The reign of Ivan IV the Terrible (1533-1584) refers to that period of Russian history that the outstanding Russian scientist V.O. Klyuchevsky called the time of Muscovite Rus' or the Great Russian State, defining the chronological framework of this stage from 1462 (the accession of Ivan III to the grand-ducal throne) to 1613 (the appearance of a new dynasty on the Moscow throne - the Romanovs). The main content of the historical process at this time was the completion of the unification of the Russian lands around Moscow into a centralized state, the formalization and approval of its political and socio-economic system. Muscovite Rus' developed as an autocratic-serf state. However, the processes taking place in the Russian lands were characterized by complexity and inconsistency, which caused ambiguous assessments of many phenomena by domestic and foreign researchers. Perhaps the most controversial is the assessment of the activities of the grandson of Ivan III and the Byzantine princess Sophia Paleologus Ivan IV, nicknamed the Terrible.

Chronologically, two stages are distinguished in the reign of Ivan IV: the first (it can be conditionally called “reformist”) - when active reforms were carried out to strengthen Russian statehood; and the second, associated mainly with the oprichnina. Therefore, in order to study the topic in more depth, it seems necessary to highlight the following sections in this educational manual:

1. Domestic and foreign policy of Russia in the 30-50s. XVI century Reforms of Ivan IV.

2. Domestic and foreign policy of the Russian state in the 60s – early 80s. XVI century Oprichnina.

When considering the first section, first of all, understand the essence of the historical conditions in which the reign of Ivan IV began. Answer the question: what were the prerequisites for the reform activities of the first officially titled Russian Tsar? Analyzing the reforms of Ivan IV, determine how Russian statehood was strengthened and centralization processes took place.

Moving on to the study of the second section, pay attention to the points of view that exist in historiography regarding the reasons for the sharp change in the internal policy of Ivan IV, the transition to the oprichnina. Understand the essence of the oprichnina. When considering its results and consequences, analyze the concepts developed by prominent domestic historians.

When studying foreign policy issues, answer the questions: how is Russian foreign policy in the period under review related to domestic politics? What are the results of the foreign policy activities of Ivan IV?

The reign of Ivan IV the Terrible is one of the most difficult and dramatic periods in Russian history. Therefore, when analyzing a topic, it is especially important to avoid one-sidedness in assessments of historical events. It is necessary to strive to implement such rules of the principles of objectivity and historicism as the study of a phenomenon in the totality of its positive and negative sides, regardless of the attitude towards them; consideration of each provision only historically, in connection with other provisions, with the specific experience of history.

The time of “boyar rule” began, which lasted almost a decade. Ivan IV wrote about his childhood impressions 25 years later in a message to Prince A. Kurbsky: “Our subjects... began to bother only about acquiring wealth and fame, and began to quarrel with each other. And how much evil they have done! How many boyars and governors, well-wishers of our father were killed!... What can we say about the parental treasury? Everything was stolen in a crafty way... My brother Georgiy and I began to be raised as foreigners or as beggars. No matter how much need we suffered for clothing and food; We didn’t have any will in anything, they didn’t treat us the way they should treat children. I remember one thing: it used to be that we were playing, and Prince Ivan Vasilyevich Shuisky was sitting on a bench, leaning his elbow on our father’s bed, with his leg resting on it.” Bloody dramas played out before the child’s eyes: adherents of some boyar clans sent rivals from other clans to prison, beat and even killed. (The Shuisky and Belsky groups fought for power).

The boy-sovereign began to fear for his life and saw the people around him as usurpers of power. For an explanation of the existing order and his position, Ivan IV turned to books. Researchers noted his extraordinary erudition and ability to quote extensive quotes from various works from memory. Contemporaries called the sovereign “a rhetorician of verbal wisdom.” Having mastered the book heritage, Ivan IV, according to S.M. Solovyov, the first of the Russian rulers to realize the significance of tsarist power, compiled its theory. The essence of all the tsar’s political thoughts, as noted by V.O. Klyuchevsky, was the idea of ​​​​unlimited autocracy, which, in the opinion of Ivan IV, was not only a normal, above-established state order, but also a primordial fact of our history, coming from the depths of centuries.

In order to strengthen autocracy, Ivan IV accepted the title of tsar in 1547, which was considered equal to the imperial one. This was the name given to the Byzantine emperors and khans of the Golden Horde. All the Byzantine teachings read by the young sovereign, calling to “honor the king,” now applied to him.

After the crowning of Ivan IV, fires followed in Moscow, and there is evidence that the cause was arson. The excited crowd killed the Tsar's relative, Boyar Glinsky, and went to the Tsar. The young king had the impression that they wanted to kill him too. It was with difficulty that this rebellion was suppressed. Even many years later, Ivan IV spoke about the events of 1547 as if it were yesterday: “And from this fear entered my soul and trembling into my bones...”. Disorders, fires, riots (popular demonstrations took place in the cities of Opochka, Pskov, Ustyug). The death of close people, all this helped Ivan IV realize the need for reforms to strengthen statehood and centralize power.

The ideological concept of reforms was most fully outlined in his petitions addressed to the sovereign I.S. Peresvetov. A native of the Russian nobles of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, he served in many countries - Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Moldova, until he came to Rus'. Peresvetov writes indignantly about the boyars, “lazy rich people.” According to the publicist, the social support of power should be the nobles - “service people”. He saw the ideal of government in power unlimited by law, using violence: “A state without a thunderstorm is like a horse without a bridle.”

Around 1549, a government circle formed in the circle of Ivan IV, which went down in history under the name of the Chosen Rada. The composition of its participants is not entirely clear. But it is known that the Radu was headed by A.F. Adashev, who came from a rich, but not very ancient family of Kostroma patrimonial landowners. The government also included the head of the church, Metropolitan Macarius, the priest of the home church of the great princes - the Annunciation Cathedral - Sylvester, Prince A.F. Kurbsky. Relying on the Chosen Rada, Ivan IV spent the late 40s and 50s. a number of structural reforms.

The real balance of power in the country, in which the boyar aristocracy occupied all the key positions in the system of government, and the political weakness of the nobility forced the tsar to maneuver between classes. Ivan IV expanded the composition of the Boyar Duma three times (previously it consisted of 5-12 boyars and no more than 12 okolnichy). Thus, nobles also got into the Boyar Duma. In order to limit the power of the boyars, Ivan IV introduces zemstvo councils. The first of them was convened in 1547. The Zemsky Sobors included: the Boyar Duma, the Consecrated Cathedral - the highest

Clergy, representatives of the nobility, upper classes. In the 16th century Zemsky Sobors met irregularly, the nature of representation in them was not clearly defined, and they did not receive official legal status. And Ivan IV himself, apparently, considered these estate-representative bodies as a forced and temporary measure. Therefore, assessing the political system of Russia in the 16th century. as an estate-representative monarchy is possible only conditionally. The first Zemsky Sobor - the Council of “Reconciliation” (during its work, everyone, even sworn enemies, forgave each other’s offenses and united for a new life) - outlined the implementation of some reforms and the drawing up of a new Code of Law.

In 1550, a new Code of Law was adopted. He streamlined and supplemented the previous one, in particular, on the issue of the peasant transition on St. George’s Day. The “elderly allowance” paid by the peasant when changing hands has increased slightly. (Which, according to some historians, was due to the fall in the exchange rate and the fall in price of silver). The strengthening of the dependence of the peasants on the feudal lord was reflected in the assignment of responsibility for peasant misdeeds to the master. They had to call their master, like the slaves, “sovereign.” For the first time, the Code of Law introduced punishment for bribery and limited the rights of governors and volosts.

During the existence of the Elected Rada, serious changes took place in the government apparatus. A system of specialized orders (originally called “izbas”) was created. Headed by I.M., foreign policy was dealt with. Viskovaty Ambassadorial order. The highest control body, which accepted complaints addressed to the tsar and conducted investigations into them, became the Petition Order. This important area of ​​work was entrusted to A.F. Adashev. The local order was in charge of the land ownership of the feudal lords. The Robber Order was responsible for ensuring the security of the state and the fight against “dashing people”. The collection of the noble militia and the appointment of governors became the duties of the Discharge Order. According to historians, in the middle of the 16th century. There were already about two dozen of these institutions.

Even under Elena Glinskaya, the gubital reform (guba - district) began and continued during the years of boyar rule. In the middle of the 16th century. The local management system looked like this. In 1556, feedings were abolished. Provincial elders, together with city clerks elected from local nobles, headed the district administration. They were entrusted with the fight against the most dangerous crimes for the state - “robberies”. In those districts where there was no private land ownership, as well as in cities, the population elected zemstvo elders, usually from the most prosperous strata of the Chernososh and Posad population. The elected local administration, unlike the newcomers - governors and volosts, was vitally interested in establishing strict order in their districts.

After the abolition of feeding, the population, instead of “feeding income”, had to pay a national tax - “feeding remuneration”. Due to this tax, service people were paid “help”. According to the first drafted Code of Service, a patrimonial or landowner could begin to serve at the age of 15. The size of the “help” depended on the amount of land available to the feudal lord. According to the Code, for every 100 quarters of land “in one field” (150 dessiatinas, about 170 hectares) an armed horseman had to go out for service. From the first hundred quarters the landowner himself came out, from the next hundred quarters his military servants came out. Monetary assistance from the “feeding payback” was received by those who took out more people than they were supposed to, or had ownership of less than 100 quarters. Mounted militia gathered only for parades or in case of military danger. Failure to appear was punishable by corporal punishment, and the estates and estates could be confiscated from the “no-one.” Nobles and boyar children were service people “by fatherland” (i.e. by origin). In addition, there were service people “according to the instrument” (i.e., according to the set): artillerymen, city guards. The Cossacks were close to them. Posokha (from the word “plow” - a unit of taxation) - a militia of black-plowed and monastic peasants and townspeople - performed auxiliary work. In 1550, a permanent streltsy army was created from “serving people according to the instrument”.

The Elected Rada paid great attention to the organization of the feudal elite of Russian society. In 1552, the Courtyard Notebook was compiled - a complete list of the Sovereign's courtyard, which included about 4,000 people. These were people who occupied the highest positions in the state, both military (voivodes, heads) and civilian lines (administrators, diplomats).

Localism was regulated, which consisted in the fact that when appointing a person to a particular position, the origin of a person was decisive. But at the same time, it was not the family heredity of official positions that was established, but the heredity of official relations between families. So, for example, Prince Odoevsky was ready to take any position, as long as Buturlin was inferior. Solving local affairs was difficult. Against one chain of past precedents, another was put forward. Before each campaign, protracted disputes began. In the middle of the 16th century. An official directory was compiled - “The Sovereign's Genealogist”, which identified those aristocratic families that had the right to live locally. All appointments were recorded in special books filled out in the Rank Order. These records were included in the “Sovereign Discharge”, which was the only source for resolving local disputes.

In the middle of the 16th century. a single tax collection unit was established for the entire state - a large plow, which, depending on the fertility of the soil, as well as on the social status of the landowner, amounted to 400-600 acres of land.

There was a centralization of the monetary system and capacity measures. Even under Elena Glinskaya, a monetary reform was launched, according to which the Moscow ruble became the main monetary unit for the entire country. For the most significant measure of the capacity of bulk solids - a quarter (it was used to measure grain), copper standards were created and sent to all counties.

The process of centralization also affected the church. In 1551, the Council of the Stoglavy took place (the collection of its decisions had 100 chapters, which is why it was called “Stoglav”). Church rituals were unified, a single pantheon of saints was approved, and measures were taken to eradicate immorality in the clergy. The council retained such a relic of the appanage system as the jurisdiction of the court of bishops over priests, but on the issue of monastic land ownership, Metropolitan Macarius, who led the meeting, pursued a line to strengthen the influence of the state. The Church retained all its lands. However, further acquisitions could only be carried out with royal permission.

The strengthening of Russian statehood from within allowed Ivan IV to pursue an active foreign policy, the main direction of which was at first eastern. In 1547-1548, 1549-1550. campaigns were undertaken against the Kazan Khanate, which ended in failure. The significance of this Khanate for Russia was determined not only by its fertile lands and important strategic position (Kazan, together with Astrakhan, controlled the Volga trade route), but also by the need to eliminate the danger of raids that constantly threatened the country. The literature notes that in the middle of the 16th century. in Kazan there were up to 100 thousand Russian slaves. The peoples of the Volga region - the Mari, Mordovians, and Chuvash - also sought liberation from the khan's dependence.

A serious siege of Kazan was undertaken in August 1552 by a Russian army of 150,000, equipped with powerful artillery. On October 2, the city was taken by storm. Khan Yadigar-Magmet was captured, soon baptized, became the owner of Zvenigorod and an active supporter of the Russian Tsar. In 1556, the Astrakhan Khanate was annexed, and the Nogai Horde (located in the Urals and Northern Caspian region) recognized vassal dependence on Russia. In 1557, the annexation of the main part of Bashkiria was completed. Thus, in the middle of the 16th century. Russia included the Middle and Lower Volga regions and part of the Urals.

In the second half of the 50s. The Western direction became the main one in Russian foreign policy. The Livonian War for access to the Baltic Sea (1558-1583) was determined by the need to establish close ties with Europe, ensure the defense of Russia's western borders and the possibility of acquiring new economically developed lands. The main result of military operations in 1558-1560. was the destruction of the Livonian Order. (Almost all of Livonia was occupied by Russian troops, Master Furstenberg was captured). The new master of the order, Ketler, recognized dependence on Poland and received Courland as his possession. However, other states also intervened in the course of events. Northern Estonia came under Swedish rule. The Danes captured the island of Ezel. Now Lithuania, Poland, Sweden, and Denmark were interested in ensuring that Livonia did not fall under Russian rule. Instead of one, Russia found itself with several strong opponents. This circumstance significantly influenced the course of the Livonian War in subsequent years.

Thus, in the late 40s - 50s. XVI century The largest series of reforms in the entire previous history of the country was carried out, which meant an unprecedented step forward in the direction of centralization and overcoming the remnants of fragmentation. The literature notes that Russian foreign policy mainly owes its successes in the 1950s to these reforms.

The transition to a policy of terror was also facilitated by the events of the Livonian War. In the early 60s. Serious successes were achieved: in February 1563 Polotsk was taken. But the depletion of resources, the fatigue of the warriors (military operations had been going on practically since 1547), the increase in taxes, and, consequently, the increase in the level of exploitation of peasants and the loss of stability of the economy of the feudal lords - all this led to military failures. In 1564, two defeats followed: in January - at the river. Uly, in June - near Orsha. The Tsar declared the “traitors” boyars to be guilty of losing the battles. Two were summarily executed. Many found themselves in disgrace.

At the end of 1564, events occurred in Moscow that left the population of the capital perplexed. On December 3, Sunday, the tsar and his entire family went to the village of Kolomenskoye, where they usually celebrated the holidays of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker. But this departure was not like the previous ones. Ivan IV took with him utensils, icons, crosses, clothes, jewelry and the entire treasury. Those accompanying the sovereign also had to have everything they needed with them. The king ordered them to take their wives and children with them. After staying in Kolomenskoye for two weeks, then visiting the Trinity Monastery, Ivan IV departed in an unknown direction. He stopped in Alexandrovskaya Sloboda (now the city of Alexandrov, Vladimir region).

A month after leaving, the royal messenger brought two messages to Moscow, announced on Red Square. In the first, Ivan IV, after a detailed description of the lawlessness of the boyar rule in his youth, reported that he put his anger and disgrace on the boyars. The butler, the groom, the guards, the treasurers, the clerks, the children of the boyars and all the clerks (almost all categories of feudal lords are listed) because they did not want to fight against the enemies of the state and committed violence against the people. The clergy were subjected to anger and disgrace for standing up for the “traitors.” And so the king, the letter read, “out of great pity of heart,” unable to tolerate all these betrayals, left his kingdom and went to settle somewhere where God himself would show him. In the second letter addressed to the townspeople of Moscow, Ivan IV assured that there was no anger or disgrace against them. This was a smart political move: the tsar cleverly contrasted the feudal lords and the townspeople, posing as a defender of the tax population from their masters.

In accordance with the worldview that existed at that time, an unprecedented social catastrophe occurred. As the chronicler writes, in the crowd listening to the text of the letters, sobs and cries were heard: “Alas, grief! We have sinned before God, angered our sovereign with many sins against him, and turned his great mercy into anger and rage! Now to whom shall we resort, who will have mercy on us and who will deliver us from the invasion of foreigners? How can there be sheep without shepherds? When the wolves see sheep without a shepherd, they will plunder them!” Everything froze, the capital instantly interrupted its usual activities: the shops were closed, the orders were empty, the songs fell silent.

Moscow black people demanded that the boyars and clergy persuade the tsar to return to the throne, declaring that they did not stand for the “state” traitors and villains and would exterminate them themselves. A deputation consisting of the highest clergy, boyars and clerks, led by the Novgorod bishop Pimen, went to the Alexandrovskaya Sloboda. Ivan IV agreed to return to the kingdom (“take back his state”) on the terms that he would announce. In February 1565, the sovereign solemnly entered the capital and convened a council of boyars and higher clergy. Contemporaries noted the terrible change that had occurred in Ivan IV’s appearance over the past two months: his eyes were sunken, his face was drawn, and only remnants of the previous hair remained on his head and beard. Apparently, the king spent this time in great emotional agitation. In the council, he proposed the conditions under which he would take back the power he had abandoned: the right to execute “traitors” and the establishment of an oprichnina. (Derived from the word “oprich” - except. Oprichnina has long been the name given to the possessions given to princesses-widows).

“Oprich” of the entire Russian land created a unique personal inheritance for the sovereign of all Rus'. Under the tsar, a special court was formed, with special boyars, a butler, treasurers and other administrators. From the service people, a thousand people were selected for the oprichnina (later their number increased to 6 thousand), for whom several streets with settlements were allocated in the capital up to the Novodevichy Convent. The former inhabitants were evicted to other areas of Moscow. For the maintenance of the court, “for his daily living” and his children, princes Ivan and Fyodor, Ivan IV allocated 20 cities with counties and several volosts from the state. The oprichnina included, firstly, counties with long-developed feudal land ownership, whose service people were the original support of the grand ducal power (Suzdal, Rostov, part of Pereslavl-Zalessky, possibly Kostroma); secondly, lands bordering the Grand Duchy of Lithuania; thirdly, black-mown lands in Pomerania, which provided great income. Feudal lords who were not accepted into the oprichnina had to leave its territory. The rest of the state was called "zemshchina". The boyar duma remained at its head, and the orders were also protected, continuing to work according to the established order (“repair the administration in the old way”). The Tsar was to be informed only about military and important zemstvo affairs. However, in fact, Ivan IV also led the Duma of the Zemstvo boyars. “For your rise,” i.e. To cover the costs of leaving the capital, the tsar exacted 100 thousand rubles from the zemshchina.

Ivan IV left his ancestral Kremlin palace. They began to build a fortified courtyard for him on the territory of the oprichnina, between Arbat and Nikitskaya. However, the tsar soon settled in Aleksandrovskaya Sloboda, coming to Moscow “not for a great time.” This is how a new, oprichnina capital arose with a palace surrounded by a moat and rampart, with guard posts on the roads. In it, the king organized a monastic order or brotherhood. He declared himself abbot, and his closest associates - Prince Afanasy of Vyazemsky and Malyuta Skuratov (G.Ya. Pleshcheev-Belsky) - cellarer and sexton, respectively. Those entering the oprichnina swore an oath to serve only the sovereign and renounced all friendly and family ties. The guardsmen dressed in black clothes and rode black horses with black harness. Therefore, contemporaries spoke of the Tsar’s servants as “pitch darkness.” A dog's head and a broom were tied to the saddle, symbolizing how the guardsmen sweep out treason and how dogs gnaw out seditious villains. Executions and orgies alternated with church services, during which the tsar and the guardsmen atone for their sins.

Historical sources contain information that the oprichnina plan belonged to Vasily Yuryev and Alexei Basmanov. (The first was a cousin of Queen Anastasia, the second was a scion of the ancient Pleshcheev family). Foreign contemporaries noted in their writings that the tsar switched to a policy of state terror at the instigation of his second wife, the Kabardian princess Maria Temryukovna. One thing is clear that the origins of the oprichnina were the relatives of the first two spouses of Ivan IV: Maria Temryukovna’s brother, Prince M.T. Cherkassky was the son-in-law of V.M. Yuryev, and son A.D. Basmanova Fyodor was married to the niece of Tsarina Anastasia.

The introduction of the oprichnina was marked by numerous executions. In 1569, Ivan IV finally dealt with the family of V.A. Staritsky. Back in 1553, the appanage prince was forced to swear allegiance to Tsarevich Dimitri. But that same year, the baby died: the nanny dropped Grozny’s first-born son into the river, and he choked. The next year, 1554, after the birth of Tsarevich Ivan (killed by his father in 1581), Vladimir Staritsky swore allegiance to him. The oath note read: “If God takes your son, Tsarevich Ivan, and there are no other children of yours left, then your order is for me to correct everything to your queen, Grand Duchess Anastasia, according to your spiritual letter and according to my kiss on the cross.” However, Ivan IV was not content with the obedience of his cousin. Vladimir Staritsky's mother was tonsured a nun and sent to the distant Goritsky Monastery on Sheksna. In 1566, the tsar changed his brother’s inheritance: instead of Staritsa and Vereya, he gave him Dmitrov and Zvenigorod. And after the denunciation of the Tsar’s cook, who testified that Vladimir had persuaded him to poison Ivan IV, a denouement came. Vladimir Andreevich, his wife and youngest daughter were ordered to take poison, and his mother was executed in the Goretsky Monastery.

The literature notes that many representatives of the old boyar families became victims of terror. So, out of 34 boyars - members of the Boyar Duma, 15 died (three were forcibly tonsured into monks), out of 9 okolnichy - 4. In 1566, Metropolitan Afanasy left the metropolis due to illness (in fact, due to disagreement with the introduction of the oprichnina). His successor was to be the abbot of the Solovetsky Monastery, Philip, who came from the boyar family of the Kolychevs (he became a monk because of his participation in the rebellion of Andrei Staritsky). From the very beginning, Philip announced that he would agree to be metropolitan only if the oprichnina was destroyed. But at the insistence of Ivan IV, he was forced to accept the position, having given himself the right “not to join the oprichnina.” Metropolitan Philip became an active denouncer of the actions of Ivan IV. The retribution was not slow to take its toll. The Metropolitan was deposed and exiled to the Tver Youth Monastery. In 1569, during Ivan IV’s campaign against Novgorod, Philip was strangled by Malyuta Skuratov.

In the summer of 1569, a certain “Volynian Peter” reported to the tsar that the Novgorodians wanted to come under the rule of the Polish king. The corresponding document was allegedly drawn up, signed by the Novgorod Archbishop Pimen, other “best citizens”, and kept behind the image of the Mother of God in the St. Sophia Cathedral. This denunciation was the formal justification for the defeat of Novgorod, which lasted 6 weeks. (On the way to Novgorod, Klin, Tver, and Torzhok were destroyed). All the churches were robbed, the city and its surroundings were devastated, and many residents died. The place of mass executions was the Volkhov River, into which, as the chronicler writes, Novgorodians were thrown for five weeks.

After the return of Ivan IV to Moscow, an investigation began to identify anti-state ties between the Novgorod Archbishop Pimen and the Novgorod clerks with the Moscow boyars. As a result, in the summer of 1570, several dozen people were brutally executed in Moscow. They were accused of preparing a conspiracy to transfer Novgorod and Pskov to the Lithuanian king, preparing to assassinate the king, and striving to enthrone V.A. Staritsky. The boyar group that created the oprichnina fell. Father and son Basmanov, M. Cherkassky, A. Vyazemsky died. The oprichnina was now headed by M. Skuratov and V. Gryaznoy, who received the rank of Duma nobles. However, soon the king was forced to cancel the division of the country into two parts. The prerequisite for this was the following events.

In 1571, the Crimean Khan Devlet-Girey raided Moscow. The guardsmen, who were tasked with keeping the barrier on the banks of the Oka, for the most part did not show up for duty. Thanks to the betrayal of defectors - the children of the boyars, Khan Devlet-Girey was able to bypass the zemstvo troops and one oprichnina regiment waiting for him, crossed the Oka River and moved towards Moscow. But the Russian governors were ahead of the khan. On May 23, they brought their troops to the capital. On May 24, the Tatars also approached Moscow. Devlet-Girey did not besiege the city, but set fire to the outskirts. Clear, dry weather and strong winds contributed to the spread of the fire. Moscow burned out in three hours. Sources indicate that up to 800,000 people died (apparently this figure is exaggerated). Negotiations with the Tatars began. Russian diplomats were ready to cede Astrakhan, but Devlet-Girey also demanded Kazan. To break the will of Ivan IV, the Crimean Khan decided to repeat the raid the next year. However, the Russian side was able to seriously prepare to repel the attack. An experienced military leader, Prince M.I., was placed at the head of the troops. Vorotynsky. Both zemstvo and oprichnina armed formations united. At the end of August, on the banks of the Lopasni River near the village of Molodi (50 km south of Moscow), the Khan’s troops, despite their double numerical superiority, were defeated.

Ivan IV understood the danger of dividing the country and troops into two parts. In 1572, the oprichnina was abolished. Both the territory and the army became united. True, a relapse of the oprichnina took place in 1575. The Tsar accepted the title of Prince of Moscow, and Kasimov Khan Simeon Bekbulatovich (before the baptism of Sain-Bulat) was declared the Grand Duke of All Rus'. Ivan IV, as a simple boyar, went to bow to the Grand Duke of All Rus', sent his orders to Simeon in the form of petitions, signing himself “Prince of Moscow Ivan Vasiliev,” who beat his forehead “with his children,” with the princes. The essence of this, as V.O. wrote. Klyuchevsky, “political masquerade” is not entirely clear. Simeon Bekbulatovich ruled the kingdom for two years, after which he was sent to Tver. It is clear that this political figure did not play any independent role.

During the oprichnina years, Ivan IV continued to pursue an active foreign policy. The victory at Molodi eliminated the Crimean threat for many years and allowed Kazan and Astrakhan to remain part of the Russian state. Foreign policy actions in the East were also successful. In Western Siberia there was the so-called Siberian Khanate. The composition of this state entity was multinational: Siberian Tatars, Khanty, Mansi, Trans-Ural Bashkirs, etc. Back in the 50s. XVI century Khan Ediger recognized vassal dependence on the Russian Tsar. But his successor Kuchum began to fight against Russia. Ivan IV set the task of annexing Siberia. The actual owners of the middle Urals, the merchant-industrialists Stroganovs, provided active assistance to the government. They received charters from the king to own lands along the river. Tobolu. Around 1581-1582 (in historiography there is no consensus regarding this date) a detachment formed by the Stroganovs (600-800 people), led by the Cossack ataman Ermak, opposed the Siberian Khanate. Kuchum was defeated, the capital of his state - Kashlyk (Isker) - was taken. The population of the annexed lands had to pay rent in kind in fur - yasak. In 1584-1585 Ermak died in battle. But it was already impossible to stop the colonization of the eastern lands by the Russian peasantry. In the 80-90s. XVI century Western Siberia became part of Russia.

Events also developed quite successfully for Russia in the Livonian War, which had become protracted. In 1569, a state union was concluded in Lublin between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland. A single state was created - the “Rzeczpospolita” (republic), headed by a king elected by the Polish and Lithuanian feudal lords. After the death of the childless Sigismund II Augustus in 1572, a struggle for power began. Ivan IV skillfully took advantage of the turmoil in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. He created the vassal “Livonian Kingdom” led by the Danish Prince Magnus (married to the surviving daughter of V.A. Staritsky, Maria). Russian troops occupied many cities and besieged Revel. Sweden concluded a truce with Russia. But in 1575, a talented commander, the Transylvanian prince Stefan Batory, came to power in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In a short period of time, he managed to strengthen the Polish-Lithuanian state (by this time Russian troops controlled almost all of Livonia) and go on the offensive. Magnus went over to the side of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In 1579, Sweden also resumed hostilities. Stefan Batory managed to take Polotsk, Velikie Luki, and in 1581 Pskov was besieged. Swedish troops occupied Narva. Only the heroic defense of Pskov, during which 30 assaults were repulsed and 50 sorties were made against the enemy, thwarted plans for a further attack on Russia. In 1582, a truce was concluded in Yama-Zapolsky with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, in 1583 in Plus - with Sweden. Russia lost almost all of its acquisitions in Livonia and Belarus (although some cities captured by Batory, including Velikie Luki, were returned to Ivan IV). Most of the coast of the Gulf of Finland, the cities of Korela, Yam, Narva, and Koporye passed to Sweden. Thus, the result of Ivan IV’s foreign policy during the oprichnina period was the advancement of the country’s borders to the east by annexing the lands of Western Siberia and defeat in the Livonian War.

The results of domestic policy were even less reassuring. The despotic features of the Russian autocracy intensified. Oprichnina did not change the structure of feudal land ownership. Although the political role of the boyar aristocracy was undermined, boyar-princely land ownership was preserved. Only the personal composition of the feudal landowners changed.

Oprichnina repressions, the growth of tax oppression in connection with the Livonian War, the raids of the Crimean Khan, the campaigns of Stefan Batory, and the plague epidemic caused an economic crisis (“rukh” of the 70-80s of the 16th century). The center and north-west of the country were devastated. Under these conditions, the landowners could not fulfill their official duties, and the state did not have enough funds to wage war and govern the country. The government found a way out of the crisis through administrative measures. In response to the flight of peasants, “reserved summers” were introduced in 1581 (from the word “commandment” - prohibition). The peasant crossing was prohibited even on St. George’s Day. Available sources do not allow us to answer the questions: were protected years introduced throughout Rus' or only in certain lands? Was the decree on their operation confirmed every year or was the ban in effect “until the sovereign’s decree”? But all researchers agree that the introduction of “reserved years” was an important step towards the formalization of serfdom in Russia. Thus, the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible largely predetermined further processes in the country: the economic crisis, the establishment of serfdom, and even the Time of Troubles.

Extensive scientific, popular science and even fiction literature is devoted to understanding the events that took place during the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible. As a rule, all researchers note the progressive nature of the reforms carried out by the tsar in the late 40s - 50s. The centralization and efficiency of management increased, and the state apparatus of Russia was formalized, which until that time bore the features of grand-ducal government. The formation of an estate-representative monarchy began, which in the future, with continued structural reforms, could acquire, as some historians believe, a “human face.”

As for the social essence and consequences of the oprichnina, there is no consensus among researchers on these issues. In the 20th century in Russian historiography the concept of S.F. dominated. Platonov. In the opinion of the famous Russian historian, the oprichnina was a form of struggle against the main opponent of the centralization of the state - the princely-boyar aristocracy. As a result of the oprichnina, the power of the old nobility - the boyars - was undermined in favor of the new nobility - the local nobility. To be fair, it should be noted that researchers working within the framework of this concept also raised the question of whether all means are good in achieving what seemed to be a good goal.

Historians S.B. Veselovsky, A.A. Zimin, V.B. Kobrin et al. critically analyzed the concept of S.F. Platonov. In their opinion, the oprichnina eliminated only minor remnants of the appanage system, practically preserving the existing social organization. It was not an anti-boyar policy. Among the guardsmen there were many representatives of aristocratic families. In addition, for one executed boyar there were three or four ordinary landowners, and for one representative of privileged service landowners there were a dozen people from the lower strata. According to the historians mentioned above, the opposition between the “reactionary” boyars and the “progressive” nobility is not correct. The boyars were high-ranking princely servants who had little in common with the Western aristocracy. It is no coincidence that in Rus' there were few boyar castles, which in the West created the basis for the military and political autonomy of its owner. In the event of a military threat, the boyars, together with the nobles, defended their principality. Economically, they were also not interested in separatism, because Their possessions were most often not located compactly, but in several districts. Based on these considerations, the conclusion was made (which became popular in the so-called “post-Soviet” historiography) that by establishing the oprichnina, Ivan IV sought only to strengthen his personal power.

An interesting point of view on the problem was expressed by Doctor of Historical Sciences A.L. Khoroshkevich. The oprichnina, as the author writes, was established by Ivan the Terrible for the sake of continuing the Livonian War, which was waged under the slogan of mastering the legacy allegedly left by Augustus the Caesar to his distant descendant Rurikovich. Suffering from a complex inferiority complex (due to uncertainty about the legality of his birth, the unmarried state of Vasily III, and the former servility of his grandfather, Ivan III), the first Russian Tsar painfully accepted the refusal of the Grand Duke of Lithuania and the King of Poland to recognize his title. Since 1560, the Livonian War turned into a Livonian-Lithuanian-Russian war. Victory in it was important as a means of self-affirmation for the Russian Tsar. The boyars did not want to support Ivan IV in his militant aspirations against the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The desire for peace with the Orthodox of the neighboring state forced the Boyar Duma, a body that expressed the corporate interests of the highest stratum of feudal lords, to act against the plans of the tsar. To suppress the resistance of opponents of the war, a policy of terror was required.

Such a famous modern historian as I.Ya. also expressed his original view of the oprichnina. Froyanov. According to the researcher, it is impossible to understand either the era or the personality of Ivan IV himself without analyzing the previous reigns of Ivan III and Vasily III. At this time, the religious and political struggle unfolded extremely sharply in the country, which determined the future fate of Russia. In the 70s XV century The so-called “heresy of Judaizers” appeared in Novgorod. (This definition was first given by the rector of the Volokolamsk Monastery, Joseph Volotsky, who was later canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church). Its adherents gave preference to the Old Testament over the New Testament, rejected the Holy Trinity, did not believe in the divine nature of Jesus Christ, laughed at the worship of icons, relics and other shrines, and took up arms against monasteries and clergy. Some authors argue that in this way the Protestant doctrine penetrated into the country through Novgorod, and, therefore, the Reformation in Russia began even earlier than in Western Europe. Having analyzed the ideological foundations of heresy, I.Ya. Froyanov came to the conclusion that such a statement is a stretch. According to the historian, the new teaching was a criticism of the foundations of Orthodoxy with a touch of Judaism. By the end of the 15th century. The main nerve of the Russian state was the inextricable connection of three links: autocracy, church and Orthodoxy. Therefore, the heresy was aimed at changing the traditional state system of Moscow Rus'. The new teaching soon spread, including in government circles. Grand Duke Ivan III himself sympathized with the heretics. But Archbishop Gennady of Novgorod and Joseph Volotsky were able to mobilize public opinion and raised a powerful wave of protests. At the beginning of the 16th century. The main heretics were executed, but it was not possible to end the heresy itself. Its supporters went underground, hatching plans to seize power. According to I.Ya. Froyanov, during the existence of heresy in Russia there were several deaths that are difficult to explain by natural causes: Ivan the Young, Elena Glinskaya, Vasily III, the first-born of the Terrible Dimitri, Queen Anastasia, and Ivan IV himself may have been poisoned. In conditions when V. Staritsky and his family, some members of the Chosen Rada and the top of the Moscow service aristocracy actively supported the heretics, Ivan IV approved the oprichnina. The king needed a guard corps that was not infected with heresy. According to I.Ya. Froyanov, the oprichnina became a weapon of struggle in defense of the Autocracy, the Church and Orthodoxy, i.e. in defense of Russian statehood.

Thus, a brief description of the main concepts of the oprichnina shows that the study of the period of the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible has not ended, and it is still too early to dot the i’s on all the issues discussed in historiography.

1. How did the Russian autocracy develop and how did it differ from Western Europe?

2. Could the reforms of Ivan IV and the Chosen One have been more radical?

3. Which of the above concepts of oprichnina, in your opinion, are more justified and why?

Main

1. Orlov A.S., Georgiev V.A. and others. History of Russia from ancient times to the present day. – M., 2006 (or any other).

2. Orlov A.S., Georgiev V.A. and others. Reader on the history of Russia from ancient times to the present day. – M., 2004 (or any other).

Additional

1. Zimin A.A. Reforms of Ivan the Terrible. – M., 1960.

2. His own. Oprichnina of Ivan the Terrible. – M., 1964.

3. Klyuchevsky V.O. Russian history. A complete course of lectures in three books. - Book 1. – M., 1993.

4. Kobrin V.B. Power and property in medieval Russia (XV – XVI centuries). – M., 1985.

5. Platonov S.F. Lectures on Russian history. – M., 1993.

6. Semennikova L.I. Russia in the world community of civilizations. – Bryansk, 1999 (or any other).

7. Skrynnikov R.G. Reign of Terror. – St. Petersburg, 1992.

8. Soloviev S.M. Essays. In 18 books. Book III. T.5-6. History of Russia from ancient times. – M., 1993.

9. Tikhomirov M.N. Russian state of the XV-XVII centuries. – M., 1975.

10. Froyanov I.Ya. History of Russia from ancient times to the beginning of the 20th century. 3rd ed., Spanish – St. Petersburg, 2001.

11. Khoroshkevich A.L., Zimin A.A. Russia during the time of Ivan the Terrible. – M., 1982.

Scientists suggest that the golden skullcap, which is the basis of the “Monomakh’s cap,” was presented to Ivan Kalita by Uzbek Khan. Already in Moscow she was crowned with a cross.

Famous historian S.M. Soloviev noted that there were conflicting rumors about this case. Some said that the divorce and tonsure were carried out at the insistence of Solomonia herself. Others argued that this happened against her will, and in Suzdal Solomonia had a son, George, who soon died. In 1934, the supposed grave of George was opened. In the burial, archaeologists discovered a doll dressed in a silk shirt. There is no reliable information about the further fate of this boy.

Currently, this statement, with which basically all subsequent historians agreed, has found its scientific confirmation. Even the composition of the poison used for the murder was determined. This is sublimate - a salt of mercury. Ivan the Terrible’s first wife, Anastasia, was also poisoned with mercury salt.

Tsar is a shortened South Slavic and Russian form of the Latin word "caesar" or "Caesar".

Ivan IV wrote about this: “Priests and church chanters in church are always drunk and stand and curse without fear, and all sorts of inappropriate speech always comes from their mouths.” The cathedral forbade the monks to drink vodka, but allowed the consumption of grape wine, beer and honey.

Having fled abroad, A.M. Kurbsky soon sent a message to the Tsar (1564), in which he accused Ivan the Terrible of tyranny and cruelty. Ivan IV replied (this letter made up more than half of the entire correspondence), then new messages appeared. In total there were three letters from Kurbsky and two from the Tsar. In addition, the disgraced prince wrote a pamphlet “The History of the Grand Duke of Moscow,” several more messages and other works. Scientists agree that both Kurbsky and Ivan IV had an extraordinary literary gift. As for political views, both were supporters of a centralized state and strong royal power. However, Ivan IV considered the despotic monarchy to be a true monarchy. Kurbsky pointed out that the tsar is responsible not only to God, but also to people. Therefore, he must respect the rights of his subjects, be able to find wise advisers, and establish dialogue with the people: “If a king is honored by the kingdom, but has not received any gifts from God, he should seek good and useful advice not only from his advisers, but also people of all people, because the gift of the spirit is given not according to external wealth and not according to the power of government, but according to the rightness of the soul.” Kurbsky himself did not follow his ideas. For cruel treatment of the people under his control in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, a lawsuit was brought against the prince.

There is no consensus in historiography about the number of deaths as a result of the oprichnina. Some researchers believe that the number of victims was in the tens of thousands. AND I. Froyanov, based on records from the “synodik of the disgraced,” claims that 3-4 thousand people were executed.

History of the Cossacks from the reign of Ivan the Terrible to the reign of Peter I Gordeev Andrey Andreevich

REIGN OF JOHN VASILIEVICH THE TERRIBLE (1547–1584)

Ivan Vasilyevich was crowned king in January 1547 and in the same year married the daughter of boyar Roman Yuryevich, Anastasia. His actual rule of the country began in 1550, after a serious misfortune that befell Moscow. In Moscow in 1547 there was a fire of unprecedented size, which incinerated it from one end to another. The Tsar, the Tsarina, his brother and some boyars, fleeing, went to the Sparrow Hills. The next day, the Tsar went to the Novospassky Monastery to visit the Metropolitan, and here the Tsar’s confessor and some boyars began to say that Moscow burned down “by magic.” The sorcerers took out human hearts, soaked them in water and sprinkled the streets with that water, and that’s why everything caught fire. The culture of the Russian people during the Mongol yoke was deprived of normal development and was supported not so much by literacy as by oral traditions. Most of the lower clergy were illiterate, and church rituals were performed from memory. With some exceptions, except for Novgorod, there were no hotbeds of enlightenment. The penetration of enlightenment from the West, “immersed in heresy,” according to the established view of the church hierarchy and people, could not have happened. Even the Theological Academy that opened in Kyiv was considered Western heretical, and its books and science were banned. Under such conditions, it was not surprising that religious ideas were built on crude superstition. The life of the common people was imbued with superstition to the same extent as that of the upper ruling class. All social life and national life were permeated with superstition. The king ordered a “search”. The boyars gathered the “black” people and began to ask: “Who cast magic on Moscow?” The crowd shouted: “Princess Anna Glinskaya was magic!”, that is, the tsar’s maternal grandmother. But she and one of her sons were not in Moscow at that time. Among the crowd was her second son, the king’s uncle, who was frightened by the crowd and hid in the church. The boyars sent a crowd against him, and the unfortunate man was killed, his people were also beaten and the courtyard was plundered. Then the crowd demanded the extradition of the Tsar's grandmother, Anna Glinskaya and her son. These demands turned into a popular rebellion, the tsar ordered the rebels to be seized, and the rebellion was stopped. Under such conditions, John IV took over the government of the country. Brought up from childhood in the hostility of the boyars towards him, knowing their hypocrisy, the tsar, upon entering the reign, began to select employees invested with his trust, regardless of the nobility of the family and age. Those close to him turned out to be his steward, Alexei Adashev, Prince Andrei Kurbsky, from the family of Yaroslavl appanage princes, the hitherto unknown priest Sylvester, who shocked the tsar during the Moscow fire with the speech of the “ancient prophet”, reproaching him for negligence and unwillingness to rule the country. From those close to the king, the “Dumnaya Rada” was created, surrounded by which the king began his reign. To solve the problems facing the country, it was necessary to use in the best possible way all the means and forces of the country. The appanage system had not yet been eliminated, and the sovereign princes were complete masters of their appanages. The lands in the principalities subject to the Grand Duke were owned by “governors” who were appointed by the princes and required to serve. The governors who owned the lands were obliged to deploy the appropriate number of armed forces for war, depending on the size of the land plot, and most likely corresponded to the name “feeders,” that is, those who used the land for their own feeding. The armies they fielded in insufficient numbers were usually untrained and unarmed. And sometimes it happened that they were not exhibited at all.

Punishments for negligence and failure to comply with princely decrees did not achieve their goals, and a radical break in the established order was required. The external situation required Moscow's efforts to protect its borders from attacks from the Asian hordes surrounding it on all sides, the remnants of the disintegrated Golden Horde. The country was independent from foreign power for half a century. The foundations of internal administration, the structure of the armed forces and relations with the outside world were laid. Although the administration of the boyars during the tsar’s childhood suspended the development of state forces, these opportunities did not disappear and should have developed in more favorable conditions and been used for the further internal and external development of the country.

In 1550, the Tsar convened a Council of clergy and secular persons. The Council corrected the existing Code of Laws, which received the name of the Tsar's Code of Laws, which changed the system of local government. All the governors and volosts who sat in the courts, and the feeders in the voivodeships were replaced by elders and kissers elected by the people, that is, jurors. New decrees eliminated intermediaries and local representatives of the country were placed in direct communication with the king, were responsible to the central government, and distributed local taxes and duties according to local decisions. Because the zemstvo people were freed from feeders and governors, the duties paid to them had to be paid into the sovereign's treasury. Thus, at the local level, the administrative, judicial and economic parts were transferred to elected elders, and duties from the people were collected. treasury of the sovereign. From the government, only governors sat in the localities, under whose command were local troops, whose duties were responsible for collecting, arming and training local troops. Under them, “city clerks” were appointed, who were in charge of government property in the cities.

Along with broad zemstvo reforms, a major reform was carried out on the organization of troops and the service class, that is, the selection and training of command personnel. From among the boyar children and nobles, a thousand of the best were elected and from them a regiment of “Moscow nobles” was created, in contrast to the “policemen”. They were allocated lands near Moscow. From among the members of this regiment, the highest command staff, chiefs of orders, governors and volosts, during the war, governors, heads of streltsy and Cossack regiments were appointed. Reforms were carried out in the internal organization of all troops. Parts of the “city” nobles were divided according to article, that is, according to service suitability, and they were given a land salary. For every fifty dessiatines, one person was required to appear for service, mounted and armed. A review was carried out and the size of land estates was equalized so that state lands were fairly distributed among landowners, and sometimes cash salaries were given in addition to land plots. The units of the “city” nobles were divided into hundreds and, instead of being named according to the cities where they were located, they received a combined arms name. Radical reforms were also carried out in the main military units. In 1550, a detachment of selected archers of 3 thousand was organized. Then this selected army was replenished with other archery troops, which, according to Moscow records, was characterized as follows: “And many more fire archers arrived and, much studied in military affairs and not sparing their heads, and at the right time, fathers and mothers, wives and children, forgetting and not afraid of death.” A “stirrup” regiment of 5,000 people was formed from selected archers. Other units of the streltsy regiments formed city regiments and were left in the cities they supported. A regulation was issued for the troops of the “votchinniki”, boyar children and nobles. The lands allocated to them became hereditary, and they were obliged to perform constant service to the king.

Carrying out major reforms of internal administration and the armed forces, the tsar established contacts with the Don, Greben and Yaik Cossacks. He took into account their geographical location and the military significance of the Cossacks and offered them an agreement that met the interests of both parties. On the part of the Moscow Tsar, guarantees were given of the inviolability of the lands occupied by the Cossacks, their independence in internal Cossack affairs, material assistance with military supplies, missing food supplies and cash salaries. The Cossacks obliged the Tsar to military service without taking an oath to him. As part of a series of military reforms, a significant number of artillery parks were also built. According to historians, Tsar Ivan the Terrible was distinguished by great intelligence, was well read, and distinguished by energy and eloquence. His lively mind, activity and eloquence encouraged those around him to act, and as a result of this activity, by 1552, reforms of the internal order and armed forces were completed. The reformed army of “deliberate” troops consisted of: 20,000 tsar’s regiment, 20,000 archers, 35,000 cavalry of boyar children, 10,000 nobles, 6,000 city Cossacks, up to 15,000 Don, Greben and Yaik Cossacks and 10,000 Tatar cavalry. Placed under royal support, these troops depended on the will of the king. The armed forces met the goals set in terms of organization and numbers.

From the book History of Russia in stories for children author

The Kingdom of the Terrible Tsar and the last Rurikovichs *1547-1584-1597

From the book History of Russia in stories for children author Ishimova Alexandra Osipovna

Death of Ivan the Terrible 1584 Royal pectoral cross Dawn was cloudy on the morning of March 18, 1584. The Moscow bells rang quietly; The people stood sadly in the churches and prayed fervently. Everyone - both old and young - cried, it seemed that everyone asked God for some kind of mercy, for some

From the book History of the Russian State author

Chapter VII CONTINUATION OF THE REIGN OF JOHN THE TERRIBLE. G. 1582-1584 War and truce with Sweden. Lithuanian affairs. Cheremissky riot. Relations with various Powers and especially with England. John's intention to marry an Englishwoman. Description of the bride. Embassy in London. Ambassador

From the book History of the Russian State. Volume IX author Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich

Chapter VII Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. 1582-1584 War and truce with Sweden. Lithuanian affairs. Cheremissky riot. Relations with various Powers and especially with England. John's intention to marry an Englishwoman. Description of the bride. Embassy in London. Ambassador

From the book History of Russia in stories for children (volume 1) author Ishimova Alexandra Osipovna

Death of Ivan the Terrible 1584 The morning of March 18, 1584 was cloudy. The Moscow bells rang quietly, people stood sadly in the churches and prayed earnestly. Everyone - both old and young - was crying: it seemed that everyone was asking God for some kind of mercy, for some great good deed. Can you guess

From the book Crooked Empire. Book I. Princes and Kings author Kravchenko Sergey

PART 5. Empire N1 (1547–1584) Imperial Theory. The main question of Philosophy Why do scientists compose theories? In scientific circles it is believed that the development of theories is necessary for the development of practice in the right direction. “Practice without theory is blind.” This means that the inventor of the wheel

From the book The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbon Edward

CHAPTER LXIII Civil wars and destruction of the Byzantine Empire. - The reign of Andronikos the Elder, Andronikos the Younger and John Palaiologos. - Regency of John Cantacuzene; his rebellion, reign and abdication. - Settlement of the Genoese colony in Pera and

author Gordeev Andrey Andreevich

BORDERS OF THE MOSCOW STATE AND GENERAL POLITICAL SITUATION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE REIGN OF JOHN THE TERRIBLE (1547) By the end of the first half of the 16th century, the borders of the Moscow state in the west were in contact with the borders of Lithuania and Poland. The Baltic coast was made up of lands

From the book History of the Cossacks from the reign of Ivan the Terrible to the reign of Peter I author Gordeev Andrey Andreevich

COSSACKS IN THE REIGN OF FEDOR IOANNOVICH (1584–1598) After the death of Ivan the Terrible, Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich ascended the Moscow throne. After strong tension in domestic and foreign policy, which lasted throughout the reign of Ivan the Terrible, the country

author Istomin Sergey Vitalievich

From the book Volume 9. Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible, 1560-1584. author Karamzin Nikolai Mikhailovich

Chapter VII Continuation of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. 1582-1584 War and truce with Sweden. Lithuanian affairs. Cheremissky riot. Relations with various Powers and especially with England. John's intention to marry an Englishwoman. Description of the bride. Embassy in London. Ambassador

From the book I Explore the World. History of Russian Tsars author Istomin Sergey Vitalievich

Ivan IV Vasilyevich the Terrible - Grand Duke of Moscow, Tsar and Great Sovereign of All Rus' Years of life 1530–1584 Years of reign 1533–1584 Father - Vasily Ivanovich, Grand Duke of Moscow. Mother - Grand Duchess Elena Vasilievna Glinskaya. Ivan (John) the Terrible - Grand Duke since 1533

From the book Native Antiquity author Sipovsky V.D.

The reign of John IV (1533–1584) The reign of Helen and the boyars The great work was completed. From small, separate patches of Russian land, the large, powerful Moscow state was forged. It was not easy for the Moscow collectors of the Russian land to accomplish this task: a lot happened at the same time

From the book Baltics on the fault lines of international rivalry. From the Crusader invasion to the Peace of Tartu in 1920. author Vorobyova Lyubov Mikhailovna

Chapter III. The struggle of Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich (the Terrible) for access to the Baltic Sea: the Livonian War The Livonian War was the greatest offensive impulse of Moscow in the 16th century, one of the most difficult wars of the era of Ivan the Terrible, the work of his life, and in the end his tragedy

From the book Historical Chronicle of the Kursk Nobility author Tankov Anatoly Alekseevich

V. The reign of Ivan the Terrible The nobility in the 16th century. - Voivodes, governors, provincial elders. - Service people. – Service and local system. – Establishment of guard, stanitsa and traveling service of Kursk nobles and boyar children. – Military exploits of the Putivl and

From the book Empire and Freedom. Catch up with ourselves author Averyanov Vitaly Vladimirovich

4. Why do they still hate Ivan Vasilyevich? John the Great is an eternally relevant king. Even after 500 years it evokes love and hatred. Why is he so beloved - to the point that some ardently advocate for his canonization? (I’ll say right away that this topic is today

Task 25 of the Unified State Exam in history: three topics for writing a historical essay to choose from.
Each topic is presented in the form of a historical period.
The proposed periods always correspond to different historical eras.

Historical essay.

An example of a historical essay for the period 1533-1584

Historical essay, writing order.

Introductory part.

The general situation in the state at the beginning of the period, tasks, main events and phenomena,
occurring during this time.

Main part.

Indicate the historical process for more detailed consideration.
- Reveal the reasons and factors that influenced the development of the historical process.
- Describe the participation of a historical figure in this process.
- Conclusion about the nature and consequences of the historical process for the state, the life of society,
its historical significance.

Conclusion.

Using the facts, draw a conclusion about this period in the history of the state.
What tasks and consequences did the events take place?
Give the opinions and assessments of historians of this period, your own assessment,
confirmed by historical facts.

An example of a historical essay for the period 1533-1584

Historical essay period 1533-1584

1533-1584 - the period of the reign of Ivan IV Vasilyevich in Russia,
known as Ivan the Terrible.

In domestic politics, Ivan IV sought to strengthen the royal power and streamline the system of public administration.
At the beginning of his reign, Ivan IV sought to rule based on representatives of different strata of society:
in 1549, the Zemsky Sobor was convened, which approved the beginning of the reforms carried out by Ivan IV with the help of the Elected Rada, consisting of representatives of the nobles and clergy.
In 1550, a new Code of Law was adopted, and a permanent Streltsy army was created.
In 1551, Stoglav was adopted, which streamlined the structure of the church.
In 1556, the provincial reform was completed, eliminating the power of governors and a new Code on the service of nobles was adopted.
In the second half of his reign, Ivan IV strove for unlimited personal power.
For this purpose, Ivan IV in 1565-1572. established the oprichnina, liquidated the last princely appanages and carried out repressions among the boyars, for which he received the nickname Grozny.
In the interests of the nobility, Ivan IV pursued a policy of further enslavement of the peasants: in 1550 the size of the “elderly” was increased, and in 1581 “reserved years” were introduced - a ban on peasants moving from one landowner to another for 5 years.

In foreign policy, the main directions were eastern, western and southern.
In the east, Ivan IV sought to eliminate the danger of raids by the Kazan and Siberian Tatars, take control of the Volga trade route and obtain fertile lands for distribution to the nobles.
For this purpose, in 1548-1552. Several campaigns were carried out against the Kazan Khanate, and it became part of Russia.
In 1556, the Astrakhan Khanate was annexed.
In 1581-1585 Ermak's campaign against the Siberian Khanate took place.
In the south, Ivan IV sought to secure Russia from the attacks of the Crimean Tatars.
For this purpose, in 1548-1554. three military campaigns were carried out in the Crimea, and in 1571 and 1572. had to repel the Crimean Tatars' raids on Moscow.
In the west, Ivan IV sought to gain convenient access to the Baltic and return the ancestral Russian lands with the city of Yuryev.
For this purpose, in 1558-1583. The Livonian War was fought.

The period of the reign of Ivan IV is assessed by historians ambiguously.
On the one hand, Ivan IV achieved great results in domestic and foreign policy: reforms of the military service, judicial system and public administration were carried out, and elements of local self-government were introduced.
The oprichnina weakened the influence of the old aristocracy and strengthened the position of the local nobility.
Ivan IV eliminated the danger of Tatar raids from the east and annexed large territories in the Volga region and Siberia.
On the other hand, the unsuccessful Livonian War led to the loss of access to the Baltic Sea and a weakening of the economy.
It was not possible to stop the Crimean Tatars' raids on Russia.
In addition, the repressions of the oprichnina period left a bad memory of the reign of Ivan IV.

Material for a historical essay

Mission: 1533-1584

List of events that can be described in a historical essay:

• Adoption of the title of Tsar, strengthening of absolutism in Russia
• Improving the public administration system
• Improving the local government system
• Judicial reform
• Financial reform
• Military reform
• Reforming the Church
• Oprichnina
• Development of culture
• Livonian War, struggle for access to the Baltic Sea
• Expansion of Russian territory

Note

Material on the listed areas can be found in the historical portrait Ivan the Terrible on this site.

General characteristics of the era

1533-1584 - This reign era At first his mother Elena Glinskaya was the regent, then the country was ruled by boyars. And from 1547, from the moment Ivan IV was crowned king, he became the ruler of the Russian kingdom. The activities of the Chosen Rada, reforms, oprichnina, the annexation of the Siberian, Astrakhan, Kazan Khanates, the unsuccessful Livonian War and much more are the events and phenomena of this period of history. I will focus on two of them.

Historical events (phenomena, processes)

1.Under Ivan the Terrible, significantly the public administration system was improved.

Causes of this phenomenon: the need to further strengthen the power of the king, the centralization of power, the further development of all spheres of society. An important step in this direction was the creation of the order system - the first professional authority. Ivan III gradually began to introduce orders. However, he created an extensive network of these institutions; the order system became an important factor in the further development of the country. The Chosen Rada, the circle of the Tsar’s associates, played a major role in this process. It existed in the years 1549 – 1560 and included prominent statesmen of the country. I would like to highlight among them who was one of the leaders of the Elected Rada and the initiator of many reforms, including public administration. He was a devious person, that is, he headed the Petition Order (having shown himself to be an incorruptible person, he punished those who repaired red tape in orders, regardless of their faces); from 1550 he headed the financial department. In many ways, under his leadership, the main functions of orders were determined, and it was determined which orders needed to be created in the state. The tsar listened to the opinion of this prominent political military figure (although he did not escape disgrace). The role of A.F. Adashev in public administration is great. It is no coincidence that it was O. Mikeshin who depicted him on the monument “1000th Anniversary of Rus'” in Novgorod.

Consequence The creation of orders was the improvement of the management system, each direction of the country’s activity was carried out and controlled by a specific order, at the head of which the tsar personally put a okolnichy, the centralization of power increased. There were also disadvantages to this phenomenon - the growth of the bureaucratic apparatus. However, the creation of a command system of management was a step forward in the formation of public administration.

2.Oprichnina.

Oprichnina is one of the terrible pages in the history of our state. Ivan the Terrible introduced it in 1565-1572.

Reasons This phenomenon was the king’s desire to strengthen his power, reduce the influence of the boyars in ruling the country, and suppress any resistance. This is essentially the establishment of totalitarianism - complete control of all spheres of society by the tsar, strengthening of absolutism, the unlimited power of the tsar. To this end, Ivan the Terrible divided the country into two territories - the oprichnina, which he ruled, and the zemshchina, which was ruled by the Boyar Duma (of course, formally). An army of guardsmen was created - faithful servants of the king. I would especially like to highlight the person who was the king’s support during this period - - Belsky. A cruel, evil man, it was he who stood at the head of the guardsmen, he directed all the terror, personally torturing and interrogating the disgraced, and participated in raids on the boyars. Malyuta Skuratov is accused of murder, who did not want to bless the tsar for the campaign to Novgorod in 1568, and led pogroms and robberies in Novgorod.

Consequence The oprichnina became robberies, murders, and the emergence of fear in society. Oprichnina was one of the reasons for the defeat in the Livonian War, as it significantly weakened the country's economy and led to the fact that military leaders were simply afraid to make independent decisions. Therefore, Ivan the Terrible abolished the oprichnina in 1572.

During his reign, Ivan the Terrible faced many tasks caused by the following reasons:

• The need to reform many areas of life
• The need to strengthen the country's power
• Expansion of territory in the east, west and south
• Increasing international authority

Consequence The king's activities were as follows:

• Carrying out financial, military, religious reforms, adopting a new code of law. All this was carried out during the first period of his reign, with the support of Ivan the Terrible’s associates - the leaders of the Chosen Rada.
• The reforms contributed to the strengthening of the army and economic development. But all this was carried out in the initial period of activity, before the introduction of the oprichnina in 1565. During the oprichnina period and after it, the country's situation noticeably worsened.
• Under Ivan the Terrible, the Kazan, Astrakhan, Siberian Khanates, and Bashkiria were annexed. Only with the Crimean Khanate did clashes continue.
• The Russian kingdom was large in territory, even despite the lost Livonian War. The neighbors were forced to take him into account.

Reign of Ivan the Terrible- one of the most controversial in the history of Russia. Historians note, on the one hand, a significant expansion of the territory, many reforms carried out in this era, which strengthened the state, but, on the other hand, the cruelty, suspicion of Ivan the Terrible, the introduction of the oprichnina became the reasons for defeats in the Livonian War, many repressions in the country, led to the death of thousands of innocent people. But undoubtedly, Ivan the Terrible created a powerful foundation for the further development of the country. However, the history of the country followed a different scenario. In just a few years, the end of the Rurik dynasty will come and the history of a new dynasty - the Romanovs - will begin.

Terms: Chosen Rada, orders, oprichnina, zemshchina,

Total: 11 points

Material prepared by: Melnikova Vera Aleksandrovna

Comment to the fragment

The term “conservative” is not very adequate to the 16th century. Extra in the sentence.

Comment to the fragment

You operate with a familiar cliche, which, however, you do not prove. If you explained what led to the death of the family of Prince Vladimir Andreevich Staritsky, the head of the Russian church, Metropolitan Philip, what caused the Novgorod pogrom, then the thesis would not only gain evidence (YES = cruel!), but would gain an explanation. We must not forget about the scale and causes of repression in modern Grozny Russia, England and France. So - for a fact and the correct date = a point according to the K-1 criterion.

Comment to the fragment

This leads to cause and effect. But it has not been proven in any way. Agree: it’s too simple = killed = strengthened autocracy. After all, it was not just about murders, but about the introduction of DIRECT STATE MANAGEMENT in the most important territories... I think that on the Unified State Exam I would not have counted this as PSS. Although I'm 50/50.

Comment to the fragment

The code of law of 1550 can lead you to a point for K-2 - for the role of the sovereign, given in the context of the era, the construction of the legislative base of the strengthened state.

Comment to the fragment

But I won’t accept this as PSS for K-3. Because you don’t say anything about the essence of the changes that have taken place in the system of state and political management. But it was so easy to remember ORDERS or at least ZEMSKY SOBRAS, which were included in the system of central government bodies.

Comment to the fragment

It would be great to clarify what kind of tribute from the Livonian Order we are talking about?

Comment to the fragment

I count it as PSS. There is a complex of causes and results of the war, expressed by the terms of peace treaties. Of course, there is a lack of precision. ""Give up Livonia and Polotsk"" = these are territories that were occupied by Russia during the war. But the rest is the loss of our territories (+ Velizh with the district in the Smolensk region + Sebezh with the district in the Pskov region).

Actual

Unfortunately, Astrakhan became part of the Moscow state in 1556.

Comment to the fragment

The consequence could have been given much more simply: THE VOLGA FROM SOURCE TO MOUTH BECAME A RUSSIAN RIVER.

Comment to the fragment

You are absolutely right that Ivan IV laid down the Baltic direction of foreign policy as the main one. This can be counted towards K-4. However, how simple and beautiful it would be: the lost territories on the Gulf of Finland will be returned under Fyodor Ivanovich + the traditions of zemsky councils will continue until the end of the 17th century.

All connections - exits to the future must be specific. And the very simple results of the period and the events narrated were the fall of the Livonian Order and the appearance of a new state on the map of Europe - the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Historical work 1533-1584

1533-1584 is the period of the reign of Ivan IV. Almost the entire reign of Ivan IV was marked by a conservative policy of strengthening personal state power, centralization and repression against people who disagreed with his policies, and the oprichnina (1565-1572) became the clearest manifestation of his policy.

Ivan IV went down in history as the Terrible. They called him the formidable for a reason, namely because he pursued an extremely cruel and merciless policy. A striking example of the manifestation of his policy was the oprichnina (1565-1572). The essence of this phenomenon was the implementation of extremely repressive measures against all segments of the population, the confiscation of feudal property and land in favor of the state, and the fight against alleged treason among the boyar-princely nobility, which consisted in the use of mass executions. The consequence of this phenomenon was strengthening the autocratic power of the tsar, reducing the role of the boyars in government, as well as significant economic decline.

Also during the reign of Ivan 4, the code of law of Ivan the Terrible was created (1550). The reason for the introduction of this code of law was that the new state required a new management system, required modernization of the legal system taking into account modern realities, and it was also necessary to make the legal process simpler and more convenient. This reform implied the punishment of judges in case of an incorrect verdict, the punishment depended on the class, new types of crimes were introduced, and the dependence of the peasants on the landowners was confirmed. The result of the introduction of the code of law Ivan 4 was the expansion of legislation and the introduction of a more flexible and modern code of law. The The code of law became the basis of a unified management system in a centralized state.