In the second half of the 17th century. The transformation of the entire system of Russian traditional culture begins, secular literature emerges, including poetry, secular painting is born, and the first “comedy performances” are organized at court. The crisis of traditionalism also covers the sphere of ideology. Alexey Mikhailovich is one of the initiators of the church reform carried out in 1652 by Patriarch Nikon. In 1666-67, a church council cursed the “Old Belief” and ordered the “city authorities” to burn anyone who “blasphemes the Lord God.” Despite his personal sympathies for Archpriest Avvakum, Alexey Mikhailovich took an uncompromising position in the fight against the Old Believers: in 1676 the Old Believer citadel, the Solovetsky Monastery, was destroyed. The exorbitant ambition of Patriarch Nikon and his outright claims to secular power led to a conflict with the tsar, which ended in the deposition of Nikon. Manifestations of the crisis in the social sphere were the riot in Moscow in 1662, brutally suppressed by Alexei Mikhailovich, and the Cossack uprising led by S. T. Razin, which was hardly suppressed by the government.
Alexey Mikhailovich himself participated in foreign policy negotiations and military campaigns (1654-1656). In 1654, Ukraine was united with Russia, and the war that began after that with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1654-1667) ended with the signing of the Truce of Andrusovo and the consolidation of Russia in Left-Bank Ukraine. But attempts to reach the shores of the Baltic Sea (Russian-Swedish War of 1656-58) did not lead to success.
A man of a transitional time, Alexei Mikhailovich was sufficiently educated, the first of the Russian tsars broke tradition and began to sign documents with his own hand. A number of literary works are also attributed to him, including “Message to Solovki”, “The Tale of the Death of Patriarch Joseph”, “The Officer of the Falconer’s Path”, etc.
From his first marriage with M.I. Miloslavskaya (1648), Alexey Mikhailovich had 13 children (including Tsars Fyodor Alekseevich and Ivan V, Tsarevna Sofya Alekseevna), from his second marriage with N.K. Naryshkina (1671) - 3 children (including Tsar Peter I).
In 1649, the Zemsky Sobor adopted a new set of laws - Cathedral Code. In the 11th chapter of the code
> “lesson summers” were abolished and the hereditary dependence of the peasants on the landowners was established;
> the peasant's property was recognized as the property of the landowner and could be sold for his debts; the landowner himself punished the peasants (except for state crimes) - the peasant became legally powerless, he could be sold, exchanged, etc.;
> harboring runaway peasants was punished by whipping, prison; for the murder of another peasant, the landowner had to give up his best peasant and his family;
> nobles could pass on the estate by inheritance, provided that their sons would serve, like their father.
In the second half of the 17th century. The transformation of the entire system of Russian traditional culture begins, secular literature emerges, including poetry, secular painting is born, and the first “comedy performances” are organized at court. The crisis of traditionalism also covers the sphere of ideology.
Alexey Mikhailovich is one of the initiators of the church reform carried out since 1652 by Patriarch Nikon. In 1666-67, a church council cursed the “Old Belief” and ordered the “city authorities” to burn anyone who “blasphemes the Lord God.” Despite personal sympathies for Archpriest Avvakum, Alexey Mikhailovich took an uncompromising position in the fight against the Old Believers: in 1676. The Old Believer citadel, the Solovetsky Monastery, was destroyed. The exorbitant ambition of Patriarch Nikon and his outright claims to secular power led to a conflict with the tsar, which ended in the deposition of Nikon.
(See D.L. Mordovtsev The Great Schism).
The manifestations of the crisis in the social sphere were the riot in Moscow in 1662, brutally suppressed by Alexei Mikhailovich. and the Cossack uprising led by Stepan Razin, which was barely suppressed by the government.
Alexey Mikhailovich himself participated in foreign policy negotiations and military campaigns (1654-1656).
The liberation movement in Ukraine in the late 40s was led by Bogdan Khmelnitsky. During the military operations against Poland, Khmelnitsky negotiated with Moscow, asking to accept Ukraine into Russian citizenship. This was the only way to avoid the danger of a complete absorption of Ukraine by Poland or Turkey.
In February 1651, at the Zemsky Sobor in Moscow, they announced their readiness to accept Ukraine into Russian citizenship. On October 1, 1653, the Zemsky Sobor decided to annex Ukraine to Russia and declare war on Poland. On January 8, 1654, a large Rada met in Pereyaslavl and decided to accept Russian citizenship.
The war between Russia and Poland of 1654-1667 soon acquired pan-European significance. Sweden, the Ottoman Empire and its dependent states - Moldova and Crimea - were drawn into it.
Initially, Russian troops achieved great success, occupied Smolensk, Vitebsk, Minsk, Kovno, and in Ukraine, together with the troops of Bogdan Khmelnitsky, they liberated Western Ukrainian lands up to Lvov.
But then Sweden entered the war, which in a short time occupied a significant part of Poland. Under these conditions, Russia concluded a truce with Poland and started a war with Sweden (1656-1658). Russia's goal was not only to protect its conquests in Ukraine and Belarus, but also to fight for access to the Baltic Sea. Russian troops made their way to Riga and began its siege. The Russo-Swedish War provided an opportunity for Poland to recover from defeat and oust the Swedes from its territory. Both Poland and Russia made peace with Sweden and began a protracted war among themselves over Ukraine.
In 1667, the Truce of Andrusovo was concluded for thirteen and a half years, according to which Smolensk and Left Bank Ukraine were assigned to Russia. Kyiv passed to Russia for 2 years.
In 1686, peace was concluded, confirming the terms of the Andrusovo Truce. Kyiv remained with Russia.
A man of a transitional time, Alexei Mikhailovich was sufficiently educated, the first of the Russian tsars broke tradition and began to sign documents with his own hand. A number of literary works are also attributed to him, including “Message to Solovki”, “The Tale of the Death of Patriarch Joseph”, “The Officer of the Falconer’s Path”, etc.
14. Contemporaries called the 17th century a “rebellious” time, and indeed, in the previous history of feudal serf Russia there were not as many anti-feudal protests as in the 17th century.
The largest of them in the middle and second half of this century were the city uprisings of 1648-1650, the “Copper Riot” of 1662, and the peasant war led by Stepan Razin of 1670-1671. “Split” occupies a special place. It began as a religious movement, which later found a response among the masses.
Urban uprisings 1648-1650 were directed against the boyars and government administration, as well as against the top of the townspeople. Public discontent was intensified by the extreme corruption of the state apparatus. The townspeople were forced to give bribes and “promises” to the governors and officials. Craftsmen in the cities were forced to work for free for the governors and clerks.
The main driving forces behind these uprisings were young townspeople and archers. The uprisings were predominantly urban, but in some areas they also spread to the countryside.
Unrest in the cities began already in the last years of the reign of Mikhail Romanov, but resulted in uprisings under his son and successor Alexei Mikhailovich. In the first years of his reign, the de facto ruler of the state was the royal educator (“uncle”) - boyar Boris Ivanovich Morozov. In his financial policy, Morozov relied on merchants, with whom he was closely associated with general trade operations, since his vast estates supplied potash, resin and other products for export abroad. In search of new funds to replenish the royal treasury, the government, on the advice of Duma clerk N. Chisty, in 1646 replaced direct taxes with a tax on salt, which immediately almost tripled in price. It is known that a similar tax (gabel) caused in France in the same 17th century. great popular unrest.
The hated salt tax was abolished in December 1647, but instead of income coming to the treasury from the sale of salt, the government resumed the collection of direct taxes - Streltsy and Yamka money, demanding payment of them in two years.
Unrest began in Moscow in early June 1648. During the religious procession, a large crowd of townspeople surrounded the tsar and tried to convey to him a petition complaining about the violence of the boyars and officials. The guards dispersed the petitioners. But the next day, archers and other military men joined the townspeople. The rebels broke into the Kremlin, in addition, they destroyed the courtyards of some boyars, rifle chiefs, merchants and officials. Duma clerk Chistoy was killed in his home. The rebels forced the government to extradite L. Pleshcheev, who was in charge of the Moscow city administration, and Pleshcheev was publicly executed in the square as a criminal. The rebels demanded the extradition of Morozov, but the tsar secretly sent him into honorable exile to one of the northern monasteries. “Posad people throughout Moscow,” supported by archers and serfs, forced the Tsar to go out to the square in front of the Kremlin Palace and give an oath to fulfill their demands.
The Moscow uprising found a wide response in other cities. There were rumors that in Moscow “the strong are beaten with donkeys and stones.” The uprisings engulfed a number of northern and southern cities - Veliky Ustyug, Cherdyn, Kozlov, Kursk, Voronezh, etc. In the southern cities, where the townspeople population was small, the uprisings were led by archers. They were sometimes joined by peasants from nearby villages. In the North, the main role belonged to the townspeople and black-growing peasants. Thus, already the urban uprisings of 1648 were closely connected with the peasant movement. This is also indicated by the petition of the townspeople submitted to Tsar Alexei during the Moscow uprising: “All the people in the entire Moscow state and in its border regions are becoming unsteady from such untruth, as a result of which a big storm is rising in your royal capital city of Moscow and in many other places, in cities and counties."
The reference to the uprising in border areas suggests that the rebels may have been aware of the successes of the liberation movement in Ukraine led by Bohdan Khmelnytsky, which began in the spring of the same 1648.
15. The era of great transformations is another name for the years of reign of the son of Alexei Romanov and his second wife Natalya Naryshkina, the first Emperor of Russia Peter I the Great.
What kind of Russia did Peter get? Industry was feudal in structure, and in terms of production volume it was significantly inferior to the industry of Western European countries. The Russian army largely consisted of backward noble militia and archers, poorly armed and trained. Rus' also lagged behind in the field of spiritual culture. Education hardly penetrated the masses, and even in the ruling circles there were many uneducated and completely illiterate people. Russia in the 17th century, by the very course of historical development, was faced with the need for radical reforms, since only in this way could it secure its worthy place among the states of the West and the East. It should be noted that by this time in the history of our country, significant shifts in its development had already occurred. The first industrial enterprises of the manufacturing type arose, handicrafts and crafts grew, and trade in agricultural products developed. The social and geographical division of labor—the basis of the established and developing all-Russian market—continuously increased. The city was separated from the village. Domestic and foreign trade developed. In the second half of the 17th century, the nature of the state system in Rus' began to change, and absolutism took shape more and more clearly. Russian culture and sciences received further development: mathematics and mechanics, physics and chemistry, geography and botany, astronomy. Cossack explorers discovered a number of new lands in Siberia.
The 17th century was a time when Russia established constant communication with Western Europe, established closer trade and diplomatic ties with it, used its technology and science, and embraced its culture and enlightenment. Studying and borrowing, Russia developed independently, taking only what it needed, and only when it was necessary. This was a time of accumulation of strength of the Russian people, which made it possible to implement the grandiose reforms of Peter, prepared by the very course of the historical development of Russia. In my opinion, Peter’s reforms were prepared by the entire previous history of the people; one can say that they were “demanded by the people themselves.” A general transformation was being prepared, which, given the peaceful course of affairs, could last for more than one generation. The reforms, no matter how they were carried out by Peter, were his personal matter, an unparalleled violent matter and, however, involuntary and necessary.
All Peter’s transformations can be divided into three stages:
· first (1699-1709\10) - changes in the system of government institutions and the creation of new ones, changes in the local government system, the establishment of a recruitment system.
· second (1710\11-1718\19) - the creation of the Senate and the liquidation of previous higher institutions, the first regional reform, the implementation of a new military policy, extensive construction of the fleet, the establishment of legislation, the transfer of government institutions from Moscow to St. Petersburg.
· third (1719\20-1725\26) - the beginning of the work of new, already created institutions, the liquidation of old ones; second regional reform; expansion and reorganization of the army, reform of church government; financial reform; introduction of a new taxation system and a new civil service procedure.
Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov is the second sovereign of the Romanov family and the son of the first king of the great dynasty. He took the throne at the age of sixteen. During his reign, the country experienced popular riots, a split in the church, reunification with Ukraine and other cardinal changes. Alexey Mikhailovich carried out reforms taking into account the country's recovery from a difficult situation.
Alexey Romanov had the nickname The Quietest. Many historians explain this by the fact that the king had a meek disposition. He knew how to listen to his interlocutor and never raised his voice to anyone.
More “picky” experts found another explanation. They start from the ancient postulate “peace and quiet.” Alexey Mikhailovich left his sons a legacy of a strong, strong state, which neighboring countries feared.
Alexey Romanov always differed from the Rurik dynasty and his father. He was raised by his uncle (as they called him then) Boris Morozov. From childhood, he instilled European traditions in Alexei Mikhailovich. For example, even the outfit for the young prince was ordered in Germany and England.
Since childhood, the tsar was fond of reading foreign newspapers: German, English, French. They were specially translated into Russian for him. In order for the prince to be aware of the latest news, an uninterrupted postal line with Riga was established.
Alexei Mikhailovich managed to make changes to the palace ceremony. Of course, copying the European model. He himself began to sign diplomatic documents. This has never been done before.
Alexey Mikhailovich Romanov introduced the most “revolutionary” reforms. Both internal and external political decisions led to the prosperity of the state. The second ruler of the Romanov family ruled the country more than successfully.
The 17th century was called the most rebellious. A person with a “meek disposition” would hardly be able to cope with such situations. Alexei Mikhailovich ruled harshly.
In matters of state, he had to rely on someone’s weighty opinion, since at the age of sixteen it was difficult to lead an entire power. He came across an unsuccessful adviser - the self-interested Boris Morozov.
He concentrated almost all power in his hands. He took exorbitant bribes and extortions, turning almost all classes of Moscow against himself. It was Morozov who introduced the tax on salt. Instead of five kopecks, a pound of salt began to be sold for two hryvnias. Therefore, in 1648, one of the largest uprisings broke out - the salt riot.
Alexei Mikhailovich carried out reforms in the midst of constant popular uprisings. Echoes of the salt riot could be traced even in the smallest villages of the state.
In 1650, a new uprising broke out in Pskov and Novgorod. Everyone was buying up bread to pay off debts for the peasants who had fled to Russia and lived in the territories that had gone to Sweden under the Treaty of Stolbovetsky.
The impending famine in Russia paled in comparison to the Cossack freemen, which developed into the Peasant War of 1670-1671.
Alexei Mikhailovich's internal reforms were aimed at strengthening the power of the tsar, while taking into account the views and interests of the classes.
In 1649, the tsar adopted one of the important legal documents: the Council Code. Thanks to this resolution, it was possible to talk about family, civil, criminal rights, as well as actual legal proceedings in the country.
After a series of reforms, the position of the estates changed. Russian merchants became more legally protected from the arbitrariness of their governors. Also in trade they were on a par with foreign traders.
Each nobleman could individually or hereditarily be the owner of land.
As a result of the adopted reforms, autocracy strengthened, and government administration became more centralized.
Alexey Mikhailovich also carried out external reforms. One of the global issues: the accession of Ukraine. Its left-bank part was led by Bogdan Khmelnitsky. He repeatedly proposed unification. In the fall of 1653, the final decision was made to accept Ukraine into Russia. It was this decision that caused the outbreak of war with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
The military campaign caused a deterioration in relations with Sweden. This state did not approve of the policies of Tsar Alexei and prevented the strengthening of Russia. Therefore, Sweden closed its access to the Baltic Sea.
Relations with Sweden deteriorated, and in 1656 the Russian army immediately took major cities, including Riga. However, in 1658, Russia lost ground due to the complicated situation in the Ukrainian lands.
The new war with Poland ended in 1667 with the Truce of Andrusovo. According to it, the Chernigov, Smolensk lands and the left bank part of Ukraine became part of Russia.
The Tsar carried out radical reforms both within his country and abroad. We can definitely say that Alexey Mikhailovich Romanov was a wise politician who achieved his goal.
The last tsar of Muscovite Rus' was able to return Smolensk, the Northern Lands, Chernigov, and Starodub to Russia. Alexey Mikhailovich annexed Ukraine and part of Siberia, founding new cities: Nerchinsk, Selenginsk, Irkutsk, Okhotsk. One of the successful cases was the opening of the passage between Asia and America in 1648.
The state's circulation included silver kopecks, half coins and money. There was no large denomination in Russia at that time. This made it much more difficult to carry out large transactions. Because of this, trade developed slowly. Therefore, Alexey Mikhailovich decided to carry out economic reforms immediately.
During the entire reign of the king there were wars. Despite this, foreign policy was actively pursued. The territories of modern Ukraine and Belarus joined Russia. In circulation in these countries there were other coins - copper and silver, which were minted on a round circle. And in Russia they used money that was made on flattened wire. Later, the territory of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was annexed to the Russian state.
All these factors led to the need to mint new coins closer to European standards.
Another important reason to carry out monetary reform is the lack of money in the treasury. There was a war, and the country was gripped by the plague epidemic of 1654-1655.
In 1654, the Tsar gave the order to mint rubles. On one side there should have been an image of a double-headed eagle with a crown on its head, and below the inscription - “ruble”, “summer 7162”. On the other side is the Tsar-rider on a horse with the inscription “By the grace of God, the great Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich of all Great and Little Russia.”
New coins were gradually introduced: fifty dollars, half fifty dollars, hryvnia, altyn and penny. Altyn and penny were made from copper wire, the first had the inscription “altyn”, and the second - “4 dengi”.
In Moscow they even created the New Moscow English Money Court to mint new coins.
The population was initially reluctant to use the new money. The authorities introduced restrictions on the acceptance of coins. Subsequently, copper money began to depreciate. This led to the fact that peasants refused to sell grain, and merchants refused to sell goods for copper money. This is how the Copper Riot appeared in 1662.
As a result of the uprising, the reform was canceled and money houses began to be closed. They began to buy back a copper penny at the rate of one hundred copper coins for one silver coin. As a result, copper coins gradually went out of circulation.
Modern historians argue that the idea to carry out monetary reform was correct. However, lack of knowledge led to failure and uprisings. Later, Peter I would carry out a similar, more successful reform, using other methods.
The military reform of Alexei Mikhailovich was carried out from 1648 to 1654. The best parts of the old system increased in the army. Elite Moscow cavalry, gunners and archers appeared.
The army reform of Alexei Mikhailovich involved the massive creation of regiments of a new system. After the end of the Thirty Years' War, many unemployed military personnel appeared. They came in handy in Russia.
The First Elected Regiment of Soldiers was formed under the leadership of Colonel Haggai Shepelev. Poles, Hungarians, and Lithuanians were added to their composition.
Soon the Second Elected Regiment was formed - the palace one. It was led by Colonel Yakov Kolyubakin.
In the process of adopting military reform from 1648 to 1654, such army units as gunners, Moscow archers, and the elite cavalry of the Sovereign Regiment increased in number. Regiments of a new order were created: soldiers, dragoons, hussars, reiters. Foreign military personnel were separately invited to serve.
Alexey Mikhailovich's customs reform was a necessity in Russia. The tax system during his reign was streamlined.
In 1655, a special body was created - the Accounting Chamber. Specialists of this chamber controlled the fiscal activities of orders and the execution of the revenue side of the treasury.
The main indirect taxes are trade duties. They were charged for any movement or sale of goods. The treasury received fees from public baths, from the production and sale of beer, vodka, and honey.
The customs duty was replaced by a single ruble duty. Its size was 5% of the cost of the goods, for salt - 10%, for fish - a special duty.
Foreigners had to pay 6% of the value of the goods at domestic customs.
Alexey Mikhailovich carried out reforms competently. The document “Conciliar Code” was adopted. Thanks to these measures, trade began to develop, customs taxation was improved, and privileges for foreigners in matters of trade were abolished.
One can briefly say about Alexei Mikhailovich: a monarch who cared about the improvement of the state. Sometimes in a monolithic country with one-man power, the wrong steps were taken, which led to disastrous consequences. A striking example is Nikon’s reforms. It was they who led to the split of the church and the formation of the Old Believers. This is one of the bloodiest pages in Russia.
The reason for the church reform of Alexei Mikhailovich was to reunite the patriarchal church of Moscow Rus' with the Byzantine one. By decrees of the tsar, many religious rituals were changed, liturgical books and icons were corrected.
The people's non-acceptance of church innovations led to an uprising called the “Solovetsky Siding.” It lasted eight years. All rebels were severely punished.
In the politics of every sovereign of medieval Russia, the issue of inheritance played an important role.
Alexey Mikhailovich was married twice. He is the father of 16 children. His first wife, Maria Miloslavskaya, lived with him for 19 years. In their marriage they had 13 children.
The second wife, Natalya Naryshkina, gave the Tsar three children. They lived together for five years.
Alexey Mikhailovich Romanov carried out both internal and external reforms for the successful development of the Russian state. Although many of his actions are still considered controversial.
During his twenty years of reign, the Russian Tsar did a lot. During his reign, many uprisings, riots, and wars took place. Despite this, Alexei Mikhailovich’s policy was aimed at strengthening Russia on the world stage. Below are the epoch-making events that occurred during the reign of the king.
Domestic policy:
Foreign policy:
With a meek, prudent rule, Alexei Mikhailovich’s father, Mikhail Fedorovich, achieved the goal for which government officials called him to the throne: stopping all disputes for the Moscow crown, reconciling the parties that were at war within the fatherland, restoring the rule of law, he established his dynasty, so that, there seemed to be no break between the generation of Ivan Kalita and the House of Romanov. The main issue was resolved, but by the beginning of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, much remained unfinished: long wars, having depleted the treasury, forced the government to introduce various taxes, burdensome for the lower classes, on all products, rural and urban, burdensome duties were levied in various forms, and farm-outs were established , enriching not so much the treasury as private upper-class people. Moreover, numerous abuses crept in: noble people, taking advantage of previous unrest, secured entire settlements and townships in cities, relieved them of public duties and gave them the means to take away trades from other urban inhabitants. Significant estates passed, contrary to the decrees of previous sovereigns, into the jurisdiction of monasteries and, like the boyar ancestors, they enjoyed many benefits that state lands did not have. With numerous seizures, with various benefits granted to individuals and companies, there was no equality either in the payment of taxes, or in court and punishment. In the first years of Alexei Mikhailovich, the merchants clearly grumbled about foreign guests who appropriated the exclusive right to duty-free trade and seized the entire domestic industry into their own hands. In the circle of noble people, a spirit of hostility was finally revealed according to the calculations of localism. In a word, although the previous parties fell silent, the spirit of rebellion disappeared and all classes expressed boundless devotion to the house of the Romanovs, but by coincidence, general dissatisfaction reigned within the state.
There, Nikon, solely out of inspiration from his offended pride, spoke boldly about the court, about the queen. This is not enough: in the heat of indignation, he wrote a letter to the Greek high priests that was insulting to Alexei Mikhailovich himself. His daring speeches were brought to the attention of the king; the letter was intercepted. Nikon's numerous enemies, secular and spiritual, hastened to denigrate him. The Patriarch could easily have regained the lost favor of the good sovereign if he had shown humility. Instead, he began to act even more arrogantly, solemnly cursed his enemies and, having appeared in Moscow without permission, despite his previous abdication of the patriarchal throne, his disputes with the dignitaries of Tsar Alexei in the Assumption Church made such a strong impression among the people that one had to fear serious unrest, common in those days. time. Already a tempting dispute arose about the limits of the power of the royal and patriarchal women. Alexei Mikhailovich comprehended the full danger and hastened to suppress the evil at the very beginning - he asked the ecumenical patriarchs to judge him with Nikon. The High Hierarchs of Alexandria and Antioch arrived in Moscow, set up a court, and at a solemn council (1666–1667) of secular and spiritual officials found Nikon guilty of insulting the royal person, of excessive lust for power, of indecent acts: he was defrocked and exiled to the Belozersky Ferapontov Monastery with the rank of monk. (After the death of Alexei Mikhailovich, Nikon was transferred to the Kirillov Monastery, from where the new Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich allowed him to return to Voskresensky. Nikon died on the way there, in Yaroslavl, in 1681.) Nikon’s unreasonable actions bothered Alexei Mikhailovich for three whole years, and it was at a time when foreign policy required the full attention of the sovereign. Owing the successes of the first war with Poland to his personal leadership, which eliminated all disputes about localism, Tsar Alexei now did not dare to leave Moscow and lead his troops to victories.
Preoccupied with internal unrest, the Russians and Poles fought the war weakly and repeatedly offered peace. The negotiations lasted for three whole years and, probably, with the intransigence of both sides, would have lasted several more years if Turkey’s intervention in the affairs of Little Russia had not accelerated the outcome. The reason for this was the reckless ambition of the Right Bank Hetman Doroshenko. Since 1665, Little Russia was divided by the Dnieper into two halves: the left side, recognizing Hetman Bryukhovetsky, was under Russian citizenship; the right, having elected the Chigirin Cossack Pyotr Doroshenko as leader, was dependent on Poland. Both hetmans, as usual, harbored irreconcilable hatred and tried to oust each other. Bryukhovetsky, in the hope of holding on with the help of Russia, appeased the Moscow court, accepted the rank of boyar, married Sheremetev’s daughter, and allowed the governors of Alexei Mikhailovich to impose a poll tax on the Cossacks. Doroshenko strove for a different goal in other ways: more decisively than all his predecessors, considering it possible for the original existence of Little Russia in the form of a separate state, not subject to either Poland or Tsar Alexei, following the example of Moldova and Transylvania, he managed to excite the Cossacks with the dream of complete independence. Courage in battle, ardent disposition, captivating gift of speech, impulses towards unbridled will, everything was consistent with the then disposition of minds, and the Cossacks were accustomed to looking at Doroshenko as a second Bogdan Khmelnitsky. Arming both Russia and Poland against himself, for sure success, he asked the Sultan to accept Little Russia under the protection of the Porte. The Sultan, busy with the war in Candia, did not want to entertain his forces, but promised to send an army. Doroshenko’s negotiations could not hide from either the Moscow court or the Warsaw court. Anticipating a thunderstorm and seeing no hope of holding Little Russia, Casimir hurried to reconcile with Alexei Mikhailovich. The treaty was concluded (1667) in Andrusov on the following conditions: 1) cease hostile actions for 13 years 6 months, meanwhile agree on eternal peace; 2) Smolensk and the Seversky Principality will remain with Russia; 3) Polotsk, Vitebsk and the cities of southern Livonia, occupied by Russian troops, should be returned to Poland; 4) Little Russia is divided into two halves: the regiments on the left side of the Dnieper will be under the authority of Alexei Mikhailovich, on the right, depending on Poland; 5) Kyiv should be returned to Poland in two years; 6) the Cossacks to be under the protection of both powers with the obligation to protect their borders from the Tatars and Turks.
The Treaty of Andrusovo, having saved Russia from the painful war with Poland and brought it significant benefits, the most important of which was the expansion of its borders along the Dnieper, did not reassure Little Russia. The Cossacks heard with grief that the sovereign had abandoned the Trans-Dnieper Ukraine, that Kyiv itself should be returned to the Poles. (The inaccurate execution by the Poles of the Andrusov Treaty prompted Alexei Mikhailovich to retain Kyiv. The Warsaw court, after repeated harassment, abandoned it in 1686.) Most of all, the ambitious Doroshenko and Metropolitan Joseph of Tukalsky did not like the terms of the treaty: the first was thinking about domination over all of Little Russia; the second feared the previous persecution of the Orthodox Church by the Uniates. The murmur also spread throughout Russian Ukraine, where there was a rumor, supported by Bishop Methodius of Nizhyn, that the court of Alexei Mikhailovich was negotiating with the Warsaw court about the cession of all of Little Russia to Poland. Doroshenko clearly rebelled against the terms of the Andrusov Treaty, announced to Casimir that neither he nor the Cossacks wanted to hear about obedience to Poland, that the Poles should not own Kiev, and invited Tsar Alexei to accept him as citizenship with all of Little Russia, as was the case under Khmelnitsky. Alexey Mikhailovich advised him to humble himself. Doroshenko also rebelled against Russia as an ally of hated Poland, won Bryukhovetsky to his side with the hope of Turkish patronage and an insidious promise to recognize him as hetman of all Little Russia. Bryukhovetsky was glad to have the opportunity to get rid of the Russian governors, whom Alexey Mikhailovich appointed as governors in the Little Russian cities, caused a general rebellion in the Ukraine subject to him and hastened to meet the cunning Doroshenko as a friend, who ordered him to be captured and sacrificed to the angry mob, and he proclaimed himself hetman of all Little Russia, independent of Poland and Russia.
There has never been such terrible unrest in Little Russia. It responded to the Don and along the Volga. The violent heads of the Zaporozhye, probably incited by Doroshenko, with the intention of entertaining our forces, made their way to the Don, outraged entire villages there, which the government of Alexei Mikhailovich tried to stop from robberies, proclaimed the ataman of the daring Don Cossack Stepan Razin and rushed to the banks of the Volga, where this villain had experienced the luck of robbery several years before. In 1668, Razin plundered the outskirts of Astrakhan and, having ravaged several Persian cities near the Caspian Sea, almost armed the Shah against Russia, but then received forgiveness. Leading a strong crowd, Razin took Tsaritsyn and Astrakhan by storm, spread the rumor that the imaginary son of Alexei Mikhailovich, Tsarevich Alexei, was seeking his protection with Patriarch Nikon, that he was going to free the peasants from the landowners, and excited the entire Volga region. Saratov surrendered to the rebel, who, with 200,000 men, was already moving towards Nizhny Novgorod, marking his path with indescribable atrocities. In Astrakhan, at the hands of thieving Cossacks, Stenka’s comrade-in-arms, Vasily Usa, Metropolitan Joseph died the death of a martyr.
The unrest in the southern and eastern borders could be all the more dangerous for Russia and Alexei Mikhailovich since the Turkish Sultan was already gathering troops to support Doroshenko. Prudent government measures stopped the unrest before the Turks appeared in Little Russia. Calm in Ukraine was restored without difficulty: the sovereign assured its inhabitants that he would not betray them to the Poles. Doroshenko, by alliance with the infidels, aroused indignation against himself and had to retire beyond the Dnieper; The Cossacks willingly agreed to recognize Colonel Mnogohrishny, who was zealously devoted to the throne, as hetman. Razin’s accomplices persisted longer, but the courageous defense of Simbirsk by boyar Sheremetev stopped the spread of the rebellion along the Volga, and the activities of other governors of Alexei Mikhailovich, who defeated Razin’s detachments piecemeal, especially boyar Miloslavsky, who captured Astrakhan, weakened the villain so much that he was handed over to the government and received a decent execution. The severity of the punishment pacified the Don and Volga regions.
Meanwhile, the thunderstorm, which both Tsar Alexei and Poland equally tried to ward off, broke out in Trans-Dnieper Ukraine without touching our borders. The hatred of its inhabitants for Polish rule was revealed with such force that, having lost hope of joining Russia, they decided to recognize the Turkish Sultan as their patron rather than the Polish king, and willingly flocked to the banner of Doroshenko, seeing in him the only deliverer from the hated yoke. Mohammed IV hurried to take advantage of such favorable circumstances in the hope of establishing his power not only in Little Russia, but also in Poland, where general anarchy reigned on the occasion of Casimir’s abdication of the throne. A large Turkish army, under the personal leadership of the Sultan, with the entire Crimean horde entered the Polish borders. The fall of Kamenets Podolsky, the siege of Lvov and the devastation of many cities frightened Casimir’s successor, Mikhail Vishnevetsky, to such an extent that, fearing the loss of his entire kingdom, he offered peace to the Sultan and agreed to very onerous conditions: by the treaty in Buchach, the king agreed to pay the Turks an annual tribute and cede Little Russia to them. True, the Warsaw Sejm, after the removal of Mohammed, who considered the war over, did not confirm the Buchach Treaty, and the Polish commander Jan Sobieski, resuming the war, defeated the enemies near Khotyn. But the Poles failed to oust the Turks from the cities they occupied in Polish Ukraine. A fierce struggle began.
Trans-Dnieper Little Russia, showered with the ashes of cities, drenched in the blood of the unfortunate people, repeatedly turned to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich with a convincing request to save it from the Turks and Poles. The sovereign, already dissatisfied with Poland for repeated violations of the Andrusov Treaty, for obvious hostility, for persistent evasion of eternal peace, was indignant at her even more after her weak government, constantly oppressing the Cossacks, allowed the Turks to interfere in the affairs of Little Russia. It was obvious that the Sultan, having taken possession of Polish Ukraine, would not leave Russian alone. The security of the state obliged Alexei Mikhailovich to take part in the country, which so earnestly wanted to be subject to him and which the Polish king so indifferently handed over as prey to the Turks. In 1674, Tsar Alexei announced to the Trans-Dnieper Cossacks that he agreed to accept them as citizenship. All ten regiments located beyond the Dnieper happily swore allegiance to him, left Doroshenko and recognized Samoilovich as hetman of all Little Russia.
Asserting his power over the Dnieper, Alexey Mikhailovich foresaw that neither the king nor the sultan would leave him in peaceful possession. He was not afraid of war with both partners and zealously prepared his measures. But death cut short his life at the very time when the fate of Little Russia and Russia’s complicated relations with Poland and Turkey had to be decided.
Russian Tsar from the Romanov dynasty since 1645.
Alexey Mikhailovich was pious and strictly observed church rituals.
Being an educated person, Alexey Mikhailovich he himself read petitions (according to legend, in the Tsar’s village of Kolomenskoye there was a box for requests addressed to the Tsar) and other documents, wrote and/or edited many Decrees and was the first of the Russian Tsars to sign them with his own hand...
Since 1648, he carried out the reform of the regiments of the tsarist army and hired a significant number of European military specialists. Craftsmen, architects, painters, doctors, and pharmacists were also invited to Moscow from Europe. In 1652, they began to settle in the German Settlement, which became a conductor of Western cultural influence in Russia. But: Orthodox Christians were forbidden to visit churches and churches, and foreigners in Russia were forbidden to visit Orthodox churches...
“His behavior was exemplary for every king-priest. Everyone knew that the king was extremely religious. In church, Alexey Mikhailovich sometimes stood for five or six hours, made a thousand prostrations, or even one and a half thousand. Usually the tsar took about two hours to attend mass.
This religious physical education made an unusually strong impression on all of Holy Rus'. Here he is, the people's intercessor before God! After her, on weekdays he went about his business. The tsar's own handwritten notes have been preserved - how he prepared for the meeting of the Boyar Duma. The agenda items are divided into three groups. Those on which the king does not have his own opinion, and he leaves them to the boyars. Those that he has already thought about, but still require discussion. And those on which he made a decision, and which now only need to be approved. In general, the strong point of his reign was the constant delegation of authority - Alexei Mikhailovich always had close associates to whom he could entrust this or that area of work.
At noon, business ended and the royal dinner began. Up to seventy dishes were served. The king often sent them - from the royal table - to those whom he wanted to please. But it was difficult to accuse him of gluttony: Alexei Mikhailovich kept all his fasts and ate literally like a monk.”
Medinsky V.R., Features of national PR, M., “OLMA Media Group”, 2010, p. 537-538.
During the reign Alexey Mikhailovich since 1653, patriarch Nikon began church reform, which marked the beginning of a schism in the Russian Orthodox Church.
The number of orders (analogues of current ministries and committees) by the end of his reign doubled from 40 to 80, and the number of orderly people more than tripled: from 800 to 2800.
After the death of his first wife Alexey Mikhailovich married in 1671 to N.K. Naryshkina, who bore him three children and, in particular, a future Emperor Peter I.
“...at the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries Peter the Great produces the deepest social, cultural, military-organizational, etc. revolution. In this "ave." first of all, and perhaps generally first of all, a revolution in power. He is creating a new form and a new type of Russian power - secularized and in the manner of European absolutism. Yes, but several decades before this “fateful” turn-over, Russian Power experienced an almost equally puzzling turn. Alexei Mikhailovich, the father of an academician and a carpenter, a navigator and a hero, started such a restructuring of everything and everyone that one can only be surprised how little we talk about it, we do not pay due attention at all. This is what one of the most educated and smartest modern Russian people writes: (Uspensky B.A., History of the Russian literary language, 1987 - Note by I.L. Vikentyev):“Alexey Mikhailovich... (...namely to the Tsar..., and not to the Patriarch Nikon played a major role in the cultural reforms of this period)... recognizes himself as the king of the entire Orthodox world, naturally focusing on the Byzantine model. This view can be seen as a development of the idea Moscow - Third Rome. If, however, earlier this idea was associated with cultural isolationism, now it is associated with universalism, i.e. a single cultural norm is assumed for the entire Orthodox world.” In other words, under Alexei Mikhailovich, Russia for the first time is trying on the role of the vanguard of all progress... no, so far only of all Orthodox humanity. And this, of course, is a cool change. The author clarifies: “This change implies a change in attitude towards the Greeks. After the Union of Florence, the Greeks began to be seen as having lost their faith, and it was necessary to dissociate ourselves from them. The establishment of autocephaly of the Russian Church is connected with this. The process of church isolation was completed with the establishment of the patriarchate in Russia (1589). With the establishment of the patriarchate, the Moscow kingdom received the same structure as the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine Empire seemed to move entirely within the borders of Moscow Rus'. This concept emphasized the religious and political self-sufficiency of Muscovite Rus' and led to cultural isolationism.” But now life becomes “better and more fun.” The country is growing stronger and, accordingly, its ambitions are swelling. “With the stabilization of Russian state power in the middle of the 17th century, political concepts changed. The political program of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich envisaged the creation of an Orthodox empire that went beyond the boundaries of Muscovite Rus'. Accordingly, the Orthodox world was not confined to the Muscovite kingdom for him, but... acquired the scale of the Byzantine Empire... Alexei Mikhailovich’s orientation towards the Byzantine basileus is manifested in a number of aspects. ...Alexey Mikhailovich orders an apple and a diadem from Constantinople, made “against the example of the pious Greek king Constantine.” Under Alexei Mikhailovich, the tsar began to be titled a saint, as was customary in Byzantium. Before this, only Greek hierarchs, but not the Russians themselves, could call the Russian Tsar or Grand Duke this way. The Byzantinization of royal power also determined a change in the rite of crowning, which was approaching the Byzantine one. Since the time of Fyodor Alekseevich (1676), the tsar at the wedding takes communion at the altar according to the priestly rite, as the Byzantine emperors did. The publication of the Code (1649) can also be considered as an imitation of the Byzantine emperors, i.e. the official introduction of a new set of laws...". With all this, the famous researcher emphasizes, “the Byzantinization of tsarist power under Alexei Mikhailovich determines the Byzantinization of all Russian life. Moscow must become not only the political, but also the cultural center of the entire Orthodox world.”
Pivovarov Yu.S., Russian politics in its historical and cultural relations, M., “Russian Political Encyclopedia”, 2006, p. 95-97.
"Tsar Alexey Mikhailovich took a pose in a transformative movement... with one foot he still firmly rested on his native Orthodox antiquity, and the other was already lifted beyond its line, and he remained in this indecisive transitional position.”
Klyuchevsky V.O., Works, Volume 3, Course of Russian History, Part 3, M., “State Publishing House of Political Literature”, 1957, p. 320.
