Where the election of Mikhail Romanov to the throne took place. Election of Mikhail Romanov to the throne

For the final completion of the Time of Troubles, it was necessary not only to elect a new monarch to the Russian throne, but also to ensure the security of Russian borders from the two most active neighbors - the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Sweden. However, this was impossible until a social consensus was reached in the Moscow kingdom, and a person appeared on the throne of the descendants of Ivan Kalita who would fully suit the majority of the delegates of the Zemsky Sobor of 1612-1613. For a number of reasons, 16-year-old Mikhail Romanov became such a candidate.

CLAIMERS TO THE MOSCOW THRONE

With the liberation of Moscow from the interventionists, the zemstvo people had the opportunity to begin electing the head of state. In November 1612, the nobleman Filosofov informed the Poles that the Cossacks in Moscow were in favor of electing one of the Russian people to the throne, “and they were trying on Filaret’s son and the thieves of Kaluga,” while the senior boyars were in favor of electing a foreigner. The Cossacks remembered “Tsarevich Ivan Dmitrievich” in a moment of extreme danger, Sigismund III stood at the gates of Moscow, and the surrendered members of the Seven Boyars could at any moment go over to his side again. Zarutsky’s army stood behind the back of the Kolomna prince. The atamans hoped that at a critical moment their longtime comrades would come to their aid. But hopes for Zarutsky’s return did not materialize. In the hour of trial, the ataman was not afraid to unleash a fratricidal war. Together with Marina Mnishek and her young son, he came to the walls of Ryazan and tried to capture the city. Ryazan governor Mikhail Buturlin came forward and put him to flight.

Zarutsky’s attempt to get Ryazan for the “vorenk” failed. The townspeople expressed their negative attitude towards the candidacy of “Ivan Dmitrievich”. Propaganda in his favor began to subside in Moscow on its own.

Without the Boyar Duma, the election of the Tsar could not have taken place. legal force. The election of the Duma threatened to drag on for many years. Many noble families laid claim to the crown, and no one wanted to give way to another.

SWEDISH PRINCE

When the Second Militia stood in Yaroslavl, D.M. Pozharsky, with the consent of the clergy, service people, and townsmen who supplied the militia with funds, entered into negotiations with the Novgorodians about the candidacy of a Swedish prince for the Moscow throne. On May 13, 1612, they wrote letters to the Novgorod Metropolitan Isidore, Prince Odoevsky and Delagardie and sent them to Novgorod with Stepan Tatishchev. For the sake of the importance of the matter, elected officials also went with this militia ambassador - one person from each city. It’s interesting that Metropolitan Isidore and Voivode Odoevsky were asked how their and the Novgorodians’ relations were with the Swedes? And Delagardi was informed that if the new Swedish king Gustav II Adolf releases his brother to the Moscow throne and orders him to be baptized in Orthodox faith, then they are glad to be with the Novgorod land in the council.

Chernikova T.V. Europeanization of Russia inXV -XVII centuries. M., 2012

ELECTION TO THE KINGDOM OF MIKHAIL ROMANOV

When quite a lot of authorities and elected representatives had gathered, a three-day fast was appointed, after which the councils began. First of all, they began to talk about whether to choose from foreign royal houses or their natural Russian, and decided “not to elect the Lithuanian and Swedish king and their children and other German faiths and any foreign-language states not of the Christian faith of the Greek law to the Vladimir and Moscow states, and Marinka and her son are not wanted for the state, because the Polish and German kings saw themselves as untruths and crimes on the cross and a violation of peace: the Lithuanian king ruined the Moscow state, and the Swedish king took Veliky Novgorod by deception.” They began to choose their own: then intrigues, unrest and unrest began; everyone wanted to do according to their own thoughts, everyone wanted their own, some even wanted the throne themselves, they bribed and sent; sides formed, but none of them gained the upper hand. Once, the chronograph says, some nobleman from Galich brought a written opinion to the council, which said that Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov was the closest in relationship to the previous tsars, and he should be elected tsar. The voices of dissatisfied people were heard: “Who brought such a letter, who, where from?” At that time, the Don Ataman comes out and also submits a written opinion: “What did you submit, Ataman?” - Prince Dmitry Mikhailovich Pozharsky asked him. “About the natural Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich,” answered the ataman. The same opinion submitted by the nobleman and the Don ataman decided the matter: Mikhail Fedorovich was proclaimed tsar. But not all the elected officials were in Moscow yet; there were no noble boyars; Prince Mstislavsky and his comrades immediately after their liberation left Moscow: it was awkward for them to remain in it near the liberating commanders; Now they sent to call them to Moscow for a common cause, they also sent reliable people to cities and districts to find out the people’s thoughts about the new chosen one, and the final decision was postponed for two weeks, from February 8 to February 21, 1613. Finally, Mstislavsky and his comrades arrived, the belated elected officials also arrived, and envoys to the regions returned with the news that the people would joyfully recognize Michael as king. On February 21, the week of Orthodoxy, i.e., on the first Sunday of Lent, the last council was held: each rank submitted a written opinion, and all these opinions were found similar, all ranks pointed to one person - Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov. Then the Ryazan Archbishop Theodorit, the Trinity cellarer Abraham Palitsyn, the Novospassky Archimandrite Joseph and the boyar Vasily Petrovich Morozov ascended to the Execution Ground and asked the people filling Red Square who they want as king? “Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov” was the answer.

THE CATHEDRAL OF 1613 AND MIKHAIL ROMANOV

The first act of the great Zemsky Sobor, which elected sixteen-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov to the Russian throne, was to send an embassy to the newly elected tsar. When sending the embassy, ​​the cathedral did not know where Mikhail was, and therefore the order given to the ambassadors said: “Go to Sovereign Mikhail Fedorovich, Tsar and Grand Duke of All Rus' in Yaroslavl.” Arriving in Yaroslavl, the embassy here only learned that Mikhail Fedorovich lives with his mother in Kostroma; without hesitation, it moved there, along with many Yaroslavl citizens who had already joined here.

The embassy arrived in Kostroma on March 14; On the 19th, having convinced Mikhail to accept the royal crown, they left Kostroma with him, and on the 21st they all arrived in Yaroslavl. Here all the residents of Yaroslavl and the nobles who had come from everywhere, boyar children, guests, trading people with their wives and children met the new king with a procession of the cross, bringing him icons, bread and salt, and rich gifts. Mikhail Fedorovich chose the ancient Spaso-Preobrazhensky Monastery as his place of stay here. Here in the cells of the archimandrite, he lived with his mother nun Martha and temporary State Council, which consisted of Prince Ivan Borisovich Cherkassky with other nobles and clerk Ivan Bolotnikov with stewards and solicitors. From here, on March 23, the first letter from the tsar was sent to Moscow, informing the Zemsky Sobor of its consent to accept the royal crown.

By January 1613, representatives of fifty cities gathered in Moscow, who, together with Moscow people, formed a zemsky (electoral) council. They immediately began to discuss the issue of foreign candidates for kingship. Thus Philip and Vladislav were rejected. Finally, a decision was made “not to elect a tsar from the list of foreigners,” but to elect the ruler of the Russian state from the great Moscow families. As soon as the discussion began about which of their own could be elevated to the throne, opinions were divided. Everyone voted for a candidate they liked, and for quite a long time opinions could not agree.

However, at the same time, it turned out that not only at the cathedral, but also in Moscow itself, among the Cossacks and zemstvo people, the son of Metropolitan Philaret, young Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov, enjoyed special authority. His name was already mentioned during the election of Vladislav and now both oral and written statements from Cossacks and townspeople began to arrive in his favor. On February 7, 1613, the cathedral decided to choose Mikhail Romanov, however, out of caution, they decided to postpone the matter for a couple of weeks in order to find out during this time in the nearest cities how they treated Mikhail. So by the twenty-first of February, the boyars arrived from their estates with good news, after which Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov was proclaimed tsar and all members of the council, as well as all of Moscow, swore allegiance to him.

However, the new tsar was not in Moscow. In 1612, he sat with his mother (nun Marfa Ivanovna) in the siege (Kremlin), and then, freed, he left for Kostroma through Yaroslavl to his villages. There he was in danger from a wandering Cossack or Polish detachment, of which there were many walking around the Russian land after the fall of Tushin. Mikhail Romanov is saved in the village of Domnino by his peasant Ivan Susanin. Having notified Mikhail of the danger, he deceives his enemies into the forest, where he accepts death, instead of showing them the boyar’s hut.

After this, Mikhail Fedorovich took refuge in the Ipatiev strong monastery near Kostroma, where he lived until the moment when an embassy appeared to him offering the throne. At the same time, Mikhail Romanov refused the throne for quite a long time, and his mother also did not want to bless her son for the throne, fearing that people would sooner or later destroy their son because of their cowardice, as had happened before with previous kings.

Only after much persuasion did the ambassadors receive his consent, and on March 14, 1613, Michael himself accepted the kingdom and went to Moscow.

Zemsky Sobor 1613. Election of Mikhail Romanov as Tsar. The cathedral embassy to him. The feat of Ivan Susanin

Immediately after the cleansing of Moscow, the provisional government of princes Pozharsky and Trubetskoy sent letters to the cities with an invitation to send elected officials, about ten people from the city, to Moscow to “rob the sovereign.” By January 1613, representatives from 50 cities gathered in Moscow and, together with Moscow people, formed an electoral [zemsky] council. First of all, they discussed the issue of foreign candidates for kings. They rejected Vladislav, whose election brought so much grief to Rus'. They also rejected the Swedish prince Philip, who was elected by the Novgorodians to the “Novgorod state” under pressure from the Swedish troops who then occupied Novgorod. Finally, they made a general resolution not to elect a “king from the Gentiles,” but to elect one of their own “from the great Moscow families.” When they began to determine which of their own could be elevated to the royal throne, the votes were divided. Everyone named a candidate they liked, and for a long time they could not agree on anyone. It turned out, however, that not only at the cathedral, but also in the city of Moscow, among the zemstvo people and among the Cossacks, of whom there were many in Moscow at that time, the young son of Metropolitan Philaret had particular success. His name was already mentioned in 1610, when there was talk of the election of Vladislav; and now written and oral statements from townspeople and Cossacks were received at the meetings of the cathedral in favor of Mikhail Fedorovich. On February 7, 1613, the cathedral for the first time decided to choose Michael. But out of caution, they decided to postpone the matter for two weeks, and at that time send to the nearest cities to find out whether Tsar Michael would be loved there, and, in addition, to summon to Moscow those of the boyars who were not at the council. By February 21, good news came from the cities and the boyars gathered from their estates - and on February 21, Mikhail Fedorovich was solemnly proclaimed tsar and both the members of the cathedral and all of Moscow took the oath to him.

Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov in his youth

The new tsar, however, was not in Moscow. In 1612, he sat with his mother, nun Martha Ivanovna, in the Kremlin siege, and then, freed, he left through Yaroslavl to Kostroma, to his villages. There he was in danger from a wandering Polish or Cossack detachment, of which there were many in Rus' after the fall of Tushin. Mikhail Fedorovich was saved by a peasant from his village Domnina, Ivan Susanin. Having notified his boyar of the danger, he himself led the enemies into the forests and died there with them, instead of showing them the way to the boyar’s estate. Then Mikhail Fedorovich took refuge in the strong Ipatiev Monastery near Kostroma, where he lived with his mother until the minute an embassy from the Zemsky Sobor came to his monastery offering him the throne. Mikhail Fedorovich refused the kingdom for a long time; his mother also did not want to bless her son for the throne, fearing that the Russian people were “faint-hearted” and could destroy young Mikhail, like the previous kings, Fyodor Borisovich,

In February 1613, Russian history took another turn. Was this a continuation of the previous path or new road? Perhaps both. In a state somewhere on the outskirts of Europe, a new ruler appeared, a seventeen-year-old sickly youth, raised by child-loving aunts in cramped rooms with low ceilings, poorly educated not only by Western European, but even by Muscovite standards, dependent on an overbearing mother and an experienced politician and father. And this young man was to become the founder of the dynasty, his descendants were to rule a huge empire... But it is unlikely that any of his contemporaries in Muscovy or beyond, looking at the young Mikhail Fedorovich (1596-1645), would have decided to predict brilliant prospects for him.

We once thought that Russian history was not too mysterious. School and university textbooks convinced us of this. But now we know that there are enough mysterious moments in Russian history. Mysteries also surrounded Michael, the founder of a dynasty that was destined to become as great, unique and tragic as the dynasty of, for example, the Ptolemaic Lagids in Hellenistic Egypt (IV-I centuries BC).

And the first mystery was the very origin of the family to which young Mikhail Fedorovich belonged. By the time of his accession, this family had, in essence, three nicknames: Koshkins, Zakharyins, Romanovs... They were supposed to remind of a certain Roman Zakharyin Koshkin (d. 1543), who was not a great commander or statesman, he didn’t even live very long, and didn’t see any sudden triumph of his kind. But what kind of triumph was this? And this was the legal marriage of Roman’s daughter Anastasia (c. 1530-1560) with Ivan Vasilyevich, who was barely out of adolescence, who went down in history under the name of Ivan the Terrible (1530-1584). The girl Anastasia became his first wife and therefore the most legitimate in the eyes of the church, and it was the church that oversaw, as they say, the ideological climate of Muscovy, a distant state that turned from a principality into a kingdom during the reign of Ivan the Terrible! Thus, Roman Koshkin’s family turned out to be related to the first Russian queen. This relationship was very useful to them, because apart from this relationship, the family was not remarkable. It didn’t even differ in nobility.

Ipatiev Trinity Monastery. Kostroma. Founded in 1330 by the Tatar Murza Cheta, who converted to Orthodoxy, the founder of the Godunov family (at one time their tomb was located in the monastery). During the Time of Troubles, sixteen-year-old Mikhail Romanov and his mother nun Martha hid here from the Poles. It was here that on March 14, 1613, the Moscow embassy arrived, bringing the decision of the Zemsky Sobor on the election of Mikhail. In the Trinity Church of the monastery, the ambassadors announced the people's will to Michael. After six hours of persuasion, Mikhail agreed. Photo: Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorsky from the archives of the US Library of Congress

It was only later, in retrospect, that the origin of the first representative of the family, Andrei Kobyla (d. 1351), was invented from the Prussian ruler Vidvung! In fact, nothing is known about this Andrei Kobyla, it is only possible to assume that he had the rank of boyar during the reign of the great Moscow prince Simeon the Proud (1317-1353), son of Ivan Kalita (1283-1341), Andrei Kobyla is mentioned among those who went for the bride Simeon...

But why was it necessary to invent origins specifically from a foreign ruler? Anyone interested in Russian history can easily notice that all the rulers of Rus'-Muscovy-Russia were, in fact, “Westernizers” and sought, one way or another, to establish relations with Western Europe. But even the first ruling dynasty - the Rurikovichs - was of Western European origin. And the Romanovs who replaced the Rurikovichs were “Westerners” to an even greater extent, not by their real origin, but by their convictions. And this is not because they chose this very “Western” path of development after much deliberation, but simply because there was no other path for them. They initially had to rely on an alliance with European monarchs, since everyone at home knew that the Romanovs were “thin”, and after all, the Rurikovichs, the Gediminovichs, and the descendants of noble Mongolian families were still alive in Muscovy. And they should have protected themselves from possible claims by allied relations with Western Europe and dynastic marriages. But all this was yet to come.

It should be noted that the course to the West was already carried out before the Romanovs. Reforming the army, Ivan the Terrible relied on mercenary troops, musketeers and pikemen. And Boris Godunov (1552-1605) sent his subjects to England to study, and tried to arrange a “European” marriage for his daughter. There is nothing to say about False Dmitry (d. 1606). He already called himself emperor and invited the Moscow boyars to wash their hands before eating. We know how it ended for him. And who would have thought that already under the grandson of the fragile Mikhail Fedorovich, the boyars would not only wash their hands, but even shave their beards!..

Metropolitan Filaret. Filaret was a secular man by nature. He was never interested in church issues. He was much more attracted to politics. And he was a good politician.He, in principle, was not against the Polish prince Vladislav taking the Moscow throne. But for this he had to convert to Orthodoxy. When the Zemsky Sobor chose Filaret’s son, Mikhail Romanov, as king, the metropolitan became, in fact, his co-ruler. He took the title of “Great Sovereign” and returned his patronymic name, against all church rules, becoming Filaret Nikitich.Reproduction from the Art-catalogue website

However, under Boris Godunov, the descendants of Roman Koshkin could not count on any brilliant future. The family fell into disgrace. They did not please Tsar Boris with the precedent! After all, he himself actually justified his rights to the throne by his relationship with Tsar Feodor (1557-1598), the son of Ivan the Terrible. Godunov's sister, Irina (d. 1633), was Fedor's wife. But the daughter of Roman Koshkin was the wife of the very first Grand Duke of Moscow, who was officially crowned king. And Fyodor Ivanovich was Anastasia Romanovna’s son... In other words, the Koshkins-Romanovs could well claim that they have no less, but, on the contrary, more rights to the throne than Boris Godunov! And Godunov took action - he subjected them to serious disgrace. Fyodor Nikitich and his wife Ksenia were tonsured and subsequently became known in history as Eldress Martha (d. 1631) and Patriarch Filaret (d. 1633). Little Misha and his sister Tatyana were left in the care of their aunts...

What happened next? Some historians, supporters of the version of the Moscow origin of False Dmitry, even believe that the cunning Romanovs were able to organize an intrigue and, first of all, push Grigory Otrepyev to the throne - “their own man,” as they say. But this version breaks down on the rocks of elementary logic. The impostor could not possibly have been Grigory Otrepyev, who, in turn, really was “from the court” of the Romanovs. Moscow was not a big city, and a man known to too many people (and that’s exactly what Otrepiev was) would not have risked coming there under the guise of the son of Ivan the Terrible. Probably the impostor was a Pole or, at worst, an Italian. Having declared him a runaway monk from the boyar's court, the Moscow rulers subsequently tried to simply discredit him, in which they succeeded!

However, Otrepyev could not possibly have been the son of Ivan the Terrible. Thanks to Boris Godunov, who “dressed up” a thorough investigation into the death of the boy Dmitry (1582-1591). The surviving papers ingeniously paint such a truthful and vivid picture of an epileptic illness that there is no doubt: this boy would not have lived long, he suffered from severe seizures, and his personality had already begun to deteriorate...

But former Fedor Nikitich Romanov, already Filaret, was not interested, it seems, in the origins of False Dmitry. The Romanovs managed to swear allegiance to him, thanks to which they were returned from exile.

Then the real leapfrog of Romanov’s oaths began. They swore allegiance to the second Dmitry (d. 1610), nicknamed the “Tushino Thief”, swore allegiance to Vasily Shuisky (1553-1612), and finally swore allegiance to another candidate approved by the Muscovite aristocracy - the young Polish prince Vladislav (1595-1648). Filaret himself traveled to Poland. And he stayed there for quite a long time. Subsequently - again! — a version was invented about his “Polish captivity.” But why take him prisoner, he was on the side of the Polish party!..

While Filaret was settling difficult relationships with the Poles, his son was elected Tsar of Moscow. Filaret then managed to come to an agreement with his Polish “colleagues”, and so far there have been no protests from them.

Scientists argue why Michael ended up in the kingdom. Moving forward different hypotheses. Historians who lived during the reign of the Romanovs were forced, like Nikolai Kostomarov (1817-1885), to write that there was no one for the Russian people nicer than the Romanovs, victims of Boris Godunov, who wanted to live according to ancient canons. All this is not confirmed by surviving documentary evidence. The Romanovs did not at all intend to live according to some old tradition, but continued the pro-Western course of Boris Godunov and Ivan the Terrible... Soviet historians could afford to be not so naive and therefore assumed that the boyars elected Mikhail, considering him weak-willed and wanting to rule themselves. But they could not consider his father to be powerless, and his mother was clearly not distinguished by weakness of will.

The election of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov to the throne in Russian culture became a symbol of the complete unity of the people and power - an exceptional event in the history of Russia. The Russian intelligentsia idealized it (like the author of this picture, Grigory Ugryumov) and took it as confirmation of the possibility of reviving the principle of conciliarity, that is, universal love and brotherhood, in Russian society. As you know, the intelligentsia was deceived. Unfortunately, she did not know who actually placed the Monomakh Cap on the young king.Reproduction from the Art-catalogue website

But that's not all. Who chose Michael? The textbooks say - Zemsky Sobor. What this Zemsky Sobor was is still not clear. Was it like a democratic Mongol kurultai or was it reduced to the conspiracy of a small group of nobles? And what kind of nobility (we had several ranks of boyars)? By the way, such individuals as Prince Ivan Golitsyn (d. 1672), who was related by blood to the Rurikovichs, laid claim to the throne. What actually happened there? A document discovered in the mid-1970s called “The Tale of the Zemsky Sobor of 1613” sheds light. And this is the picture that emerges: Moscow is actually blocked by Cossack detachments, the houses of the applicants are surrounded. The Cossacks are strongly lobbying for the election of young Mikhail Romanov! That's why they... chose him!

Let's try to figure out who was called the Cossacks in the 17th century. These were a kind of condottieri, free armed seekers of fortune. They were hired first to one army, then to another, then to Pozharsky, then to the Polish hetman Zholkiewski (1547-1620)... It must be said that the Romanovs did not fulfill their promises and did not give the Cossacks the territories in question. This became the reason for serious Cossack protests, of which the most famous are the movements of Razin (c. 1630-1671) and Pugachev (1740/42-1775). The latter, by the way, promised to finally fulfill his promise and “grant” the Cossacks the “eternal and free possession” of the Don “with all the green meadows, with all the dark forests”...

So, the Romanovs gained power. But it was also necessary to hold her. But the situation turned out to be not so simple. It was necessary to destroy the most important contenders, that is, first of all, Marina Mniszek (c. 1588 - c. 1614) and her son, little Ivan, who was barely four years old. Marina’s claims were based on the fact that she was officially crowned, “anointed king,” and her son was formally Rurikovich, the grandson of Ivan the Terrible! It was formally, of course, and not actually, but in this case this “formality” mattered... However, Marina and her son were captured and executed. The first important act of the new king was the decree on public execution four year old child. This was already something new in world practice!

Usually, unwanted child applicants were quietly smothered with a pillow in some dark dungeon. But Mikhail could not afford this; he was justifiably afraid of the appearance of an impostor who “miraculously escaped.” (By the way, such an impostor, a certain Ivan Luba, subsequently appeared anyway, but his case, of course, did not work out.) Therefore, the execution of the boy was public. Russian documents were recorded simply: hanged! But foreign sources report otherwise. The Dutchman Elias Herkman published in 1625 eyewitness accounts of the public hanging of a small crying child... It turned out that the first Romanov executed the last Rurikovich from the branch descended from Alexander Nevsky (1220-1263). And three hundred years later, history turned into a tragic zigzag - an execution in distant Siberia, where the Romanovs would exile their political opponents, the boy, the last representative of the ruling branch, for three hundred years in a row...

But the Romanovs at the very beginning of their reign had no time for sentimentality. We can assume that the order for the public execution of little Ivan was actually given not by Mikhail, but by his domineering mother, Elder Martha. She also selects her son’s first bride, a girl from the family of her relatives, the Khlopovs. Young Marya is given a solemn new name - Anastasia, once again reminding everyone of her relationship with the first queen in Russian history. To become relatives of the new queen was, of course, prestigious and profitable this time too. A tight knot of all sorts of intrigues is twisted. And just then Filaret returns to his homeland. The prospect of a Russian marriage for Mikhail is dropped.

An experienced politician, Filaret is looking for allies in the West. Where? Of course, where the Rurikovichs came from, where Boris Godunov was looking for a groom for his daughter, in Denmark. However, the Danish king Christian IV (1577-1648) refuses his niece's hand. The Swedish king Gustav Adolf (1594-1632) also refuses, does not want to give up Princess Catherine. Europe does not recognize the newborn Romanov dynasty.

Filaret decides to be content with the local nobility for now and celebrates his son’s wedding with Princess Maria Dolgorukova. But soon Mikhail’s young wife dies (1625). What caused the death of this Rurikovna is not known. But it is known that several more times the Dolgorukovs-Dolgorukies will try, with the help of their women, to get close to the Romanov throne, but these attempts will not be successful either for the bride of Peter II (1715-1730) or for the favorites of Alexander II (1818-1881). Finally, ambitions were temporarily abandoned, and the humble noblewoman Evdokia Streshneva (d. 1645) became Mikhail’s wife. She bore him a dozen children, but only three daughters and a son, the future Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (1629-1676), survived.

After a short time, the Romanovs took an oath of allegiance to Vladislav. He grew up and did not want to recognize as king a man who was formally his subject. In 1632, a war began that cost Muscovy the Smolensk and Chernigov-Seversk lands. But in 1634, King Vladislav nevertheless renounced his claims to the Moscow throne and recognized Michael as king.

The last years of Mikhail Fedorovich's reign were overshadowed by a difficult internal political conflict. The documents brought to us information about a certain conspiracy, the exposure of which led to a long court case and repression. The queen fell ill, and two princes died one after another. And finally, another attempt to establish close relations with Europe failed. Mikhail Fedorovich wanted to pass off as a European eldest daughter Irina (1627-1679). This time the king even agreed to the illegitimate royal son of the Danish king Christian IV - Voldemar (1622-1697). This twenty-year-old youth bore the title of Count of Schleswig-Holstein. But the wedding did not take place. The Church, continuing to play the role of a “monopolist” in the sphere of ideology, did not want the princess to marry a non-Orthodox prince. The Church was a force and owned lands and serfs. The prince, in turn, did not want to give in and did not want to change his faith. The conflict dragged on. The young man actually found himself in Muscovite captivity. He was released and released to his homeland only after the accession of Alexei Mikhailovich.

In 1645, Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich died. The king hardly died satisfied, because he left his young son to the mercy of fate, as they say. But this same fate was favorable to the Romanov dynasty for almost three hundred years, and already the great grandson Peter brilliantly continued the policies of his father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and led his state onto the path of greatness...

Partner news

The Zemsky Sobor, convened in January 1613 (there were representatives from 50 cities and the clergy) immediately decided: a non-Christian should not be elected to the throne. There were many claimants to the throne worthy people. However, out of everyone, they chose 16-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov, who was not even in Moscow at that moment. But the former Tush residents and Cossacks stood up for him especially zealously and even aggressively. The participants of the Zemsky Sobor were afraid of the latter - everyone knew the irrepressible power of the Cossack freemen. Another candidate for king, one of the leaders of the militia, Prince D.T. Trubetskoy, tried to please the Cossacks and gain their support. He arranged rich feasts for them, but received nothing but ridicule from them in return. The Cossacks, who boldly walked around Moscow in armed crowds, looked at Mikhail Romanov as the son of the “Tushino patriarch” Filaret, who was close to them, and believed that he would be obedient to their leaders. However, Mikhail was also suitable for many other people - Russian society longed for peace, certainty and mercy. Everyone remembered that Mikhail came from the family of the first wife of Ivan the Terrible, Anastasia, the “blueberry,” revered for her kindness.

The zemstvo people made the decision to elect Mikhail on February 7, and on February 21, 1613, after a solemn procession through the Kremlin and a prayer service in the Assumption Cathedral, Mikhail was officially elected to the throne. The Council sent a deputation to Kostroma to visit Mikhail. Those sent on behalf of the whole earth called the young man to the kingdom.

By the time the deputation arrived in Kostroma, Mikhail and his mother, nun Martha, lived in the Ipatiev Monastery. Here, on April 14, 1613, a meeting of the Moscow delegation with Martha and Mikhail took place. The king's mother did not agree for a long time to let her son become king. Martha can be understood: the country was in a terrible situation, and the mother, knowing the fate of Mikhail’s predecessors, was worried about the future of her foolish 16-year-old son. But the deputation begged Marfa Ivanovna so fervently that she finally gave her consent, and on May 2, 1613, Mikhail Fedorovich entered Moscow and was crowned king on July 1st.