Early Russian History. Key Issues: Учебно-методическое пособие по английскому языку

Ф Е Д Е РАЛ Ь Н О Е АГ Е Н С Т В О П О О БРАЗО В АН И Ю В О РО Н Е Ж С КИ Й Г О С У Д АРС Т В Е Н Н Ы Й У Н И В Е РС И Т Е Т

Early Russian History Key Issues У чебно-метод и ческоепособи епо англи йскому яз ыку (специ альность 030400 – И стор и я)

В О РО Н Е Ж

2005

2

У твер ж д ено научно-метод и чески м советом и стор и ческого ф акультета (пр отокол № 10 от23 и ю ня2005 год а).

С остави тель Г ончар оваЛ .Ю .

У чебно-метод и ческоепособи епод готовлено накаф ед р естр ановед ени яи и ностр анных яз ыков и стор и ческого ф акультетаВ ор онеж ского госуд ар ственного уни вер си тета. Рекоменд уетсяд лястуд ентов 3 кур сад /о и стор и ческого ф акультета (специ альность 030400 – И стор и я).

3

Chapter 1

BIRTH OF THE RUSSIAN STATE Read the text: "Scratch a Russian and you'll find a Tartar." That is a shibboleth which is still heard occasionally in this prejudiced modern world. It is intended as an epithet and a comment on the racial origins of the Russian people. There are no similar slogans about the origins of Americans because there were no original Americans aside from the Indians. "Scratch an American and you'll find an Indian" is not a common saying. This fact points up the difficulty in dealing with the origin of European and Asiatic states. America came prepackaged from Western Europe. There is no ancient or even medieval America. We have no problem in tracing the origin of the American state system. The colonists brought it with them in their baggage from England. Not so the Russians. The development of the Russian state was a cumbersome and difficult process, accompanied by severe and bloody birth pangs. The womb was the great Russian steppe - the modern-day Ukraine. A variety of barbaric tribes inhabited those undulating plains and the littoral of the Black Sea between 1000 B.C. and 600 A.D. None of them formed a permanent, sedentary state or a recognizably organized society. Nomads do not do such things. The steppes do not lend themselves to permanent settlements very well. They are practically indefensible for one thing and ancient peoples were not too thrilled by the arts and demands of agriculture. So they rode, hunted, fought, slaughtered and ravaged. It was not only their idea of fun - it was a way of primitive life. Further north in the forest zone things were different. The Finno-Ugrian tribes did set up semi-permanent abodes under the trees and near the many rivers of European Russia.

Eastern Slavs and Varangians: a question of political and cultural influence The Slavs, an Indo-European group of barbarians first found somewhere near the Pripet marshes in Western Russia, were the first to form a loose tribal organization in the sixth century A.D. They began to settle on the land and gradually consolidated into a single body. This process was hardly done by the time Rurik seized power and created the first Russian state. It is indeed with Rurik that Russian, as opposed to tribal, history begins. The Ruriks created a Russian state based on conquest and slavery, and conquest and slavery remained an essential feature of early Russian society up to the time of Vladimir I. There are two important facts about early Russia: the fusion of the Eastern Slavs into a coherent body in the seventh century; and the appearance of the Normans and Vikings or Varangians, as the Greeks called them, in the ninth century. These stormy invaders from the murky northern forests were called Rusi by the East Slavs.

4

This is how Russia received its name. It was a Scandinavian import like “America” is an Italian import. The Rusi Rurik and Amerigo Vespucci have that much in common. Russia should really be called Eastern Slavonia and America should be called Indiana. But, unfortunately, history and those who make it are not always particularly conspicuous for scientific logic. Nobody knows when or how the slavs separated themselves into West, East, and South Slavs. And certainly no one knows why this division occurred. In the fifth and sixth centuries we read in contemporary accounts about Slavs existing and in the sixth we have evidence that they lived between the Carpathian mountains and the Dnieper river. By the seventh century they had evolved a higher form of social organization consisting of families, clans and tribes under a prince or "kniaz". They settled mostly along river basins. They were held together by a vague kind of religious mysticism which gave them tribal consciousness. Evidence of this is found in the early chronicles, which tell the story about the famous and controversial "Rurik invitation." According to the monks who wrote these chronicles the event took place in the year 862. "Clan rose up against clan, and there was strife between them. Our land is great and rich, yet there is no order in it." So the Eastern Slavs appealed to the northern Varangians: "Come, bring order to us and dispose over us." Many scholars today are challenging the credibility of this legend. Some even doubt the existence of Rurik. They believe the Chronicle may be wrong about 862 as the beginning of the Russian state. It existed long before that date. The god-fearing chronicler was either ignorant or else sought to gloss over the brutal facts of early Slav history. The Norse certainly played a role in the early commerce and the establishment of military fortifications in this general area. And they probably did so before 862. There certainly was much rivalry and warfare throughout the sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries. The Vikings took part in this strife, usually as defenders of one tribe or another and thus gradually came to dominate the tribes. This led to their expulsion from Novgorod, an early Slav center in the north. But tribal struggles brought renewed chaos and thus led to the "invitation" of a new group of Norsemen in 862. Whether Rurik, who was the leader of this new group, used force or not to establish his control is problematical. The contractual character of the origin of his rule is admitted by most scholars. Rurik, however, was only one among several Varangian princes who came to rule the fighting Slavs. His family relationship to two other well-known Viking characters, Askold and Dir, is not clear. The chief function of these foreign princes was not administration and the keeping of order as the Chronicle would have it, but rather that of defense and maintenance of commerce on the river routes. Florinsky and Kluchevsky agree on this. This defensive function led to a shift of the center from further south to Kiev, which is a better position from which to defend the north-south and east-west trading routes. Kiev thus became a bulwark against invaders from the east like the Pechenegs and their ilk. In the final analysis it does not really matter whether the Varangians came by invitation or not unless you are a super-nationalistic Russian, of course. The fact is they came and they established the first Russian state. This should not be surprising.

5

The Slavs were engaged in primitive agriculture and forest clearing at the time, whereas the Vikings were a seafaring people, pirates and traders at the same time. They were warlike trading fraternities who boldly pursued old and new trading routes, including the one across Russia. Contemporary authorities call the route "from the Varangians to the Greeks." The main route started at the Western Dvina, forded to the Dnieper and than led to the Black Sea and Constantinople, taking the rapids near present-day Zaporoshe in stride. The Vikings were Germanics but they did not Germanize the Slavs. There were too few of them for that. Over the centuries they were completely absorbed by the Slavs. But they did leave certain important traces behind. They certainly created or helped create the first Russian state. They left a variety of words and names behind. They paved the way for the formidable trading activity of Kievan Russia. They stimulated growth of towns and left their mark on the class structure, on various legal concepts and institutions. One of these was the "druzhina", the body guard on which the military supremacy of the rising princely power was based. The "druzhina" later developed into the famous "boyar" nobility.

First Russian Princes Kiev eventually overshadowed Novgorod as a political capital, especially under prince Oleg (d. 912) who brought greater unity between north and south. Oleg expanded the territory further south towards Constantinople, which he visited in 907 and with which he concluded a trading agreement in 912. Russia was born on the route between two seas, and foreign trade was, from the beginning, a major factor in its rise. Thus the cradle of the new realm was in the southwest, on the left bank of the Dnieper, in the so-called Ukraine, a term meaning marshland or frontier. From the end of the ninth century, thanks to its excellent location, Kiev became "the mother of all Russian towns" and the center of the first Russian state. It was Vladimir I (980-1015) who first, by force and conquest, created a state out of the tribal groupings. He was one of those rare men of ancient times driven by a vision of vast political dominion. Like Alexander the Great and his relative contemporary Charlemagne he used force and trickery to unite a large territory which collapsed after his death because it lacked the necessary political machinery and network of communications. Modern dictators have the advantage of these instruments of power and seem to survive longer. Although Vladimir's personality is not as well known as Charlemagne's his achievements and accomplishments were much the same. He was far ahead of his time in his conception of a political structure, which envisaged the replacement of traditional society characterized by family, clan and tribe. He wanted a real state held together by force and subjugation. From the Kievan center he spread his power to the middle reaches of the Dnieper, westward to the Prut, the San and Carpathians, northeast to the Moskva and the headwaters of the Don; north as far as Lake Byelo, Lake Ilmen, the western Dvina and the region of Novgorod; and southward at least as far as the rapids of the Dnieper, which the traders of Kiev managed in his day to navigate down to the Black Sea and thence to Constantinople. He left his people with the concept of political unity of the Russian

6

lands and he reinforced this idea by compelling them to accept Christianity in its Greek Orthodox form in 988. But like other great empires which rise rapidly Vladimir's soon collapsed. Brother struggled against brother for possession of land, all of which was considered to be the private property of the ruling family. The oldest member of the dynasty, the so-called vyeliky kniaz or "Grand Duke" resided in Kiev and was supposed to be the supreme ruler with the rest of his male relatives as his subordinates. The next oldest member of the family was to succeed the Grand Duke, instead of his son, but it did not always work that way. Ambition and greed interfered. So there was nearly constant warfare among the princes. Yaroslav I (1019-54) and Vladimir Monomakh (1113-25) managed to consolidate their positions temporarily, but after their death political chaos arose again. This chaos was also promoted by external threats and invasions by the Khazars, Pechenegs, Polovtsians and others. These tribes on horseback ravaged the steppes and left Kiev frequently helpless. These factors brought the Kievan period to an end. Rulers of principalities moved into the remoter forest regions and stayed away from Kiev. The population soon began to move northeast as well. Clearing the forest as they went, they pressed on towards a new kind of life which was hard but safer than before. This colonization, which began around 1100 and lasted until 1300, played a major role in shaping the course of Russian history. In many ways parallel to German colonization in the period 1150-1350, it marked the beginning of the Moscovite state. So the power of Kiev fell. In the west Galicia and Volhynia became independent and in latter centuries these areas became continuous bones of contention among Russia, Lithuania and Poland. This whole area was not fully embraced again by mother Russia until 1945. In the north, Novgorod also reasserted its independence. Kiev itself was conquered by the Tartars in 1240. It never again recovered its political importance, although it remained a vital commercial and religious center.

Life in Kievan Russia What was life like during the Kievan period? Hunting, fishing and forestry were the everyday occupations of most people. They also farmed, mostly organized by village communes (mir, obshchina), although this is now disputed by some scholars. From the very beginning there were towns where the merchants and traders dealt in honey, wax, furs and even wood. The towns also served as forts in time of war. But a primitive bourgeoisie as it were did not yet really exist despite what Marxist historians would have us believe. During the winter months produce was exacted by the prince and his "druzhina" from the peasant population and large quantities were stored in Kiev. In the spring these goods were carried down the Dnieper, unloaded and reloaded at the rapids, and then taken to Constantinople and bartered for other goods or exchanged for money. The Russians frequently stayed in Constantinople for as long as six months and kept a considerable permanent trading organization there. All this was carefully arranged by treaty with the Byzantine emperor. Important as this trade was

7

it was only secondary to the major activity of most people - that of primitive agriculture. Between 850 and 1200 the old tribal organization gave way to a stratified society. At the top stood the military caste, the druzhina, originally Viking now largely slavified, next came the merchants, followed by the artisans in the towns. These were all free men. The broad base was provided by the free peasants and hired workers. At the very bottom were the slaves. The institution of slavery was accepted by the Russians without question as was the case by most ancient societies. Although no opposing classes had yet appeared there was a definite division between the ruling, land-owning warriors and the laborers. It was the beginning of feudal society. Yet Kievan Russia was not essentially an absolute state. Democratic elements did exist. Meetings of tribal elders and of town folk (veche) originally administered and enforced the law. The prince eventually superimposed his power over these primitive assemblies, except in Novgorod were the veche maintained its power for a long time until crushed by Moscow absolutism.

Kievan Statehood: did it exist? A fundamental question is raised by all these facts. Was Kiev actually a state? Florinsky, a well-known historian of Russia, denies it. He argues that the frontiers of Kiev were uncertain, the tribes still in a state of flux with many nomadic habits, the powers of the grand dukes of Kiev imprecise. He still had to contend with princes "under him" (treaty of 907) who frequently had more land and power than he did and whose representative he still was. In the 9th and 10th centuries what we have, according to Florinsky, is a loose federation of autonomous city states in process of extension. The Grand Duke merely delegates members of his druzhina to control the principalities and cities. Local centers were under a "possadnik" or governor who collected tribute, served as judge who collected fines and shared them with the prince. The families were large - Vladimir had 12 sons, each of whom was a possadnik, forming the basis of the Rurik dynastic claim. Local interest, however, were often stronger than the claims of the Veliki Kniaz. So discord and violent internal struggle was endemic. Aside form staying in the family no rule of succession existed until 1054. Kluchevsky agrees essentially with Florinsky but he puts greater emphasis on the unity which existed and the domination which the princes enjoyed. This was primarily due to the fact all depended on the Grand Duke to arrange and conduct the trade. Grekov, a Soviet historian, believes Volhynia, rather than Kiev was the first state. Since a state means, according to Grekov, there is authority to collect regular taxes. This first occurred in Volhynia. No matter who is right and how the state is defined, it seems quite obvious that some primitive form of it existed in Kievan Russia. So Kiev is the mother of Russian cities and the first political entity we can call Russian.

8

Vocabulary work Read and memorize the following words and expressions, suggest their Russian equivalents: prejudice, n slogan, n origin, n originate, v nomad, n abode, n (e.g. semi-permanent abodes) marshland, n tribe, n tribal, adj (e.g. tribal consciousness) fuse, v fusion, n chronicle, n (the Chronicle) monk, n credible, adj credibility, n (e.g. the credibility of a legend, story, etc) rivalry, n warfare, n strife, n expulsion, n scholar, n commerce, n (=trading) bulwark, n (=stronghold) seafaring people warlike trading fraternities

trade route to pave the way for smth supremacy, n (e.g. military, political supremacy) supreme, adj (e.g. supreme ruler) cradle, n (e.g. the cradle of the Russian state) trickery, n political machinery achievement, n (=accomplishment) subjugation, n reinforce, v (e.g. to reinforce an idea) compel, v (to compel smb to do smth) possess, v (e.g. to struggle for possession of land) prince, n principality, n village communes (=obshchina) merchant, n bourgeoisie, n treaty, n artisan, n (=craftsman) tribute, n stratified society grand duke assembly, n (=meeting) rule of succession

Questions for discussion Comment on the following: 1. The author traces the origin of the word “Rus” to the name of the northern Varangian invaders. What other hypotheses concerning the issue have been formed by scientists? Which one seems the most plausible to you? 2. Why is the Chronicle’s story about “Rurik invitation” considered a subject of much controversy? 3. How can you define the role the Varangians played in early Russian history? 4. On what ground does the author compare Vladimir I of Russia with Alexander the Great and Charlemange?

9

5. What is the core of the scientific debate as to Kievan statehood? What are the general criteria of a state? Does Kiev match them, from your point of view?

Chapter 2

THE CHRISTIANISATION OF RUSSIA Read the text: Few institutions have been as persistent and constant in their influence upon people as the church and the system of beliefs and customs which it preaches and practices. This propensity for religious beliefs seems to be anchored in the inner recesses of the human psyche. Whether you call this the divine spark in man or superstition does not matter. The fact is that religion is something indestructible in human nature and in human history. After more than 70 years of Soviet rule and the propagation of atheism, the Russian Church still exists and there are no signs of immanent death. No history of Russia, therefore, would be complete or even meaningful without due consideration of the formative influence of religion and the church, particularly in its early history.

Christianity and Russia before the Conversion Prior to their conversion, the eastern Slavs were heathen and worshipped crude images representing the forces of nature. It is likely that Christianity was known in the territory of future Russia in the ninth century and perhaps earlier. The Grand Duchess Olga became a Christian in the middle of the tenth century. By that time many Russians, Varangians, as well as Slavs, had probably received baptism. The intimate trade contacts with Constantinople, by which scores of merchants annually visited the Byzantine capital marveled at the splendor of its churches, was responsible for many conversions. Indeed, this trade contact paved the way for the eventual acceptance of Christianity by Kiev. Byzantine colonies in the Crimea - the Eastern Empire as successor to Rome had fallen heir to the Greek towns in the peninsula - brought Russians in contact with Christianity. The Slavs of Moravia and of Galicia, with whom Kiev maintained trade contacts, had long been Christian and the Bulgars had been won over by 864. Missionaries from Moravia and Constantinople had appeared in Kiev even before it was seized by Oleg, Olga's predecessor. Whether Oleg and Igor ever considered accepting Christianity is uncertain. There was good reason why they should not accept it. That reason lay in the fact that converts to the church headed by the patriarch of Constantinople must accept the authority of the patriarch in religious matters and at the same time the eastern emperor insisted upon recognition of his authority over the new converts in political matters. Whenever a pagan nation in the East accepted the new faith, there arose this

10

question of religious and political subjection to Constantinople, the two going hand in hand. The only possibility of retaining political independence was through the patriarch's consent that the new converts might have their own autonomous church under an archbishop or a metropolitan bishop. The consent was never lightly given and had to be wrung from the patriarch in each case. However, missionaries from Constantinople baptized Olga in Kiev in 955. She probably accepted Christianity as a matter of state policy. She may have hoped that more cordial economic and political relations with the Eastern Empire would grow out of her baptism. The nation, however, did not follow her, nor did her son Sviatoslav, in spite of her earnest attempt to persuade him. Olga stepped aside and in 962 Sviatoslav took over as grand prince of Kiev. Sviatoslav was more interested in war and conquest than religion. He left Kiev with the intent of establishing a new capital in Bulgaria. Russia was now ruled by three of his sons who soon began to fight among themselves. They gradually killed each other off. One of the sons, Vladimir survived.

Vladimir on the Throne: Paganism vs Christianity Vladimir spent the first decade of his reign in constant war. He won the title of Grand Prince of Kiev in the role of champion of paganism against the rising tide of Christianity that had been washing over the area from Constantinople, from Moravia and Central Europe, and from the Byzantine outpost on the Sea of Azov with its bishopric at Tmutorokan. Missionaries from the West and south had been at work in Kiev in the time of Askold and Dir. Some of Igor's druzhina or bodyguard had been baptized and Olga had accepted the new faith. Many Russian merchants, Varangian and Slav, who constituted the dominant class in a commercial state, had become Christian. And there were a few of Kiev's neighbors who had not forsaken their pagan gods. The Khazars were Jewish and the Volga Bulgars were Moslems. Poland, Hungary, and Bulgaria had become Christian. even the Varangians in their Scandinavian homeland were welcoming Christianity. The kings of Norway and Denmark accepted baptism shortly after Vladimir assumed power in Kiev. The pressures upon Vladimir, then, were strong and mounting to adopt a new faith and the new civilization that went with it. After Vladimir's accession there had been a brief, violent reaction in favor of continuing pagan worship in Kiev. On the hills of the city the new grand prince set up idols to the pagan gods of the Slavs and offered human sacrifices of Christian martyrs to them - to Pereni, god of thunder and lighting; to Veles, protector of flocks and herds; to Svarog, the god of the heavens; and to his children, Dazhbog, giver of warmth and fertility, Stribog, who controlled the atmosphere and brought wind and rain, and Khors, the god of sunlight. Contemptuous of the virtues proclaimed by the Christian missionaries, Vladimir took seven wives, one of them the beautiful widow of his murdered brother Yaropolk, and in addition, says the chronicler, kept hundreds of concubines. Like many Russian rulers, Vladimir had a gargantuan sexual appetite.

11

Choosing the Religion After the brief orgy of paganism and sexual feasting that opened the new reign, Vladimir went off on military campaigns. Everywhere he went, to the west or to the east, the grand prince came up against the fact that only Kiev was behind the times in still clinging to her old gods. During the negotiations to end his indecisive war with the Volga Bulgars his recent antagonists urged him to accept Islam. Returning from that campaign, Vladimir decided to examine the various religions that surrounded pagan Kiev. Elders of the capital and members of the prince's bodyguard came together to discuss the merits of the various faiths, and it is not unlikely that missionaries from east, west and south attended the meetings. Those who spoke for affiliation with Constantinople could make the best case. They could remind the prince that his grandmother Olga had chosen the faith that emanated form the eastern capital, and they could plead the advantages that must come from associating with the greatest city of the Western world, the city upon whose markets Kievan prosperity in large measure depended. While the question of accepting one of the new religions was under discussion, envoys came to Kiev from the emperor in Constantinople to beg Vladimir's help in putting down a revolt in Asia Minor that threatened the capital. The envoys proposed as an inducement, the offer that Vladimir might marry the emperor's sister, a signal honor form the head of so powerful a state. Vladimir, in turn, must accept Christianity before the marriage could take place. The prospect must have flattered him. But behind all the pressures of the moment, Vladimir must fully have realized that Russia's religious isolation had to end sooner or later, and he must have understood as well that the logic of Russia's geographical, economic, and political situation was overwhelmingly on the side of accepting the faith of Constantinople in preference to any other. In the fall of 987 Vladimir sent his ambassadors to Constantinople to sample the Orthodox Christian faith. On September 8 a splendid service was celebrated for them in the Cathedral of St. Sophia, and they were in ecstasies of rapture. They thought they were in heaven, and that during the service the angels of God (who were in fact mosaics seen behind fluttering candles) had come down and floated about their heads. The Byzantine clergy gravely assured them that such was undoubtedly the case. They returned to Vladimir full of praise for the imperial religion. Early in 988 Vladimir was baptized, his army came to the aid of the emperor and the emperor's twenty-five year old sister Anna became Vladimir's wife. The young imperial princess was quite reluctant to surrender herself into the hairy arms of the barbarian from the north. "You send me into slavery," she told the emperor, "I would rather die here." But, nevertheless, she became a humble instrument in the Christianization of Russia. But her first experiences of the land of midnight were undoubtedly discouraging. She fell desperately ill, and it took a miracle to save her.

12

Christianity Makes its Way in Russia Vladimir now set to work with a vengeance to establish the faith that he had espoused. His men hurled down the pagan idols in the city and caste them into the Dnieper. At his order, the entire population of the city marched to the river to receive baptism from the priests who had come from the Crimea. Couriers rode off to the other cities of the realm to order similar measures. That very summer construction began on the first of a number of stone cathedrals, and the prince assigned a tithe of his revenue to their maintenance. The chief Kievan cities - Novgorod, Chernigov, Polotsk, and Rostov - became episcopal centers. For many years the bishop of Tmutorokan served a head of the Kievan church. Vladimir ignored the patriarch of Constantinople, and there was no direct contact between the Russian church and Constantinople until 1037. In that year the patriarch appointed the first metropolitan bishop of Kiev who assumed the headship of the Russian church. Christian churches rose up all over Russia at Vladimir's command, the prince insisting that they should occupy the sites where pagan idols earlier had stood. Monasteries appeared, not only in Kiev but in the recesses of the forest. The church opened schools to which Vladimir ordered members of the upper classes to send their children. The schools, as a matter of course, were church schools whose chief purpose was to train recruits for the clergy. A regular system of charity for the unfortunates of society was inaugurated under government auspices. Russia's conversion was an act of public authority that took the form of mass baptism. It is clear that strong official pressure was brought to bear upon the Russians to make them embrace the new faith. The result was that the acceptance of Christianity was in many instances formal rather than a matter of inner conviction, and heathenism survived for centuries in the religious practice of the Russian people side by side with Christian doctrine and observances. The slow and unsatisfactory progress of Christianity may be explained in part by the character of the Russian church organization and the complexion of the clergy.

How the System Worked The significant feature in the organization of the Russian Church was its dependence on Constantinople. The whole of Russia constituted one metropolitanate, governed by a metropolitan who was both nominated and consecrated by the patriarch of Constantinople. Many of the early clergy were Greeks and Balkan Slavs, and it took a long time before native Russians replaced them. There was a marked difference in the social and economic status of the higher and lower clergy. The bishopric was lucrative and honorable. Bishops received the proceeds of a special tax levied on the laity as well as various fees and charges paid by the lower clergy, for consecration, permission to perform marriages, etc. Judicial fees were another source of revenue. It also appears that at an early date Church dignitaries and institutions acquired large landed estates. Members of the higher hierarchy were well provided for, lived in ease and luxury, and zealously defended Church properties and privileges against the secular power.

13

The lower clergy enjoyed none of these advantages, depending on donations and fees charged for marriages, baptism and funerals. With some exceptions, the intellectual standards of the clergy were low. Few of the village priests were fully literate, while a large proportion could neither read or write and merely committed to memory the more important prayers and services. This complexion of the clergy may well explain the high place held in Russian piety by external observance, and the relative indifference to dogma and the inner meaning of the Christian faith. This aspect of Russian Christianity had important consequences in the subsequent history of the Russian church. Monasteries played an important part in the development of the Russian church. Some, like the Kievan Monastery of the Caves, were founded by men of ascetic disposition who dedicated themselves to mediation and prayer and strictly observed the rules of the monastic orders. Others were established by princes and wealthy boyars and had as their primary objective to minister to the spiritual needs of their benefactors and, after their death, to pray for the peace of their souls. In conclusion then it is fair to say that the reign of Vladimir is pre-eminently important in the history of Kievan Russia.

Consequences By his decision to embrace Christianity, although it could not for long have been forestalled and the choice of a religion was never really seriously in doubt, he brought a new civilization to Russia. A new code of morals, a sense of social justice, a corps of clerics capable of keeping court records and of committing to writing the historical experience of the nation, a sense of the need for education, a school of art and architecture, an alphabet and a language, and a changed international position all these came to Russia with the new faith. But Vladimir accepted the new religion without sacrificing his independence. The Russian church from its very founding was an intensely national church. Religiously Russia was not lost in the anonymity that characterized western Europe in medieval times. Indeed, there would be many times in later centuries when the most nationally conscious agency in the nation was the Russian church that Vladimir head founded and whose chauvinistic direction he had done so much to inspire. In terms of long-range effects the conversion under Vladimir was also highly significant: It brought Russia into the circle of European Christendom and made her a part of Western civilization and European culture. It isolated Russia from Western Europe because of the split in the Christian Church which occurred in 1054. It made Russia dependent on Byzantine trade and commerce. It made Russian culture essentially Byzantine in nature. Byzantine culture surpassed all culture in Europe at that time. It came to Russia ready-made. It made the church an instrument of political unification. It laid the groundwork for the "imperial idea" in Russian history. Russia inherited the mantle of Byzantine imperialism.

14

Vocabulary work Read and memorize the following words and expressions, suggest their Russian equivalents: preach, v preacher, n superstition, n convert, n (v) conversion, n heathen, n (adj) (=pagan) heathenism, n (=paganism) worship, v duke, n duchess, n baptize, v baptism, n missionary, n patriarch, n subject, adj subjection, n to go hand in hand bishop, n archbishop, n priest, n access, v (e.g. to access the throne) accession, n sacrifice, n (v) (e.g. human sacrifices) martyr, n (e.g. Christian martyrs) virtue, n reign, n

campaign, n (e.g. military campaign) negotiate, v negotiations, n merit, n faith, n prosperity, n envoy, n clergy, n laity, n realm, n monastery, n unfortunate, n (e.g. unfortunates of society) auspices, n (e.g. under the auspices of … ) conviction, n (e.g. a matter of inner conviction) metropolitan, n consecrate, v consecration, n estate, n (e.g. landed estate) hierarchy, n zeal, n zealous, adj (e.g. to defend smth zealously) secular, adj monastic order

Questions for discussion Comment on the following: 1. Do you support the author’s idea that religion has the formative influence over a country’s history? Use specific examples to illustrate your answer. 2. In your opinion, how could the course of Russian history have been altered, had it accepted another religion? 3. What were the pros and contras the first Russian princes had to keep in mind considering conversion into Christianity? 4. Has Russia ever become a fully Christian country?

15

Chapter 3

THE TARTAR YOKE Read the text: If the Byzantine heritage has had an important influence on the development of Russian history and culture, so has another heritage, coming from another direction and leaving behind more uncertain benefits. The destinies of nations, like the fates of individuals, are sometimes profoundly affected by events over which they have no control. The conquest by the Mongols, in the thirteenth century, of a large portion of the then known world, including Russia, is a good example of the decisive part which the contingent and the unforeseen play in human affairs.

How it all Began The Mongols were a mixed group of peoples who first enter upon the world state in the area of North China and Eastern Siberia. They were nomads who raised cattle and moved about on fleet horses. They were fierce warriors who had perfected the art of horseback Blitzkrieg. They were always on the move, looking for better grazing pastures and sedentary settlements to plunder. According to tradition the various Mongol chiefs held a council in 1206 which decided to establish an empire under the leadership of Ghingis Khan. So they embarked on a vast program of conquest. In 1207 they took southern Siberia, followed by long wars in China and Turkestan. By the time of Ghingis Khan's death in 1227 they had conquered China, Siberia, central Asia and Trans-Caucasia. Although a flying detachment of Mongol horsemen invaded Russia and defeated her armies in 1223, giving the Russians a taste of what was to come, nothing happened until 13 years later. In 1236, however, Batu, the grandson of the great Khan, decided it was time to go on the warpath again. A large Mongol army under Batu crossed the Urals and wiped out the Volga Bulgars. This time it was more than fun and games. The Mongols brought wagons, wives, children and cattle with them. Although the Russians did not at first realize it, the Mongols apparently planned to stay for a while. But they made themselves rather unwelcome by destroying cities, towns and settlements. Yet the Russian princes made no effort to unite and organize for the defense. The princes of Riazan, the first Russian land to be invaded, pleaded vainly for assistance from the grand duke of Vladimir. The city of Riazan was captured in December 1237, pillaged and burned. A similar fate befell Kalomma, Moscow, Suzdal, Vladimir, Rostov, Yaroslav and Tver. The next spring 14 more Russian cities fell to the conqueror. By 1239 most of Russia except Novgorod and the northwest had been subdued. In 1241 Batu crossed the Carpathians and invaded Hungary, Silesia, Moravia, Croatia and the Dalmatian coast of the Adriatic. Batu was about to

16

threaten Western Europe in 1242 when he suddenly turned back and retreated to the Black Sea steppes. For the next 240 years the Mongols stayed in Russia.

Golden Horde Takes Shape In the Black Sea area Batu established the autonomous Mongol state of the Golden Horde with the newly built capital of Sarai on the lower Volga. This state included the Russian principalities, the land of the Volga Bulgars, the Black Sea steppes inhabited by the Cumans, the northern Caucasus, Western Siberia and Turkestan. The Golden Horde was at first a province of the Mongol empire. This fact forced many Russian princes to travel all the way to Karakorum in Mongolia to consult with the great Khan himself over such things as tribute, conformation of office and redress of grievances. But dissension eventually weakened the empire and its autonomous states became warring factions. In the fifteenth century it became apparent that the Mongol empire could no longer hold together. At the same time the Russians finally succeeded in overcoming their ancient disorders and building up a unified state under the leadership of the Moscow princes. The disintegration of the Golden Horde and them consolidation of Muscovy culminated in what is traditionally known as the "liberation from the Tatar yoke," an event that took place at the end of the fifteenth century..

Interrelations The khans of the Golden Horde were stern masters. The principal objective of their Russian policy was recruitment of men for the army and the raising of revenue to meet the costs of administration and imperial expansion. Russian soldiers are known to have fought in the ranks of the conquerors. The Russian princes continued to draft men into their armed forces as they did before the invasion, but under the Mongol rule these troops were largely at the disposal of the khan. Exaction of tribute was one of the chief concerns of the Golden Horde in dealing with the Russian dependency. There was a variety of new taxes and their assessment was based on census taken by the Tartars. Collection of tribute was at first in the hands of Mongol officials, but late this function was handed over to Russian grand dukes and princes. The most important direct tax was the "vykhod". Its total amount was determined by the Mongols and was then assessed by the local grand duke among the princes under his jurisdiction, who made the final allocation and then collected it. Direct extortions were heavy, among them being the provision of transportation, lodgings and maintenance for Mongol officials. No less burdensome were the frequent trips the princes had to make to Mongolia and Sarai to appear before the Khan. They usually brought their families and suitable presents for the Khan and his officials. While the devastation wrought by the invasion was great, the conquerors made surprisingly few formal changes in the pattern of the Russian government. But one change was unmistakable: the source of all power was now the sovereign will of the khan of the Golden Horde. This meant in practice that the Russian princes had to be

17

confirmed in office by their new suzerain and that all major issues were referred to the Golden Horde. The Mongols, however, seldom used their absolute powers in an arbitrary fashion. As a rule they showed respect for Russian traditional institutions and confirmed in office the princes who appeared to be entitled to it by precedent and custom. When more than one prince appeared to claim the position the khan usually selected the prince who promised to raise the most tribute. Thus the Russian people usually received a higher tax rate along with a new prince. The dynastic position of some of the ruling families, as for instance the princes of Moscow, was strengthened by increasing the financial burdens of the people whom they governed. In many instances the princes came to be looked upon, not as spokesmen of local interests before the Mongol power, but as agents of the khan enforcing his edicts at the expense of the local people. Another significant change brought by the Mongols was the undermining of the constitutional position of the veche. After the conquest the veche was deprived of its traditional powers of making agreements with the princes and of expelling or inviting them. This loss of authority, combined with the devastation suffered by the commercial cities and the decline of trade during the opening decades of the Mongol rule, was responsible for the eclipse of the veche. With the exception of Novgorod and Pskov the veche ceased to meet in the middle of the fourteenth century. The church fared poorly during the invasion. Monasteries and houses of worship were pillaged and burned, bishops and priests were butchered. After the conquest, however, the policies of the Golden Horde towards the church were more tolerant, humane and politically expedient. The status of the church was determined by decrees of the khan. Higher clergy like the princes were confirmed in office by the khan and the church agreed to pray publicly for the Mongol ruler and his family. In return the church and the clergy were exempt from taxes and military service. Anti-church propaganda was punishable by death and the church and its property was protected by the khan's agents. This cooperation proved to be mutually beneficial. It made if easier for the Mongols to rule Russia and it allowed the church to grow and increase its land holdings. In the long run it created difficulties between church and state by strengthening the material power and independence of the church. Although trade was at first hampered by the invasions and disorders, it soon recovered and was actively promoted by the Mongols. Most of the trade was controlled by the Mongols but many native traders had a share of the profits. Trade with Western Europe was carried on chiefly through Novgorod, which was an outpost of the Hanseatic League.

From the Field of Kulikovo to the Ugra River The internal strife that developed in the Mongol empire towards the end of the thirteenth century and continued intermittently until its final disintegration offered the Russian princes opportunities to reassert their independence. In the 1360's a rebellion in southern China led to the severance of that territory and the breakdown of the Mongol empire. These difficulties let young prince, Dimitry of Moscow, to stop payment of the tribute. The khan then tried to force payment with a punitive invasion.

18

The Russians had no choice but to fight. Dimitry issued a call to arms, but few of Russia's princes responded. Yet enough of an army was raised to give the Russian forces under Dimitry an unexpected victory in 1380 at the Battle of Kulikovo near the Don. Dimitry thus received the name of Donskoy. This battle was the first and only major Russian victory over the Golden Horde and it added stature and luster to the grand dukes of Moscow. However, the Tartars soon recovered and reasserted their domination of Russia. They now interfered more directly in Russian affairs than before Kulikovo. More revolts and punitive expeditions followed for another whole century. Finally in the second half of the fifteenth century Moscow grew stronger and the Mongols weaker. The leading Russian prince of this period was Ivan III of Moscow (1462-1505). The Golden Horde was ruled from 1460 to 1480 by Khan Akhmad. Friction, presumably resulting from Russia's failure to provide tribute, led to a major Mongol invasion in 1472 which was accompanied by the destruction and burning of a number of cities. Two years latter Moscow was visited by a large Tartar embassy and a huge trade delegation comprising some 3000 merchants. New difficulties soon arose thereafter. When negotiations failed, Akhmad concluded an alliance with the king of Poland and the grand duke of Lithuania and in 1480 invaded Russia. Ivan was reluctant to accept the challenge but was finally persuaded to assume command of the troops. The two found themselves facing each other across the Ugra River, a narrow stream that formed the boundary between Russia and Lithuania. They just stood there glaring at each other for months. Finally in November Akhmad suddenly retreated. Why? Well his Polish and Lithuanian allies failed to send troops and a rival Tartar chieftain attacked one of his camps which contained Akhmad's wives and family. Soon after that Akhmad was assassinated by one of his countrymen. In this undramatic and unheroic fashion the "Tartar yoke" fell from the neck of Russia. The Golden Horde survived until 1502, when the Crimean Tartars delivered the final blow which terminated its existence as a state.

The Yoke in the Long Run: Determinant Influence? Two and one half centuries of foreign rule are bound to leave a profound imprint on a subjugated nation. The influence of the Mongol tradition may be traced in the crude methods by which Russia's unification was achieved in the fifteenth century and in the character of the absolutist government that was to rule her for over 300 years. The conditions created by the invasion were probably instrumental in bringing about the destruction of the veche, although there is no assurance that this rudimentary form of democracy would have survived and would have grown into an institution of truly representative government even if the Tartars had never come to Russia. The military organization and administrative practices of Muscovy were probably also affected by Mongol institutions. The social effects of the Mongol rule are more pronounced. There was a great deal of intermarriage and social intercourse between the Russian princes and members of the Russian upper class, on the one hand, and their opposite numbers in

19

the Golden Horde, on the other. As the fortunes of Sarai declined and those of Moscow increased many Mongol notable switched their allegiance to Muscovy. Many of these people became important Russian landowners. Many Mongols also entered the Russian administrative and military services. At the end of the 17th century about 17% of the Russian upper class were of Eastern, chiefly Mongol, origin. There were also important cultural effects. Mongol domination retarded Russia's cultural development. It delayed for at least two centuries any contact between Russia and Europe, which was at that time the only fountain of progress and enlightenment. The Russian Middle Ages were barren of achievement in any field of creative endeavor, except perhaps that of icon painting, which reached high standards in the fifteenth century. In the economic field the most spectacular development was that of the invasion. It took time before the Russian economy recovered from the devastation wrought, although the extremely low technical and economic levels prevalent during this period facilitated the task. Foreign trade, which came to a standstill with the conquest, revived substantially thereafter. There was little progress in agriculture and industry, but there is no evidence that these pursuits sank below their modest preMongol level. As with cultural endeavor it was a case of stagnation and arrested development rather than of deterioration and decline. The Russian economy, however, was severely affected by two manifestations of the Mongol rule: exaction of tribute, often exorbitant ones, and warlike action that took the form either of invasions of Russia or of foreign wars in which the Russians were forced to participate side by side with their masters. The blending of the Byzantine tradition embodied in the church and Mongol ideas and administrative usages paved the way for the establishment of the semioriental absolutism of the Muscovite tsars. The window on Europe, which might have admitted the refreshing breeze of western influences, was still tightly shut, while the deadening storms from the Asiatic steppes swept freely through the length and breadth of the land. Moscow autocracy of the 16th century was no different form that of the Tartar Khans. The landed aristocracy became servile to the Moscow grand dukes and tsars. The veche lost the right to choose and expel princes - a function which had been taken over by the khans. The common people began to drift quite noticeably into the dark night of serfdom.

Vocabulary work Read and memorize the following words and expressions, suggest their Russian equivalents: heritage, n foresee, v (foresaw, foreseen) the unforeseen to be on the move pasture, n

decree, n clergy, n exempt, adj (to be exempt from taxes) hamper, v (=hinder; e.g. to hamper the progress of business)

20

plunder, v (=loot, pillage, ravage, sack) to go on the warpath subdue, v grievance, n (=complaint) dissention, n (=discord, strife, friction) chieftain, n dignitary, n recruit, v (= draft; e.g. to recruit men for the army) revenue, n (e.g. to raise revenue) disposal, n (e.g. to be at smb’s disposal) census, n burden, n (e.g. financial burden) deprive, v (to deprive smb of smth) butcher, v (=slaughter)

sever, v severance, n (=separation) call to arms (e.g. to issue a call to arms) punitive, adj (e.g. punitive measures, invasion, expedition) subjugate, v (e.g. a subjugated nation) unify, v unification, n allegiance, n enlightenment, n icon, n (e.g. icon painting) endeavor, n (e.g. creative endeavor) standstill, n (= pause, inaction, stagnation; e.g. come to a standstill) embody, v serfdom, n

Questions for discussion Comment on the following: 1. The majority of great nomadic invasions known to history were directed westward – from Asia to Europe. What was the main driving force that moved all those huge masses of people along the same route? 2. How can you characterize “the Russian policy” of the Golden Horde? 3. Why did the Yoke last for so long? 4. What influence did it have over Russia? What do you think of an opinion that eternal Russian fate to be behind Europe is mainly due to the existence of the Tartar Yoke which European countries were free from?

Chapter 4

THE AGE OF RAGE Read the text: The sixteenth century was a century of unbridled force and exuberant intellectual activity. The Kremlin, recently erected beside the Moskva by Italian architects, stood on the fringe of an intellectual world that was to contain at one and the same time, Leonardo, Charles V, Luther, and Loyola, unique personalities side by side with seething peasant revolts, mass movements toward evangelical religion, and the first beginning of the national power states. It was the beginning of the panEuropean sphere, with its claim to intellectual hegemony over a quarters of the world.

21

The whole Muscovite outlook on life was quite remote from this new Western Europe, despite certain superficial similarities between Ivan IV and Francis I of France. Ivan faced the same problems with his nobility that Western rulers confronted. But there was no ideological system in Russia and the social life seemed lifeless and immoveable. The feudal lords, the smaller territorial princes, and their heirs had to be overthrown. For the sake of national unity it had to be done by whatever means might be necessary - in England, France or Russia.

A Renaissance Tyrant on the Russian Throne Ivan IV is a sinister and arresting figure in the history of the Russian Middle Ages. The surname of "Groznyi" (Dread or Terrible) by which he is known is fully deserved. Boundless suspicion, insatiable cruelty, and extreme depravity were perhaps his outstanding characteristics. He was a cruel tyrant, who never knew the meaning of moderation; he drank too much, laughed too loudly and hated and loved too fiercely. And he never forgot anything. However, Ivan was definitely smart and despite his cruelty, his reign is a great one in Russian annals.

Troubled Adolescence Ivan was only 3 years old when his father died. His uncle Yuri challenged his rights to the throne, was arrested and imprisoned in a dungeon. There he was left to starve. Ivan's mother, Jelena Glinsky, assumed power and was regent for five years. She had Ivan's other uncle killed, but a short time afterwards she suddenly died, almost surely poisoned. A week later her confidant, Prince Ivan Obolensky, was arrested and beaten to death by his jailers. While his mother had been indifferent toward Ivan, Obolensky's sister, Agrafena, had been his beloved nurse. Now she was sent to a convent. Not yet 8 years old, Ivan was an intelligent, sensitive boy and an insatiable reader. Without Agrafena to look after him, Ivan's loneliness deepened. The boyars alternately neglected or molested him; Ivan and his deaf-mute brother Yuri often went about hungry and threadbare. No one cared about his health or well being and Ivan became a beggar in his own palace. A rivalry between the Shuisky and the Belsky families escalated into a bloody feud. Armed men roamed the palace, seeking out enemies and frequently bursting into Ivan's quarters, where they shoved the Grand Prince aside, overturned the furniture and took whatever they wanted. Murders, beatings, verbal and physical abuse became commonplace in the palace. Unable to strike out at his tormentors, Ivan took out his frustrations on defenceless animals; he tore feathers off birds, pierced their eyes and slit open their bodies. The ruthless Shuiskys gradually gained more power. In 1539 the Shuiskys led a raid on the palace, rounding up a number of Ivan's remaining confidants. They had the loyal Fyodor Mishurin skinned alive and left on public view in a Moscow square. On December 29, 1543, 13-year-old Ivan suddenly ordered the arrest of Prince Andrew Shuisky, who was reputed to be a cruel and corrupt person. He was thrown

22

into an enclosure with a pack of starved hunting dogs. The rule of the boyars had ended. By then, Ivan was already a disturbed young man and an accomplished drinker. He threw dogs and cats from the Kremlin walls to watch them suffer, and roamed the Moscow streets with a gang of young scoundrels, drinking, knocking down old people and raping women. He often disposed of rape victims by having them hanged, strangled, buried alive or thrown to the bears. He became an excellent horseman and was fond of hunting. Killing animals was not his only delight; Ivan also enjoyed robbing and beating up farmers. Meanwhile he continued to devour books at an incredible pace, mainly religious and historical texts. At times Ivan was very devote; he used to throw himself before the icons, banging his head against the floor. It resulted in a callosity at his forehead. Once Ivan even did a public confession of his sins in Moscow.

Hits and Blows of the First Years of Reign In 1547 Ivan was finally crowned Tsar of all Russians. He had taken methodical and meticulous care in preparing for his coronation. Later, when he decided to choose a wife, Ivan had eligible young Princesses and daughters of noblemen presented to him in a kind of 'Miss Russia Contest'. He instantly fell for the beauty and charm of Anastasia Romanovna and married her. By all accounts Anastasia had a quieting effect on Ivan. He called her his "little heifer" and they were to have 13 years of wedded bless. Anastasia bore him six children of whom only two survived infancy. In the first years of his reign Ivan was advised by three devote men: Alexej Adasjev, the priest Silvester and the metropolitan Macarius. Ivan reformed the government and reduced both corruption and the influence of the boyar families. He also reformed the church and the army, creating an elite force, the Streltsi. Subsequently, Ivan conquered the Khanates of Kazan and Astrakhan near the Wolga River. In 1558 he conquered the Baltic cities Narva and Polotsk and started trading directly with England. In the midst of these wars, in March 1553, Ivan had fallen ill with a high fever. During his illness Ivan demanded the Princes and boyars to swear an oath of allegiance to his baby son Dmitri, but most were unwilling to do so. Ivan recovered, but he never forgave the treachery of those around him when they thought he was dying. Henceforth his policy was to set up a strong centralised state and to oppress and destroy his enemies within it. A few months later the Royal couple was visiting a monastery to give thanks to God for Ivan's recovery, when a nurse accidentally dropped Dmitri into the river. The baby drowned. In the summer of 1560 Anastasia succumbed to a lingering illness. At her death Ivan suffered a severe emotional collapse. He banged his head on the floor in full view of the court and smashed his furniture. His suspicion deepened into paranoia. Angry and depressed, with his old cruelty resurfacing, Ivan raged against the boyars. He suspected them of having Anastasia poisoned and although he had no actual evidence against the boyars, he had a number of them tortured and executed. His

23

advisor Adasjev died in prison, Silvester was exiled and in 1563 Macarius died of natural causes. Ivan had alternately violent fits of temper and feelings of remorse, while blasphemy and superstition succeeded his pious moods. Shortly before Christmas in 1564, Ivan suddenly packed his belongings and treasures, secretly left Moscow and announced his intention to abdicate. The populace called for his return. After a month of negotiations Ivan agreed to come back, demanding absolute power to punish anyone he considered disloyal and to dispose of their estates as he wished. It is likely that Ivan deliberately used his threat as a weapon against the boyars' resistance to strengthen his position as absolute ruler of Russia.

The Oprichnina The instruments of Ivan's new rule were the 'Oprichniki', who were handpicked by Ivan and had to swear him a personal oath of allegiance. The mere sight of the Oprichniki instilled fear: they dressed in black and rode black horses. Many were criminals without any remorse about killing anyone Ivan disliked. The Oprichniki didn't hesitate to burst into a church during mass, either abducting the priest or murdering him in front of the altar. Subsequently, Ivan founded a pseudo-monastic order: he was the 'abbot' and his Oprichniki were the 'monks'. They regularly performed sacrilegious masses that were followed by extended orgies of sex, rape and torture. Frequently Ivan would act as master of the rituals, in which, with sharp and hissing-hot pincers, ribs were torn out of men's chests. Drunken licentiousness was alternated with passionate acts of repentance. After throwing himself down before the altar with such vehemence that his forehead would be bloody and covered with bruises, Ivan would rise and read sermons on the Christian virtues to his drunken retainers. An ancient term, oprichnina signifies an entailed domain and was used to describe the estate settled on the widow of a sovereign prince. The choice of the term was presumably Ivan's own; he liked to think of himself as an orphan or a widower. Under the new dispensation the territory of the nation was split into two parts: zemshchina and oprichnina. The former was administered by the traditional institutions, from the boyar duma down; oprichnina, the personal domain of the tsar, had its own administrative agencies independent of those of the zemshchina. Oprichnina presumably had two main objectives: the first, of a passing nature, was the extermination of treason; and the second, of lasting significance, was the elimination of the political influence of the landed aristocracy. In pursuit of the former goal the oprichniki were actually agents of the security police. This function was emphasized by their appearance; the emblem of their authority was a broom and a dog's head attached to their saddles. The second objective - the destruction of the influence of the landed aristocracy - was achieved by a mass transfer of the population, a familiar policy used extensively by Vasili II, Ivan III and Vasili III. The territories assigned to oprichnina, including streets in Moscow and other urban centers, were cleared of property owners and occupants and settled by the oprichniki. The dispossessed owners, among then many boyars and former princes, were given

24

estates in service tenure elsewhere, preferably in distant border regions. There was nothing new in this policy except the scale on which it was implemented. The resulting elimination of the influence of the landed aristocracy and the mass transfer of land were the chief political, economic and social consequences of the oprichnina. There are a variety of opinions about the long-range historical significance of this strange experiment of Ivan's. According to one view, a blend of practical and economic factors and vague plans of a totalitarian state are involved here. Ivan wanted to have an area immediately at his disposal with all intermediate authorities removed. In other words, he may have made a semi-conscious effort to eliminate the feudal structure, what there was of it in Russia. He therefore had to make a clean sweep in order to create a new state on a new social basis. The oprichnina state was a form of self-government. The crown created a monopoly of all the trade through the oprichnina. The retail trade in liquor was controlled by the state. A new bureaucracy and new state army was created. Newly conquered lands were annexed to the oprichnina and not the zemshchina. There was an attempt to assimilate the varied races and minorities in Russia. The Tartar element was absorbed. Ivan seemed to be trying to create a Great Russian nationality, transcending loyalty to Muscovy. New administrators replaced the boyars and usurped their functions as local administrators. The oprichnina delivered the final blow to the appanage system. It opened Russia's windows to the East, particularly China and India' It was also a social and political revolution, since Ivan and his oprichniki made violent attacks on the monks and the church.

Russian Terror The oprichniki constituted a security police whose relentless aim was to purge the land of treacherous elements. Ivan's victims suffered heartless torture. Many were drowned or strangled or flogged to death; some were impaled, others roasted on a spit, still others fried in large skillets. Ivan the Terrible used to carry a metal-pointed staff with him, which he used to lash out at people who offended him. Once, he had peasant women stripped naked and used as target practice by his Oprichniki. Another time, he had several hundred beggars drowned in a lake. A boyar was set on a barrel of gunpowder and blown to bits. Jerome Horsey wrote how Prince Boris Telupa "was drawn upon a long sharp-made stake, which entered the lower part of his body and came out of his neck; upon which he languished a horrible pain for 15 hours alive, and spoke to his mother, brought to behold that woeful sight. And she was given to 100 gunners, who defiled her to death, and the Emperor's hungry hounds devoured her flesh and bones". His treasurer, Nikita Funikov, was boiled to death in a cauldron. His councillor, Ivan Viskovaty, was hung, while Ivan's entourage took turns hacking off pieces of his body. In 1570, on the basis of unproved accusations of treason, Ivan sacked and burned the city of Novgorod and tortured, mutilated, impaled, roasted, and otherwise massacred its citizens. A German mercenary wrote: "Mounting a horse and brandishing a spear, he charged in and ran people through while his son watched the entertainment...". Novgorod's archbishop was first sewn up in a bearskin and then

25

hunted to death by a pack of hounds. Men, women and children were tied to sleighs, which were then run into the freezing waters of the Volkhov River. The mass of corpses made it flood its banks. Novgorod never recovered. Later the city of Pskov suffered a similar fate. After two years of bad harvests, a plague epidemic ravaged the countryside in 1570. The next year Moscow was devastated by a fire. The Crimean Tartars, the Turks, the Lithuanians and the Swedes threatened Russia's borders. Ivan lost Narva, but the Tartar invasion was stopped after their sacking of Moscow. In 1572 Ivan suddenly dismissed the Oprichniki. Some of Ivan's strangest behaviour occurred that year, when he again abdicated and placed a Tartar general, Simeon Bekboelatovitch, on the Moscow throne, while he retired to a country estate. Ivan made regular visits to the capital to pay homage to the new Tsar. The charade lasted for a year.

Boyars Weakened, Serfdom Strengthened The name oprichnina disappeared seven years after its adoption, and the expanding territory under the new administration took on the name of ''court land'' or "domain land''. It became a state within the state, complete with its own regularly constituted organization and functioning under completely new, unquestionably loyal officials, who owed their position, their land, and their very lives to the service they rendered the tsar. Here in his ''domain'' where the tsar ruled without let or hindrance, Ivan executed or tonsured or banished most of the old hereditary landowners and confiscated their estates. He transplanted thousands of leading families from one district to another in an obvious effort to destroy their influence, for he saw their power as a threat to good government and even to national survival. A few old boyar families voluntarily surrendered their lands and sought service in the new order, but in each case they received in exchange for their ancestral holdings distant new estates which they retained only under service tenure. The new landowner-vassal relationship made the gentry in the domain land completely subservient to the tsar. The consequences of the oprichnina were revolutionary. Although Ivan did not destroy the aristocratic element in Russia - enough of it survived to launch a civil war after his death - he so weakened and altered it that the aristocracy was never again the same. In dispossessing the old boyars who had held their land by hereditary right, even when he merely transplanted them to some distant new estate which they held by service tenure, he uprooted them, destroyed their old connections, deprived them of their old adherents, and took away their local position of respect which generations on the old estates had brought their families. No longer was there any material or social basis for the haughty independence they had once known. From that time forward they were ''service gentry'' whose position and well-being depended upon their service to the state. But Ivan left the task half finished to Peter the Great a century later. The old hereditary boyars were not the only ones to experience the rooting out of old ties. When the new pomestchiks took over the estates confiscated from some

26

defiant old landowner, they received with it the peasants who had worked the fields for centuries. Whatever rights the peasants had maintained under their old masters melted away under the new, for the government tightened the curbs upon the peasant's right to move in order to bind him firmly in the service of the pomestchik, who required maintenance and support if he in turn were to render his service obligation to the state. The system that the oprichnina created was a two-storied house of service, or in fact slavery, with the pomestchiks occupying the upper story and the peasants, rapidly becoming serfs, occupying the lower.

The Fall of the Dynasty Over the years, Ivan's married life had become unstable, underlining his egocentricity, insecurity and manic temperament. In 1561 he had married a Circassian beauty, Maria Temriukovna, but he soon tired of her. Two years after her death in 1569 he married Martha Sobakin, a merchant's daughter, but she died two weeks later. Ivan's fourth wife was Anna Koltovskaya, whom he sent to a convent in 1575. He married a fifth time to Anna Wassilchikura, who was soon replaced by Wassilissa Melentiewna. She foolishly took a lover, who was impaled under Wassilissa's window before she, too, was dispatched to a convent. After his seventh wedding day Ivan discovered that his new bride, Maria Dolgurukaya, was not a virgin anymore. He had her drowned the next day. His eight and last wife was Maria Nagaya, whom Ivan married in 1581. Ivan had always had quite a good relationship with his eldest son, and young Ivan had proved himself at Novgorod. On November 19, 1581 Ivan became angry with his son's pregnant wife, because of the clothes she wore, and beat her up. As a result she miscarried. His son argued with his father about this beating. In a sudden fit of rage, Ivan the Terrible raised his iron-tipped staff and struck his son a mortal blow to the head. The Prince lay in a coma for several days before succumbing to his festering wound. Ivan IV was overcome by extreme grief, knocking his head against his son's coffin. The murder doomed the dynasty to extinction, for Ivan's sole remaining heir, his younger son Fedor, was a simpleton whose marriage was barren.

The Mad Monarch? Ivan's mistrust, sadism and uncontrolled rages suggest an abnormal personality. His disturbing behaviour can be traced back to his traumatic childhood. After his illness of 1553, which could have been pneumonia or encephalitis, and the death of his first wife in 1560, Ivan's erratic and cruel behaviour increased. He had some psychopathic characteristics; his quick mood shifts, unreliability, egocentricity and his impersonal sex life and lack of lasting emotions. His first mock abdication shows that he was a master at manipulating other people, while convincing them of his good intentions. He was without any compassion for his subjects, whom he beat up, robbed or raped just for fun. His personal friendships were of short duration and his friends usually ended up dead. Some examples are the fate of Adasjev and Silvester and the impalement his brother-in-law, when his third wife died. However,

27

he did show signs of remorse after the death of his son. Ivan became addicted to the ingestion of mercury, which he kept bubbling in a cauldron in his room for his consumption. Later the exhumation of his body showed that he suffered from mercury poisoning. His bones showed signs of syphilic ostratis. Ivan's sexual promiscuity with both sexes, his last illness and many features of his personality support a diagnosis of syphilis, a venereal disease that was often 'treated' with mercury. However, it can not be determined indisputably if Ivan's problems were basically organic or psychological.

Some Practical Steps Although Ivan IV claimed to rule by divine right and fought every check upon his authority, custom required the prince or tsar to seek the advice of the boyar duma which met frequently, sometimes daily, with the tsar presiding. The Sudebnik, the law code that Ivan IV issued in 1550, even required the duma's approval of all important decisions. Laws or ukazes declared in Duma meetings began, '.The tsar has directed and the boyars have agreed..' There can be no doubt of Ivan's ability to cow any who might oppose his will in the duma. Yet it was, in part at least, to free himself from even this mild restraint that the tsar convoked the Zemskii Sobor to still the voice of the boyars in a chorus of commoners votes, and then organized the oprichnina to avoid meeting with the duma altogether. As the small principality of Moscow grew into the Russian state and acquired enormous territory, the household officials who had served the prince when his patrimony was hardly larger than a great landowners estate could not handle the multiplicity of problems facing the nation-state. New government bureaus called prikazes were set up, each headed by an appointee of the grand prince and staffed with a corps of clerks. Some of these bureaus dealt with particular governmental functions, whereas others administered new lands added by conquest. One prikaz handled receipts and disbursements like any treasury department in the West; another supervised embassies sent abroad and foreign missions received in Moscow like any foreign ministry in western Europe; still another dealt with military matters like any western war office. Alongside these bureaus created on functional lines were other bureaus whose responsibility it was to deal with all types of administrative matters in a given territory, particularly in one recently acquired. A prikaz for Novgorod governed that wide area after its absorption by Ivan III . When the principality of Tver was added to Moscow there had to be a prikaz to administer it. The conquest of Kazan added another to this growing list, and late in the sixteenth century another prikaz, or bureau or colonial office, came into existence to govern Siberia. There was no order and little logic in the way in which these bureaus proliferated. A new function added or a new district conquered seemed to dictate the creation of another prikaz. By the end of the sixteenth century there were thirty such departments; by the time Peter the Great a century later swept them away and set up a new administrative pattern the number had doubled. Often their functions overlapped; several of them, for example, gathered and spent revenue.

28

The End By the end of his life, Ivan was habitually bad tempered. Daniel von Bruchau stated that in his rages Ivan "foamed at the mouth like a horse". He had long looked older than his years with long white hair dangling from a bald pate onto his shoulders. In his last years, he had to be carried on a litter. His body swelled, the skin peeled and gave off a terrible odour. Jerome Horsey wrote: "The Emperor began grievously to swell in his cods, with which he had most horribly offended above fifty years, boasting of a thousand virgins he had deflowered and thousands of children of his begetting destroyed." In 1584, as he was preparing to play a game of chess, Ivan fainted suddenly and died. During his reign hardly a family of noble birth had not been touched by his murders, and some had been completely eliminated. Countless acres of cultivated land had been abandoned by farmers during the terror of the Oprichniki, and forests had begun reclaiming the land. The end of the dynasty would bring turmoil. The chaos in which Ivan left the administration, the bitterly resentment of the boyars who had survived his purges, the sense of insecurity and fright felt by men of every class, the foreign enemies whose hatred of Russia Ivan's campaigns of pillage, torture, and desolation had sharpened all compounded to leave the land weak and divided. For many years there would be serious question whether the nation could survive. Despite some remarkable achievements, all in all Ivan the Terrible set the stage for an era of unbelievable confusion and disorder which has gone down in history as the Time of Troubles. Vocabulary work Read and memorize the following words and expressions, suggest their Russian equivalents: fringe, n (e.g. to stand on the fringe of smth) revolt, n (e.g. peasant revolts) hegemony, n nobility, n depravity, n moderation, n reign, n challenge, n (v) (e.g. to challenge smb’s rights to the throne) dungeon, n (e.g. to imprison smb in a dungeon) regent, n jailer, n convent, n (e.g.to send a woman to a

remorse, n blasphemy, n superstition, n abdicate, v (abdication, n) populace, n abduct, v (abduction, n) monastic order sacrilegious mass licentiousness, n repentance, n sermon, n (e.g. to read religious sermons) virtue, n (e.g. Christian virtues) orphan, n exterminate, v (=eliminate) landed aristocracy implement, v (e.g. to implement a policy,

29

convent) molest, v (= bother, annoy) deaf-mute, adj (= dumb and deaf) threadbare, adj (= shabby) rivalry, n (= competition) feud, n (e.g. family feud, personal feud, blood feud) roam, v (= wander) torment, v (= torture, tantalize) tormentor, n pack, n (e.g. a pack of starved hunting dogs, a wolf pack) scoundrel, n (= rascal; e.g. a gang of young scoundrels) rape, n (v) confession, n (e.g. to do a public confession of smb’s sins) coronation, n devote, v (adj) devoted, adj (= faithful) khanate, n (e.g. the Khanates of Kazan and Astrakhan) fever, n (e.g. high fever, yellow fever; to come down with a fever) to swear an oath of allegiance treachery, n (= treason, betrayal) to do smth in full view of smb to rage at (against) smb exile, n (v) (e.g. to send smb into exile; to live in exile) fit, n (e.g. a fit of temper, a fit of nerves, hysterical fit, a fit of coughing, etc)

measures, etc) retail trade bureaucracy, n apanage system purge, n (v) strangle, v flog, v staff, n (e.g. Ivan used to carry a metalpointed (iron-tipped) staff with him.) sack, v (=plunder; e.g. to sack a city) mutilate, v impale, v (The king used to impale his prisoners on sharp sticks and place them in public view.) massacre, n (v) (= kill, slaughter) mercenary, n plague, n homage, n (e.g. to pay homage to smb) banish, v hereditary landowner service tenure adhere, v (adherent, n) haughty, adj (e.g. haughty landlords) defy, v (defiant, adj; defiance, n) succumb, v (e.g. to succumb to a wound, to a disease) mercury, n law code treasury, n proliferate, v turmoil, n desolation, n

Questions for discussion Comment on the following: 1. At the beginning of the chapter Ivan’s reign is called “great” , whereas at the end it is blamed for leaving the country in a state of extreme confusion and disorder. Are these statements as contradictory as they seem at first sight? How can you reconcile them? What generally makes a monarch “great” ? 2. What factors built up Ivan’s personality? Was his behaviour and policy anyhow similar to that of other European leaders of the time? 3. Can we justify the Oprichnina? 4. In your opinion, was Ivan more a monstrous madman or a skillful political manipulator? Give specific reasons to support your answer.

30

Chapter 5

POLES ON THE WARPATH Read the text:

Why Troubles? The Polish invasion and occupation of Russia, which the Russians refer to as the Time of Troubles, had its origin in the social and economic difficulties inherited from the time of Ivan the Terrible. Ivan IV created what we might call an inner disequilibrium. Every social class in Russia had a bag full of grievances in the 16th century. The old aristocracy had been ruined and those who had survived with their lives sought to restore its former power and glory. But fear and terror pervaded all aspects of Russian life and prevented the formation of sensible policies and programs which would have restored all sense of national unity and pride. The new aristocracy, called dvoriane had no esprit de corps. They were all varied lot and did not have all sense of mutual interest. Some of the estates which the new pomestchiks had acquired were inadequate to sustain their new position in the state and in local administration. There was an overwhelming labor shortage which affected not only the dvorianstvo, but all estate owners, including the state and the church. Hundreds of peasants searched for freedom and economic security in Siberia and other less populated areas and thus contributed to all general exodus of peasants from their former estates. The plight of the peasants was certainly an unpleasant one and no one could really blame them for running away. Special privileges granted to the secular and ecclesiastical landlords contributed to their impossible situation. There was throatcutting competition among landlords for tenants. The monasteries were the chief beneficiaries of this cruel competition, since most peasants thought they would be better treated by the monks than by their former landlords. This flight of the peasantry was encouraged by the church, which had persuaded the State to give the peasants legal permission for moving on one single day of the year - the holiday of St. George. Many peasants used St. George's Day to flee from their creditor lords. But flight from the obligation to pay one's debts had very bad results. It tended to turn the debtor into all slave of the new owner, since the debt could be used to blackmail the peasants. The state intervened to some degree by preventing ''old timers" to leave. So, the sixteenth century was a time when large masses of the Russian population were uprooted. One foreign observer called it a major demographic crisis, which it certainly was. There was a rising wave of popular discontent in every social group and class. Freedom was ruthlessly eliminated by the actions of the state and the frustrated landlords. Perhaps, because of these domestic problems foreign states became involved in Russian affairs. It was certainly tempting since Russia seemed to have lost its unity and cohesion, making it a vulnerable tool for the ambitions of her more powerful neighbors. These hungry neighbors were primarily Poland-Lithuania and Sweden.

31

Clashes with Neighbors In 1587 Sigismund III from the Swedish house of Vasa was elected to the Polish-Lithuanian throne. Russia vigorously opposed this election since it threatened to create a large state on her western border. But, despite Russian opposition Sweden and Poland-Lithuania were joined in 1592, when Sigismund succeeded to the Swedish throne. However, the Swedes themselves objected and Sigismund was forced to return to Poland. Russia had been in an almost permanent state of war with Poland. But in 1587 a 15-year armistice was signed between Poland and Russia and Sigismund confirmed this return to peace. Using this armistice with Poland, Russia than tried to recover some territory lost to Sweden by Ivan IV. The Russians actually occupied Yam and Ivanograd, but failed to take their major objective, Narva. Peace was finally restored again with Sweden in 1595. But Russia' access to the Baltic was still denied her and disagreements with Sweden, therefore, continued to plague Russian policy-makers and became another cause of the great war with Sweden under Peter the Great.

Dimitry Alive? During this time the actual tsar was Fedor, but he was totally incapable of ruling. The real power was in the hands of a group of boyars. Among these the most powerful turned out to be Boris Gudonov, whose only claim to prominence was the marriage of his sister to the feeble tsar Fedor. Although he had no legitimate claim to the throne Boris Gudonov managed to have himself elected to the tsarship in 1598. For a while managed fairly well, but then the problem of the Pseudo-Dimitry popped up and gave him considerable trouble. It also invited foreign entanglements. Dimitry, the brother of Fedor and son of Maria Nagoi, Ivan IV's last and illegal wife, was the only legitimate heir. But Dimitry had apparently died at Uglich in 1591; some think he was killed through a conspiracy of boyars inspired by Boris Gudonov. This, of course, opened the way' for Boris to assume the throne after Fedor died in 1598. However, a series of pretenders now claimed that Dimitry had not really died and that therefore the legitimate heir was still about the land and should assume his office. One of these pretenders was a fellow by the name of Gregory Otrepov, who set himself up on the Dniester in a castle owned by the Polish nobleman George Muiszek. He was supported by many other Polish nobles and even became a Roman Catholic in 1804. Part of the reason for the conversion was a proposed union of east and west and the introduction of Roman Catholicism in Russia. Eventually Otrepov became engaged to Marina Muiszek, the daughter of George. Yet, thus far the Polish government was not, apparently involved in these machinations. It was a purely Russian phenomenon, according to the Russian historian Platonov. Some even claim that the Jesuits and the Pope were behind this scheme, but there is no proof for that. What does seem fairly certain is that the powerful boyar family of the Romanovs and other boyars wanted to use Dimitry as a weapon against Boris Gudonov. As a result

32

of this Boris began to persecute the Romanov family' But this only crystallized the opposition, which began to gather around the so-called Pseudo-Dimitry. When Boris Gudonov died in 1605 many boyars who had been loyal to Boris now would rather switch than fight and consequently went over to the forces of Dimitry. So Dimitry-Otrepov was able to install himself in the Kremlin with his Polish retinues. His success was due to three important factors: - the weakness of the Moscow government; - the neutrality of the upper classes; and - the enthusiasm of the underprivileged and oppressed who looked upon Dimitry as a savior and easily believed the propaganda about him being the real son of Ivan IV and hence the true tsar. The connivance of the Polish government and the assistance of the Polish nobles certainly helped his assumption of power as well, although it was not the determining factor at this time. The small nucleus of Polish knights in Dimitry's army soon lost its identity when numerous Russian forces and peasants joined Dimitry's army as it advanced on the capital in 1604. So the dominant factor was not Polish but Russian. Yet once he was established in Moscow the Poles in his retinue began to make trouble. Many foreign mercenaries demanded their pound of flesh. Jesuits and Polish clericals in his following schemed for a re-union of the eastern and western churches.

Fatal Mistakes The Russians, both high and low, soon began to resent the foreigners whom Dimitry appointed to high office. Dimitry's Roman Catholicism and his obvious indifference to orthodox ritual troubled the Russians and made them suspicious. A kind of conservative reaction set in. A series of disputes developed over petty titles and etiquette always involving Poles versus Russians. Then in March 1606 Dimitry and Marina Muiszek were married in a public ceremony within the Kremlin. A large Polish delegation, including many Roman Catholic friars came to the wedding. A massive popular disturbance, instigated by the boyars, led to the murder of Dimitry and hundreds of Poles and Lithuanians. A boyar by the name of Vasili Shuisky now takes the reigns of government in his hands and calls himself tsar. He is offered support by Charles IX of Sweden against a group of dissident Cossacks who refuse to accept his claim to the throne.

Again Dimitry But Shuisky refused to accept the offer, probably because he feared that the Swedes also had designs on Russia. In any case, a so-called Second Pretender pops up in Poland in 1607. The Poles under King Sigismund now give more direct aid to the Russian pretender, primarily because Sigismund resents the massacre of the Poles during the wedding of the first pretender in May 1606. The Poles are also incensed at the indignities which the Russians repeatedly heaped on the Polish ambassadors in Russia. This Second Pretender was largely dependent on Polish troops and two Polish

33

magnates, Sapia and Rozynski, assume command of the Polish army for the pretender. The dissident Cossacks are also recruited and led by the Poles. So a war develops between the Russians and the Second Pretender's PolishCossack army with its headquarters at Tushino. This war began in the spring of 1608 and soon led to the blockade of Moscow. To aid his nephew, the tsar, prince Michael Skopin-Shuisky now decides to get into the act. The prince begins to gather his own private army of mercenary Swedes, Frenchmen, Englishmen and Scotch adventurers, totaling some 15,000 men, and marches to relieve Moscow. Meanwhile, the Second Pretender at Tushino quarrels with Rozynski and his Polish followers and thus looses his support. As a result Tushino has to be abandoned and the blockade of Moscow collapsed in 1610.

Swift Shifts The Poles meanwhile are mad at the Russians for making the alliance with Sweden and in September 1609 they decide to besiege Smolensk. Sigismund also calls on the Poles at Tushino to join his colors and as a result the Russian aristocrats and even the leader of the Russian church Filaret who had supported the Pretender go over to the Poles under Sigismund when the star of the Pretender seems to be sinking fast. These Russian nobles who changed their allegiance to the Poles were sarcastically referred to as perelety or ''migratory birds,'' which did not of course endear them to the hearts of loyal Russians, especially the common folk. These boyar switch-hitters now made an agreement with Sigismund which promised to take Wladyslav as the new tsar of Muscovy. It also assured the inviolability of Russian institutions and the Orthodox Church, including the rights of landlords over their peasants and the rights of dvoriane to promotion on the basis of service and merit. The still dissident Cossacks meanwhile join the second Pretender who has now migrated to Kaluga. Michael Shuisky dies and is replaced by Prince Dimitry Shuisky - the Shuisky family is bound and determined to get to the seat of power - who in turn is defeated by the Hetman Zolkiewski and his Cossacks. As a result many of Dimitry's troops desert to the Poles. The Swedes, who had been fighting against some of the Cossacks decide to withdraw to Novgorod. Finally the boyar tsar Vasili Shuisky, who had managed to hang on to the slim threads of power, is dethroned and a government made up of the boyar duma takes over in July 1610. But this boyar duma has accepted the agreement made with Sigismund by the perelety and thus the Poles become the rulers of Moscow between 1610 and 1612. Wladyslav is elected tsar by a questionable Zemski Sobor and the population of Russia (mostly Muscovites) takes an oath of allegiance to the new tsar and to Zolkiewski after the latter defeated the Second Pretender.

Popular Uprising Opposition to the Poles built up almost as soon as the foreign dictatorship was established in Moscow. The old patriarch Hermogen stimulated anti-Catholic feeling in Moscow. Prokopy Liapunov organized an opposition army in Riazan, where there were few Poles to stop him. In Nishni-Novgorod a wholesale cattle dealer by the

34

name of Kurzma Minin organized an army to march on Moscow and Hermogen who has bad meanwhile been arrested, spreads opposition from prison. The Cossacks are organized by Prince Trubetskoy and Zarutsky. A large, though scattered, militia is thus organized to free Russia from the Polish intruders. While Moscow is being attacked the Second Pretender, having lost most of his following, is murdered. But the city of Novgorod, always going its own way, severs all ties with Moscow and submits to Swedish suzerainty. But a Polish army manages to storm and take Smolensk, while Rome and Poland celebrate the Polish-Catholic victory. Liapunov fails, but Minin and a new hero by name of Pozharsky organize a militia which marches on Moscow, where the Cossacks have already taken control of a large portion of the city. Two armies under Pozharsky and the Cossacks under Zarutsky are able to defeat a Polish relief army which is sent to hold Moscow. By December 1612 the Poles are completely routed and Russia is once again free of foreign control, although the situation is still faced with the difficult problem of securing a new tsar.

A Revolution that Restored the Past So in conclusion we might ask what the significance of this time of trouble really was. Some have insisted that these events constituted a kind of social revolution in Russia. If it was a revolution, it was certainly an abortive one, that achieved very little in the way of substantive social change. The masses were awakened and moved to take joint action; dynasties were changed; there was foreign occupation; there was desolation, hatred, and impoverishment. Yet not a single constructive political idea came out of it all. Energies were expanded to restore the past, not to bring about social change. Muscovite absolutism emerged unscathed from these primitive conflicts and disorders. The only important change was the final breakdown of the ancient princely and boyar families, a process which had already started during the unification and the oprichnina. The successors to the power of the ancient aristocracy were the dvoriane who owed their new wealth and influence to the sovereigns pleasure. This new aristocracy followed the example of the old. What we have here is a mere change of personalities rather than a remodeling of the social structure. The church retained its estates and privileges, as one could have expected. Serfdom was rejuvenated and officially accepted. In fact it was stronger than before and became the very foundation of the Muscovite state. The foreigners merely stimulated chauvinism and the fear to depart from tradition. The Cossacks, the mass of peasants and slaves gain nothing from this movement which they had mainly generated. A small minority of Cossacks were allowed to form military, semiautonomous communities and the masses of slaves and serfs were returned to their masters. The reasons for the failure of this so-called revolution are obvious enough: the anarchistic character of the movement, the inability of the leaders to keep it under the control, the lack of revolutionary vision and the deep-rooted tradition of passive submission.

35

Vocabulary work Read and memorize the following words and expressions, suggest their Russian equivalents: esprit de corps (ф ранц .) labor shortage exodus, n plight, n (e.g. the plight of peasants) peasantry, n secular, adj ecclesiastical, adj (=clerical) tenant, n flee, v (fled, fled) creditor, n (ant.: debtor) blackmail, n (v) vulnerable, adj armistice, n Pseudo-Dmitry pop up, v entanglement, n heir, n (e.g. a legitimate heir) conspiracy, n pretender, n retinue, n

machination, n underprivileged, adj oppressed, adj savior, n (the Savior) connivance, n friar, n indignity, n (=humiliation) headquarters, n insurgent, n (adj) cession, n besiege, v the common folk inviolability, n wholesale, n (adj) (e.g. a wholesale cattle dealer) militia, n intruder, n sever, v (e.g. to sever ties, relationship) joint action impoverishment, n

Questions for discussion Comment on the following: 1. What factors dragged the country into the Time of Troubles? Is it doomed to be a general rule that after any great period in the history of a country there follows a period of weakness and confusion? 2. A phenomenon of pretenders: why are people prone to believe? 3. Would you, following the author’s view, call the popular movement of the early 17th century in Russia a revolution? 4. Is there really the old Russian deep-rooted tradition of passive submission? What are its roots?

С остави тель Г ончар оваЛ ю бовь Ю р ьевна Ред актор Буни наТ .Д .

36