equipped again with Polish money, the new impostor in 1608 began a campaign against Moscow. Residents of Russian cities greeted him with bread and salt. False Dmitry 2 approached Moscow, but could not take it and became a camp 17 km away. from Moscow near the village of Tushino. From the name of which False Dmitry 2 received the nickname “Tushinsky thief.” He split the country into two parts. During the year of the existence of the Tushino camp, two authorities arose in the country: the government of Tsar V. Shuisky in Moscow and the government of False Dmitry 2 in Tushino.
During this period, a virtual regime of dual power was established in the country. Detachments of Tushinites controlled a significant territory of the Russian state, robbing and ruining the population. In the Tushino camp itself, the impostor was completely controlled by the leaders of the Polish-Lithuanian detachments, which became an important factor in influencing Russia. This meant concrete intervention of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the internal affairs of Russia.
During this period, Tsar Vasily Shuisky decided to ask for military assistance from Sweden, whose throne was claimed by the Polish king. The royal nephew, Prince M.V. Skopin-Shuisky, was sent to the north to gather troops. In February 1609, he concluded a military treaty in Vyborg with Sweden, according to which it was supposed to send a 15 thousand-strong military detachment for the ceded city of Korela with the district, but instead of the promised 15, it sent only 7 thousand mercenaries led by General J. P. Delagardie .
Skopin-Shuisky's army moved through Novgorod and Tver, replenished along the way with local militias. It was able to defeat the Tushins and lift the siege from the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. In March 1610, the talented commander entered Moscow. Most of the Polish troops went to King Sigismund III. But in Moscow, during the celebration of the victory in April 1610, Skopin-Shuisky unexpectedly died. It was believed that he was poisoned by the royal relatives.
The Polish king sought to turn Russia into a sphere of interest for Poland and did not want the spread of Swedish influence in Russia. In 1609, Poland began open intervention in Russia. False Dmitry 2 fled to Kaluga, where he was killed. Vasily Shuisky was deposed and tonsured a monk. A government of seven boyars was formed in Moscow. Meanwhile, Swedish troops began to capture the Russian North and later captured Novgorod by deception.
The third attempt to overcome the Troubles also failed. The destruction of Russian society has gone too far. Only drastic measures could stop the destruction. Vasily Shuisky, like Boris Godunov, did not believe in his chosenness by God and did not take drastic measures in society.
2.4 "Seven Boyars"
Power in Russia passed into the hands of a government of seven boyars (the so-called “seven boyars”), led by Prince F. I. Mstislavsky. The desperate situation of the new government forced the boyars to conclude an agreement with Sigismund 3 on the calling of the Polish prince Vladislav to the Russian throne. In 1610, meetings of representatives of different classes of Russian society who were in Moscow also spoke out in support of Vladislav. They thus tried to achieve an end to the Time of Troubles, the withdrawal of Polish-Lithuanian troops from Russian territory and the restoration of the Russian state within its borders. Therefore, we cannot say that only the boyar government made such a decision.
However, these same boyars are responsible for the fact that after the conclusion of the treaty they did not ensure that the Polish-Lithuanian side fulfilled its terms, allowed the entry of the Polish garrison into Moscow and the illegal interference in the internal affairs of Russia by Sigismund 3, thus committing national treason. At this important historical moment, the government of the boyars was unable to protect the state interests of the country.
5 Zemstvo militias. The accession of the new Romanov dynasty
After the capture of Moscow by the Poles, Russia faced the threat of losing its national independence. However, the “great devastation” of the Russian land caused a widespread upsurge of the patriotic movement in the country. A zemstvo militia (the first Ryazan) was organized under the leadership of Prokopiy Lyapunov, which at the beginning of March 1611 set out for Moscow. A new uprising broke out in Moscow at this time. Street battles broke out, in which the interventionists began to fail. Then they set the city on fire. The Polish garrison took refuge behind the walls of the Kremlin. When the militia entered Moscow, they found only ashes in its place. The siege of the enemy garrison began. Soon after the murder of Prokopiy Lyapunov in June 1611, the First Zemstvo Militia disintegrated.
Meanwhile, Sigismund 3 took bloodless Smolensk. The Swedes began negotiations with the Novgorod boyars on the recognition of the son of King Philip of Sweden as the Russian Tsar.
Autumn 1611 Russian state, which did not have a central government and troops, was on the verge of a national catastrophe. But the Russian people saved the country from foreign enslavement.
The banner of the struggle for national liberation was raised in Nizhny Novgorod. Here in October, the zemstvo elder Kuzma Minin-Sukhoruk, a small meat and fish merchant, appealed to the townspeople to gather a people's militia to liberate Moscow. This is how the Second Zemstvo Militia (Nizhny Novgorod) was created in 1612.
On Minin’s initiative, the “Council of the Whole Earth” was created, which became the provisional government of the Russian state. Prince D. M. Pozharsky, who distinguished himself during the Moscow uprising against the Poles, is invited to lead the zemstvo army. At the end of August 1612, the army of Minin and Pozharsky approached the capital. Here a fierce battle took place with the royal army under the command of Hetman Khotkevich. The Poles were defeated and fled.
The interventionists holed up behind the Kremlin wall capitulated on November 4th. The capital of Russia was completely liberated. The complexity of the political situation in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the lack of funds to continue military operations forced Sigismund III to temporarily abandon his claims to the Russian throne.
The liberation of Moscow created objective premises for restoring the foundations of state power in the country. In January 1613, after lengthy preparations, the Zemsky Cathedral opened in a solemn ceremony in the Assumption Cathedral of the capital, consisting of almost 700 representatives of the Boyar Duma, the consecrated cathedral of the Orthodox clergy, Moscow courtyard officials, as well as deputies from 50 cities, archers, Cossacks and black-sown peasants.
The Zemsky Sobor was supposed to resolve the most important issue - the election of a new Russian dynasty. It was previously agreed that foreign applicants for the Russian throne, as well as the son of Marina Mnishek, would not be considered. As a result, 16-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov (1613-1645), the son of Metropolitan Philaret (Fedor Nikitich Romanov), was approved as the new king of the revived Russian state under strong pressure from the Cossacks. Origin from an ancient (known since the 15th century) family of Moscow boyars Koshkins-Zakharyins-Yuryevs, kinship through the female line with the last king of the Rurik dynasty, extensive family connections of his father, as well as youth made Mikhail Romanov’s candidacy the most acceptable.
On February 1613, the solemn “verdict” of the Zemsky Sobor took place with the approval of the new Russian autocrat, who became the founder of the Romanov dynasty, which was destined to rule our Fatherland for over three centuries.
Chapter 3. Consequences of the Troubles
Overcoming the consequences of the Troubles in the economy, internal development, foreign policy, and the progress of civilization took, by and large, a whole century. We can probably say this: over the course of a century, Russia overcame the consequences of the Time of Troubles in order to be revived at the beginning of the 18th century with the reforms of Peter the Great.
To say that the consequences of the Troubles were extremely difficult for the progressive development of the country would, perhaps, be weak. There are other definitions here - the consequences were catastrophic.
Measures are being taken to strengthen autocratic power. Huge lands and entire cities are transferred to large secular and spiritual landowners. Most of the estates of the middle nobility are transferred to the category of estates, new land plots are “complained” “for the service” of the new dynasty.
In economic terms, the Troubles were a long-term, powerful setback for both the village and the city. Ruined, plundered cities and villages, their depopulation, desolation of arable lands, decline in crafts and trade - these are the sad results of the “great Polish-Lithuanian devastation,” as the historian Klyuchevsky calls these circumstances in his works, especially in the central and southern counties. The government, very concerned about all this, sends “watchmen” around the country, and they reveal the scale of the devastation, identify “empty” and “lived”, thereby determining the solvency of the remaining residents, the prospects for restoring the viability of all sectors of the economy.
The new government of Mikhail Romanov, in search of additional sources of financing, increased tax oppression to the limit, which caused fierce resistance from the peasantry tormented by the Troubles. A more or less real restoration of agricultural production occurred in the middle - third quarter of the 17th century.
When they began to overcome the first and most severe economic consequences of the Troubles, the first thing the government seized on was the restoration of the deadlines for searching for peasants and the fundamental ban on the right of their transition. Thus, the economic and social results of the Time of Troubles strengthened the factors of the serfdom order.
After Tsar Mikhail Romanov came to power, the internal political situation in the country remained extremely unstable; detachments of former Tushinites carried out rampages in many areas. On the southern outskirts of Russia, centers of Cossack performances have been preserved. Ataman Ivan Zarutsky posed a particular danger, who, after the defeat near Voronezh in the summer of 1613, withdrew with his troops to Astrakhan and, with the support of the Persian Shah, tried to maintain his political influence, using Marina Mnishek and her son (from her marriage to False Dmitry 2) as a contender for the Russian throne. Only after the expulsion of Zarutsky and Marina Mnishek from Astrakhan in June 1614 did the Yaik Cossacks hand them over to the Moscow authorities. However, in the summer of the following year, Moscow was besieged by the Cossack rebel army of Ataman Balovnya, and the government, before defeating the rebels, had to conduct humiliating negotiations, waiting for the approach of the noble militia.
Russia's international position after the Time of Troubles was also difficult. Smolensk was in the hands of the Poles, and Veliky Novgorod with its “suburbs” was occupied by the Swedes. After an unsuccessful attempt in 1615 to seize Pskov, Sweden entered into peace negotiations with Moscow: on February 27, 1617, a new Russian-Swedish peace treaty was concluded in the village of Stolbovo. According to his articles Novgorod land returned to Russia, and Sweden retained Ivangorod with the Izhora land, the city of Korela with the district and the city of Oreshek. As a result, Russia lost its only access to the Baltic Sea (the Baltic issue was resolved only under Tsar Peter 1).
The Polish army of Prince Vladislav and the Ukrainian Cossacks under the command of the Zaporozhye hetman P. Konashevich-Sagaidachny made a new campaign into the interior of Russia. In October 1618, enemies approached Moscow, its defense was led by governor D. M. Pozharsky. Soon the Ukrainian Cossacks, realizing the intrigue of the Polish lords with their claim to the Russian throne, returned home. As a result, on December 1, 1618, in the village of Deulino (near Moscow), a truce was concluded between Russia and Poland for a period of 14 and a half years. The Smolensk, Chernigov and Novgorod-Seversk lands remained behind the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. But the most significant thing is that Vladislav never renounced his rights to the Russian throne. An important point the agreement was an exchange of prisoners - All surviving members of the Grand Embassy who were captured during the capture of Smolensk and during the last campaign (including the father of Tsar Mikhail Romanov, Metropolitan Filaret) were to return to Russia.
The signing of two unequal treaties ended the Time of Troubles and the Polish-Swedish intervention for Russia. A significant role in the reconciliation of the Swedes and Poles with Moscow was played by the rapidly growing first in the history of the system of international relations pan-European armed conflict of opposing coalitions - the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648).
But the most important thing was that, despite human, material and territorial losses, the Russian state retained national independence, ensuring its further development and independent solution of domestic and foreign policy problems.
Conclusion
The stormy and tragic years, called by contemporaries “the Time of Troubles,” became very difficult for the Russian state. The Troubles arose spontaneously, as a result of certain patterns, it did not develop according to a specific scenario. In my opinion, this time is full of numerous tough events that no one simply could have foreseen.
The troubled period arose in certain conditions that arose in Russia, or rather, it was the collapse of the dynasty. After all, the main thing for the Russian state was the tsar by birth. Therefore, when a dynastic crisis occurred, one must reckon with the fact that turmoil became inevitable. Of course, it was necessary to try to regulate the processes with less blood and tame the negative tendencies. Contemporaries of the Time of Troubles found it impossible to do this and almost impossible.
The essence of what was happening was well understood among the people and was defined by the word “theft,” but quick and simple ways No one could offer a way out of the crisis. Each individual's sense of involvement in social problems turned out to be underdeveloped. In addition, considerable masses of ordinary people became infected with cynicism, self-interest, and oblivion of traditions and shrines. The decay came from above - from the boyar elite, which had lost all authority, but it threatened to overwhelm the lower classes. Antisocial interests clearly prevailed, while energetic and honest people, according to S. M Solovyov, “died as victims of lack of order” (4, p. 234). In all classes there was discord, distrust, and a decline in morals. This was offset by the thoughtless copying of foreign customs and patterns. The confusion in the minds was intensified by rampant corruption and high prices. The Troubles were largely a rebellion of the nobility of the outskirts against the privileged center, which led to the creation of two hostile centers of power in the country.
For Russia, it is very important to take into account that even in a society with solid and centralized state power (and under Godunov, a branch of power was practically formed), dangerous passions can rage, which can very quickly lead to the rapid collapse of the existing structure of power.
The end of the Time of Troubles contributed to the victory of the state principle over zemstvo-local ambitions. It became clear that connecting regions together serves their own benefit - provided that the voluntary nature of this connection and the rights to local identity are respected. The Russian state after the Time of Troubles appeared, according to A.P. Shchapov, “in the meaning of a zemstvo-regional federation.” “...Moscow, humble, punished by the falling away of scattered regions from it, now called them to a new organic fraternal union with it, in the name of spiritual and moral unity...” (9, p. 34).
In the history of the Time of Troubles, everything is complex, everything is ambiguous. The finale is important - the revival of the state.
List of used literature
1. Antonenko, S. “We must survive, since the Troubles are over...” / S. Antonenko // Motherland. - 2005. - No. 11. - P. 103 - 107.
2.Gralya, I. Code of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth / I.Gralya // Motherland. - 2005. - No. 11. - P. 45 - 49.
3. Doroshenko, T. Overcoming the “great ruin” of the Russian state / T. Doroshenko // Science and life. - 2006. - No. 1. - P. 92 - 95.
4.Zuev, M. N. Domestic history: textbook manual: book. 1: History of Russia from antiquity to the end of the 19th century / M. N. Zuev. - M.: Publishing house "ONICS 21st century", 2005. - 544 p.
History of Russia from ancient times to the end of the 17th century / Ed. ed. A. N. Sakharov; A. P. Novoseltseva. - M.: AST Publishing House LLC, 2000. - 576 p.: ill.
Karamzin, N. M. History of the Russian State. T. 9 - 11 / N. M. Karamzin. - Kaluga: Golden Alley, 1993. - 592 p.: ill.
Klyuchevsky, V. O. About Russian history / V. O. Klyuchevsky. - M.: Education, 1993. - 576 p.
Nazarov, V. Russia at a crossroads / V. Nazarov // Motherland. - 2005. - No. 11
Popov, G. Lessons from the Time of Troubles / G. Popov // Science and Life. - 2003. - No. 8. - P. 30 - 35.
Troubles in the Moscow State: Russia at the beginning of the 17th century in the notes of contemporaries / Comp. A. I. Pliguzov; I. A. Tikhonyuk. - M.: Sovremennik, 1989. - 462 p.: ill. - (Memory).
Skrynnikov, R. G. Troubles in Russia at the beginning of the 17th century. Ivan Bolotnikov / R. G. Skrynnikov. - L.: Nauka, 1988. - 253 p. - (Pages of the history of our Motherland).
Shishkov, A. Cleansing from the Troubles / A. Shishkov // Motherland. - 2005. - No. 11. - P. 4 - 6.
Tutoring
Need help studying a topic?
Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
No. 14. TIME OF TROUBLES IN RUSSIA
Troubles – indignation, rebellion, sedition, general disobedience, discord between the people and the authorities (V. I. Dal)
TROUBLES (TIME OF TROUBLES)- a deep spiritual, economic, social, and foreign policy crisis that befell Russia in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. It coincided with the dynastic crisis and the struggle of boyar groups for power, which brought the country to the brink of disaster. The main signs of unrest are considered to be anarchy (anarchy), imposture, civil war and intervention. According to a number of historians, the Time of Troubles can be considered the first civil war in Russian history.
Contemporaries spoke of the Troubles as a time of “shakyness,” “disorder,” and “confusion of minds,” which caused bloody clashes and conflicts. The term “troubles” was used in everyday speech of the 17th century, in the paperwork of Moscow orders, and was included in the title of the work of Grigory Kotoshikhin ( Time of Troubles). In the 19th and early 20th centuries. got into research about Boris Godunov, Vasily Shuisky. In Soviet science, phenomena and events of the early 17th century. classified as a period of socio-political crisis, the first peasant war ( I.I.Bolotnikova) and the foreign intervention that coincided with it, but the term “turmoil” was not used. In Polish historical science, this time is called “Dimitriada”, since at the center of historical events stood False Dmitry I, False Dmitry II, False Dmitry III- Poles or impostors who sympathized with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, posing as the escaped Tsarevich Dmitry.
The preconditions for the Troubles were the consequences of the oprichnina and Livonian War 1558–1583: economic ruin, rising social tension.
The causes of the Time of Troubles as an era of anarchy, according to the historiography of the 19th and early 20th centuries, are rooted in the suppression of the Rurik dynasty and the intervention of neighboring states (especially united Lithuania and Poland, which is why the period was sometimes called the “Lithuanian or Moscow ruin”) in the affairs of the Muscovite kingdom. The combination of these events led to the appearance of adventurers and impostors on the Russian throne, claims to the throne from the Cossacks, runaway peasants and slaves (which manifested itself in Bolotnikov's peasant war). Church historiography of the 19th–early 20th centuries. considered the Troubles a period of spiritual crisis in society, seeing the reasons in the distortion of moral and moral values.
The chronological framework of the Time of Troubles is determined, on the one hand, by the death in Uglich in 1591 of Tsarevich Dmitry, the last representative of the Rurik dynasty, on the other hand, by the election to the kingdom of the first king from the Romanov dynasty Mikhail Fedorovich in 1613, the subsequent years of struggle against the Polish and Swedish invaders (1616–1618), the return of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch Filaret (1619). But many historians define the chronological framework of the Time of Troubles from the moment of the death of Fyodor Ivanovich in 1598 year and the rise to power of the boyar Tsar Boris Godunov.
First stage The Time of Troubles began with a dynastic crisis caused by the assassination of the king Ivan IV the Terrible his eldest son Ivan, the rise to power of his brother Fedor Ivanovich and the death of their younger half-brother Dmitry (according to many, stabbed to death by the henchmen of the de facto ruler of the country, Boris Godunov). The throne lost the last heir from the Rurik dynasty.
The death of the childless Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich (1598) allowed Boris Godunov (1598–1605) to come to power, who ruled energetically and wisely, but was unable to stop the intrigues of disgruntled boyars. The crop failure of 1601–1602 and the subsequent famine initially caused the first social explosion (1603, the Cotton uprising). External reasons were added to the internal ones: Poland and Lithuania, united in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, rushed to take advantage of Russia’s weakness. The appearance in Poland of the young Galich nobleman Grigory Otrepyev, who declared himself Tsarevich Dmitry to be “miraculously saved”, became a gift to King Sigismund III, who supported the impostor.
At the end of 1604, having converted to Catholicism, False Dmitry I entered Russia with a small army. Many cities in southern Russia, Cossacks, and dissatisfied peasants went over to his side. In April 1605, after the unexpected death of Boris Godunov and the non-recognition of his son Fyodor as tsar, the Moscow boyars also went over to the side of False Dmitry I. In June 1605, the impostor became Tsar Dmitry I for almost a year. However, a boyar conspiracy and an uprising of Muscovites on May 17, 1606, dissatisfied with the direction of his policy, swept him from the throne. Two days later, the tsar “shouted out” the boyar Vasily Shuisky, who gave the cross-kissing record to rule with the Boyar Duma, not to impose disgrace and not to execute without trial.
By the summer of 1606, rumors spread throughout the country about a new miraculous salvation of Tsarevich Dmitry: an uprising broke out in Putivl under the leadership of a fugitive slave Ivan Bolotnikova, peasants, archers, and nobles joined him. The rebels reached Moscow, besieged it, but were defeated. Bolotnikov was captured in the summer of 1607, exiled to Kargopol and killed there.
The new contender for the Russian throne was False Dmitry II (origin unknown), who united around himself the surviving participants in the Bolotnikov uprising, the Cossacks led by Ivan Zarutsky, and Polish troops. Having settled in June 1608 in the village of Tushino near Moscow (hence his nickname “Tushino Thief”), he besieged Moscow.
Second stage The Time of Troubles is associated with the split of the country in 1609: in Muscovy there were formed two kings, two Boyar Dumas, two patriarchs (Hermogenes in Moscow and Filaret in Tushino), territories recognizing the power of False Dmitry II, and territories remaining loyal to Shuisky. The successes of the Tushins forced Shuisky to conclude an agreement with Sweden, hostile to Poland, in February 1609. Having given the Russian fortress of Korela to the Swedes, he received military assistance, and the Russian-Swedish army liberated a number of cities in the north of the country. This gave the Polish king Sigismund III a reason for intervention: in the fall of 1609, Polish troops besieged Smolensk and reached the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. False Dmitry II fled from Tushin, the Tushino people who left him concluded an agreement with Sigismund at the beginning of 1610 on the election of his son, Prince Vladislav, to the Russian throne.
In July 1610, Shuisky was overthrown by the boyars and forcibly tonsured a monk. Power temporarily passed to the “Seven Boyars,” a government that signed an agreement with Sigismund III in August 1610 on the election of Vladislav as king on the condition that he convert to Orthodoxy. Polish troops entered Moscow.
Third stage The Time of Troubles is associated with the desire to overcome the conciliatory position of the Seven Boyars, which had no real power and was unable to force Vladislav to fulfill the terms of the agreement and accept Orthodoxy. With the rise of patriotic sentiment since 1611, calls for an end to discord and restoration of unity intensified. The center of attraction of patriotic forces became the Moscow Patriarch Hermogenes, Prince. D.T. Trubetskoy. The formed First Militia included the noble detachments of P. Lyapunov, the Cossacks of I. Zarutsky, and former Tushino residents. In Nizhny Novgorod and Yaroslavl he gathered an army K. Minin, a new government was formed, the “Council of All the Earth.” The first militia failed to liberate Moscow; in the summer of 1611 the militia disintegrated. At this time, the Poles managed to capture Smolensk after a two-year siege, the Swedes managed to take Novgorod, a new impostor appeared in Pskov - False Dmitry III, who was “proclaimed” by the tsar there on December 4, 1611.
In the fall of 1611, on the initiative of K. Minin and D. Pozharsky, who was invited by him, the Second Militia was formed in Nizhny Novgorod. In August 1612 it approached Moscow and liberated it on October 26, 1612. In 1613, the Zemsky Sobor elected a 16-year-old tsar. Mikhail Romanov, his father, Patriarch Filaret, returned to Russia from captivity, with whose name the people pinned hopes for the eradication of robbery and robbery. In 1617, the Peace of Stolbovo was signed with Sweden, which received the Korelu fortress and the coast of the Gulf of Finland. In 1618, the Deulin Truce was concluded with Poland: Russia ceded Smolensk, Chernigov and a number of other cities to it. Only Tsar Peter I was able to compensate and restore Russia’s territorial losses almost a hundred years later.
However, the long and difficult crisis was resolved, although the economic consequences of the Troubles - the devastation and desolation of a vast territory, especially in the west and southwest, the death of almost a third of the country's population continued to affect another decade and a half.
The consequences of the Time of Troubles were:
1) changes in the country's governance system.
2) The weakening of the boyars, the rise of the nobility who received estates and the possibility of legislatively assigning peasants to them resulted in the gradual evolution of Russia towards absolutism.
3) The revaluation of the ideals of the previous era, the negative consequences of boyar participation in governing the country, which became obvious, and the severe polarization of society led to an increase in ideocratic tendencies. They were expressed, among other things, in the desire to substantiate the inviolability of the Orthodox faith and the inadmissibility of deviations from the values of national religion and ideology (especially in opposition to “Latinism” and the Protestantism of the West). This strengthened anti-Western sentiments, which aggravated the cultural and, ultimately, civilizational isolation of Russia for many centuries.
The Time of Troubles occupies a serious place in the history of Russia. This is a time of historical alternatives. There are many nuances in this topic that are generally important for understanding and rapid assimilation. In this article we will look at some of them. Where to get the rest - see at the end of the article.
Causes of the Time of Troubles
The first reason (and the main one) is the suppression of the dynasty of the descendants of Ivan Kalita, the ruling branch of the Rurikovichs. The last king of this dynasty - Fyodor Ioannovich, son - died in 1598, and from that same time the period of the Time of Troubles in the history of Russia began.
The second reason - more the reason for the intervention during this period - is that at the end of the Livonian War, the Moscow state did not conclude peace treaties, but only truces: Yam-Zapolskoye with Poland and Plyusskoye with Sweden. The difference between a truce and a peace treaty is that the former is only a break in the war, and not its end.
Course of events
As you can see, we are analyzing this event according to the scheme recommended by me and other colleagues, about which you can.
The Time of Troubles began directly with the death of Fyodor Ioannovich. Because this is a period of “kinglessness,” of kinglessness, when impostors and generally random people ruled. However, in 1598, the Zemsky Sobor was convened and Boris Godunov, a man who had long and persistently walked to power, came to power.
The reign of Boris Godunov lasted from 1598 to 1605. At this time the following events occurred:
- The terrible famine of 1601 - 1603, the consequence of which was the rebellion of Cotton Crookshanks, and the mass exodus of the population to the south. And also dissatisfaction with the authorities.
- Speech of False Dmitry the First: from the autumn of 1604 to June 1605.
The reign of False Dmitry the First lasted one year: from June 1605 to May 1606. During his reign The following processes continued:
False Dmitry the First (aka Grishka Otrepiev)
The boyars grew dissatisfied with his rule, since False Dmitry did not respect Russian customs, married a Catholic, and began to distribute Russian lands as fiefs to the Polish nobility. In May 1606, the impostor was overthrown by the boyars led by Vasily Shuisky.
The reign of Vasily Shuisky lasted from 1606 to 1610. Shuisky was not even elected at the Zemsky Sobor. His name was simply “shouted”, so he “enlisted” the support of the people. In addition, he gave the so-called cross-kissing oath that he would consult with the boyar duma in everything. During his reign the following events occurred:
- The peasant war led by Ivan Isaevich Bolotnikov: from the spring of 1606 to the end of 1607. Ivan Bolotnikov acted as the governor of “Tsarevich Dmitry,” the Second False Dmitry.
- The campaign of False Dmitry II from the autumn of 1607 to 1609. During the campaign, the impostor was unable to take Moscow, so he sat down in Tushino. Dual power appeared in Russia. Neither side had the means to defeat the other side. Therefore, Vasily Shusky hired Swedish mercenaries.
- The defeat of the “Tushinsky Thief” by the troops of Swedish mercenaries led by Mikhail Vasilyevich Skopin-Shuisky.
- Intervention of Poland and Sweden in 1610. Poland and Sweden were at war at this time. Since Swedish troops, albeit mercenaries, were in Moscow, Poland had the opportunity to begin an open intervention, considering Muscovy an ally of Sweden.
- The overthrow of Vasily Shuisky by the boyars, as a result of which the so-called “seven boyars” appeared. The boyars de facto recognized the power of the Polish king Sigismund in Moscow.
Results of the Time of Troubles for the history of Russia
The first result The Troubles began with the election of a new reigning Romanov dynasty, which ruled from 1613 to 1917, which began with Mikhail and ended with Mikhail.
The second result the boyars began to die out. Throughout the 17th century, it lost its influence, and with it the old tribal principle.
Third result— devastation, economic, economic, social. Its consequences were overcome only by the beginning of the reign of Peter the Great.
Fourth result— instead of the boyars, the authorities relied on the nobility.
PS.: Of course, everything you read here is available on a million other sites. But the purpose of this post is to briefly talk about the Troubles. Unfortunately, all this is not enough to complete the test. After all, there are many nuances left behind the scenes, without which it would be impossible to complete the second part of the test. That's why I invite you for Andrey Puchkov's Unified State Exam preparation courses.
Best regards, Andrey Puchkov
Chronology
- 1605 - 1606 Reign of False Dmitry I.
- 1606 - 1607 Uprising led by I.I. Bolotnikov.
- 1606 - 1610 The reign of Vasily Shuisky.
- 1610 “Seven Boyars”.
- 1612 Liberation of Moscow from invaders.
- 1613 Election of Mikhail Romanov to the throne by the Zemsky Sobor.
Time of Troubles in Russia
The Troubles in Russia at the end of the 16th and beginning of the 17th centuries became a shock that shook the very foundations of the state system. Three periods can be distinguished in the development of the Troubles. The first period is dynastic. This was the time of struggle for the Moscow throne between various contenders, which lasted up to and including Tsar Vasily Shuisky. The second period is social. It is characterized by the internecine struggle of social classes and the intervention of foreign governments in this struggle. The third period is national. It covers the time of the struggle of the Russian people against foreign invaders until the election of Mikhail Romanov as Tsar.
After death in 1584 g. , his son succeeded him Fedor, incapable of governing affairs. “The dynasty was dying out in his person,” noted the English ambassador Fletcher. “What kind of king I am, it’s not difficult to confuse me or deceive me in any matter,” is a sacramental phrase put into the mouth of Fyodor Ioannovich A.K. Tolstoy. The actual ruler of the state was the tsar's brother-in-law, boyar Boris Godunov, who endured a fierce struggle with the largest boyars for influence on state affairs. After death in 1598 g. Fyodor, the Zemsky Sobor elected Godunov as tsar.
Boris Godunov was an energetic and intelligent statesman. In conditions of economic devastation and a difficult international situation, he solemnly promised on the day of his crowning of the kingdom, “that there will not be a poor person in his state, and he is ready to share his last shirt with everyone.” But chosen king did not have the authority and advantage of a hereditary monarch, and this could call into question the legitimacy of his presence on the throne.
Godunov's government reduced taxes, exempted merchants from paying duties for two years, and landowners from paying taxes for a year. The tsar started a large construction project and took care of educating the country. The patriarchate was established, which increased the rank and prestige of the Russian church. He also pursued a successful foreign policy—further advances into Siberia took place, the southern regions of the country were developed, and Russian positions in the Caucasus were strengthened.
At the same time, the internal situation of the country under Boris Godunov remained very difficult. In conditions of unprecedented crop failure and famine in 1601-1603. the economy collapsed, hundreds of thousands of people died of hunger, the price of bread rose 100 times. The government took the path of further enslavement of the peasantry. this caused a protest from the broad masses, who directly linked the deterioration of their situation with the name of Boris Godunov.
The aggravation of the internal political situation led, in turn, to a sharp decline in Godunov’s prestige not only among the masses, but also among the boyars.
The biggest threat to B. Godunov’s power was the appearance in Poland of an impostor who declared himself the son of Ivan the Terrible. The fact is that in 1591, under unclear circumstances, the last of the direct heirs to the throne died in Uglich, allegedly running into a knife in a fit of epilepsy. Tsarevich Dmitry. Godunov’s political opponents accused him of organizing the murder of the prince in order to seize power; popular rumor picked up these accusations. However, historians do not have convincing documents that would prove Godunov’s guilt.
It was under such conditions that he appeared in Rus' False Dmitry. This young man named Grigory Otrepiev introduced himself as Dmitry, using rumors that Tsarevich Dmitry was alive, “miraculously saved” in Uglich. The impostor's agents vigorously disseminated in Russia the version of his miraculous salvation from the hands of assassins sent by Godunov, and proved the legality of his right to the throne. Polish magnates provided some assistance in organizing the adventure. As a result, by the autumn of 1604, a powerful army was formed for a campaign against Moscow.
The beginning of the Troubles
Taking advantage of the current situation in Rus', its disunity and instability, False Dmitry with a small detachment crossed the Dnieper near Chernigov.
He managed to attract to his side a huge mass of the Russian population, who believed that he was the son of Ivan the Terrible. False Dmitry's forces grew rapidly, cities opened their gates to him, peasants and townspeople joined his troops. False Dmitry moved on the wave of the outbreak of the peasant war. After the death of Boris Godunov in 1605 g. The governors also began to go over to the side of False Dmitry, and at the beginning of June Moscow also took his side.
According to V.O. Klyuchevsky, the impostor “was baked in a Polish oven, but hatched among the boyars.” Without the support of the boyars, he had no chance of winning the Russian throne. On June 1, on Red Square, the impostor’s letters were announced, in which he called Godunov a traitor, and promised “honor and promotion” to the boyars, “mercy” to the nobles and clerks, benefits to merchants, “silence” to the people. The critical moment came when people asked boyar Vasily Shuisky whether the prince was buried in Uglich (it was Shuisky who headed the city in 1591). state commission to investigate the death of Tsarevich Dmitry and then confirmed death from epilepsy). Now Shuisky claimed that the prince had escaped. After these words, the crowd broke into the Kremlin and destroyed the houses of the Godunovs and their relatives. On June 20, False Dmitry solemnly entered Moscow.
It turned out to be easier to sit on the throne than to stay on it. To strengthen his position, False Dmitry confirmed the serfdom legislation, which caused discontent among the peasants.
But, first of all, the tsar did not live up to the expectations of the boyars because he acted too independently. May 17, 1606. The boyars led the people to the Kremlin shouting “The Poles are beating the boyars and the sovereign,” and in the end False Dmitry was killed. Vasily Ivanovich ascended the throne Shuisky. The condition for his accession to the Russian throne was the limitation of power. He vowed “not to do anything without the Council,” and this was the first experience of building a state order on the basis of a formal restrictions on supreme power. But the situation in the country did not normalize.
The second stage of the turmoil
Begins second stage of the turmoil- social, when the nobility, metropolitan and provincial, clerks, clerks, and Cossacks enter the struggle. However, first of all, this period is characterized by a wide wave of peasant uprisings.
In the summer of 1606, the masses had a leader - Ivan Isaevich Bolotnikov. The forces gathered under the banner of Bolotnikov were a complex conglomerate, consisting of different layers. There were Cossacks, peasants, serfs, townspeople, many service people, small and medium-sized feudal lords. In July 1606, Bolotnikov's troops set out on a campaign against Moscow. In the Battle of Moscow, Bolotnikov's troops were defeated and were forced to retreat to Tula. On July 30, the siege of the city began, and after three months the Bolotnikovites capitulated, and he himself was soon executed. The suppression of this uprising did not mean the end of the peasant war, but it began to decline.
The government of Vasily Shuisky sought to stabilize the situation in the country. But both service people and peasants were still dissatisfied with the government. The reasons for this were different. The nobles felt Shuisky's inability to stop peasant war, the peasants did not accept serfdom policies. Meanwhile, in Starodub (in the Bryansk region) a new impostor appeared, declaring himself the escaped “Tsar Dmitry”. According to many historians, False Dmitry II was a protege of the Polish king Sigismund III, although many do not support this version. The bulk of the armed forces of False Dmitry II were Polish nobles and Cossacks.
In January 1608 g. he moved towards Moscow.
Having defeated Shuisky's troops in several battles, by the beginning of June False Dmitry II reached the village of Tushino near Moscow, where he settled in camp. Pskov, Yaroslavl, Kostroma, Vologda, Astrakhan swore allegiance to the impostor. The Tushins occupied Rostov, Vladimir, Suzdal, and Murom. In Russia, two capitals were actually formed. Boyars, merchants, and officials swore allegiance either to False Dmitry or to Shuisky, sometimes receiving salaries from both.
In February 1609, the Shuisky government entered into an agreement with Sweden, counting on assistance in the war with the “Tushino thief” and his Polish troops. Under this agreement, Russia gave Sweden the Karelian volost in the North, which was a serious political mistake. This gave Sigismund III a reason to switch to open intervention. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth began military operations against Russia with the aim of conquering its territory. Polish troops left Tushino. False Dmitry II, who was there, fled to Kaluga and ultimately ended his voyage ingloriously.
Sigismund sent letters to Smolensk and Moscow, where he claimed that, as a relative of the Russian tsars and at the request of the Russian people, he was going to save the dying Muscovite state and its Orthodox faith.
The Moscow boyars decided to accept help. An agreement was concluded on the recognition of the prince Vladislav Russian Tsar, and until his arrival obey Sigismund. On February 4, 1610, an agreement was concluded that included a plan for government under Vladislav: immunity Orthodox faith, restriction of freedom from arbitrary authorities. The sovereign had to share his power with the Zemsky Sobor and the Boyar Duma.
On August 17, 1610, Moscow swore allegiance to Vladislav. And a month before this, Vasily Shuisky was forcibly tonsured a monk by the nobles and taken to the Chudov Monastery. To govern the country, the Boyar Duma created a commission of seven boyars, called “ seven-boyars" On September 20, the Poles entered Moscow.
Sweden also launched aggressive actions. Swedish troops occupied a large part of northern Russia and were preparing to capture Novgorod. Russia faced a direct threat of losing its independence. The aggressive plans of the aggressors caused general indignation. In December 1610 g. False Dmitry II was killed, but the struggle for the Russian throne did not end there.
The third stage of the turmoil
The death of the impostor immediately changed the situation in the country. The pretext for the presence of Polish troops on Russian territory disappeared: Sigismund explained his actions by the need to “fight the Tushino thief.” The Polish army turned into an occupation army, the Seven Boyars into a government of traitors. The Russian people united to resist the intervention. The war acquired a national character.
The third period of unrest begins. From the northern cities, at the call of the patriarch, detachments of Cossacks led by I. Zarutsky and Prince Dm begin to converge on Moscow. Trubetskoy. This is how the first militia was formed. In April - May 1611, Russian troops stormed the capital, but did not achieve success, as internal contradictions and rivalry among the leaders took their toll. In the autumn of 1611, the desire for liberation from foreign oppression was clearly expressed by one of the leaders of the Nizhny Novgorod settlement Kuzma Minin, who called for the creation of a militia to liberate Moscow. The prince was elected leader of the militia Dmitry Pozharsky.
In August 1612, the militia of Minin and Pozharsky reached Moscow, and on October 26 the Polish garrison capitulated. Moscow was liberated. The Time of Troubles or “Great Devastation,” which lasted about ten years, is over.
Under these conditions, the country needed a government of a kind of social reconciliation, a government that would be able to ensure not only the cooperation of people from different political camps, but also class compromise. The candidacy of a representative of the Romanov family suited different layers and classes of society.
After the liberation of Moscow, letters were scattered throughout the country convening a Zemsky Sobor to elect a new tsar. The council, held in January 1613, was the most representative in the history of medieval Russia, which at the same time reflected the balance of forces that emerged during the war of liberation. A struggle broke out around the future tsar, and they ultimately agreed on the candidacy of 16-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov, a relative of Ivan the Terrible’s first wife. This circumstance created the appearance of a continuation of the previous dynasty of Russian princes. February 21 1613 Zemsky Sobor elected Mikhail Romanov Tsar of Russia.
From this time, the reign of the Romanov dynasty in Russia began, which lasted a little over three hundred years - until February 1917.
So, concluding this section related to the history of the “time of troubles”, it should be noted: acute internal crises and long wars were generated largely by the incompleteness of the process of state centralization, the lack necessary conditions for the normal development of the country. At the same time, it was an important stage in the struggle for the establishment of a Russian centralized state.
