Sovereign Ivan the Terrible: the restoration of the empire

Sovereign Ivan the Terrible: the restoration of the empire

Russia has never been a closed "island", interaction with the West, the western kingdoms went on constantly: they traded, concluded dynastic alliances, fought. Kiev, Moscow, Novgorod were visited by foreign embassies, envoys of Rome, Scandinavians, Germans, Hungarians, Italians traded.


In the XVI century, the British appeared with the Dutch, which is interesting, the British, shipwrecked and who showed the way Russian fishermen, then announced that they had “discovered” Russia. But Russia was not an African or Aztec state, therefore, they did not dare to act as usual by the “discoverers”. I had to look for mutually beneficial cooperation.

Sovereign Ivan the Terrible, perhaps, is comparable in terms of "spitting" with Stalin, it is difficult to find in our past a figure as unloved as he. Svyatoslav is also not loved, but his exploits are simply hushed up. And Ivan Vasilyevich constantly "bark". True, this did not prevent our people from preserving the Good Memory about him - in Russian folklore he is a defender of the "orphaned and needy" from the "strong", he is the Terrible Tsar who fought with internal and external enemies.

It was very difficult for him, he soon lost his father and mother, the boyar clans seized a lot of power, strong enemies were everywhere around the country: they were disturbed by raids and organized campaigns for the “living goods” of Kazan and the Crimean Khanate, the powerful Ottoman Empire stood ( 19 century, then the Ottoman Turks forced to tremble almost all of Europe, except the North). From the north, hung over the power of the Swedes, from the west the old enemies - Lithuania, Poland.

The king carried out important reforms: the military strengthened the army, powerful artillery was created: guns cast during the reign of Ivan the Terrible, served for several decades and participated in battles as early as the 17 century; pounds and caliber in 1200 pounds, she terrified enemies, took part in the siege of Polotsk 20 of the year. According to the researcher A. Chernov, the infantry of Grozny was ahead of the infantry of the countries of Western Europe: the archers were all armed with gunfire weaponsthat put them above the infantry of western countries, where part of the infantrymen (the so-called pikemen) had only cold weapons. The regiments of the “Foreign system” were created, the advanced experience of the Swedish and Dutch infantry was used. Created a local government, received self-government and peasant communities, adopted a new Law, abolished the feeding. The man himself is very educated, he patronized the development of education, architecture, by his order was created a unique monument of Russian literature - Facial Chronicle, contributed to the development of typography.

Having strengthened, Russia began a movement to the South and the East: the whole great river Volga was joined, the problem of the Kazan and Astrakhan khanates was solved; In the citizenship of Russia crossed the legs, Russia is returning to the North Caucasus. Movement to the East began, it will end with access to the Pacific Ocean and the creation of Russian America. Ivan the Terrible was able to stop the expansion of the Crimean-Turkish troops in the southern strategic direction: in 1569, the Turkish army was destroyed near Astrakhan; in the battle of Molodyla 30 July - 2 August 1572, under the command of Governor Prince Mikhail Vorotynsky, 40-thousand were destroyed. (according to other sources 120-thousand.) Crimean-Turkish army.

The war for the Baltic territories - the famous Livonian war - was successfully launched. In case of her success, Ivan the Terrible would have outstripped the exploits of Peter the Great. The old enemy of Russia - the Livonian Order - was actually destroyed, but then strong enemies came out against Russia - Lithuania, Poland, Sweden, and the Crimean Khanate from the south. The “German emperor, papal Rome” launched an “information war” against Russia. It was then that the powerful weapon of the enemy manifested itself vividly - the method of “cultural cooperation, the temptation of“ freedoms ”, customs, lifestyle of Western Europe began to penetrate into Russia more and more. He succumbed to a part of the elite of Russia, to know that this is one of the main reasons for the introduction of the oprichnina. Many clans of nobles dreamed of the position of the Polish gentry and magnates, their liberties.

Rome actively conducted not only the information war, but organizational work, it was his agents who were able to conduct a brilliant operation to merge Lithuania and Poland into the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - the Union of Lublin 1569 of the year. At this time, Sigismund II was at the same time the Grand Duke of Lithuania and the Polish king. But in Lithuania, the throne was handed down, and in Poland the king was elected. Sigismund was entangled by Jesuit agents, at the same time Yuri Mniszek (Jerzy Mniszek) appeared, he delivered to the king of girls, trying not to marry the childless king again, eventually he died childless, the Jagiellonian dynasty stopped with him. Jesuit Antonio Possevino was able to persuade King Johan of Sweden to accept Catholicism, an alliance with the Poles was created.

Possevino was on a mission in Moscow, in February 1582, he tried to persuade Ivan to unite with Rome, to subordinate the Orthodox Church to the Pope. In Rome, they thought that heavy defeats would break the will of the king, but it did not work out. As a result, according to a number of researchers, Ivan the Terrible was poisoned, it was at that time the usual method of the Jesuits, and even court intriguers. At the same Sigismund poisoned two wives.

That is why for the internal and external enemies of Russia and the Russian people, Ivan the Terrible is an enemy who is hated to the stage of animal fear. He pursued a successful foreign and domestic policy, strengthened the army, began to create the Russian fleet on the Baltic Sea, with the help of Captain Carsten Rohde. Krepil and expanded borders, razil external enemies and internal. Began movement on two main strategic directions - South and East. Resisted the temptations of Rome. According to the research of Skrynnikov, only a few thousand people were subjected to repression under him, and in Paris he was more slaughtered for one St. Bartholomew’s night. During his time, the spiritual and material culture of Russia developed.

He proved himself as a great diplomat and statist, researcher M. V. Tolstoy writes in "Stories The Russian Church ”:“ But the hopes of the Pope and Possevin’s efforts were not crowned with success. John had all the natural flexibility of his mind, dexterity and prudence, which the Jesuit himself had to do justice, rejected harassment about allowing Latin churches to be built in Russia, rejected disputes about faith and union of churches on the basis of the rules of the Florentine cathedral and did not get carried away by the dreamy promise the empire of the Byzantine Empire, lost by the Greeks, allegedly for their retreat from Rome. ” Possevino himself noted that "the Russian Tsar stubbornly avoided, avoided talking on this topic." As a result, Rome did not receive any privileges in Russia, nor an agreement to enter the bosom of the Catholic Church, and the mediation between Russia and the Commonwealth had to be performed.

Sources of:
Ivan the Terrible and the Jesuits. The mission of Antonio Possevino in Moscow. Comp. and foreword I.V. Kurukina. M., 2005.
The history of diplomacy. T. 1. M., 1959.
Zimin A. A. Reforms of Ivan the Terrible. M., 1960.
Lobin A. N. Tsareva Pushkari. Motherland No. 12. 2004.
Possevino A. Historical writings on Russia 16 c. M. 1983.
Skrynnikov R. G. Ivan the Terrible. M., 2001.
Chernov A.V. The Armed Forces of the Russian State in 15-17 c. M., 1954.
http://topwar.ru/3711-pervyj-russkij-flot-piraty-groznogo-carya.html
http://militera.lib.ru/bio/vipper_ru/index.html



Transport company "MotusTrans" offers transport services, automobile Trucking across Russia and the CIS. The company works confidently, efficiently and at affordable prices. Individual approach to each client. More information can be found on the company's website - motustrans.ru.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

10 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. mitrich
    mitrich 26 May 2011 11: 08 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Ivan Vasilievich Grozny, as well as I.V. Stalin was a man of his time. And to consider this extraordinary person you need from the position of TOGO time. And then the truly bloodthirsty English and French kings of the XNUMXth century model are depicted by their compatriots as "white and fluffy", "enlightened", etc., and Grozny is like a monster with us. Although the krovushki shed no less than Vanya. Objectively, under Grozny, the Russian state “grew” Kazan and Astrakhan, vast regions of Siberia were explored, and the Livonian War with Poles and Lithuanians was fought with varying success. In a word, Grozny was a great sovereign, whom I put on a par with Peter I, Catherine II and, finally, with my beloved Joseph Vissarionovich.
    ps In general, thanks to Sasha Samsonov for his articles, although sometimes he is not right.
    1. radio operator 19 June 2011 11: 27 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      You, in my opinion, correctly draw parallels between Ivan the Terrible and Stalin. Of all the autocrats, Stalin respected only Ivan IV. Both unleashed terror, the search for internal enemies. But, Stalin, at least transferred the country on the rise, developing. But the Terrible Tsar - the collapsing and falling into turmoil Muscovy. Whether the fruits of the Livonian War prosc @ are very fast, because there were no resources to support either the developed lands or the Russians. Even Smolensk lost.
      After the Horde, Grozny introduced the “Serf, paternalistic tradition” instead of the traditions of free combatants that took place in pre-Horde Russia and was restored by Ivan III.
      Peter, just returned the country to the rails of development and modernization, the only thing he did not dare to liberate the peasants. They cannot be compared at all. Under Peter, Russia, in fact, grew in land, on the orders of Peter laid Siberian cities, built an efficient fleet, successfully fought in Europe.
      And Catherine carried out the secularization of church lands, begun by Ivan III and stopped by Ivan the Terrible.
      Under Peter, the country received an impetus for the development of European and world level, under Ivan the Terrible, according to Karl Wittfogel and Marx: the political tradition of Muscovy Ivan the Terrible inherited Mongol despotism.
  2. datur 26 May 2011 11: 52 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    He was great and terrified.
  3. Ald
    Ald 26 May 2011 13: 45 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The formidable figure is very ambiguous and you can argue about his personality endlessly. The first half of his reign was very successful - state and military reforms were carried out, Kazan and Astrakhan were taken (although many forget that Ivan III was the first to take Kazan and put his protege there, which provided Russia with peace in this direction for many years). But the second half of the reign is a failure. Violent repression and persecution, a lost, exhausting Livonian war that ravaged the country. What are the more pros or cons? There are so many people and opinions.
    In my opinion, Grozny did not succeed in the main thing: to continue the work of his father and grandfather - the gathering of Russian lands. If Ivan III and Vasily III methodically, tearing Russian lands from Lithuania, piece by piece, joining them to their growing power, then Ivan IV was not only unable to expand his country at the expense of the Russian lands, but also with his overly harsh domestic policy: oprichnina, cruelties in Novgorod and Tver scared the Russians in Lithuania, depriving themselves of the opportunity to attract them to their side. For comparison, a large number of border princes from Lithuania with their lands and subjects (princes Mosalsky, Odoevsky, Vorotynsky, etc.) voluntarily sided with Ivan III.
    In general, I believe that we have greatly underestimated the identity of Ivan III. How many different princes and kings stand monuments, some more deserved, some less. Not so long ago, a monument was erected in Moscow to the specific prince Daniil of Moscow, I don’t know what he did so great, but there is no monument to the creator of the united Russian national state, Ivan III.
    1. Escander
      Escander 5 June 2011 21: 05 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      --- "In my opinion, Grozny did not succeed in the main thing: to continue the work of his father and grandfather - the gathering of Russian lands."

      Under Ivan the Terrible, dear, (the first king of all Russia, if anyone has forgotten), Russia has grown 100% in land. But there were “cruelties in Novgorod and Tver” for what reason, why didn’t it sound?
      There is no prophet in his own country.
      Abroad, there are more museums and monuments to our commanders than at home.
    2. radio operator 19 June 2011 10: 39 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quite rightly noticed that
      Quote: Ald
      The first half of his reign is highly successful.
      After all, while he "made his campaign against the Germans," they took into slavery and destroyed 800 thousand (!) Russian murzes of the remnants of the Golden Horde. "
      Destroyed the pearl of the Russian Crown - Veliky Novgorod, with a cruelty that the Mongols never dreamed of. A shameful enslavement of peasants! Slaves from their own people ...
      Before Ivan IV there were no earthly gods.
      The fact that the Cossacks went east, moving away from terror was not the merit of the autocrat. Cossacks were much later able to "pacify" and put in the service of Russia, but not the Terrible Tsar.
      Unfortunately, his famous grandfather remains undeservedly pushed into the shadow of a bloody grandson.
  4. datur 26 May 2011 15: 37 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    life, history is not written only in white or black. look about the other Great ones — did they have everything good and successful? And in our case, it is full of freaks and outside the country who are ready to pervert everything and fill us with our great ones and just RUSSIA with mud. and just drown. if strangers can still be understood, then their own is generally complete morality.
  5. mitrich
    mitrich 26 May 2011 18: 33 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Ald
    write more of your comments. Read more interesting than Karamzin.
  6. slan
    slan 26 May 2011 22: 41 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: datur
    He was great and terrified

    Yes, well?)) Yeltsin was a great horror. Medvedev is just awful ..
    You need to judge by deeds, not gossip in murders. "Terrible" is not for the character given the nickname, as well as "Donskoy" and "Nevsky." It will still be useful to ponder which of his contemporaries was distinguished by a meek disposition and greatest humanism? Maybe the Pope?)) Just the era of the Inquisition ..
    Grozny was the last of the great Rurikovich. And the Romanovs did everything to legitimize their power, including due to the planting of the myth of the incredible suffering of the Russian people before their accession. And where did Gorbachev begin? .. Yes, there are many parallels with Stalin ..
  7. datur 26 May 2011 22: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    slan, great and terrible with a capital letter! and you about these cockroaches.