The election of a king. The first chosen tsar - Pre-Petrine Rus

During the Time of Troubles, Russia underwent a number of transformations in the social, political and religious spheres of life. The peak of these social transformations, which marked the end of the Time of Troubles and the onset of political stability, was the Zemsky Sobor of 1613.

Ivan IV (the Terrible) did not leave a single heir behind him. It was the fact of the presence of a free throne that caused the Troubles in the Russian state. Troubles meant endless attempts by internal and external forces to seize power.

At the same time, during the period of the XVI-XVII centuries. Numerous Zemsky Sobors were convened, which served as an advisory body to the sovereign. The most important goal of the Zemsky Sobor was the election of a new autocrat and a new ruling dynasty. As a result of the council on January 16, the first tsar from the Romanov dynasty was elected.

What were the prerequisites for convening the Zemsky Sobor?

1. the dynastic crisis that began as early as 1598 as a result of the death of Fyodor Ioannovich, who was the only heir to Ivan the Terrible;
2. alternate and frequent change of power: from the wife of Fyodor Irina to Boris Godunov, from Boris Godunov to his son Fyodor, and then to False Dmitry the First and Vasily Shuisky, and as a result of the uprising against Shuisky - to the interim government.
3. decentralization and political stratification of society: one part of the Russian population swore allegiance to Prince Vladislav, the northwestern part of the population was under Swedish occupation, and the part near Moscow was under the influence of the camp of the deposed False Dmitry II.

How was the preparation of the cathedral?

After the expulsion of foreign invaders from Russia in 1612, the opportunity arose for the election of a new monarch. To this end, Minin, Trubetskoy and Pozharsky sent letters of invitation to all parts of Russia, in which representatives of the nobility were called to the All-Russian Council. But no one expected that people would come for so long. Throughout the country there were riots and chaos. Only in the Tver region, almost all the cities were burned to the ground and completely devastated. From some areas only 1 representative was sent, from others - 10 each. This contributed to the transfer of the cathedral for a whole month - from December to January. Historians estimate the number of participants in the January Cathedral at 700-1500 people. Such a number of people at that time could only be accommodated in Moscow by the Assumption Cathedral, in which the Zemsky Sobor took place.

Who were the contenders for the royal throne?

• Polish prince Vladislav;
• False Dmitry II;
• Swedish prince Carl-Philip;
• King of England James I;
• son Ivan (his historians call him "Vorenok");
• Golitsyns;
• Romanovs;
• Mstislavsky;
• Kurakins;
• Vorotynsky;
• Godunovs;
• Shuisky;
• Prince Dmitry Pozharsky;
• Prince Dmitry Trubetskoy.

Who took part in the election of the king?

The cathedral was numerous and was represented by:

• noble boyars, who were divided into two approximately equal camps: some considered Fyodor Mstislavsky or Vasily Golitsyn to be the ideal contender, while others considered Mikhail Romanov;
• nobles who voted for Dmitry Trubetskoy, whom they considered "their own", but who also had the rank of "boyar";
• the clergy, in particular Filaret (father of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov), who was the patriarch in Tushen and was very respected there;
• the Cossacks, who changed their preferences depending on who was ready to pay them: at first they supported the Tushenskys, and then they were ready to put someone who would have something to do with Tushin to the kingdom;
• representatives from the peasants;
• city ​​elders.

Today, the only historical source from which we can find out about the real composition of the cathedral is the electoral letter of Mikhail Fedorovich. Representatives from different parts of the country left signatures on this letter. It is known for sure that there were at least 700 participants in the cathedral. But only 227 people left their signatures on the letter. This may mean that many people simply refused to sign the letter. And this can be proved at least on the example of Nizhny Novgorod. There were 19 of its representatives at the council, and only four signed. Among these 277 signatures were representatives of all major classes.

Approved letter of election to the Moscow state of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov

How did the Zemsky Sobor end?

The first decision of the council was the approval of a mandatory condition for candidates for the throne - the monarch had to be Russian and in no way relate to strangers.

The second decision was that the cathedral elected Mikhail Romanov as tsar, who at the time of the council was only 16 years old. As a result, all power was concentrated in the hands of one legitimate monarch, who founded a stable ruling dynasty. The Russian state was able to stop the attacks of the Kingdom of Poland, Germany and Sweden, which sought to take the free Russian throne.

A delegation from the Zemsky Sobor arrived in Kostroma to notify Mikhail of his election. He was able to come to Moscow for the coronation only in May 1613.

Unfortunately, very few authentic documents have survived to this day that would shed light on all the subtleties of those events and decisions. We only know about numerous intrigues around the cathedral. This is quite natural, given the responsibility and scale of the decision being made. Entire dynasties could lose their influence. For the country, this was the only opportunity to get out of the political crisis.

Why did they choose Mikhail Romanov?

His figure is not at all accidental in big politics. He was the nephew of Fyodor Ivanovich and the son of Patriarch Filaret (who was very popular with the Cossacks and the clergy). Fyodor Sheremetyev vigorously campaigned for his choice among the boyars. The main argument that was supposed to convince the boyars to vote for Mikhail Romanov was his youth and inexperience (which automatically meant the possibility of creating his own puppet on the throne). But it didn't work initially.

Moreover, after 1613, the voters wished that Mikhail came to Moscow. But for the modest and timid Mikhail, this demand was very untimely. He would simply make a bad impression on voters. For this reason, the Romanovs convinced the others that the road from Kostroma to Moscow was a very dangerous one in the current political situation. Ultimately, this requirement was dropped.

It is impossible to unambiguously explain the reasons for choosing the Romanov dynasty. Most researchers agree on the assumption that the figure of Mikhail Romanov was the most convenient for all Russian dynasties. In fact, at the very beginning of his reign, all power functions were not with Michael, but with his father Filaret, who ruled the country on behalf of his son.

By the way, the main argument against Michael at the council was the friendly ties of his father Filaret with False Dmitry I, who made him his metropolitan, and with False Dmitry II, who made Filaret Patriarch. Such friendly relations, according to the decision of the cathedral, were unacceptable for a candidate for the throne.

What was the role of the Cossacks in the conduct of the cathedral?

The Cossacks played a significant role in the victory of the Romanovs. According to an eyewitness, in February the boyars decided to choose a monarch "at random", tritely casting lots. The Cossacks didn't like it. And their orators began defiantly loudly speaking out against such tricks of the boyars. At the same time, the Cossacks shouted the name of Mikhail, offering to choose his candidacy. The Cossacks were immediately supported by the "Romanovites". And as a result, most of the boyars opted for Mikhail.

The role of the British in legitimizing the cathedral?

The first foreigners who recognized the legitimacy of the newly elected monarch were the British. In the same year, England sent its representatives to Moscow under the leadership of John Metric. From this event, the accession of the Romanov dynasty was finally established. Mikhail Romanov was grateful to the British. The newly elected monarch restored relations with the English "Moscow Company", provided preferential terms of trade for English merchants with other foreigners, as well as with Russian "big business".

What are the features and uniqueness of the Zemsky Cathedral?

Among historians, disputes are still ongoing about the relativity of the procedure for choosing Tsar Michael. But at the same time, no one argues that this cathedral has become unique in Russian history, because:

• the cathedral was the most massive, numerous among all Zemsky cathedrals;
• all classes participated in the cathedral (except for serfs and childless peasants) - there were no analogues to this in Russia;
• an ambiguous, but most important decision for the country was made at the council;
• the cathedral chose not the most prominent and strong candidate, which serves as a pretext for the assumption of intrigues and bribery.

What were the results, the historical significance of the Zemsky Sobor and the choice of Mikhail Romanov?

1. exit from the dynastic crisis;
2. end of the Time of Troubles;
3. rapid economic growth;
4. centralization of power;
5. urbanization and growth in the number of cities (up to 300 by the end of the 17th century);
6. geopolitical advance towards the Pacific Ocean;
7. growth of agricultural turnover;
8. the creation of a single economic system as a result of the growth of trade, small and large trade between the most remote regions of Russia;
9. increasing the role of estates in the administrative system;
10. social consolidation and ideological unity of the people;
11. strengthening the socio-political system of government in Moscow and in certain districts;
12. preparing the ground for the transformation of the Russian monarchy into an absolutist one;
13. further replacement of cathedrals by the procedure for confirming the legitimacy of the heir at meetings under the king;
14. the principle of election was replaced by the principle of administrative delegation.

Royal regalia of Mikhail Feodorovich - the first Russian Tsar of the Romanov dynasty. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

Today, our entire country elects the head of state - the President of Russia. For us, this is not the first election. However, the election of the head of state took place not only in modern history.

Chronicles of Tsargrad: Is Ivan the Terrible?

Strange as it may seem today, Tsars were also elected in Russia: Feodor Ioannovich, Boris Godunov, Vasily Shuisky, the failed tsar, the Polish prince Vladislav. In 1613, not just the election of the Tsar took place, but the whole Romanov Dynasty, to which our people swore on the cross to be faithful until the end of time, and which reigned for 300 years. How and why were tsars elected in Russia?

In 1533, during a serious illness, Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible made a will in which he transferred the throne to his one-year-old son, Tsarevich Dimitri Ioannovich. However, the child drowned under strange circumstances in the same year. The recovered Ivan Vasilyevich bequeathed the throne to his next son, Tsarevich Ivan Ivanovich, but he died in 1581, most likely from mercury poisoning. Three years later, on March 18, 1584, the Tsar himself suddenly died, leaving no will.

In that era, there was no law on succession to the throne, but there was an unspoken rule that the closest relative of the Monarch, most often the eldest son, would take the throne. However, the election of the Tsar in Russia was almost always carried out by the Zemsky Sobor, which met after the death of the previous sovereign and was held to approve the candidacy of the heir even in the case when the line of succession was obvious. The convocation of the Council is presented as the result of an initiative "of the entire multitude of popular Christianity, from end to end of all the states of the Russian kingdom."

The last Rurikovich on the Russian throne is Tsar Theodore Ioannovich. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

The same thing happened with Theodore Ioannovich. The Council of 1584 was not a formal confirmation of the son of Ivan the Terrible on the throne. Shortly before his death, Ivan Vasilyevich appointed a board of trustees, which was supposed to help his son Theodore Ivanovich govern the state. The council included the uncle of the Tsar Nikita Romanovich Zakharyin-Yuriev, princes Ivan Fedorovich Mstislavsky, Ivan Petrovich Shuisky, boyars Bogdan Yakovlevich Belsky and Boris Fedorovich Godunov. Between them began a struggle for influence. The throne was claimed by the relatives of the last wife of Tsar Ivan the Terrible, Maria Nagoya, from whom there was a young son, Tsarevich Dimitri Ioannovich. According to the chronicler, eminent people came from all cities to Moscow and prayed with tears to Tsarevich Theodore that he would be king in the Muscovite state and be crowned with a royal crown. Strongly stood for Theodore and the common people, who loved the meek and Christ-loving Tsarevich. As a result, according to the Pskov Chronicle:

As soon as the Nizhny Novgorod militia arose, its leaders were more concerned with the immediate election of a new Tsar than with the liberation of Moscow from the Poles. The popular masses were imbued with the same demand. All Russians agreed on this: both the Zemshchina and the Cossacks could not imagine Russia "stateless". " Not only boyars, everyone needs the Emperor", - said the Russian people. The people demanded from Prince Pozharsky the election of the Tsar, when the militia was still moving towards Moscow. In the capital itself, shortly before the convocation of the council, the sentiments expressed by the chronicler dominated:

Moscow is crowded and rich, and for that we all promise that everyone will die for the Orthodox Faith, and do not have the king's son for the kingdom.

The Council of 1613, which elected Mikhail Feodorovich Romanov Tsar, was one of the most complete "councils of the whole earth" both in terms of the number and social status of those participating in it. In December 1612, representatives of many cities gathered in Moscow. Judging by the signatures on the electoral certificate, more than 40 cities sent their elected representatives. Nizhny Novgorod alone sent at least nineteen of its representatives to the council of 1612-1613, not counting nobles and boyar children. As noted by S.F. Platonov: " All sections of the free population participated in the great state and zemstvo work of the tsar's "choosing". Some works of the 17th century make us understand that the matter at the Council was not without friction.

Having come to Moscow ... from all sorts of ranks, all sorts of people, - the New Chronicler tells about the election of Tsar Michael, - the election of the Sovereign has begun. And there was a lot of excitement for every person: everyone wants to do something according to their own thoughts, everyone about whom they say: without remembering the scriptures, like "God is not only a kingdom, but also power, to whom He wants, He gives; and whom God calls, He will glorify" .

At the Council, the question was raised about the candidacy of the Swedish Prince Carl-Philip, voices were heard from supporters of Prince Vladislav. Russian people of the XVI-XVII centuries. were devoted to the national idea. In addition, the unsuccessful choice of Vladislav and the disasters that followed him even more reeled Russia from the thought of a foreign sovereign. There were supporters of the princes D.T. Trubetskoy and D.I. Pozharsky. Their candidacies were put up for the Council. However, being aristocratically inclined, they turned against themselves very many Russian people, and perhaps precisely by raising the question of a foreign tsar. Moreover, the Cossacks did not like Pozharsky, and the Zemstvo was unpleasant to Trubetskoy.

The founder of the three-hundred-year-old Romanov dynasty is Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich. Photo: www.globallookpress.com

Finally, after many disagreements, the candidate who stood for the Cossacks and the Zemshchina triumphed: the young Mikhail Feodorovich Romanov. One of the district representatives spoke about him, some Galician son of a boyar. He recalled the relationship of the Romanovs with the royal family of Ivan the Terrible. Council meetings were apparently noisy. They argued a lot and got excited. But when the ordinary zemshchina and the Cossacks unanimously put forward their candidate, disputes and quarrels ceased. The Russian people felt that unanimity had been reached, that the Troubles were coming to an end, and they perked up. Then faithful people were sent to different cities of Russia to secretly visit "whoever they want to be the Sovereign Tsar on the Muscovite state." On February 21, 1613, those who were sent arrived with a unanimous response of agreement with the conciliar election. Then "in the great Moscow palace, in the presence, inside and out, of all the people from all the cities of Russia," Mikhail Feodorovich Romanov was solemnly proclaimed Tsar of the Russian land.

L.P. Reshetnikov notes:

The king is a lad, spiritually pure, who has not stained himself with fratricidal strife, power struggles, and perjury. In Kostroma, a historic act of acceptance by the Romanovs and the entire Russian people of a grandiose historical task took place. The Romanovs (the very name of the new dynasty carried a mystical semantic load that spoke of its historical purpose: the embodiment of the idea of ​​the Third Rome in life) were well understood. In March 1613, in Kostroma, the House of Romanovs inherited a small devastated state. Just think about it, several regions of central Russia, virtually deprived of access to the seas, gripped by criminal terror and the emerging religious schism. And after 300 years it was the greatest Empire, stretching from Warsaw to Vladivostok, from the Land of Emperor Nicholas II to Kushka. It's not just about borders and territories. We live in the state that was created under their leadership, we live in the cities they erected, we move along the roads laid and built in their still majority in their reign. We are proud to name the world-famous names of Pushkin, Lermontov, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, Tolstoy, who could become a phenomenon only in the Romanov Empire. For the past 100 years we have been trying to destroy the great state created under the leadership of the Romanovs with a tenacity worthy of a better use. They destroyed the insane experiments of forceful imposition of the red model, and then the liberal one, and achieved results here, and almost halved, and the people are dying out in various ways. But at the same time, look at what a powerful structure was created by the leadership of the House of Romanov. We are not only still alive, but a new life is being born, again life with God.

Before Peter the Great, the reckoning in Russia started from the creation of the world.

Reshetnikov L.P.

Reshetnikov L.P. The accession of the Romanovs - a new historical mission // The accession of the Romanovs - a new historical mission

sp-force-hide ( display: none;).sp-form ( display: block; background: #ffffff; padding: 15px; width: 630px; max-width: 100%; border-radius: 8px; -moz-border -radius: 8px; -webkit-border-radius: 8px; font-family: inherit;).sp-form input ( display: inline-block; opacity: 1; visibility: visible;).sp-form .sp-form -fields-wrapper ( margin: 0 auto; width: 600px;).sp-form .sp-form-control ( background: #ffffff; border-color: #30374a; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px; font-size: 15px; padding-left: 8.75px; padding-right: 8.75px; border-radius: 3px; -moz-border-radius: 3px; -webkit-border-radius: 3px; height: 35px; width: 100%;).sp-form .sp-field label ( color: #444444; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal;).sp-form .sp-button ( border-radius : 4px; -moz-border-radius: 4px; -webkit-border-radius: 4px; background-color: #002da5; color: #ffffff; width: auto; font-weight: 700; font-style: normal; font -family: Arial, sans-serif; box-shadow: none; -moz-box-shadow: none; -webk it-box-shadow: none;).sp-form .sp-button-container ( text-align: center;)

Zemsky Sobors are the Russian version of estate-representative democracy. They fundamentally differed from Western European parliaments by the absence of a war of "all against all".

According to the dry encyclopedic language, the Zemsky Sobor is the central estate-representative institution of Russia in the middle of the 16th-17th centuries. Many historians believe that Zemsky Sobors and estate-representative institutions of other countries are phenomena of the same order, subject to the general laws of historical development, although each country had its own specific features. Parallels can be seen in the activities of the English Parliament, the States General in France and the Netherlands, the Reichstag and the Landtags of Germany, the Scandinavian Rikstags, the Diets in Poland and the Czech Republic. Foreign contemporaries noted similarities in the activities of the cathedrals and their parliaments.

It should be noted that the very term "Zemsky Sobor" is a later invention of historians. Contemporaries called them "sobor" (along with other types of meetings) "council", "zemstvo council". The word "zemstvo" in this case means state, public.

The first council was convened in 1549. It adopted the Sudebnik of Ivan the Terrible, approved in 1551 by the Stoglavy Cathedral. The Sudebnik contains 100 articles and has a general pro-state orientation, eliminates the judicial privileges of specific princes and strengthens the role of the central state judicial bodies.

What was the composition of the cathedrals? This issue is considered in detail by the historian V.O. Klyuchevsky in his work “The composition of the representation at the zemstvo councils of ancient Russia”, where he analyzes the composition of the councils on the basis of the representation of 1566 and 1598. From the council of 1566, dedicated to the Livonian War (the council advocated its continuation), a sentence letter, a full protocol, have been preserved with a list of names of all the ranks of the cathedral, a total of 374 people. Council members can be divided into 4 groups:

1. Spiritual persons - 32 persons.
It included the archbishop, bishops, archimandrites, abbots and monastery elders.

2. Boyars and sovereign people - 62 people.
It consisted of boyars, okolnichi, sovereign clerks and other senior officials with a total of 29 people. The same group included 33 ordinary clerks and clerks. representatives - they were invited to the council by virtue of their official position.

3. Military service people - 205 people.
It included 97 nobles of the first article, 99 nobles and children
boyars of the second article, 3 Toropetsky and 6 Lutsk landowners.

4. Merchants and industrialists - 75 people.
This group consisted of 12 merchants of the highest rank, 41 ordinary Moscow merchants - “Muscovite merchants”, as they are called in the “conciliar charter”, and 22 representatives of the commercial and industrial class. The government expected advice from them in improving the system of tax collection, in the conduct of commercial and industrial affairs, which required trading experience, some technical knowledge that the clerks and indigenous governments did not possess.

In the 16th century Zemsky Sobors were not elective. “Choice as a special authority for a particular case was not then recognized as a necessary condition for representation,” wrote Klyuchevsky. - A metropolitan nobleman from Pereyaslav or Yuryev landowners was a representative of Pereyaslav or Yuryev nobles at the cathedral because he was the head of the Pereyaslav or Yuryev hundreds, and he became the head because he was a metropolitan nobleman; he became a metropolitan nobleman because he was one of the best Pereyaslav or Yuryev service people ‘in the fatherland and in the service’”.

From the beginning of the 17th century the situation has changed. When changing dynasties, new monarchs (Boris Godunov, Vasily Shuisky, Mikhail Romanov) needed recognition of their royal title by the population, which made class representation more necessary. This circumstance contributed to some expansion of the social composition of the “elected”. In the same century, the principle of the formation of the "Tsar's Court" changed, and the nobles began to be elected from the counties. Russian society, left to its own devices during the Time of Troubles, “involuntarily learned to act independently and consciously, and the idea began to emerge in it that it, this society, the people, was not a political accident, as Moscow people used to feel, not aliens, not temporary inhabitants in someone's state ... Next to the sovereign's will, and sometimes in its place, now more than once there was another political force - the will of the people, expressed in the verdicts of the Zemsky Sobor, "wrote Klyuchevsky.

What was the election procedure?

The convocation of the cathedral was carried out by a draft letter, which was heard from the king to famous people and localities. The letter contained the agenda items, the number of electives. If the number was not determined, it was decided by the population itself. The letters of conscription clearly stipulated that “the best people”, “kind and smart people”, to whom “Tsar and Zemstvo affairs are customary”, “with whom one could talk”, “who would be able to tell grievances and violence and disgrace and what to fill the Muscovite state with” and “to arrange the Muscovite state so that everyone comes to dignity”, etc.

It is worth noting that there were no requirements for the property status of candidates. In this aspect, the only limitation was that only those who paid taxes to the treasury, as well as people who served, could participate in the elections held by estates.

As noted above, sometimes the number of elected people who needed to be sent to the council was determined by the population itself. As A.A. Rozhnov in the article “Zemsky Sobors of Moscow Russia: Legal Characteristics and Significance”, such an indifferent attitude of the government to the quantitative indicators of popular representation was not accidental. On the contrary, it obviously followed from the very task of the latter, which was to convey the position of the population to the Supreme Power, to give it the opportunity to be heard by it. Therefore, the determining factor was not the number of persons who were part of the Council, but the degree to which they reflected the interests of the people.

Cities together with their counties constituted constituencies. At the end of the elections, a protocol of the meeting was drawn up, which was certified by all those participating in the elections. At the end of the elections, a “choice by hand” was drawn up - an election protocol, sealed with the signatures of voters and confirming the suitability of the chosen ones for the “Sovereign and Zemstvo cause”. After that, the elected persons with the "reply" of the governor and "the electoral list at hand" went to Moscow to the Discharge Order, where the clerks were convinced of the correctness of the elections.

The deputies received orders from voters, mostly verbal, and upon their return from the capital they had to report on the work done. There are cases when attorneys, who failed to satisfy all the requests of local residents, asked the government to issue them special “safe” letters that would guarantee them protection from “every bad thing” from disgruntled voters:
“They, elected people, in the cities, the governors from city people, were ordered to protect them from all sorts of bad things, so that your sovereign at the Council Code, according to the petition of the Zemstvo people, did not teach your sovereign’s decree against all articles”

The work of the delegates at the Zemsky Sobor was carried out mainly free of charge, on a “voluntary basis”. Voters provided the elected only with a "reserve", that is, they paid for their travel and accommodation in Moscow. The state, however, only occasionally, at the request of the people's deputies themselves, "commended" them for carrying out the deputy duty.

Issues decided by Councils.

1. The election of the king.
Council of 1584 Election of Fyodor Ioannovich.

According to the spiritual 1572, Tsar Ivan the Terrible appointed his eldest son Ivan as his successor. But the death of the heir at the hands of his father in 1581 abolished this testamentary disposition, and the tsar did not have time to draw up a new will. So his second son Fedor, becoming the eldest, was left without a legal title, without an act that would give him the right to the throne. This missing act was created by the Zemsky Sobor.

Council of 1589 Election of Boris Godunov.
Tsar Fedor died on January 6, 1598. The ancient crown - Monomakh's cap - was put on by Boris Godunov, who won the struggle for power. Among his contemporaries and descendants, many considered him a usurper. But such a view was thoroughly shaken thanks to the works of V. O. Klyuchevsky. A well-known Russian historian argued that Boris was elected by the correct Zemsky Sobor, that is, it included representatives of the nobility, clergy and the upper classes of the townspeople. Klyuchevsky's opinion was supported by S. F. Platonov. Godunov's accession, he wrote, was not the result of intrigue, for the Zemsky Sobor chose him quite consciously and knew better than we did what he was choosing for.

Cathedral of 1610 Election of the Polish king Vladislav.
The commander of the Polish troops advancing from the west to Moscow, hetman Zolkiewski, demanded from the “seven boyars” the confirmation of the agreement between the Tushino Boyar Duma and Sigismund III and the recognition of Prince Vladislav as the Moscow tsar. "Seven Boyars" did not enjoy authority and accepted Zholkevsky's ultimatum. She announced that Vladislav would convert to Orthodoxy after receiving the Russian crown. In order to give the election of Vladislav to the kingdom the appearance of legality, a semblance of a Zemsky Sobor hastily gathered. That is, the Council of 1610 cannot be called a full-fledged legitimate Zemsky Sobor. In this case, it is interesting that the Cathedral in the eyes of the then boyars was a necessary tool for the legitimization of Vladislav on the Russian throne.

Council of 1613 Election of Mikhail Romanov.
After the expulsion of the Poles from Moscow, the question arose of electing a new tsar. Letters were sent from Moscow to many Russian cities on behalf of the liberators of Moscow - Pozharsky and Trubetskoy. Information came about the documents sent to Sol Vychegodskaya, Pskov, Novgorod, Uglich. These letters, dated mid-November 1612, ordered representatives of each city to arrive in Moscow before December 6, 1612. As a result of the fact that some of the candidates were late with their arrival, the cathedral began its work a month later - on January 6, 1613. The number of participants in the cathedral is estimated from 700 to 1500 people. Among the candidates for the throne were representatives of such noble families as the Golitsyns, Mstislavskys, Kurakins and others. Pozharsky and Trubetskoy themselves put forward their candidacies. As a result of the elections, Mikhail Romanov won. It should be noted that in the Council of 1613 for the first time in their history, black-snouted peasants took part.

Cathedral of 1645. Approval on the throne of Alexei Mikhailovich
For several decades, the new royal dynasty could not be sure of the firmness of its positions and at first needed a formal consent of the estates. As a consequence of this, in 1645, after the death of Mikhail Romanov, another "electoral" council was convened, which approved his son Alexei on the throne.

Cathedral of 1682. Approval of Peter Alekseevich.
In the spring of 1682, the last two "electoral" zemstvo sobors in the history of Russia were held. At the first of them, on April 27, Peter Alekseevich was elected tsar. On the second, on May 26, both younger sons of Alexei Mikhailovich, Ivan and Peter, became kings.

2. Questions of war and peace

In 1566, Ivan the Terrible gathered estates to find out the opinion of the "land" on the continuation of the Livonian War. The significance of this meeting is set off by the fact that the cathedral worked in parallel with the Russian-Lithuanian negotiations. Estates (both nobles and townspeople) supported the king in his intention to continue hostilities.

In 1621, a Council was convened regarding the violation of the Deulino truce of 1618 by the Commonwealth. In 1637, 1639, 1642. estate representatives gathered in connection with the complication of Russia's relations with the Crimean Khanate and Turkey, after the capture of the Turkish fortress of Azov by the Don Cossacks.

In February 1651, the Zemsky Sobor was held, the participants of which unanimously spoke in favor of supporting the uprising of the Ukrainian people against the Commonwealth, but no concrete assistance was provided then. October 1, 1653 Zemsky Sobor adopted a historic decision on the reunification of Ukraine with Russia.

3. Financial matters

In 1614, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1632 and later Zemsky Sobors determined the amount of additional fees from the population, decided the question of the fundamental possibility of such fees. Councils 1614-1618 made decisions on "pyatins" (collecting a fifth of the income) for the maintenance of service people. After that, "Pyatynshchiki" - officials who collected the file, using the text of the conciliar "verdict" (decision) as a document, traveled around the country.

4. Domestic policy issues
The very first Zemsky Sobor, which we have already written about, was devoted precisely to internal issues - the adoption of the judge Ivan the Terrible. The Zemsky Sobor of 1619 resolved issues related to the restoration of the country after the Time of Troubles and the determination of the direction of domestic policy in the new situation. The Council of 1648 - 1649, caused by mass urban uprisings, resolved issues of relations between landlords and peasants, determined the legal status of estates and estates, strengthened the position of the autocracy and the new dynasty in Russia, and influenced the solution of a number of other issues.

The following year, after the adoption of the Council Code, the council was once again convened to stop the uprisings in Novgorod and Pskov, which could not be suppressed by force, especially since the rebels retained their principled loyalty to the monarch, that is, they did not refuse to recognize his authority. The last "zemstvo council", concerning domestic policy issues, was convened in 1681-1682. It was devoted to carrying out the next transformations in Russia. The most important of the results was the “conciliar act” on the abolition of parochialism, which made it possible in principle to increase the efficiency of the administrative apparatus in Russia.

Duration of the cathedral

Meetings of members of the cathedral lasted unequal times: some groups of elected conferred (for example, at the council of 1642) for several days, others for several weeks. The duration of the activities of the collections themselves, as institutions, was also not the same: issues were resolved either in a few hours (for example, the council of 1645, which swore allegiance to the new Tsar Alexei), then within several months (the cathedrals of 1648 - 1649, 1653). In 1610-1613. Under the militias, the Zemsky Sobor turns into the supreme body of power (both legislative and executive), which decides questions of domestic and foreign policy and operates almost continuously.

Completion of the history of cathedrals

In 1684, the last Zemsky Sobor in Russian history was convened and dissolved.
He decided the question of eternal peace with Poland. After that, the Zemsky Sobors no longer met, which was the inevitable result of the reforms carried out by Peter I of the entire social structure of Russia and the strengthening of the absolute monarchy.

Significance of cathedrals

From a legal point of view, the power of the tsar was always absolute, and he was not obliged to obey the zemstvo councils. Councils were an excellent means for the government to find out the mood of the country, to get information about the state of the state, whether it could bear new taxes, wage war, what abuses existed, and how to eradicate them. But the councils were most important to the government in that they used their authority to carry out such measures as under other circumstances would have aroused displeasure, and even resistance. Without the moral support of the councils, it would not have been possible to collect for many years those numerous new taxes that were imposed on the population under Michael to cover urgent government expenses. If the cathedral, or the whole earth, has decided, then there is nothing to do: willy-nilly, one has to fork out beyond measure, and even give away the last savings. It is necessary to note the qualitative difference between zemstvo sobors and European parliaments - there was no parliamentary war of groups at the sobors. Unlike similar Western European institutions, the Russian Councils, having real political power, did not oppose the Supreme Power and did not weaken it, extorting rights and benefits for themselves, but, on the contrary, served to consolidate and strengthen the Russian kingdom.

Application. List of all cathedrals

Quoted from:

1549 February 27-28. About reconciliation with the boyars, about the governor's court, about judicial and zemstvo reform, about compiling the Sudebnik.

1551 from February 23 to May 11. About church and state reforms. Drawing up the "Cathedral Code" (Stoglav).

January 1565 3. On the messages of Ivan the Terrible from Alexandrova Sloboda to Moscow with a notice that due to "changing deeds" he "left his state."

1580 no later than January 15. On church and monastery land tenure.

1584 no later than July 20. On the abolition of church and monastery tarkhans.

May 1604 15. About the break with the Crimean Khan Kazy-Girey and the organization of a campaign against his troops.

1607 February 3-20. On the release of the population from the oath to False Dmitry I and on the forgiveness of perjury against Boris Godunov.

1610 no later than January 18. On sending an embassy from Tushin near Smolensk on behalf of the Zemsky Sobor for negotiations with King Sigismund III on Zemstvo affairs.

February 1610 14. Reciprocal act on behalf of King Sigismund III, addressed to the Zemsky Sobor.

July 1610 17. On the deprivation of the throne of Tsar Vasily Shuisky and on the transfer of the state until the tsar was elected under the rule of the boyar government (“seven boyars”), headed by the boyar prince. F.I. Mstislavsky.

1610 August 17. Sentence record on behalf of the Zemsky Sobor with Hetman Zholkiewski on the recognition of the Polish prince Vladislav as the Russian Tsar.

1611 not later than March 4 (or from the end of March) to the second half of the year. The activities of the "council of all the earth" at the first militia.

1611 June 30. "Sentence" (constituent act) "of the whole earth" on the state structure and political orders.

October 1612 26. Act of recognition by the Polish interventionists and members of the boyar duma, who were under siege in Moscow, of the sovereignty of the Zemsky Sobor.

1613 no later than January to May. On the election of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov to the kingdom.

1613 to May 24. On the dispatch of collectors of money and supplies to the cities.

1614 to March 18. On the suppression of the movement of Zarutsky and the Cossacks.

1614 to April 6. On the collection of five-point money.

September 1614 1. About sending an embassy to the rebellious Cossacks with an exhortation to submit to the government.

1615 to April 29. On the recovery of five-point money.

1617 to June 8. On the recovery of five-point money.

1618 to April 11. On the recovery of the penny money.

1637 about September 24-28. About the attack of the Crimean prince Safat Giray and the collection of allowances and money for the salaries of military people.

1642 from January 3 to January not earlier than 17. Appeal to the Russian government of the Don Cossacks regarding the acceptance of Azov into the Russian state.

1651 February 28. On Russian-Polish relations and on the readiness of Bohdan Khmelnitsky to become Russian citizenship.

1653 May 25, June 5 (?), June 20-22 (?), October 1. About the war with Poland and the annexation of Ukraine.

Between November 24, 1681 and May 1682 6. Sobor of sovereign military and zemstvo affairs (on military, financial and zemstvo reforms).

May 23, 26, 29, 1682. On the election of John and Peter Alekseevich to the kingdom, and Princess Sophia as the supreme ruler.

There are 57 cathedrals in total. One must think that in reality there were more of them, and not only because many sources did not reach us or are still unknown, but also because in the proposed list the activities of some cathedrals (during the first, second militias) had to be indicated in general, in while there were probably more than one meeting, and it would be important to note each one.

The Zemsky Sobor of 1613 marked the end of the Time of Troubles and was supposed to bring order to the rule of Russia. Let me remind you that after the death of Ivan 4 (the Terrible), the place on the throne was free, since the tsar left no heirs. That is why the Troubles occurred, when both internal forces and external representatives carried out endless attempts to seize power.

Reasons for convening the Zemsky Sobor

After the foreign invaders were expelled not only from Moscow, but also from Russia, Minin, Pozharsky and Trubetskoy sent invitation letters to all the destinies of the country, urging all representatives of the nobility to come to the Cathedral, where a new tsar would be elected.

The Zemsky Sobor of 1613 opened in January, and it was attended by:

• Clergy
• Boyars
• nobles
• City Elders
• Peasant representatives
• Cossacks

In total, 700 people took part in the Zemsky Sobor.

The course of the Council and its decisions

The first decision that was approved by the Zemsky Sobor was that the tsar must be Russian. He must not refer to aliens in any way.

Marina Mniszek intended to crown her son Ivan (whom historians often call "Vorenok"), but after the decision of the Council that the tsar should not be a foreigner, she fled to Ryazan.

History reference

The events of those days must be considered from the point of view of the fact that there were a huge number of people who wanted to take a place on the throne. Therefore, groups began to form, which united, promoting their representative. There were several such groups:

• Noble boyars. This included representatives of the boyar family. One part of them believed that Fedor Mstislavsky or Vasily Golitsyn would become the ideal tsar for Russia. Others leaned towards the young Mikhail Romanov. The number of boyars by interests was divided approximately equally.
• Nobles. These were also noble people with great authority. They promoted their "king" - Dmitry Trubetskoy. The difficulty was that Trubetskoy had the rank of "boyar", which he had recently received in the Tushensky yard.
• Cossacks. By tradition, the Cossacks joined the one who had the money. In particular, they actively served the Tushensky court, and after the latter was dispersed, they began to support the tsar, who was related to Tushin.

Mikhail Romanov's father, Filaret, was a patriarch in the Tushensky court and enjoyed great respect there. Largely due to this fact, Mikhail was supported by the Cossacks and the clergy.

Karamzin

Romanov did not have many rights to the throne. The more serious claim to him was that his father was on friendly terms with both False Dmitrys. The first False Dmitry made Filaret a metropolitan and his protege, and the second False Dmitry appointed him patriarch and his protege. That is, Mikhail's father was on very friendly terms with foreigners, whom they had just got rid of by the decision of the Council of 1613, they decided not to call for power anymore.

results

The Zemsky Sobor of 1613 ended on February 21 - Mikhail Romanov was elected tsar. Now it is difficult to reliably speak about all the intricacies of the events of those days, since not so many documents have survived. Nevertheless, it is known for certain that the Cathedral was surrounded by complex intrigues. This is not surprising - the stakes were too high. The fate of the country and entire ruling dynasties was being decided.

The result of the Council was that Mikhail Romanov was elected to the kingdom, who at that time was only 16 years old. The unequivocal answer "Why exactly him?" no one will. Historians say that it was the most convenient figure for all dynasties. Allegedly, young Mikhail was an extremely suggestible person and he could be "managed as the majority needs." In fact, all the fullness of power (especially in the first years of the reign of Romanov) was not with the tsar himself, but with his father, Patriarch Filaret. It was he who actually ruled Russia on behalf of his son.

Feature and controversy

The main feature of the Zemsky Sobor of 1613 was its mass character. Representatives of all classes and estates, with the exception of serfs and rootless peasants, took part in deciding the future of the country. In fact, we are talking about an all-estate Council, which had no analogues in the history of Russia.

The second feature is the importance of the solution and its complexity. There is no definite answer why Romanov was chosen. After all, it was not the most obvious candidate. The entire Council was marked by a large number of intrigues, bribery attempts and other manipulations of people.

Summarizing, we can say that the Zemsky Sobor of 1613 was of great importance for the history of Russia. He concentrated power in the hands of the Russian tsar, laid the foundation for a new dynasty (the Romanovs) and delivered the country from constant problems and claims to the throne from the Germans, Poles, Swedes and others.

First elected king

Boris Godunov (1552-1605) did not belong to the Russian noble nobility. He was a descendant of the baptized Tatar Murza Chet, who came sometime in the 14th century. to serve the Moscow Prince Ivan Kalita. Boris Godunov began his service as a squire. He was responsible for the state of the royal bow, his quiver and arrows. In the last years of the reign of Ivan IV, Boris was one of the noble courtiers. He was married to the daughter of the head of the guardsmen, Malyuta Skuratov, and soon became a relative of the royal family. His sister, the beautiful Irina, married (at the choice of Ivan IV) Tsarevich Fyodor Ivanovich.

After the death of Ivan IV in 1584, his sons Fedor and two-year-old Dmitry became contenders for the Russian table. Two political groups hostile to each other immediately emerged. One, led by representatives of the old Velsky family, was for Dmitry, and the other, led by Boris Godunov, was for Fedor. Fedor will inherit the Russian throne. With this new monarch, a sick, physically weak person who looked more like a humble monk (“fasting” and “silent” - this is how his contemporaries characterized him), Boris Godunov will actually become one of the rulers of Russia.

When Ivan IV died, Boris Godunov was thirty-two years old. He was handsome, smart, business-like, according to some contemporaries - "lucid", but also cautious in his actions. He correctly understood the main problems of the state. Continuing the policy of Ivan IV, he abandoned the bloody repressions characteristic of the era of Ivan the Terrible. At the same time, he knew how to deftly eliminate his political opponents, who tried to influence the weak-willed king. Metropolitan Dionisy, who showed dissatisfaction with the behavior of Boris, was deposed. His place was taken by the Rostov Archbishop Job. In 1589 a patriarchate was established in Russia. Metropolitan Job will become the first patriarch of Russia.

However, many then realized that the new king would not be able to cope with the duties of the head of state. His father understood this too. On the eve of his death, he tried to surround his son with people loyal to him and experienced in the service. Among them was Fyodor's uncle (brother of his mother, Queen Anastasia) Nikita Romanovich Yuryev-Zakharyin, who, being close to Ivan IV, did not stain his name with any bad deeds - according to legend, he even interceded for the disgraced during the period of the oprichnina. He was respected by the boyars, which helped him to restrain their aggressiveness in civil strife.

Yuriev-Zakharyin died a year after the accession of Fyodor Ivanovich. The struggle for the possibility of influencing the king immediately became noticeable. The princes Shuisky and Mstislavsky were especially active. Boris soon got rid of these rivals: they were sent to distant prisons and monasteries.

Boris was friendly with the sons of Nikita Romanovich - with the young Romanovs (this is how Nikita's sons began to be called - after the name of their grandfather). Yuryev-Zakharyin before his death took an oath from Godunov that he would be a caring protector of his sons.

Godunov's power increased more and more. He has already become the "yard governor" of the tsar, "the governor of the kingdoms of Kazan and Astrakhan." It was then clear even to foreign guests that it was not Fyodor Ivanovich, but Boris Godunov, who ruled the state. The rise of Boris will be dissatisfied with a significant part of the princely-boyar elite.

Tsar Fedor had no children (his only daughter died in infancy), his younger brother Tsarevich Dmitry could become the heir to the table after his death. He was the son of Ivan IV and his last wife Maria Nagoya.

Special respect for the widow Maria Nagoya and her relatives was not shown in the royal environment, although Fyodor Ivanovich treated Dmitry with tenderness. Maria and her son did not live in the capital, but in the city of Uglich, which Ivan IV gave to Dmitry as an inheritance. This younger son of the king was also very sick. Dmitry was 7 years old when, in 1591, news came to Moscow that on May 15 he died, in the current expression, "from a stab wound in the neck."

After the ringing of the Uglich bells, which informed the people about the tragedy, the Uglich people immediately decided that the perpetrators of this terrible event were Boris Bityagovsky, Kochalov, and their comrades assigned to the prince, who, without waiting for an investigation, were killed.

A commission of inquiry was sent to Uglich, which was actively involved in the responsible work entrusted to it. Interrogations of witnesses to the incident and those who were the first to hear about it, who rang the bells and who ordered it, who participated in the murder of those suspected of attempting the life of the prince, were carried out using torture, as was then supposed. As a result, it was concluded that the prince "stabbed himself with a knife himself" during another epileptic seizure. The commission included Metropolitan Gelasy of Krutitsy, Prince Vasily Shuisky, recently returned from exile, and his relative, okolnichik Kleshnin. The Boyar Duma agreed with the conclusions of the commission, and the Uglichites, guilty of arbitrariness and death of people, were severely punished.

In 1598, Tsar Fedor died - the last of the Kalita family, from the Rurik dynasty, who ruled the Russian state for more than seven hundred years. Tsarina Irina was asked to become the head of state, but she refused, went to the monastery. The Zemsky Sobor, with the blessing of Patriarch Job, elected Boris Godunov to reign. He is the first elected tsar in Russia.

The Zemsky Sobor, at which Boris Godunov was elected, differed from previous Councils in that it was not made up of special persons chosen from various estates of the Russian state, as was the case before, but from those persons who were at the head of these estates (according to the elections or by appointment). There were a considerable number of people at the Council who were personally indebted to Boris. But these facts began to pay attention much later.

The wedding of Boris Godunov to the kingdom took place on September 1 - on the first day of the new year, 1598. Then the new year in Russia, until the time of Peter I, began not in January, but in September.

Boris Godunov began his political activity under Fedor successfully. He was able to repel the invasion of Khan Kazy Giray. In honor of this event, the Donskoy Monastery was built in Moscow. The war with Sweden ended with the return of the cities of Yam, Ivan Gorod and others to Russia, but Ivan IV did not succeed in this. Godunov founded the Arkhangelsk pier on the White Sea - since then foreign ships could come there. He contributed to the development of Siberia: he gave benefits to immigrants to these new, uninhabited regions of the country. Under him, the cities of Tobolsk, Berezov, and others were built there. Cities in the Volga region: Samara, Saratov, Tsaritsyn, Ufa - were also built under Boris.

Boris Godunov understood the need for further development of education in the country. He sent young people to study abroad, invited foreign specialists. He even wanted to open schools, perhaps even a university, where foreign languages ​​would be taught, but the clergy did not approve of this plan. Obviously, it was afraid of the penetration of the ideas of Catholicism, Protestantism into Orthodox Russia.

Accepting the blessing of the patriarch during the wedding in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin, Boris said: "God is my witness that there will be no beggar in my kingdom, I will share the last shirt with the people." Indeed, he generously gave to the poor. During his lifetime, he was even called a "poor man." There is an assumption that Boris Godunov was preparing a decree, according to which it was supposed to determine the amount of the peasants' duty and thereby put an end to their unlimited exploitation.

But more and more difficulties appeared that were difficult to overcome during the seven-year reign of Boris. Many historians believe that the domestic and foreign policies of Ivan IV negatively affected the country's economy. And this was argued by the fact that during the oprichnina, not only in war, but also in civilian life, as a result of forced migration, families lost their breadwinners, close relatives, and friends. Huge material losses were also felt. But there is also a directly opposite opinion: under Ivan IV, the economic and political position of Russia was strengthened. The lean years of the beginning of the century greatly complicated the situation in the country and were one of the main economic reasons for the ripening Troubles. This is noted in all sources of that time. Hunger, disease, epidemics began.

Tsar Boris was active in the fight against hunger. He tried to feed the hungry for free, but there was not enough bread for everyone at the expense of the royal treasury. He sought to give work to everyone, but the money they received was not enough to buy the required amount of bread. People were dying of hunger. In addition, the process of enslavement of peasants continued after the death of Ivan the Terrible. All this worsened the life of the people and also became a nourishing basis for the Time of Troubles, one of its sources.

“Boris belonged to the number of those unfortunate people who both attracted to themselves and repelled from themselves, attracted by the visible qualities of mind and talent, repelled by invisible, but felt shortcomings of the heart and conscience. He knew how to arouse surprise and gratitude, but he did not inspire confidence in anyone; he was always suspected of duplicity and deceit and was considered capable of anything ... This "worker tsar", the king of slaves, seemed to them a mysterious mixture of good and evil ... "- this is how historian V. O. Klyuchevsky characterized the first elected Russian Tsar Boris Godunov .