Ruling Strategies And Life Of Ivan The Terrible

Introduction

The dispute over Tsar Ivan Vasilievich has been going on for more than four centuries: it began during the life of Ivan the Terrible. One of the first characteristics was given at the beginning of the seventeenth century, it is very contradictory: ugly ('ridiculous') with a long and crooked nose ('the nose is stretched and crocheted'), the king is also tall, his 'dry body' and thick muscles, Tall shoulders and broad chest.

Then comes the praise: 'The husband of wonderful reasoning, book teaching, is vain, to the militia is insolent, for the fatherland is strong.' But then comes the condemnation of cruelty, inexorability in the shedding of blood: a multitude of people from small to large under the reign of his kingdom, and there and then: many good things have done, his host loving and caring is shown. It seems that the contemporary has come to a standstill in front of the many facets of the human character.

The variety of assessments of the cases and personality of Ivan IV has found a continuation in science. The historian of the XIX century Karamzin is unequivocal: 'hero' in the first period of his reign, he turns into a tyrant in the second. In the second half of the XIX century, historical science began to reveal the laws of the course of history. Historian SM Soloviev represented the historical development of Russia at that time as a change of 'tribal' beginnings to 'state ones.'

In this sense, the activities of Ivan IV were a step forward, to the victory of statehood. Solov'ev spoke sharply about the executions of innocent people, wrote that 'the historian will not utter the word of justification to such a person.'

Subsequent historians, In addition to V.O Kliuchevski, at times, as if flaunting freedom from moral assessments of the past, they said that one should not judge, but understand people past. Since the late 30-ies the assessment of the activities of Ivan IV is almost unanimous. On the pages of scholarly works, novels, on the cinema screens and in the theaters of Ivan began to depict, as a great patriot of the Russian land, mercilessly and justly dealt with traitors boyars. The reasons for this attitude were beyond science. Terror seemed attractive to justify the events in the country during this period.

To understand the activities of Ivan IV, you need to know what country he inherited when, in 1533, a three-year-old child ascended the throne.

Biography

By the end of the 16th century, Russia was a big country. In the west, the border area is the Smolensk land, in the south-west - the districts of Orel, Kursk and Tula. Kaluga was a border town. Further - a wild field - the steppe, which was under constant threat of an attack by the Crimean Khan. In the east, Russia ended in the Nizhny Novgorod and Ryazan districts. The state was already unified, but the unification of the Russian lands ended only recently. Feudal lords from different parts of the country move, receive patrimony and estates in new places. Gradually formed a single all-Russian class of feudal lords. The process began and was far away from centralization and the system of local self-government was archaic.

In places, the power belonged to the governors and volutes. They were feeders: they received counties and volutes for feeding; this meant that the feeder was supposed to receive some of the taxes from his county or volost, but not for administrative or judicial activity, but as a reward for former military service. This led to the fact that the kormlenschik could relate to his duties through his sleeves, often delegating them to his servants. Yes, and in the receipt of feedings there was no order - most likely for a bribe to the deacon who had distributed them.

The inconvenience for the centralization of the state was also represented by the existing princedoms: they were still two; they belonged to the younger brothers Vasily III - Yuri (Dmitrov and Zvenigorod) and Andrew (Tver land and Vereya). Brothers-individual princes all the more troubled Basil III, that he did not have an heir for a long time.

Ivan IV was born on August 25, 1530. His mother - the second wife of Basil III - a young beautiful princess Glinskaya (the first Solomonia after 20 years of childless living together Vasily III was imprisoned in a monastery). She came from a family with an intriguing pedigree. It was said that after the defeat at Kulikovo Field and the death of Mamai in the fight against Tokhtamysh, his sons fled, were baptized and received the town of Glinsk as an inheritance, became princes of Glinsky. If the legend is true, then Ivan IV was simultaneously a descendant of Dmitry Donskoy and Mamai.

When Ivan was 3 years old his father died - 54-year-old prince Vasily III, having had time to bless his eldest son to the great principality. Ivan IV was further proud of being a monarch all his life. The child before whom they kneel is kissed by respectable adults, a combination of the formal power of an autocratic sovereign with childhood helplessness.

The first five years with the child was a mother who firmly and resolutely ruled the country. Prince of Yuri Ivanovich and Andrei Ivanovich, she somehow removed. They died in confinement. And a year later Elena Glinskaya herself died at the age of 30 and Ivan, from the age of 8 with a scepter and power, sits alone on the throne and around him the fierce struggle of the boyar clans for power.

Self Management and Reforms

Already at Elena Glinskaya an attempt was made to change the system of local government. Along with the governors and volostels, who received feeding, they began to introduce electors from local noblemen - labial elders to combat 'robberies' and 'dashing people.' In the reign of the Shuiskys, who played a prominent role in the Tsar's entourage, with the young Ivan, many estates were handed out unseen, which strengthened centralization.

In the period of the boyar rule, a new important change in the city's life appears: after the governors, volostels, and tiunas, power of a different origin appears - the urban and rural residents receive from the government themselves to catch, judge and execute thieves and robbers, for which children should be placed in their heads Boyar, adding to their elders, tenth and better people.

The constant increase in state needs in the Moscow state required an increase in financial resources. The Moscow government acted very simply on the concepts of time: it imposed a new tax. So there were 'pischalnye money' - from Novgorod posad, suburbs, rows, pogosts. The nearest volosts to the place of military operations were to set up conscripts for the war, and the distant ones paid 'posh money'. In addition, the so-called 'white' food for the troops was assembled. The 'ermine' money and 'yamskie' were paid.

In addition to tribute, the source of income served as a source of income: in 1543 Vologda scribes, according to the word of the Grand Duke, were given to the Cyril Abbot by the two great black heaths to receive ten times a year from the monastery. The arable land, hayfields, forests, rivers, and mills were given for rent. And yet the reforms were slow: all the power of the rulers swallowed up the struggle for power - it was not up to big state affairs.

From the end of the 40s, Ivan IV passes to independent government. At the age of 16, a year after his adulthood, Ivan gathered the boyars and said that he wanted to marry, but before the marriage 'to look for his former grandparents' in order to take a new title. The ancestors of Ivan IV did not bear the title of tsar, but the adoption of the royal title could raise the authority of the sovereign to what metropolitan Macarius, who played an important role in the environment of Ivan IV and his relatives - the Glinsky, aspired.

If the title Grand Duke could be perceived as the first among equals, the king - a sharp selection from the series, a fundamentally new title. The very term 'king' - from the Latin 'Caesar', which from the personal name of Kai Julius Caesar turned into an imperial title.

An important role played the royal title in international relations. While negotiating with the Kazan, Astrakhan, Crimean Khanates, the Russian sovereign now appeared with the same title as his partners. In relations with Western Europe, the word 'king' was translated as the emperor or left untranslated, while the 'grand duke' is the 'prince', the duke.

The coronation took place in January 1547. And then 'the Tsar and the Grand Duke of All Russia' married to the arrogant Anastasia from the old Moscow clan Zakharyin.

However, after the coronation, the Glinsky continued to rule. The tsar indulged in amusements and repeatedly manifested his cruel nature. The king made his first death sentence at the age of 13, ordering his henchmen to seize the prince Andrew Mikhailovich Shuisky, who was hated by him, and to kill what was and was done. In September, on the orders of the 15-year-old Grand Duke Athanasius Buturlin, the language was cut off for an 'impolite word', in the summer the 16-year-old monarch ordered the boyars Vorontsov and Ivan Kubensky to cut off their heads to their favorites, as the deacon, who was his personal enemy,.

All this happened before the wedding of the kingdom. In early 1547, the young king again demonstrated his steep character. The 70 most honorable Pskovites came to the Tsar with a complaint about the abuses of the governor, Prince Ivan Ivanovich Turuntai-Pronsky. The 17-year-old king was indignant and, as the chronicle of the Pskovites tells us, 'lapped, poured hot wine, burned his beards and hair, lit the candle and ordered them to put the naked on the ground.'

Signs of unhappiness were the unrest of the Pskov dwellers and the Moscow uprising after the fire of 1547. In summer fire broke out in Moscow, but the fire was really great on June 21, 1547: the fire continued until it burned for about 10 hours. The results were daunting: several thousand people were killed, the entire population was left homeless. Grief demanded an exit in search of the guilty.

The rebellious Muscovites turned their anger on the boyars, especially the Glinsky in power, and went to the king, armed with shields and pitchforks, demanding their extradition. The frightened king, who escaped the fire in the village of Vorobyevo, managed to calm the crowd, to persuade that there was no Glinsky in Vorobiev (which was true) and the crowd dispersed, reassured by the fact that the tsar did not commit reprisals over her. But it was a trick. Soon Ivan IV ordered to arrest these people and execute them. It is known that the tsar sent two thousand men to suppress another insurrection in Opochka against the tax collector.

Reforms in Governance

Around 1549 a new group came to power called Elected Rada. One of the prominent figures who stood at the head of the Chosen was happy priest Selivestre, who served in the Annunciation Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin.

The author of the famous 'Domostroi' Ivan Selivestr addressed with instructions to the tsar, accusing the young monarch of 'riotousness' and 'children's violent morals.'

Another leader of the Chosen was pleased with Alexei Fedorovich Adashev from the not very noble family, but 'kind', he undoubtedly possessed intelligence and talent, was stern and powerful, distinguished by religiosity and asceticism. Perhaps the circle was unofficial and did not have a solid name. It included princes Kurbsky, Kurlyatev.

During this period there was a tense reformatory activity. Began to create the first orders of the bodies that ran separate branches of public life, at that time they were called 'huts.'

One of the first - the Ambassador's order, headed by the deacon Ivan Mikhailovich Viskovitiy - for about 20 years led foreign policy.

In charge of Adashev was the Petition hut. This institution was supposed to take petitions in the name of the tsar and conduct investigations on them. It was the highest control body. A local order was in charge of the distribution of estates among servicemen. The discharge order was a kind of headquarters of the armed forces. The robbery order was engaged in a struggle against 'robberies' and 'dashing people.' Zemsky order ruled Moscow, was responsible for the order in it. (3, 471) In 1550 a code of laws 'Sudebnik' was created, systematized and edited, for the first time penalties for bribe-takers were introduced.

In a more severe centralization, the church of a single state needed. There was a need to unify the rituals, which remained different in different lands. Since apart from the all-Russian and Moscow saints in each locality there were also their own: Yaroslavl, Novgorod, Metropolitan Makarii was created covering the entire all-Russian pantheon.

In 1551, a church council was convened, which went down in history as Stoglavy, his decisions were consolidated into 100 chapters. In addition to the above, the aim was also to improve the mores of the clergy and raise its authority.

The tsar himself played an active role in this cathedral, the decisions of the cathedral are even entitled 'tsar questions and conciliar answers about various church rites.' (1; 52) Very serious reforms concerned the organization of a class of feudal lords. One of them was the limitation of parochialism. The dispute between feudal lords about their place in the hierarchy of official positions.

Worshiping more and more before the significance of a single ruler and autocrat, the members of the squad, who now accepted the name of servicemen, cherished clan honor in service encounters with each other, the number of local events increased significantly.

Historically, during the reinforcement of the Moscow principality, the Moscow princely squad was replenished with newcomers, the service was new, and the service relations of the ancestors were remembered by everyone, without giving rise to a dispute about the appointment to the place. But the older the service became, the more the number of generations passed in this service, the more numerous the state court, the more confused the relations between servicemen, the more frequent the local 'cases' - disputes over the appointment to the post.

The servants adhered tenaciously to the local situation, since the local account was based on precedents - 'cases' and, taking an 'unintended' appointment, a serving person inflicted damage on his descendants and other relatives.

The tsar received petitions 'in the fatherland of the account.' The king used parochialism to elevate those who were 'in time', i. E. Close and humiliate those who were in disgrace. However, the localism created great inconvenience during the hostilities, when there was no time to disassemble the patrimonial advantages and inflicted damage to the state's expanding service of officials.

Therefore, in 1550, a service dress was introduced - a decree where to serve boyars and voivods in regiments. It emerged from it that, firstly, the number of cases in which voivods of different regiments could be localized was limited, secondly, the right of young servicemen of noble origin to settle with voivodes of less noble origin before they became voevodas was destroyed. The subordinate service had no influence, was not considered a precedent.

Thus, the localism was limited either to refusal to the competitor in general in any post or by an indication that the appointment was not a precedent. The 'verdict' preserved the localism, but weakened its negative consequences in practical activities.

In 1555-1556, the 'Code of Service' was adopted, which introduced the exact procedure for the service of feudal lords. It was established the norm, from what amount of land - estates or patrimony should go out one warrior on horseback.

According to this reform, local power passed into the hands of elected representatives from the local population. The diplomas, which were given to the volosts to be governed by their elect, were called 'otkupnymi,' the parish with a certain amount repaid from the governors and volostels. The government gave her the right to pay off as a result of her request, but if she did not beat the brow, she considered that the new order was unprofitable for her, and then she remained with the old one.

The Elected Council apparently did not have a carefully designed program of actions; ideas were born from the rulers in the very process of transformation.

Not all Elected government managed to implement. The question of the degree of personal participation of Ivan IV in the government activities of the 1950s remains open, because in official documents it is impossible to separate what Ivan himself did from the results of the activities of advisers.

And, although he went to the elected parliament, Ivan IV accused her of usurping power and refused to implement part of the reforms, the main thing was that he called for the rule of such politicians as Adashev and Selivestra and apparently submitted to their influence. Perhaps it is not by chance that from these years of life of the terrible king there is no news of outbursts of anger, executions, etc.

The End of His Government

In 1560, the government circle of Selivestra and Adashev was removed from power, and his personal figures were in disgrace. Disagreements and mutual displeasure were the reason for the logical conclusion. A significant place was given to the case, which occurred back in 1553, when a seriously ill young king raised the question of the heir. The king wanted the boyars to swear allegiance to their only son, who was only about five months old. Among the confidants there were disagreements, it was suggested that the elderly prince Vladimir Andreevich should become the heir, and some Rada figures supported this nomination.

After some time the incident was over: all swore to the baby, including Prince Vladimir Andreevich himself, the king recovered, and the prince did not live to be a year old.

But the sludge remained and after 12 years Ivan the Terrible wrote to Kurbsky that 'Selivestr and Adashev, forgetting the tsar's blessings, wanted to destroy our baby, having reigned Prince Volodimer.' When the government of the Elected Rada of Selivestra fell, it was tonsured into monks and sent first to Kirillo-Belozersky, and then to the Solovetsky Monastery. Alexei Adashev and his brother Danilo were sent to serve in Livonia, where the war was going on. After a while Alexei was no longer alive, andDanilo was imprisoned and two years later he was executed. (1; 98) It was believed that the discrepancy between Ivan and the elected Rada lay in the field of foreign policy. Tsar Ivan accused Selivestra and Adashev of opposing the Livonian War and 'opposing'. Adashev and Selivestre, clever and gifted politicians, could, after the outbreak of the conflict with Livonia, when it became clear that the Grand Duchy of Livonia and Poland would be opponents of Russia in this war, be convinced of futility and advise the tsar to find ways to honorably come out of the difficult situation. The sense of reality did not allow us to lead the former eastern direction of foreign policy in the south. Selivestr and Adashev knew that behind the back of the Crimean Khanate was a mighty Ottoman Empire. Only defense, no offensive actions against the Crimea, this option was the only possible one. It is not without reason that in the letters to the Kurbsky king Ivan did not dare repeat the lie about the fact that Adashev quarreled Russia with the Crimean khan.

Ivan the Terrible connects his break with the advisers with the death of his first wife - Queen Anastasia, directly accusing yesterday's interlocutors of the murder. In bad relations with the leaders of the Elected Rada were relatives of Anastasia - Zakharyiny. Court quarrels between the Zakharyins and the temporary workers after the death of the queen acquired an ominous shade in the eyes of the tsar; he particularly liked to remember someone else's guilt. (2; 55) However, the quarrels over Anastasia became only the last straw in the discord between the tsar and the advisers. It was the cooling of relations that made Ivan IV believe in absurd accusations. The psychological conflict was that both Adashev and Selivestre and their associates were very powerful people, with a strong will.

But Tsar Ivan was also very power-hungry. As a man easily impressed, Tsar Ivan could for a time tolerate submission to someone else's will: I say it's autocratic, that I can even listen to the advice of my subjects. But how easily he was attached to people, just as easily and dealt with former favorites. Adashev and Sylvester must have overestimated their influence on the tsar and did not notice the moment from which the tsar began to obey them with ever greater reluctance. And then the king's attachment to his advisors turned into a burning hatred.

But this psychological conflict was the result of another conflict - between different ideas about the methods of centralization of the country. Structural reforms conducted by the government of the Elected Council, like all structural reforms, went slowly, their fruits did not ripen immediately. The impatient man, as was Tsar Ivan, it seemed that there was no result, that nothing had been done.

The accelerated path of centralization in the conditions of Russia in the 16th century was possible only with the use of terror. And first of all, because the apparatus of state power was not yet formed. During the reign of the Elected Rada, the court of feeders in the localities was replaced by the administration through electives from the local population, but, fulfilling their administrative duties, in fact on a voluntary basis, the labial and zemstvo headmen are not yet the apparatus of power. The central government was weak, did not have its agents on the ground.

Cruelty, terror is an indicator of the weakness of power, its inability to achieve its goals in the usual ways. Instead of a long and complicated work on the creation of the state apparatus, Tsar Ivan tried to resort to the most 'simple' method: 'do not do - order,' 'do not obey - execute'. But this path of terror was unacceptable for the elected Rada and although the severity and cruelty of punishments fit into the value system of the century: people were even hanged on suspicion of robbery, confession was obtained through torture officially formalized, the only type of imprisonment was considered life, from servicemen Unquestioning obedience was required, this was not an atmosphere of mass terror, universal fear, mass denunciation.

Hence follows the resistance of Sylvester and Adashev to one or another of the initiatives of the Tsar and perseverance in enforcing his own predestination. The conflict was resolved by the fall of the Chosen government.