Grand Duke of Moscow and All Rus' (1505-1533).
Vasily III Ivanovich was born on March 25, 1479. He was the son of the Grand Duke (1440-1505) and. The father sought to transfer full power to his son from his first marriage, Ivan Ivanovich the Young, and back in 1470 he declared him his co-ruler, but he died in 1490.
The ensuing struggle to determine the future heir to the throne ended in the victory of Vasily Ivanovich. First, he was declared the Grand Duke of Novgorod and Pskov, and in 1502 - the Grand Duke of Moscow and Vladimir and All Rus', autocrat, that is, he became his father’s co-ruler.
After his death in October 1505, Vasily III Ivanovich unhinderedly ascended the throne, receiving, according to his father’s will, the Great Reign of Moscow, the right to manage the capital and all its income, the right to mint coins, 66 cities and the title of “Sovereign of All Rus'.”
Having become the head of state, Vasily III Ivanovich continued his father’s policy - “gathering lands,” strengthening the grand-ducal power and defending the interests of Orthodoxy in Western Rus'. From the very beginning, he energetically fought for the centralization of the state, under him the last semi-independent Russian lands were annexed - (1510), Volotsky inheritance (1513), (1514), Ryazan (1521), Starodub and Novgorod-Seversky (1522) principalities.
In foreign policy Vasily III Ivanovich, in addition to the fight for Russian lands, also waged periodic wars with the Tatars of the Crimean and Kazan Khanates, who raided. The Grand Duke's diplomatic method to protect himself from attacks was to invite Tatar princes to Moscow service, who received vast lands.
In relation to more distant countries, he pursued as friendly a policy as possible. Vasily III Ivanovich negotiated with Prussia, inviting it to an alliance against Lithuania and Livonia; received the ambassadors of Denmark, Sweden, Turkey, and the Hindu Sultan Babur. He discussed with the Pope the possibility of union and war against Turkey. Trade relations were connected with Italy, France and Austria.
In his domestic policy Vasily III Ivanovich, to strengthen the autocracy, fought against the noble boyars and feudal opposition. For speaking out against the policies of the Grand Duke, many boyars and princes, and even Metropolitan Varlaam, fell into disgrace over the years. Vasily III Ivanovich took measures to remove the remnants of appanage rule to new places. The result of this policy was the rapid growth of local noble land ownership, the limitation of the immunity and privileges of the princely-boyar aristocracy.
Also, Vasily III Ivanovich pushed the boyars away from participating in solving state issues. “Councils” with the boyar duma during his reign were mainly of a formal nature: all matters were decided personally by the Grand Duke or in contact with a few trusted people. However, the strength of tradition was such that the tsar had to appoint representatives of the boyars to significant positions in the army and administration.
The reign of Vasily III Ivanovich was also marked by the rise of Russian culture, the spread of the Moscow style of literary writing, which took a leading place among other regional literatures. At the same time, the architectural appearance of the Moscow Kremlin took shape, which turned into a well-fortified fortress.
Vasily III Ivanovich was married twice. His first marriage took place back in 1505. His wife then became the boyar's daughter Solomonia Saburova. Since this marriage was fruitless, Vasily III Ivanovich, despite the protests of the church, obtained a divorce in 1525. His second wife was the princess, whom he married in 1526. In this marriage were born the sons Ivan (future) and the feeble-minded Yuri.
Grand Duke Vasily III Ivanovich died on December 3, 1533. He was buried in the Archangel Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. The dying prince declared the three-year-old to be his heir under the regency of Elena Glinskaya.
With the elevation of Daniel to the rank of Metropolitan of Moscow, one could expect that Josephiteism would finally establish itself in Muscovy. And indeed, Daniel soon eliminated his main opponents. When a vacancy arose for one or another important position in the church administration, Daniel appointed a Josephite. It must be agreed that he knew how to select qualified assistants, and some of his appointments were quite successful. It was Daniel who elevated Macarius to the rank of Archbishop of Novgorod in 1526. Macarius proved himself to be one of the enlightened Russian clergy, and he was to play an important role in the first half of the reign of Ivan the Terrible. Daniil supported Vasily's autocracy different ways and increased the subordination of the Russian church to the power of the Grand Duke. In turn, Vasily III was forced to renounce his claims to church lands.
Since church lands were not subject to confiscation into the local fund, Vasily III had no choice but to convert part of the state (black) lands to estates, although he took advantage of every opportunity to expand the fund state land through annexation, as was the case with Pskov and Ryazan. By 1523, Vasily also managed to annex the Seversk land. Two Seversk princes, descendants of former enemies of Vasily II - Vasily Shemyachich Novgorod-Seversky and Vasily Starodussky, grandson of Ivan Mozhaisky - recognized the dominance of Ivan III in 1500 and were left in the Seversk land as appanage princes. They hated each other and plotted against each other. Vasily Starodubsky died around 1518, and his inheritance went to Moscow. In 1523 Grand Duke Vasily III called Prince Vasily Shemyachich to Moscow for explanations, since he was suspected of a secret connection with King Sigismund. Shemyachich was afraid to appear in Moscow, but Metropolitan Daniel vouched for his safety by swearing an oath on the icon of the Mother of God. At first Shemyachich was well received in Moscow, but was soon arrested and imprisoned. There he died six years later, and his inheritance was included in the Moscow lands.
Daniil did not defend Shemyachich, which outraged many Russians, especially those who followed the commandments of Nil Sorsky. Grand Duke Vasily, however, was pleased with Daniel's actions, or rather the lack of any actions. Soon Daniil helped Vasily with his family affairs. As already mentioned, Vasily was upset by the infertility of his wife Solomonia (née Saburova). Solomonia was a kind and virtuous woman, and Vasily was pleased with everything, except for the lack of heirs. For Vasily III, this was not only a family matter, but also a state matter. If he had died childless, his brother Yuri would have succeeded him, and Vasily did not trust Yuri; to be more precise, he despised it.
Leading Moscow boyars, guided by state considerations, supported Vasily III's decision to divorce Solomonia and marry again. The whole matter now depended on the metropolitan, without whose permission Vasily III could not begin the divorce process. Divorce in such a case was contrary to the gospel commandments and the customs of the Greek Orthodox Church. At first, Daniel was hesitant to give permission for divorce. Probably under the influence of Maximus the Greek, he advised Basil III to consult with the eastern patriarchs and the monks of Mount Athos. This was done, but Vasily did not receive a positive answer. Then Daniel finally gave permission for the divorce. On November 28, 1525, Solomonia, despite her protests, was tonsured as a nun under the name Sophia and sent to the Intercession Monastery in Suzdal. Soon after this, Daniel blessed Vasily’s second marriage with the young princess Elena Glinskaya and himself performed the service on the wedding day, January 21, 1526.
Daniel's complicity in the divorce and remarriage of Vasily III caused the indignation of many prominent Russian people, especially opponents of Vasily III and Josephiteness. In one of the editions of the Pskov Chronicle, Vasily’s second marriage is called adultery. This was also the opinion of Vassian Patrikeev. Maxim the Greek also believed that divorce and new marriage were illegal from a church point of view. Some boyars, including Prince Semyon Fedorovich Kurbsky and Ivan Nikitich Bersen-Beklemishev (who had long been out of favor with the Grand Duke), sharply criticized both the Metropolitan and the Grand Duke.
Most of those who opposed Vasily's divorce and remarriage were punished in one way or another under various pretexts. Prince Kurbsky fell into disgrace and died out of favor in 1527. Bersen-Beklemishev was accused of insulting the Grand Duke and in February 1525, together with his friend, was taken into custody and tortured. Bersen was sentenced to death, and his friend the clerk was sentenced to have his tongue cut out. Bersen was a friend of Maxim the Greek and often visited him. This circumstance was revealed during the trial of Bersen, and Maxim was summoned to testify before a special council, which was presided over by the Grand Duke himself, and which included not only bishops and monks, but also boyars.
The religious and political views of Maxim the Greek will be discussed in another volume. Here it would be useful to say a few words about his position in Rus' before 1525. At one time, he was invited to Moscow with a proposal to translate interpretations of psalms and some other Greek works, as well as to refute the heresy of the Judaizers. Maxim believed that his mission was only temporary. The problem was that when he left Mount Athos, he knew neither Slavic (used by the Russians in their church books) nor Russian. He immediately set about learning both languages. Since he was a good linguist (who knew Greek and Latin perfectly), this task was not too difficult, but, naturally, it took time. Two Russian scientists, including Dmitry Gerasimov, were assigned to work with Maxim. They didn't know Greek; Thus, Maxim was forced to translate the original Greek text into Latin, and Gerasimov and his colleague were already translating it into Russian. Later, Maxim could independently translate directly from Greek into Russian. Of course, errors in translation were inevitable, and in the end these errors became the reason for the Josephites to attack him.
Maxim was received by Metropolitan Varlaam with great respect. Under the influence of Varlaam, Vasily III also initially treated him favorably; The Greek was looked upon as a major reformer, a scientist and a talented person, who was called upon to give advice to the sovereign and metropolitan on how to build an ideal state and society. Maxim’s spiritual and ethical views on Christianity were consonant with the views of the Trans-Volga elders (we should not forget that the roots of the spirituality of Nil Sorsky also went back to the wisdom of the learned monks of Mount Athos). Followers of non-covetous people, such as Varlaam and Vassian Patrikeev, were better able to understand and appreciate Maximus than the Josephites. Therefore, it is quite natural that Vassian Patrikeev and his friends became close friends with Maxim and began to visit him often. Most of Maxim’s conversations with guests were of a religious nature, but sometimes, especially in conversations with the disgraced boyar Bersen-Beklemishev, political issues were also raised. Maxim himself was ready to wholeheartedly support those who opposed the right of monasteries to own land.
As soon as Varlaam was removed from the Moscow throne and Daniel became metropolitan, opponents of monastic property lost their influence at the grand ducal court. At first, Daniel was tolerant of Maxim, respecting his learning, but soon his attitude changed, and after the trial of Bersen, he decided to take on Maxim as well.
At the council of 1525, Maxim was accused of sharply criticizing Russian church books, praising the authority of the Patriarch of Constantinople, and making some dogmatic errors. The last accusation arose due to the fact that Maxim, when writing in Slavic, sometimes made mistakes and was misunderstood. As for the authority of the Patriarch of Constantinople, Maxim never hid his opinion that the Metropolitan of Moscow needed a blessing from the patriarch. Maxim considered himself a member of the Greek Church, and not subordinate to the authorities of the Russian Church. Maxim was given a severe punishment. He was imprisoned in the Volotsk monastery “for repentance and correction”; he was forbidden to teach anyone, write anything, or correspond with anyone.
In prison, Maxim experienced severe physical and spiritual suffering. Despite the harsh regime, he managed to write several letters in which he defended himself and sharply attacked the shortcomings of the Russian church hierarchy. This became known to Daniel, and in 1531 Maxim once again appeared in court. This time, part of the accusations against him were of a political nature. Based on friendship with the Turkish envoy, the Greek Skinder, who had already died by that time (1530), Maxim was accused of sympathizing with the Turks. In addition, Maxim was found guilty of blasphemy and distortion of Scripture, and on this basis he was forbidden to receive Holy Communion, which was a severe blow for him. He was transferred from Volok to the Otroch Monastery in Tver. The Bishop of Tver had previously been a monk of the Volotsk Monastery, and Daniel could be sure that no favor would be shown to Maxim.
Having decided the fate of Maxim, the council of 1531 moved on to consider the “so-called” crimes of Vassian Patrikeev. In particular, Metropolitan Daniel accused him of following the doctrines of pre-Christian Greek philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato. Daniel's anger was also aroused by Vassian's heated polemic with the Josephites on the issue of the monastery land. Moreover, Vassian expressed doubts about the proposed canonization of Metropolitan Jonah and Macarius of Kalyazin, each of whom was to be officially canonized in 1547. In a number of his writings, Vassian expressed certain unorthodox views, especially on the divine nature of the body of Christ. This made it possible for Daniel to declare Vassian a follower of the heresy of Eutyches and Dioscorus, that is, a Monophysite and a Manichaeist. The council recognized Vassian as a heretic and sentenced him to imprisonment in the Volotsk monastery. There, the convict was thrown into the same prison cell that had previously been occupied by Maxim the Greek, who was now in Tver. Vassian was imprisoned in a monastery indefinitely, and the date of his death is unknown to us. This probably happened around 1532. The famous opponent of Ivan the Terrible, Andrei Mikhailovich Kurbsky, says that Vassian, on the orders of Vasily III, was “soon starved to death” by the Volotsk monks. Kurbsky may have been mistaken regarding the causes of Vassian's death, but the fact that Vassian died "shortly" after arriving in Volok seems plausible.
The remarriage of Vasily III entailed many religious, political, dynastic and psychological changes. From a religious and political point of view, Vasily broke with many people close to him. Among these people, as we know, were the spiritual luminary of Orthodox Christianity Maxim the Greek and the seeker of religious truth Vassian Patrikeev. However, the boyar duma, like the majority of the boyars in general, continued to support the general policy of Vasily III. The position of the boyar council remained the same. The uncle of the new Grand Duchess Elena - Prince Mikhail Lvovich Glinsky - was soon forgiven by Vasily, returned and became an important figure at the Grand Duke's court. In the Duma, Glinsky occupied third place after Prince Belsky and Prince Shuisky.
In 1526, the West again tried to reconcile Moscow with Lithuania. An envoy from Emperor Charles V went to Moscow, accompanied by Baron Herberstein as a representative of his brother, King Ferdinand. The pope also sent his legate. This time, Western mediation in the Moscow-Lithuanian conflict was partly successful, and the truce was extended for another six years, provided that Smolensk remained under Moscow’s rule.
The Crimean Tatars raided the Moscow border regions several times, but each time they were repulsed. However, they managed to cause Moscow a lot of trouble. Moscow's position in relation to the Kazan Khanate was greatly strengthened thanks to the construction of a new Russian fortress - approximately halfway between Nizhny Novgorod and Kazan on the right bank of the Volga at the mouth of the Sura River, a tributary of the Volga (1522). The fortress, known as Vasilsursk (in honor of Vasily), served as an outpost in further Russian campaigns against Kazan. In 15321, the Kazan people agreed that Vasily III would choose a new khan for them, provided that it would not be Shah Ali. Vasily sent Shah-Ali’s brother, the Kasimov prince Yan-Ali (Enalei), to Kazan. Thus, Muscovite suzerainty over Kazan was restored.
From a dynastic point of view, the second marriage of Vasily III solved the problem of succession to the throne. On August 25, 1530, Grand Duchess Elena gave birth to her first son, baptized under the name Ivan; he will become the future Tsar of Rus' - Ivan the Terrible. Three years later on. Another prince appeared - Yuri. The birth of Ivan greatly strengthened Vasily’s spirit and gave him confidence in his decisions, both family and political issues. Now he agreed to the marriage of his younger brother, Prince Andrei Staritsky, with Princess Euphrosyne Khovanskaya, who turned out to be a very ambitious woman. (The Khovansky princes were descendants of Gediminas). The wedding of Andrei and Euphrosyne took place on February 22, 1533.
For Vasily, the birth of a son, contrary to the opinion of those who criticized his second marriage, was a sign of the Lord's mercy, and this made him more courageous in dealing with his opponents. In 1531, he mercilessly destroyed both Vassian Patrikeev and Maxim the Greek.
At the time of his remarriage, Vasily III was forty-seven years old, and his bride Elena was a young girl. In all likelihood, Vasily was passionately in love with her; next to her he felt younger and sought to match his wife. Elena spent her youth in Lithuania and absorbed many concepts and customs of Western civilization and the Western way of life. Vasily III began to follow some Western customs. He began to shave his beard, which went against the long-standing Moscow tradition. To the modern reader this may seem an insignificant fact, in view of the extreme conservatism of the Moscow way of life in In the 16th century this had a symbolic meaning.We should not forget that Peter The great one began era of his fundamental reforms from the fact that in 1698 he began to personally cut the beards of Russian nobles.
Vasily III liked to communicate with Western people, especially doctors and engineers. The way of life in the West was closely related to religion. For Russians of that time - and not only for Russians - religion was the core of culture. Vassian, taught by the bitter experience of Maximus the Greek, largely succumbed to Western influence. It was precisely during the time of Basil III that the power of the Roman Catholic Church in Europe ceased to be monolithic, and Protestantism raised its head. The Master of the Teutonic Order became a Lutheran and in 1525 founded a new secular state - Prussia. The new Protestant state sought to influence relations between Moscow and Poland, thus religious changes in Prussia influenced international politics in a certain way. However, for some time, Protestantism in Rus' did not have much significance - Roman Catholicism remained the symbol of the West. All the time that Vasily III was in power, the pope hoped to convert Rus' to the “Roman faith.” He was disappointed, but there is no doubt that Vasily and some Russians from his circle favorably perceived Western teaching, in the form in which it was presented by Catholics, although they were not ready to convert to Catholicism.
Vasily’s favorite doctor was a German from Lübeck, Nikolai Bulev. In Russian sources he is called "Nikolai Nemchin" or "Nikolai Latinets" (i.e., Roman Catholic). Nikolai spent many years in Rus' and excelled in the Russian language. He was a man of lively mind and was interested not only in medicine, but also in astronomy and astrology. As for religion, he advocated a union between the Eastern and Western churches. He expressed his views in letters to many influential Russians and conversations with boyars and clergy. Among his admirers was the Latin-speaking boyar Fyodor Karpov, whom we can call the Russian “Westernizer” of the 16th century (in terms of the history of Russian intellectual life of the 19th century). In short, Nikolai Bulev became a popular figure among the Russian intellectual elite of the time of Vasily III. We can judge the opinions of Nikolai Bulev practically only by the statements of his opponents - Maxim the Greek and Filofey from Pskov.
On September 21, 1533, Vasily III, together with his wife and two children, went as a pilgrim to the Sergius Trinity Monastery. From there Vasily went to Volok to hunt, but soon fell ill. His illness began with an abscess on his left thigh, which soon began to grow alarmingly and caused inflammation. At first, Vasily demanded that his illness and blood poisoning be kept secret. He summoned only his doctors and several boyars to Volok. When Nikolai Bulev arrived, Vasily told him: “Brother Nikolai! You know about my great mercy towards you. Can not! Will you do something, use some medicine to alleviate my illness?” The doctor replied: “Sir, I know about your mercy towards me. If it were possible, I would cripple my own body to help you, but I don’t know of any karst for you, except for the Lord’s help.”
Face to face with impending death, Vasily III showed great fortitude. He told those around him: “Bral Nikolai was right when he called my illness incurable. Now I need to think about how to save my soul." Before his death, Vasily III wanted to secure the throne for his son Ivan and take monastic vows. He was transported to Moscow, where his wife and children, his brothers, Metropolitan Daniel and many boyars gathered in the Grand Duke's palace. Daniil and the top boyars were unanimous in recognizing Ivan as heir to the throne and pledged to proclaim him the new Grand Duke as soon as Vasily III died. However, Vasily III’s desire to become a monk before his death caused protest among many. This confusing situation was resolved by Metropolitan Daniel, and Vasily, who was in a semi-conscious state, was tonsured) by the monks. He died on December 3, 1533.
Thus, the three-year-old boy Ivan became the sovereign of All Rus'. Until he comes of age, he should rule the country. a regency consisting of Grand Duchess Elena, Metropolitan Daniel and leading boyars. This reign could be successful if the regents agreed and cooperated. But the agreement did not last long, then discord began, which was destined to have a painful impact not only on the boy Ivan, but also on the stability of Great Rus'.
On June 20, 1605, the second tsar from the Godunov dynasty, Fyodor Borisovich, was killed, and the war began.And 100 years before that, on September 4, 1505, Grand Duke Vasily III married Solomonia Yuryevna Saburova. Thanks to this union, Russia avoided a change in the ruling dynasty and unrest, which could have begun a century earlier than it did. But what do we know about this?
Very often, if people do something evil, we do not skimp on our words towards them. But if a person did something good or refrained from evil, we sometimes do not appreciate it, we do not know how to be grateful to his memory. This is precisely the fate of the Grand Duchess Solomonia, who saved our autocracy from the approaching storm.
At baptism, Solomonia Yurievna Saburova received the name in honor of the heroine of the Israeli people - the mother of the seven Maccabean martyrs, whose feat prompted the Jews to rebel against Antiochus Epiphanes, who desecrated the Temple of Solomon. Solomonia was the daughter of Yuri Konstantinovich Saburov and the great-granddaughter of Fyodor Sabur. Her close relatives served in Veliky Novgorod, which shortly before was annexed to Moscow by Ivan III. His father was a scribe of the Novgorod land (compiler of the oldest Novgorod scribe books), and his brother Ivan Yuryevich was a Novgorod butler.
In 1505, her father gave Solomonia in marriage to the heir to the Russian throne - Prince Vasily Ivanovich, the future Vasily III. In the same year, Grand Duke Ivan III died and Vasily Ivanovich became the ruler of the Russian land, and Solomonia became the Grand Duchess.
There is a legend that Ivan III, having decided to marry his son Vasily, went to ask for advice at the grave of his great-grandmother, the wife of Dmitry Donskoy, whose husband was saved by Fyodor Sabur. During the prayer, in front of the Grand Duke, the candle bent in the shape of the letter “C”, and the Grand Duke understood the answer to his prayer as follows: “we need our own, Russian, Saburova”...
Such a choice was not accidental and was possible because the Rurikovichs treated the Saburovs very favorably. When the grandson of Dmitry Donskoy Ivan III, after the death of his parents - Vasily II the Dark and Sofia Vitovtovna, gave several villages to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery - in commemoration of their souls, the day of special commemoration of the parents was determined to be November 14. This is the day of the Holy Apostle Philip and the Hieromartyr Hypatius - the patrons of the boyar Zechariah Chet, all his descendants and the Ipatiev Monastery: “Food for the great princes. Pominati Grand Duchess Sofia of Grand Duke Vasily...". This day could have been chosen in memory of how Dmitry Donskoy, during the Tatar raid, hid with his family in the Saburov family monastery -. It is not surprising, therefore, that Ivan III chose the great-granddaughter of Fyodor Sabur as his wife for his son.
In the same year, another wedding took place, cementing the union of the Rurikovichs and the Saburovs: Solomonia’s sister Maria Yuryevna married Prince Vasily Semenovich Starodubsky, also the great-great-grandson of Dmitry Donskoy. And their father, Yuri Konstantinovich, was granted a boyar status.
The marriage of Vasily Ivanovich and Solomonia Yuryevna was formalized in Byzantine traditions - Solomonia was chosen from 500 girls at a show of brides gathered in Moscow for such an occasion: it was ordered to “announce in all parts of your state so that - regardless of nobility or blood, but only for beauty - the most beautiful girls were found, and in pursuance of this decree, more than 500 girls were chosen and brought to the city; Of these, 300 were selected, then 200, and finally reduced to 10, which were examined by midwives with all possible attention, in order to make sure whether they were really girls and whether they were capable of giving birth to children and whether they had any defect - and finally, from these 10 there was wife chosen." It is interesting that Ivan the Terrible would subsequently do exactly the same thing: in 1571 he would hold a viewing of brides, at which he would choose Marfa Sobakina as his wife, and Evdokia Saburova for his son Ivan. Thus, the pre-made choice of a bride from the Saburov family was twice staged as a magnificent celebration.
During her marriage with the Grand Duke, the name of Solomonia is mentioned three times in the chronicles: first in connection with the move of the Grand Duke's family to a new courtyard near the Church of the Annunciation in the Kremlin (May 7, 1508 - it was on this day that the Monk Nil of Sorsky passed away), then in connection with traveling together with the Grand Duke on an autumn tour of the Russian land (September 8, 1511 - at Christmas Holy Mother of God and on the day in which Fyodor Sabur became famous) and in connection with the burial of Vasily III's brother, Prince Semyon Ivanovich (June 28, 1518). Thus, the Grand Duchess took an active part in the life of her husband. It is known that there was correspondence between them, which, unfortunately, has not survived. In addition, we again see that many events in the life of the family were timed to coincide with memorable dates.
Samples of Russian facial embroidery have survived to this day - amazing multi-figure compositions by Solomonia herself: the veil “Appearance” Mother of God St. Sergius" with holidays and "St. Kirill of Belozersky with his life." Single-figure compositions have also been preserved: the shrouds “Our Lady of Petrovskaya” and “Metropolitan Peter” (let me remind you that, like the Saburovs, the saint was of Galician-Volyn origin and, according to legend, his fate is closely connected with them), “Reverend Sergius of Radonezh”, “ Venerable Kirill of Belozersky”, “Venerable Paphnutius of Borovsky”, “Venerable Leonty of Rostov”, “Venerable Euphrosyne of Suzdal”. Last work speaks of the attention of the grand ducal couple to Suzdal shrines and monasteries - in 1509 Vasily III visited the Suzdal Intercession Monastery and began stone construction here. By 1518, the Gate Church of the Annunciation, the Church of the Origin of the Precious Tree of the Holy Cross and the Intercession Cathedral were built, which have survived to this day.
Along with works that came out of the workshops of other descendants of Zakharia Chet - the Saburovs, Godunovs and Peshkovs, facial embroidery from the workshop of Grand Duchess Solomonia is constantly mentioned in the works of art historians - as the most striking example of Russian art of the 16th century.
Several icons of this century are known with images of the patrons of the grand ducal family - the martyr Solomonia, Basil of Paria and Basil the Great. This is the icon “Basily the Great and Grand Duke Vasily”, thanks to which we know what Solomonia’s husband looked like - he is depicted in full height opposite the saint. This is the icon of the Maccabee Brothers, their teacher Eleazar and their mother Solomonia, which is the contribution of the grand ducal house to one of the monasteries. And finally, this is the image of “Our Lady of Vladimir with Basil the Great and Solomonia,” which belonged to the Saburov family.As for the last icon, this copy of the famous miraculous icon was made on the highest level, probably a royal icon painter who turned directly to the 12th century icon ( Vladimir icon The Mother of God was preserved in its original form until 1514, without renovations). In the 17th century, in memory of the family union of Basil and Solomonia, Saints Basil and Solomonia were depicted on the margins of the icon, and in the 19th century, the inscription was written on the back of the image: “1508 [year]. From the clan of boyars, Grand Duchess Solomonia passed into the Denisov clan, from the Denisov clan to the Koshutin clan.”
It can be assumed that we are not talking about the Denisovs, but about the Denisyevs (the inscription was probably made by a representative of the Koshutin family, who could distort the surname) - two ancient families of the Denisyevs are known, one of which comes from Grigory Mikhailovich Denisyev, mentioned at the wedding of the sister of Vasily III Feodosia and Prince Vasily Danilovich Kholmsky (1500). Probably, the Saburovs and Denisyevs also became related through marriage.
Divorce case
Grand Duke Vasily and Grand Duchess Solomonia lived in marriage for 19 years, but they had no offspring. This prompted them to intensely pray for the gift of offspring: thus, on the already mentioned shroud of 1525, “The Appearance of the Mother of God to St. Sergius,” donated by the couple to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery, images of “The Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary” and “The Conception of John the Baptist” were embroidered with the inscription: “Lord have mercy on the blessed Grand Duke Vasily Ivanovich, Sovereign of All Russia and his blessed Grand Duchess Solomonia and their cities, may the Lord give them the fruit of the womb.”
This sadness of the grand ducal couple is poetically reflected in the chronicle - it is based on “Jacob’s Tale of the Birth of Mary,” a well-known non-canonical work that tells about Joachim and Anna, who had no children for a long time, and about their joy in connection with the birth of Mary, the future Mother of God . In the same 1525, “the Great Prince, the king of all Russia, went on a detour; Let him go quickly into gilded chariots and armourers with him, as befits a king; and looked up to the sky and saw a bird's nest on a tree, and made great weeping and sobbing, saying within yourself: Be cruel to me, to whom I am likened; I am not like the birds of the air, for the birds of the sky are fertile, nor the beasts of the earth, for the beasts of the earth are fertile, I am not like anyone else, nor the waters, for the waters are fertile, for the waves comfort them and the fish mock them (that is, having fun. - CHALK.); and despite the earth and saying: Lord, I am not like this earth, for the earth bears its fruit for all time, and bless you, Lord.”
It is important to note that five years later, in exactly the same terms, the chronicler will describe the sadness of Vasily III regarding his second childless marriage. Thus, speaking about which of the spouses was the cause of childlessness, we must understand that Rurikovich could also be the “culprit”.
In the “Tale of the tonsure of the Grand Duchess Solomonida” it is said that she wanted monastic tonsure: “In the summer of 7034, the blessed Grand Duchess Solomonida, seeing the barrenness of her womb, like Sarah of old, began to pray to the sovereign Grand Duke, that he would command her to be clothed into a monastic image." A striking detail: Solomonia is constantly compared either with Abraham’s wife Sarah or with the righteous Anna, but both of them, after many years of barren marriage, brought offspring!
The Grand Duke did not agree with the proposal of his dear wife for a long time, not wanting to part with her. But when Solomonia turned to the metropolitan and he supported her, he still agreed. The Grand Duchess wanted the family of Vasily III to continue, and even without an heir, his position was shaky, and this could lead to the suppression of the Rurik dynasty or, at least, to a struggle for power: “The Tsar and Sovereign of All Russia does not want to do his will.” , began to say: “How can I ruin a marriage? If I do this, the second one won’t be able to buy anything”... The Grand Duchess, seeing the sovereign’s adamantness in her prayer, began to pray... the Metropolitan of All Russia, may he beg the sovereign for this and do the will of her being... His Holiness... the Metropolitan of All Russia, prayer Do not despise her tears, praying a lot for this to the sovereign with all the sacred host, may he command her will to be. The Tsar and Sovereign of All Russia, seeing her unshakable faith... commanded her will to be done. The blessed Grand Duchess, having enjoyed the honeycomb of the bees from the royal lips, joyfully departs to the monastery... and she cuts off the hair of her head from her spiritual father, the Nikolsky Abbot David. And her name for the rank of Mnishe was called Sophia.” This happened on November 28th.
Let's take a closer look at what name Solomonia took when she was tonsured, where it happened and who tonsured her.
Saint Sophia is not commemorated either on November 28, when her tonsure took place, or in the coming days. But let us remember that this was the name of the mother (Sofya Paleolog) and grandmother (Sofya Vitovtovna) of her husband, Vasily III. It is logical to assume that Solomonia took the name of the patron saint of one of her husband’s relatives when she was tonsured. This is supported by the fact that the Byzantine custom of viewing brides (during which Solomonia was chosen) was established in Rus' thanks to the Greeks Trachaniots - members of the retinue of Sophia Paleologus - and that the veil “Appearance of the Mother of God to St. Sergius” was embroidered by Solomonia based on a similar veil of Sophia Paleologus 1498 of the year. Thus, the choice of the name “Sophia” was a gesture designed to emphasize that even after tonsure, Solomonia-Sophia remained devoted to her husband and his cause.
This is supported by the choice of the monastery for tonsure: the Moscow monastery of St. Nicholas the Old was first mentioned in chronicles in 1390 - in connection with the arrival of Metropolitan Cyprian and the monks accompanying him to Moscow from Constantinople. It was in this monastery that the Metropolitan, preparing for a meeting with the Grand Duke, put on his bishop's vestments and from here procession headed to the Kremlin. Since ancient times, the monastery has been positioned as “Greek”. It was logical for Solomonia to take the name of her husband’s mother (Greek) in the “Greek” monastery. A little later, Tsar Ivan the Terrible assigned the St. Nicholas Monastery to Athonite monks.
It is even more interesting that the spiritual father and abbot of the monastery of St. Nicholas the Old was the Venerable David of Serpukhov - in the world Prince Daniil Vyazemsky, from the Rurikovichs († September 19, 1529). For more than 40 years he labored in the Borovsky monastery, but in 1515 he left this monastery to found a new monastery. The lands for him (20 kilometers from Serpukhov and 80 kilometers from Moscow) were provided by Prince Vasily Semenovich Starodubsky, the husband of Maria, the sister of the Grand Duchess. Having settled here, the Monk David set up cells, erected the first churches - in honor of the Ascension of the Lord with a chapel in honor of the Dormition of the Blessed Virgin Mary and a refectory in the name of St. Nicholas.
The Monk David was a spiritual child Venerable Paphnutius Borovsky and Joseph Volotsky. Since Paphnutius was a student of St. Nikita of Serpukhov, and he, in turn, was a child of St. Sergius of Radonezh, we can say that the Grand Duchess was the spiritual great-granddaughter of St. Sergius. The dedication becomes immediately clear Venerable Sergius and Paphnutia of the shrouds embroidered by Solomonia. Nothing was done without meaning!
The tonsure took place in the monastery of St. Nicholas the Old, and Sofia began to live in the Moscow monastery of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary on the Moat. However, she did not stay here for long - relatives and friends began to visit her often, wanting to express their support for her. All this distracted from the monastic feat, and she asked the Grand Duke for permission to go to the Intercession Monastery in Suzdal, which she knew very well and where she had been more than once before being tonsured: “The blessed Grand Duchess monk Sophia, seeing God, did not want her to remain: many from the nobles and from her relatives, and the princesses, and the noblewomen began to come to her, for the sake of visiting, and shed many tears, looking at her nudes. The God-loving Grand Duchess monk Sophia was overcome with great sorrow for this, and began to say: “If I had desired the glory of this world, I would have reigned together with the Tsar and Sovereign of All Rus', but today I wish to remain silent in private and pray to the All-Bountiful God for the sovereign’s health, and yes If only the Lord God had given me my great sin and received remission, but for the sake of my great sin God would not have given fruit to the sovereign and deprived all Orthodoxy of the state through my infertility? And they began to pray to the sovereign to command her to go to the monastery of the Most Pure Lady Mother of God of the Honorable Protection of the Protection in the God-saved city of Suzhdal. The great prince gave thanks for this to the Lord God, who gave her so much zeal and was amazed at the warmth of her faith, and soon commanded that being... This Christ-loving woman was not like Sarah, but Anna, the spouse of Jakim the God-father: Sarah, for the sake of barrenness, commanded to bring Hagar to Abraham, the rob Anna, by fasting and prayer, resolved the infertility, and conceived the Mother of God Mary in her womb and gave birth to the immaterial Light, the Queen.”In the same way - as a voluntary - tonsure is described in the chronicles: “In the summer of 7034, November 28, the Grand Duchess Solomoneya tonsured herself as a monk, for the sake of illness; and the great prince let her go to a nunnery in Suzdal”; “Great Prince Vasilei Ivanovich ordered his Grand Duchess Solomanida to be tonsured a monk and sent her to Suzdal to the monastery of the Intercession of the Most Pure Ones, to the maiden monastery, and she was tonsured in Moscow at the Nativity of the Most Pure Ones behind the cannon huts in the maiden monastery of St. Nicholas by the old abbot David”; “Great Prince Vasilei Ivanovich tonsured Grand Duchess Solomonia, on her advice, due to the burden of illness and childlessness; but he lived with her for 20 years, but there were no children.”
The fact that the decision to take the tonsure was meaningful and voluntary is supported by the following fact: for the tonsure Solomonia chose November 28 - the memory of the Venerable Martyr Stephen the New and the Martyr Irinarch. This date was celebrated in the Saburov family as memorable: in the Fodder Book of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, the Peshkov-Saburov family is commemorated precisely on November 28: “The Peshkov family. Remember Dimitri (Semenovich, cousin of Solomonia’s father. - CHALK.), Semion, Aquilina, John, Nicephorus (the last three men are Solomonia's second cousins. - CHALK.), Dominica, Demetrius, monk Sergius, monk Andreyan (Angelov, elder, cellarer of the Trinity-Sergius Monastery. - CHALK.). Their dachas [for the soul’s remembrance] are a patrimony in the Kolomensky district on the Moscow River, the village of Saburovo.”
It is amazing that the granddaughter of Solomonia's second cousin - the first wife of Tsarevich Ivan Ivanovich Evdokia Saburov, nun Alexander - passed away on the same day - November 28! This happened at the beginning of the 17th century (in 1614 or 1619).
 |
As we see, Solomonia’s voluntary tonsure, the Grand Duke’s grief over the dissolution of his marriage with her, and the blessing of the priesthood (including the disciple of St. Joseph of Volotsk, Metropolitan Daniel) for his remarriage to Elena Glinskaya are facts beyond doubt.
However, there were also opponents of this marriage.
The grandson of Yuri Patrikeevich, at whose wedding Fyodor Sabur uttered the famous “God in Kike,” was the monk prince Vassian (Patrikeev), a student of St. Nile of Sorsky. This is how his response to the Grand Duke is described in a 16th-century story: “Vasyan said to the great sovereign Sitsa: “I never... invented such a forgiveness as you ask from my unworthy lips. This is the question of Herodius of the only head of the Baptist” - that is: the desire to divorce his wife is similar to the act of the daughter of Herodias, who, having pleased the feasters with her dance, asked the king for the severed head of John the Baptist. “The Grand Duke Sovereign... conveys his thought to Elder Vasyan: “I want my Grand Duchess Solomonia to be separated from her first marriage for the sake of childlessness... And I want a second marriage, for the sake of childbearing, and so that the seed of our Vladimir ancestor is not exhausted.” And Vasyan answered the Grand Duke... in words, saying: “The Scripture, sir, writes: God has united, let not man separate... And if you separate your first marriage from yourself, and join the second, you are called an adulterer.”
The same assessment was given by the authors of the chronicles compiled in the Pskov and Novgorod lands, who were often very critical of Moscow: “The Great Prince Vasily Ioanovich tonsured his princess Solomoneya, and took Elena for himself; and all this is for our sin, as the apostle wrote: he lets his wife go, and marries another, commits adultery”; “Sovereign Prince Great Vasilei Ivanovich of All Rus' tonsured Grand Duchess Solomania as a monk and exiled him to Suzdal.”
Apart from Patrikeev, who had not found a common language with Vasily III for a long time, it is difficult to name other opponents of divorce. In Soviet times, when they wrote about this divorce, they came up with many imaginary opponents - for example, the Monk Maxim the Greek. But he was not at all against divorce. Soviet historians generally had little understanding of canonical issues and religious disputes. After all, the divorce of spouses due to childlessness and the desire of one of the spouses to become a monk was permitted by the Church. Another thing is that this was the first such example in Russian history.
It is much more interesting to pay attention to the “Inventory of the Tsar’s Archive of the 16th century,” in which “the tale of Yury Maly, and Stefanida Rezanka, and Ivan Yuryev’s son Saburov, and Mashka Korelenka, and others about the illness of the Grand Duchess Solomanida” was recorded. Of the cases mentioned in this inventory, only one has been preserved, which tells about the interrogation of Solomonia’s elder brother Ivan Yuryevich Saburov: “On the summer of November 7034, 23 days, Ivan said: the Grand Duchess told me: “There is a wife named Stefanida, a cutter, and now in Moscow, and you get it and come to me”; and Stefanida’s tongue was tried and... he sent her to the courtyard of the Grand Duchess with his wife and Nastya, and that Stefanida was with the Grand Duchess; and Nastya told me that Stefanida was slandering water and moistening the Grand Duchess with it, and she looked at her on her belly and said that the Grand Duchess would not have children, and after that the tongue came to the Grand Duchess and she told me: “... and she was slandering water to me Stefanida ordered me to wet myself so that the great prince loved me, and Stefanida told me to drink water in the washstand, and ordered me to wet myself with that water”... and the Grand Duchess unwrapped the shirt or cover, or some other dress of the Grand Duke, and from that washstand she wet it dress".
In addition to Stefanida, the Grand Duchess called on a certain Masha: “Yes, Ivan said: the Grand Duchess said to me, sir: “They told me the blueberry that she knows the children (and she herself is without a nose) and you get that blueberry” and then sent the blueberry to get it... and that blueberry said I don’t remember butter, I don’t remember unleavened honey, and she sent her to the Grand Duchess with Nastya, and told her to get rid of it so that the Grand Duke would love her, and share the children, and after that he went to the Grand Duchess came, and the Grand Duchess told me: “Nastya brought me some of the blueberry, and rubbed it with it.” Ivan had a hand in this memory.” On the back of the document there is a note: “Yes, Ivan said: what do you say to the gentleman, I won’t forget how many wives and men came to me about those matters.”
As can be seen from the case, “Stephanida the Ryazanka” and “Mashka the Karelka” are healers. “Yuri Maloy” is Yuri Dmitrievich Trakhaniot, a native of a family of Greeks who came to Russia with Sophia Paleologus. He is known as a confidant of the Russian sovereigns - for example, he was entrusted with such sensitive matters as the investigation of the betrayal of Vasily Shemyachich and the escape of Prince Ivan Ryazansky. In addition, he was part of the inner circle of St. Gennady of Novgorod, the creator of the first Russian Bible.
Solomonia's brother Ivan Yuryevich was also a prominent person at the sovereign's court - a kravchiy, whose duties included not only serving the sovereign at the table and sending out dishes from the royal table to nearby boyars, but also ensuring that through food and drink the sovereign and members of the Boyar Duma did not were poisoned - accidentally or on purpose. Kravchim were well-born, especially trusted people. Therefore, we have no reason not to trust the testimony of Ivan Yuryevich.
Those actions that Stefanida and Marya taught the Grand Duchess (giving her husband the spoken water to drink or moistening his clothes with this water) are a sin. In the 16th century, the following penances were imposed for him: according to one source, “it is a sin to wash yourself with milk or honey and give someone to drink mercy for.” Penance - 8 weeks, 100 bows per day"; according to another - “or she anointed herself with oil or honey and, having washed herself, gave someone something to drink or eat, creating magic, penance for a year, and 300 bows per day.” Considering that at that time, for some sins, many years of penance were imposed (thousands of prostrations a day for decades, with excommunication from communion), we can conclude: the Grand Duchess’s sin was not regarded as serious. This is also supported by the fact that he gave testimony brother Solomonia, who, without hiding, named his wife Anastasia. Of course, this sin was against the Grand Duke (although at the same time for him), but, as subsequent events show, the matter did not proceed.
It must be borne in mind that accusations of witchcraft and infertility were at that time a very popular weapon of political struggle. As an example, we can cite Prince Kurbsky, brave from afar - the “first dissident”. In “The History of the Grand Duke of Moscow,” he wrote about Vasily III exactly the same thing that Solomonia was accused of: “Old in the future, he was looking for evil enchanters from everywhere, so that they would help him to fruitfulness, because he did not want the ruler to be his brother after him, because he had brother Yury."
Solomonia became a nun on November 28, and her brother testified just three days earlier. Although Solomonia herself expressed the desire to go to the monastery, there were probably other circumstances. Vasily III tried to provide for an option with her disagreement. An inquiry was launched to find out how the Grand Duchess behaved in marriage. Such an investigation was also necessary in order to be sure that she would not be able to give birth to a child in the future.
If the testimony of Ivan Saburov corresponds to historical truth, then it must be assumed that Solomonia really used conspiracies as a means of conceiving a child.
In modern consciousness, the image of not only holy people, but even ordinary clergymen very easily collapses at the slightest hint of a sin committed by them. “How can the priest behave like this?”, “What kind of saint is he, because he did such and such?” - such questions are heard often. This is precisely a liberal, distorted view of the subject in question. Examples from Israeli, Byzantine, Russian and any other history suggest that, no matter how banal it may sound, the ministers of the Church of Christ are also people with their sins and weaknesses. Is it any wonder that they sometimes fell? After all, the main thing is not to fall, but to be able to rise.
The disciple and spiritual child of the Athonite and Optina elders, Konstantin Nikolaevich Leontyev (later the monk Clement) understood this very correctly: “Many of the saints, many of the martyrs, perhaps, were cunning in the moments of their fall; they were people; It is a sin to consider saints sinless. The Apostle Peter cheated out of fear and denied Christ for a moment.” This must be clearly understood before making a judgment on the evidence that Solomonia - the future Venerable Sophia of Suzdal - called upon healers for help.
The case of Yuri Tsarevich
Outside Russia, the unheard-of precedent of a prince’s divorce from his wife was perceived in a purely practical way - as an informational occasion that could be used in the fight against Russia.
In 1526, stunning news came from Suzdal to Moscow: in the monastery the Grand Duchess gave birth to a son, George (Yuri). The Austrian diplomat Sigismund Herberstein wrote that a rumor arose: Solomonia would soon be resolved. “This rumor was confirmed by two respectable women, the wives of the first advisers: the treasury guard Georgy Maly (Yuri Dmitrievich Trakhaniot. - CHALK.) and Yakov Mazur (bed-bed Yakov Ivanovich Mansurov. - CHALK.), - and they assured that they heard from the lips of Solomonia herself. Wanting to find out the matter with certainty, the Grand Duke sent “adviser Fyodor Rak (secretary Tretyak Mikhailovich Rakov) to Suzdal. - CHALK.) and a certain secretary Potat (secretary Grigory Nikitich the Lesser Putyatin. - M.E.-L.), instructing them to carefully investigate the veracity of this rumor... She, they say, answered them that they were unworthy to see the child... Some stubbornly denied that she gave birth. So, the rumor says two things about this incident.”On the one hand, foreigners were very fond of conveying precisely questions of an intimate nature in their writings about Russia - the more dubious and dirty, the better. Here, for example, is what Herberstein wrote (already in an affirmative tone) about the second wife of Vasily III, Elena Glinskaya: “...immediately after the death of the sovereign, his widow began to disgrace the royal bed with a certain [prince] nicknamed Sheepskin.”
On the other hand, we see that Herberstein’s first message mentions real historical figures: Yakov Mansurov, Fyodor Rakov, Grigory Putyatin, Yuri Trakhaniot. Moreover, the latter is mentioned in Russian archival sources as a person who was interviewed in connection with Solomonia’s infertility. All these persons are known as the sovereign’s trusted people on especially important matters.
Let's look at another foreign certificate. The famous historian of Russian life I.E. Zabelin owned the manuscript of the translation of “Moscow, or Russian, History” by the German Heydensthal. He quotes her in his “Home Life of Russian Queens”: “When rumors spread at court that the former Queen Solomeya was not idle in the monastery and would soon give birth, Tsar Vasily soon sent boyars and two noble ladies to directly examine Solomea. Solomeya, when she heard their arrival in Suzdal, was extremely afraid and went out into the church at the very altar and, holding the throne with her hand, stood, waiting for those sent to her; and when the boyars and ladies came to her, they asked her to come out of the altar to them. And she didn’t want to go out to them. And when they asked whether she had to be non-idle, she answered that I, with all my proper position and honor, was a queen and... in a short time I began to be non-idle from my husband Tsar Vasily Ivanovich and had already given birth to a son, George, who is now I have given him a guardian in a secret place until he grows old; and where he is now, I cannot tell you in any way, although in that I will accept death for myself. The boyars realized that she was untruthful, and the ladies, having examined her, that she had never been idle, returned to Moscow and told Tsar Vasily about everything, as if it was all a lie and a deception.”
Sophia's entry into the altar seems impossible. The great princes had this right, according to the 69th rule of the VI Ecumenical Council: “None of all those belonging to the category of laity? let him not be allowed to enter the sacred altar. But according to some ancient legend, this is by no means forbidden to the power and dignity of the king when he wants to bring gifts to the Creator.” But this does not apply to women. Although Byzantine empresses sometimes entered the altar, they were ordained deaconesses before that.
However, the main motive (the birth of his son George) is confirmed by the fact that all this “Nemchin Heidenstalus himself heard from the lips of one boyar’s daughter, who herself was among the girls at the royal review during the election of Sobakina.” The fact is that this review in 1571 was attended by Evdokia Saburova, whom Ivan the Terrible wooed for his son, as well as a close relative of the future Tsar Boris Godunov, Vasily Fedorovich, and his wife Pelageya. They could well be the sources of this information.
Indirect evidence in favor of the birth of George can be provided by a number of facts, which in themselves can be explained differently, but taken together are of significant interest.
Considering Orthodox posts and the tonsure of Solomonia on November 28, 1525, the birth of her child may occur in April 1526, when the memory of several Saint Georges is celebrated at once. This name could have been chosen either in honor of Solomonia’s father, Yuri Konstantinovich Sverchkov-Saburov, or, even more likely, according to family tradition Rurikovich.
The foundations of veneration in Rus' of the Holy Great Martyr George the Victorious and the name George (Yuri) were laid in the 11th century by Grand Duke Yaroslav-Yuri the Wise. Many famous Rurikovichs bore this name, including Yuri Dolgoruky. Gradually, a tradition took shape to name a newborn baby both in honor of the patron saint and in honor of an ancestor (or relative). Moreover, this was often done for two different purposes.
Firstly, the baby was given the name of that relative whose dynastic rights and clan seniority were disputed. For example, Vasily the Dark named his son Yuri the Elder (1437-1441) in honor of his great-uncle Yuri of Zvenigorod, from whom he disputed the rights to the Moscow Grand Reign. And when Yuri Vasilyevich died, he named his next son, Yuri the Young (1441-1472), in honor of both Yuri. Also, Ivan III named his son Yuri in honor of his brother, thereby “taking away” the fullness of dynastic rights from him.
Secondly, the Rurik fathers named their new children after the names of the children who died in infancy. So, Ivan the Terrible named his son Dmitry (1552-1553) in honor of his ancestor - Dmitry Donskoy, and when he died, he named in honor of both Dmitrievs - both Donskoy and his early deceased son - his other descendant - Tsarevich Dmitry of Uglich (1582-1591 ).
Based on this material, we can confidently say that the son of Vasily III and the nun Sophia, Yuri Vasilyevich, was named after his great-uncle, Yuri Vasilyevich Molodoy. Tsarevich Yuri did not live long, and by 1533 he was no longer alive, which allowed Vasily III to name his second son from Elena Glinskaya that way. Thus, Yuri Vasilyevich the Young (1533-1563) received not only the name of Yuri Vasilyevich the Elder (1526 - ca. 1533), but also his rights to the grand-ducal table.
As you can see, genealogical and onomastic studies give us additional indications of some facts in the biography of Solomonia’s son.
What else do we have?
The great princes (and not only them) had a custom of making a vow - to build a temple or monastery in honor of the birth of a son. Moreover, this was not necessarily done in the year the child was born. So, in 1531, Vasily III built the Church of the Beheading of John the Baptist in Stary Vagankovo, which was dedicated to the birth of his son Ivan in 1530.Didn't Vasily III build a temple in honor of the birth of his first-born son Solomonia? Indeed, in the Resurrection Chronicle we find mention of this: in April 1527, a church was erected at the Frolov Gate of the Moscow Kremlin in the name of the Holy Great Martyr George the Victorious. The famous sculpture of St. George (by Ermolin), which since 1464 has been on the Frolovskaya (now Spasskaya) tower of the Kremlin, was placed here.
A few days later - on May 7, 1526 - the Suzdal Intercession Monastery, in which the Venerable Sophia lived, received the village of Pavlovskoye, Suzdal district, as a gift: “Behold, the Great Prince Vasily Ivanovich of all Russia granted the Most Pure Protection of the Holy Theotokos to Abbess Ulyanea and all the sisters that are He granted them, gave them the Most Pure Protection of the Intercession in Suzhdal, his village of Pavlovskoe with villages and repairs ... "
And a few months after this, on September 19, nun Sofia herself was granted the village: “Behold, the Grand Duke Vasily Ivanovich of all Russia. I granted Elder Sophia in Suzdal my village of Vysheslavskoye with villages and repairs, with everything that came to that village and villages and repairs from the time of birth to her belly, and after her belly another village of Vysheslavskoye to the house of the most pure Protection of the Holy Virgin. Abbess Ulyana and all the sisters. Or according to her, another abbess will be in that monastery at the Intercession of the Holy Mother of God, for their good.”
Let us note: on May 7, 1508, the grand-ducal family moved to a new courtyard near the Church of the Annunciation in the Kremlin, and on the same day the Monk Nil of Sorsky passed away. And September 19 is the eve of the feast of the holy martyr Eustathius, Grand Duke Mikhail of Chernigov and his boyar Fyodor. It is on this day that the Saburov family is commemorated in the Fodder Book of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. It seems that this gift was specially timed to coincide with the holiday (as you know, the church day begins at 6 pm the previous day).
There is also evidence of the commemoration of Prince Yuri Vasilyevich for his repose. In the Fodder Book of the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery (a list of the Imperial Public Library, located in the collection of the 17th century) there is the following entry: “The month of January on the 1st day according to Prince Yurya Ivanovich, and according to Prince Yurya Vasilyevich, and according to Prince Ondriya Ivanovich, and according to the princess his Euphrosyne, in the other guild Evdokia, and by his son, Prince Volodymer Ovdrievich, and by his princess, Evdokia, and by his son, Prince Vasily, and by his two daughters, by Evdokia and by Marya, they wrote the profit food for the sovereign’s salary that the sovereign granted mercy for them.”
The persons mentioned are Andrei Staritsky (1490-1537) and Yuri Ivanovich (1480-1536) - brothers of Vasily the Third; Evfrosiniya Andreevna Staritskaya († in 1569), née Princess Khovanskaya, wife of Andrei Staritsky; their son Vladimir Staritsky (1533-1569), Princess Evdokia Nagaya († 1597) - the first wife of Vladimir Staritsky; their son Vasily Staritsky (1552-1573); as well as the children of Vladimir Staritsky from his second marriage (with Princess Evdokia Odoevskaya) († 1569) - Maria († 1569) and Evdokia (1561-1570). All of these individuals died between 1536 and 1597. Thus, the sovereign mentioned is, of course, Fyodor Ivanovich. But who is “Prince Yuri Vasilyevich”?
Let's look at the entry in another Fodder book -: “According to Prince Yury Vasilyevich, the memory of April on the 22nd day of the panakhida and mass serve as a cathedral, until the monastery stands.”
A certain “Prince Yuri Vasilyevich” is mentioned again. Vasily III had a son, Yuri, from Elena Glinskaya, the brother of Ivan the Terrible. However, he was born on October 30, 1533, was baptized on November 3 of the same year, and died on November 24, 1563. But the two entries above mention January 1 and April 22 (the eve of the holiday of St. George (Yuri) the Victorious). There is every reason to assume that this is not Ivan the Terrible’s brother according to Elena Glinskaya, but his brother from his father’s first marriage - that is, the son of Solomonia, born in April and died in January.
Sovereign Ivan the Terrible was a very smart and educated person; he knew the history of his family very well and studied archival documents. Let’s remember about “Box 44” - “And there are lists in it - the fairy tale of Yury Maly, and Stefanida Rezanka, and Ivan Yuryev’s son Saburov, and Mashka Korelenka, and others about the illness of the Grand Duchess Solomanida” - and about what has been preserved from it just one thing. So, in 1566, “on the 7th day of August, the sovereign took this box to himself.” Ivan the Terrible took on a lot of archival matters, but his interest in this box is very indicative.
Unexpected confirmation that Sophia's son existed came 300 seconds later. extra years, during the years when representatives of the Soviet government actively opened the tombs and shrines of saints.
Monastic tradition clearly recorded the burial place of the nun Sophia’s son. The “Historical and Archaeological Description of the Intercession Maiden Monastery” states that “with right side the tomb of Solomonia is a half-arshin monument; as they say, her seven-year-old son, who was born in the monastery, is buried here” (although, according to another version, the young “Princess Anastasia Shuiskaya”, the daughter of Tsar Vasily, was buried here); “There is a legend similar to the truth that Solomonia, already tonsured in Suzdal, gave birth to a son, Yuri, who lived with her and died 7 years old. The stone covering his tomb is shown near Solomonia's tomb."
After 1934, the director of the Suzdal Museum A.D. Varganov picked up an anonymous white stone slab located next to the tomb of St. Sophia in the crypt of the Intercession Cathedral. Underneath it was discovered a small burial log, covered on the inside with a layer of lime. It contained “the remains of a child’s shirt and decayed rags without any traces of bones.”
It is important to note three signs that allow us to date this burial and dismiss the version that there was a burial there of a girl from the Shuisky family: firstly, the slab above the burial with its ornamentation repeated the nearby tombstone of the old woman who died in 1525. Secondly, such decks were typical for the 16th century. And thirdly, the shirt turned out to be a man's shirt.
At the beginning of 1944, Varganov handed over the following to the textile restoration department of the State Historical Museum in Moscow: “1) a small tangle of scraps of dark brown silk fabric, tied together with blackened metal woven braid; 2) chest decorations made of metal cord, sewn in rows onto silk fabric, with a slit in the middle; 3) a piece of metal braid with a smaller end of the same braid sewn to it on the side, torn downwards; 4) a floor decoration made of metal cord sewn in rows onto silk fabric, with two torn ends of the braid at the bottom; 5) a woven belt made of untwisted reddish silk and metal threads, with scraps of tassels at the ends.” Dry earth mixed with sparkles of silver fell from all these objects. Moreover, “the scraps of fabric, metal stripes and belt were covered with dark brown spots, warped and were hard to the touch. The fabric was wrinkled and caked. The metal cords have darkened..."
As a result of long and painstaking work, restorer E.S. Vidonova restored the shirt of a boy about 5 years old, who belonged to the nobility, from worm-colored silk taffeta, with blue gussets, lining and backing, decorated with silver stripes and remnants of pearl embroidery along the collar, sleeves and hem, along with a belt made of Shemakha silk with spun silver and tassels at the ends. The material and technique were confidently dated to the first half of the 16th century.
Let us pay attention to the dark brown spots, the absence of the boy’s remains in the children’s burial, and the presence of earth and lime inside the log. Apparently, this indicates that the child died as a result of a tragic accident, but even years later he was not left alone: the grave was opened because someone was very interested in the reality of the existence of Solomonia’s son.
What was the cause of death of Tsarevich Yuri Vasilyevich and where his body disappeared remains a mystery. However, if we assume that he lived for 7 years, then he died in 1533. And the grave could be opened soon - during the reign of Elena Glinskaya. The fact is that at the end of this year Vasily III died, and Grand Duchess Elena remained ruler for some time under the young Ivan Vasilyevich. The exile of the monk Sofia immediately followed: she “was in Kargopol for five years and from then she was quickly transferred to the Maiden Monastery in Suzdal to the Intercession of the Most Pure Ones.” Nun Sofia was returned to Suzdal only after the death of Elena herself, that is, already by order of Ivan the Terrible (in 1538).
Kargopol was not chosen by chance: from the beginning of the century this city was under the personal control of Vasily III and was known as a place of exile for high-born people. In addition, in the middle of the century, this area was described by the cousin of the monk Sofia, Ivan Yakovlevich Saburov.
All this suggests that Grand Duchess Solomonia - nun Sophia was perceived by Elena as a possible rival. If we assume that Sophia did not have a child, then her claim to the throne is doubtful. But if we assume that there was a boy, this suggests that he O could have a better right to claim the throne than the children of Helen. Thus, Glinskaya’s repression against the first wife of Vasily III speaks in favor of the existence of Tsarevich Yuri.However, we concluded that Yuri died during the lifetime of Vasily III, who managed to name his second son after him with the same name. What worried Elena Glinskaya, since the boy died? Probably, his funeral was arranged with complete secrecy, or Vasily did not discuss the fate of Prince Yuri with his second wife at all. So she wanted to make sure that the child died.
The sequence of events is clear: death of Yuri (son of Solomonia) - birth and naming of Yuri (son of Elena) - death of Vasily III - regency of Elena - exile of Sofia - opening of Yuri's grave - death of Elena - return to Suzdal of Sofia - reign of the young Ivan the Terrible.
One can only guess what feelings the Monk Sophia must have experienced, who gave birth to a son after tonsure, witnessed his death, and then discovered her son’s open grave (and the body had disappeared). Of course, all this was a difficult ordeal for the mother.
In my opinion, there is no doubt that Tsarevich Georgy (Yuri) Vasilyevich is a real historical person and that he died as a child. But the Russian people have their own opinion on this matter: Tsarevich Yuri has been called Ataman Kudeyar for almost 500 years.
Ataman Kudeyar
This personality is one of the most popular in Russian folklore: legends about Kudeyar are recorded in a vast territory coinciding with the boundaries of the Wild Field of the 16th century - in Kaluga, Bryansk, Tula, Oryol, Kursk, Belgorod, Ryazan, Tambov, Voronezh, Penza, Saratov , Samara and Ulyanovsk (former Simbirsk province) regions, as well as in Suzdal.
I know of six legends in which the son of Vasily III and Solomonia Saburova - Tsarevich Yuri - is identified with Ataman Kudeyar.
1. Saratov legend about how, going to fight Kazan, Ivan the Terrible entrusted Moscow to Kudeyar Vasilyevich, but he drew up a false decree calling for Kazan and went to the steppes with the sovereign’s treasury.
2. Simbirsk legend that Ivan the Terrible wanted to execute his brother Yuri-Kudeyar and for this purpose called him to Kazan, but Kudeyar learned about these intentions and took up defense in the Krotkovsky town near Sengiley on the Volga.
3. The story of how Ivan the Terrible met with Yuri (who was hiding under the name of “Prince Lukhovsky”) under the walls of besieged Kazan, after which Yuri fled to the north - almost to Solovki.
4. Kursk legend that Yuri-Kudeyar was kidnapped by the Tatars in order to ask the king for a ransom for him, but when this failed, Yuri was sent along with the Tatar army to obtain the Moscow throne for himself. When this also failed, he did not return to Crimea and remained in Rus', where he took up robbery.
5. The Suzdal legend that Kudeyar entered into an alliance with the Tatars, came to Rus' with them, and then, seeing their atrocities, returned to the Russian camp and helped his own people defend Moscow.
6. The story contained in the memoirs of A.Ya. Artynov, a famous Rostov local historian of the 19th century, a peasant of the palace village of Ugodichi near Rostov: “About Sidorka Altina, his direct descendant, my uncle Mikhail Dmitriev Artynov, in his history about the village of Ugodichi, written by him in 1793, says the following: Sidorko Amelfov was a kisser of the Rostov lake and the headman of the sovereign fishermen; he often traveled to Moscow with fish rent to the great Sovereign Palace; on one of these trips he was an involuntary listener of the royal secret, for which he paid with his life. His guilt was as follows: while on duty in the large Moscow palace and being a little tipsy (having drunk), he got lost there and went into a deserted part of the palace. Looking for a way out, he finally came to a small chamber adjacent to the royal dwelling, and there he heard a loud conversation between the Terrible Tsar and Malyuta Skuratov about Prince Yuri, the son of Solomanida Saburova. Grozny orders Malyuta to find Prince Yuri and rid him of him. Malyuta promised the tsar to fulfill this exactly and after this conversation he went out the door, in front of which Sidorko was barely standing alive. Malyuta saw him and stopped; then he went back to the king, after which he imprisoned Sidorka and tortured him to death on the rack together with his father Amelfa, who had come to Moscow to visit his son.” The pedigree of the author of this story is known precisely from the time when his ancestors served Grand Duchess Elena Glinskaya - in the 30s of the 16th century they were palace peasants.
A sign that there is no “smoke without fire” in this case, too, is the mention in the legends of Yuri-Kudeyar of “Prince Lukhovsky”, also known as “Prince Lykov”: in 1664, among treasure hunters, a certain “letter that was sent” became known from the Crimea, to Putivl in the past years, “from that thief Kudoyarov to his brother Kudoyarov and from a comrade from his Kudoyarov, from a certain Prince Lykov.”
As genealogists show, there really is a direct, historically reliable connection between the Saburov-Godunovs (and therefore Tsarevich Yuri) and the Lykov princes. Fyodor Nikitich Romanov - the future Patriarch Filaret and the father of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich - had five brothers and six sisters. His sister Irina was married to Ivan Ivanovich Godunov, and his sister Anastasia was married to Prince Boris Mikhailovich Lykov-Obolensky, who betrayed Tsar Boris Godunov and supported False Dmitry I - Grishka Otrepiev. That is, Ivan Godunov and Prince Boris Lykov were brothers-in-law.
The daughter of Prince Lykov and Romanova, Maria, married Ivan Shein, whose mother was Maria Mikhailovna Godunova. In this case, Prince Boris Lykov and Maria Godunova were each other's matchmaker and matchmaker. Thus, Prince Boris Lykov had a brother-in-law Ivan Godunov and a matchmaker Maria Godunova. If we assume that Prince Yuri Vasilyevich is a real historical person, then Ivan Godunov is his fifth cousin. For that time and for this family - a fairly close relationship. The great-grandfather of Prince Boris Lykov-Obolensky is the second cousin of Mikhail Yaroslavich Chet-Obolensky. But Mikhail Chet and Solomonia Saburova are also second cousins. Thus, the Lykov princes are relatives of Solomonia Saburova both according to the Saburovs, and according to the Godunovs, and according to the Obolenskys.
 |
Here again Tsar Ivan the Terrible, the capture of Kazan and a certain Yuri are mentioned. This plot allows us to say that we are talking about the Russian serviceman Kudeyar Bakhmetev mentioned in the sources: we know his arrival in December 1553 as a messenger from the Nogai Murza Kasim to Ivan the Terrible.
Thus, we are talking about a specific representative of the Bakhmetev family, who, of course, was not a relative of Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich, but was in his service. And he became a “relative” due to the fact that, in addition to the baptismal name Yuri, he also bore the name Kudeyar, which in the popular consciousness was firmly connected with the personality of the son of Vasily III and Solomonia Saburova.
In general, the name Kudeyar is by no means as rare as researchers sometimes try to imagine. In the 17th century alone, I know (besides Bakhteyarova) five more people who bore this name:
1. Kudeyar Chufarov, a landowner from Arzamas, mentioned in 1581.
2. Prince Kudeyar Ivanovich Meshchersky, 1580.
3. Kudeyar Karachaev, son of the Mudyuranovs, - Moscow ambassador, Cossack.
4. Kildeyar (Kudeyar) Ivanovich from the family of Kursk nobles Markov.
5. The son of a boyar from Belev, Kudeyar Tishenkov, who betrayed his homeland and fled to Crimea. In 1571, he convinced the Crimean Khan Devlet Girey to march not on Kozelsk, as was planned, but directly on Moscow. The raid was very devastating, Moscow burned out, and Kudeyar went back with the Tatars to the Crimea. However, after some time, Tishenkov turned to Ivan the Terrible with a request for pardon and permission to return to Moscow. Permission was given. Nothing more is known about him.
Thus, we can confidently say that in the image of Yuri-Kudeyar, the biographies of several completely real, but different people have merged in the popular consciousness. Initially, the people paid attention to how the grand ducal and royal children, brothers and uncles “disappeared” - people understood perfectly well that some of these deaths were caused by the struggle for the throne. Here the concept of “executions of God” surfaced in the popular consciousness - the idea, in full accordance with biblical values, that invasions of foreigners are God’s punishments for human sins. Such executions were also Tatar invasions, in one of which Kudeyar Tishenkov took an active part. Paradoxically, the people considered the arrival of himself, but in the guise of Tsarevich Kudeyar, as a punishment for the death and removal from the throne of Tsarevich Yuri Vasilyevich.
Further more. After the chain “Tsarevich Yuri - the execution of God - Kudeyar” was established in the popular consciousness, biographical facts from the lives of all famous Kudeyars of the 16th century began to be added to the legends about Yuri-Kudeyar, for example Kudeyar Bakhmetev, and then the name Kudeyar became a household name, and “Kudeyars” “They began to call all robbers in general. The “exploits” of the “Kudeyars” (especially with a Robinhoodian touch) began to be attributed to Yuri-Kudeyar, whose subordinates were Stenka Razin from the 17th century, and Emelka Pugachev from the 18th century. By this time, the son of Solomonia should have been 250 years old.
Thus, we see that there is a historical basis under the legends about Tsarevich Yuri-Kudeyar, but this is a collective image.
It is important to note one more plot that will help us understand the place that the personal tragedy of the son of Solomonia occupies in Russian history. It's about about the fate of Ivan III’s eldest and only son from his first marriage, Ivan the Young, and the latter’s son, Dmitry Vnuk. They are Vasily III's brother and nephew, and Tsarevich Yuri Vasilyevich's uncle and cousin.
For a long time there was not even talk about the fact that Vasily Ivanovich would become the heir to the Russian throne. This role was assigned to Ivan Ivanovich the Young, married to Elena Voloshanka, the daughter of the Moldavian ruler Stefan. And even after Ivan the Young died, Ivan III saw neither Vasily, but Dmitry Vnuk, the son of Ivan the Young, as his successor. Moreover, Dmitry Vnuk was crowned king according to the model of the Byzantine emperors - during the lifetime of his grandfather. But at the turn of the 16th century, the situation changed dramatically: the crowned successor to the throne, together with his mother, faded into the background, and Vasily Ivanovich began to be called the official heir.
What happened? Often historians try to explain this by the struggle of people and clans. But this is only partly true, since at the heart of it was a struggle of ideas. The fact is that behind Ivan Molodoy and Dmitry Vnuk there were forces that were dear to them Specific Rus', in other words, separatists. What’s even worse, through Elena Voloshanka, the heresy of the Judaizers penetrated into the family of Ivan the Young - a colossal threat to Russian Orthodoxy, which consisted of sympathies for Jewish religious ideas. Judaizers did not recognize the Russian Paschal and chronology from the Creation of the world, icons and relics of saints, they focused on the celebration of Saturday, etc. The greatest fighters against this heresy were St. Gennady of Novgorod and St. Joseph of Volotsk.
It so happened that Vasily Ivanovich, together with his mother Sophia Paleolog, became involved in a conspiracy against the family of Ivan the Young, which was uncovered. The ordinary executors of the conspiracy were executed, and Vasily and his mother fell into disgrace and were not even invited to the crowning of Dmitry Vnuk.
But, despite the secondary importance of Vasily’s family line, despite the conspiracy in which he participated, shortly before his death, Ivan III transferred the throne to him. Vasily was never crowned king, and only his son Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible was crowned (in the image of the wedding ceremony of Dmitry Vnuk) in 1547.
At the same time, Dmitry Vnuk himself was kept in captivity, where he ended his life shortly after Vasily’s marriage to Solomonia Saburova. Is it possible to feel sorry for him, married to Russian kingdom, but died in captivity? Undoubtedly. Is it possible to feel sorry for his father, Ivan the Young, who was a successful statesman and prince of Tver, but died young as a result of a struggle for power? Undoubtedly. Does this mean that Ivan III or his wife Sophia Paleologus or their son Vasily III were villains? Of course not! They were great statesmen, thanks to whom and during whose reign the Russian state ideology took shape, known to us from the works of the Josephites and as the idea of Moscow - the Third Rome. It was thanks to these people that a united Russia, not divided into appanages, with its single national idea, became stronger.
Thus, having briefly examined the fate of Dmitry Tsarevich, we see that there was nothing surprising in the fate of Yuri Tsarevich - the removal from the throne and the subsequent death of the young heir at the end of the 15th - first half of the 16th century were not isolated phenomena. The fate of Yuri-Kudeyar was exactly the same as the fate of his uncle Ivan the Young and the fate of his cousin Dmitry-Vnuk.
The Russian people, ordinary contemporaries of these events, saw only the external side of these events, and did not have all the necessary information in order to make judgments at the national level, therefore Russian folklore reflects sympathy specifically for the losing side.
The fate of Ivan the Young became the basis for the appearance of a cycle of Russian fairy tales about Ivan Tsarevich. Let's compare the main episodes from the life of Ivan Tsarevich and the well-known biographical details of Ivan Ivanovich the Young.
Ivan Tsarevich has two villain brothers - Vasily and Dmitry, and Ivan the Young has brothers Vasily and Dmitry.
In a fairy tale: golden apples begin to mysteriously disappear, and Ivan’s brothers turn a blind eye to this, and Ivan is the only one who was able to catch the thief. In life: Sophia and Vasily were accused of intending to seize the Grand Duke's treasury, located in Beloozero, during the conspiracy.
In the fairy tale: Ivan married the princess Elena the Beautiful/Wise, whom he brought home from distant lands. In life: Ivan married Elena, the daughter of the Moldavian ruler Stefan.
In the fairy tale: Ivan was treacherously killed by his own brothers. In life: Ivan died during the struggle for the throne.
In the fairy tale: The Tsar was angry with Ivan’s brothers and put them in prison. In life: shortly after Ivan’s death, Sophia was sent to prison along with her son Vasily.
In a fairy tale: we meet the Firebird and the Gray Wolf. In life: on the coins of Tsarevich Ivan, who was the appanage prince of Tver, we meet them.
It is clear that the Russian people romanticized the image of the losing side in fairy tales, or at least did not tell the tale to the end: after all, the “villains” won and turned out to be positive heroes.
We see exactly the same thing in the case of Yuri Tsarevich - Ataman Kudeyar. Let's think: what should Vasily III do when he learned that his wife gave birth to a son in the monastery? Recognize the heir and return his nun wife to Moscow? To avoid bigamy, he had to divorce a second time - from his young wife Elena Glinskaya. Would anyone take seriously a sovereign who, within two years, first divorces his first wife and marries a second, then divorces his second in order to reunite with his first - a nun?! Of course not. Yes, it was not possible.
Maybe Vasily III should have left Sophia in the monastery, but brought his son Yuri closer? How would his second wife, the point of marriage with whom was to give birth to an heir, react to this? To do this means to bring confusion into the grand-ducal family and forever quarrel with everyone who stood behind Elena Glinskaya and the descendants of Zechariah Chet. Thus, a “time bomb” would have been laid: immediately after Vasily’s death, two groups would have formed - pro-Yurievskaya and proglinskaya. No, Vasily already went through this in his youth, and tried in every possible way to avoid similar situation for their descendants.
Thus, we see that the fate of Yuri Vasilyevich was predetermined - especially after the birth of his son Ivan from his marriage with Elena. Yuri Vasilyevich had to live his whole life under supervision: even if he himself had not taken up the task of “getting the throne,” there would always have been people (both within the country and outside) who would have raised the banner of Yuri for their own political purposes. Is it possible to feel sorry for Yuri? Undoubtedly. Does this mean that Vasily III or Ivan the Terrible were villains? Of course not.
This is how the situation with the birth of Sofia’s son was perceived by only two observers - ordinary Russian people and foreigners, who equally believed that “the villains imprisoned the innocent Yuri.” But the reasons for this opinion were different. If in Russian folklore the legends about Yuri-Kudeyar became, as it were, a continuation of the cycle of fairy tales about Ivan Tsarevich, then foreigners perceived the information about the son of Solomonia in a completely different way. The idea that the grand ducal couple had a son who has more rights to the throne than Ivan the Terrible, who is on it, runs like a red thread through the works of numerous foreign intelligence officers and adventurers.
Many of the authors of the 16th-17th centuries talk about this. For example, Adam Olearius wrote: “the tyrant Ivan Vasilyevich” “forcibly sent his wife Solomonia to the monastery after spending 21 years in marriage life with her, he could not have children; he then married another woman named Elena... The first wife, however, soon gave birth to a baby son in the monastery.”
Yes, yes, that’s right: according to Olearius, Solomonia’s husband was not Vasily Ivanovich, but Ivan Vasilyevich, that is, Ivan the Terrible! Further more.
Petrey de Erlesund put the following words into Sophia’s mouth: “Neither she nor the Grand Duke will see the baby’s bright face and sweet eyes; but the day will come when in due time he will fearlessly appear before the eyes of his subjects, let them see his bright eyes and will not leave her shame, desecration and humiliation without vengeance... Many of the Russians told for sure that Salome gave birth to a son... and then, having entered During his great reign, he called himself Ivan and committed many inhuman cruelties in Russia and Livonia. But some dispute this and think that Ivan is younger son Vasily from Elena, daughter of Vasily Glinsky."
As we see, two ideas are being pursued here simultaneously: Yuri Tsarevich will take revenge on the Rurikovichs for tonsuring his mother and removing himself from the throne; and he probably did this, since, having changed his name, he ruled Russia as Ivan the Terrible - “tyrant and murderer.”
It turns out that Yuri was both the son and husband of Solomonia and also Ivan the Terrible! Even if we put aside the genealogical nonsense of the two authors, then in any case their pathos is clear: Russian rulers are tyrants and usurpers who illegally own the throne. What's the next thought? Of course, we need to help Russia and give it a beneficent ruler! As I.E. rightly noted. Zabelin, the rumor about the birth of George in the mouths of foreigners “is a seditious attempt to cause confusion in the sovereign’s family and in the state, the first attempt to install an impostor.” And if in the 16th century it was not possible to steal the name of Tsarevich Yuri for this purpose, then at the turn of the 16th-17th centuries this was completely successful - in the case of Tsarevich Dmitry of Uglich, in whose name several False Dmitrievs ruled at once.
Miracles of St. Sophia
However, politics was politics, and life went on: after becoming a monk, Sophia became famous for her pious life and works. In the monastery, the Grand Duchess continued to embroider and dug a well with her own hands. She lived another 17 years and passed away at the age of approximately 60 - on December 16, 1542, having outlived not only her husband and his second wife, but also her son Yuri.According to monastery legend, Tsar Ivan the Terrible visited the monastery in 1552, before his campaign against Kazan. After her capture, he made a contribution to the monastery, and Tsarina Anastasia Romanova placed a shroud on the tomb of St. Sophia.
In 1563, the second wife of Ivan the Terrible, Tsarina and Grand Duchess Maria Temryukovna and Tsarevich Ivan Ivanovich went to pray at the Suzdal Intercession Monastery, and the next year Tsar Ivan himself went “to Suzdal to the Intercession of the Most Pure Mother of God in the maiden monastery for the holiday of the Intercession of the Most Pure One to pray with his great queen Princess Marya, with her son and Tsarevich Ivan.” Let me remind you that seven years later this prince will marry Evdokia Saburova, and eight years later she will also be tonsured a nun (under the name Alexandra) - in the same monastery.
At the end of the 16th century, Tsarina Irina Godunova, a relative of Sofia, made a contribution to the monastery: “Yes, the Empress Tsarina Grand Duchess Irina sent to the Grand Duchess Solomonida, and to the monastery Sofia, the cover is black velvet, and on it there is a cross, silver cloaks are gilded, embossed, and on the cloaks there is carving Deesis and chosen saints, and near the cloaks there is a copy and a cane and the signature of the cross is lowered with pearls, and near the cover of the signature the words are embroidered in gold on Tausin satin, and near the signature the rope is embroidered in gold and lined with crimson taffeta.”
In 1598, half a century after Sophia’s repose, the first miracle known to us occurred at her grave - the wife of Prince Daniil Andreevich of Suzdal, Princess Anna Fedorovna Nogteva, who had been blind for six years, regained her sight. After the death of her husband, she also took monastic vows in this monastery and took the monastic name of Alexander.
In the new century, Russia faced difficult trials. During the Time of Troubles, in 1609, detachments of a loyal supporter of the false Dmitry, Prince Alexander Lisovsky, who was known for his mercilessness in taking cities and monasteries, which he subjected to complete destruction (it would not be superfluous to note that he was a Jesuit), came to Suzdal. But this time a miracle happened: in a dream, a formidable nun appeared to him with burning candles in her hands and began to scorch him with flames. Fear fell on the chieftain, and his hand was taken away. Struck by the wrath of God, Lisovsky did not ruin Suzdal.
Many miracles at the tomb of Sophia are known to us thanks to the keymaster of the Intercession Cathedral, priest Anania Fedorov, who wrote them down and told descendants about the nationwide veneration of the nun Sophia. Miracles multiplied, Suzdal hierarchs began to raise the issue of canonization. In 1750, Patriarch Joseph of Moscow and All Rus' allowed her to be venerated as a saint. But soon Russia was shaken by even more severe trials than the Time of Troubles: church schism, the liquidation of the patriarchate, Peter's reforms. As a result, for more than two centuries the name of St. Sophia was under an unspoken ban. But people continued to venerate the saint.
Only in 1916, with the blessing of the Holy Synod, the name of St. Sophia of Suzdal was included in church calendar, and in 1995 her relics were solemnly discovered.
Saint Sophia is one of those saints whose help we constantly feel: miracles multiply. I will give several examples from 2001-2006, told by residents of Moscow, Ivanovo, Vladimir region and Tyumen.
“In mid-February 2003, my mother had a stroke. left-hand side her face was distorted, her speech was impaired, her eyes almost couldn’t open. I had consecrated oil from the relics of St. Sophia of Suzdal, which I acquired at the Intercession Monastery, and with this oil I offered my mother to anoint her head and face...
In the hospital, she had a dream: she stood in a large temple, surrounded by people in black clothes, their faces were stern. The mother became scared, she wanted to break out of this circle. Suddenly she saw a woman in princely clothes, very beautiful, appear in the temple. Easily approaching her mother, she took her hand and said: “Let's go.” In the morning, mom felt much better.”
“In 2002, doctors diagnosed me with uterine cancer; They were supposed to have an operation in the fall... I saw in a dream an ancient icon depicting a saint unknown to me, and at the same time I felt that I had to come to her relics... In August, for the Feast of the Transfiguration, I came to Suzdal... Entering the main cathedral of the Intercession Monastery, I saw on the wall the same icon that I saw in my dream. It was an icon of St. Sophia of Suzdal. For three days I went to the monastery for services and venerated the relics of the holy ascetic. When I went to the hospital in September, it turned out that there was no longer a need for surgery, and six months later I was taken off the register.”
The reign of Vasily 3 briefly became the end. Vasily 3 actually destroyed the remnants of appanage principalities and created a single state. His son inherited an already powerful state.
In short, in the 1st half of the 16th century. Russia has experienced a great economic boom. Vasily’s father began to pursue an active policy in this direction. He made several campaigns towards Siberia and the Urals, and entered into an alliance with the Crimean Khanate. This policy made it possible to stabilize relations on the southern borders and bring peace there.
Reign of Ivan 3 and Vasily 3
The reign of Ivan 3 and Vasily 3 made it possible to stabilize the situation within the country, and was able to defeat another state hostile to Muscovite Rus' - the Livonian Order. The Livonian Order attacked Pskov. The rule of Pskov and Novgorod was similar, both territories were republics. However, the power of Novgorod was much greater. By the way, Pskov itself helped to annex Novgorod to the territory of the Russian state. But when the Order attacked Pskov, it had to rely only on the help of Moscow. His troops in large quantities he didn't have.
Pskov began to gradually turn into a territory where dual control was established:
- Pskov Veche;
- Prince sent from Moscow.
It is clear that the Moscow governor could not agree with the Veche on everything; conflicts arose. When Vasily 3 ascended the throne, he decided that it was no longer necessary to appoint a prince. He planned to abolish this system. Prince Repnya-Obolensky was sent to the city. He provoked a conflict with the Veche and Vasily began to prepare for the attack and conquest of Pskov.
In 1509, Vasily III and his army approached Novgorod. The inhabitants of Pskov found out about this, and hurried to the sovereign with their gifts. Vasily pretended to accept all the gifts. Everyone was ordered to appear at the sovereign's court. There, residents of Pskov were taken into custody. The People's Council was abolished, about 300 families were evicted by order of the sovereign, and the lands were given over to servicemen from Moscow. In 1510, the Pskov Republic ceased to be independent.
It so happened that many perceive the reign of Vasily 3 until his death as the time between the two Ivans. IvanIII became the first sovereign, became the first to collect Russian lands.aka Grozny also made a great contribution to the history of Muscovite Rus'. But here is the reign of VasilyIII is somehow missed by many. But he ruled for almost 30 years. The period is quite impressive.
Beginning of the reign of Vasily 3
The beginning of the reign of Vasily 3 began with the annexation of Pskov. In general, it is worth saying that Vasily III began to continue the work of his eminent father, Emperor Ivan III. The main directions of his policy coincided with his father's. Officially, Vasily Ivanovich was on the throne for 28 years. The reign of Vasily 3 was 1505-1533, but he actually began to rule when Ivan III was still on the throne. Vasily was the official co-ruler.
Vasily Ivanovich knew exactly what fate awaited him. He was being prepared that he might soon lead the Moscow state. But Vasily did not find out about this early years. The fact is that he had a son born in his first marriage - Ivan “Young”. He was the heir to the throne. Ivan Ivanovich had a son, Dmitry. The boy could also claim the throne in the event of his father's death. Of course, there was no clear decree that the throne would go to Ivan the Young. However, the young man actively participated in government affairs; many perceived him as the heir. In 1490, Ivan fell ill and soon died.
Thus, in different time There were three candidates for the throne:
- Ivan Ivanovich “Young”;
- Vasily Ivanovich III;
- Dmitry Ivanovich is the grandson of Ivan III.
In 1505, Vasily Ivanovich, the second eldest son of Vasily, was on the throne; he was born in his second marriage to the Byzantine princess Sophia Paleologus. As already mentioned, Vasily continued his father’s political course. He built new temples and stone houses. By 1508, a new palace was built, and Vasily III moved his family there.
It is interesting that many historians describe the character of VasilyIII as an arrogant and proud person. He believed in his exclusivity as the ruler of Russia, probably this vanity was instilled in him by his mother, Sophia Paleolog, and his father, IvanIII. He suppressed all resistance in Rus' very harshly, sometimes using cunning and ingenuity. However, there are very few people he has executed. His reign was not like a reign; there was no terror at all. BasilIII preferred to eliminate his opponents without execution.
The reign of Vasily 3
Based on his political views, Vasily sought to pursue a tough and clear policy. He sometimes consulted with his associates, but made most decisions on his own. But still, she played an important role in governing the country. Boyar Duma. The reign of Vasily 3 did not become “disgraced” for the boyars. The Duma met regularly.
At different times, Vasily III's close associates were:
- Vasily Kholmsky;
- Prince of Denmark Puppy;
- Dmitry Fedorovich Volsky;
- Princes from the Penkov family;
- Princes from the Shuisky family and others.
Main events of domestic and foreign policy:
- The confrontation between Moscow and the Crimean Khanate, as a result, Khan Muhammad-Girey went over to the side of Lithuania;
- Strengthening the southern borders, construction of Zaraysk, Tula and Kaluga;
- 1514 capture of Smolensk by the troops of Daniil Shchenya;
- 1518 invitation of a monk from Mount Athos to translate Greek books, Michael Trivolis (Maxim the Greek) arrived;
- 1522 Daniel became the new metropolitan (he replaced the previously removed
- Varlaam);
- Annexation of the Ryazan Principality (1522).
By creating and decorating churches, Vasily Ivanovich adhered to his interests in religion and art. He had excellent taste. In 1515, the Assumption Cathedral was completed on the territory of the Kremlin. When he first visited the cathedral, he noted that he felt great here. Vasily also showed great interest in the Old Russian language, he studied it, and could speak it quite well. And he loved his wife Elena (she was his second wife) and son very much. There are several letters that show the warmth with which he treated them.
Russia during the reign of Vasily 3
In September 1533, Vasily III visited the Trinity-Sergius Monastery with his wife and children, then he went hunting. Soon after his arrival, Vasily fell ill. A tear formed on the sovereign’s left thigh. The inflammation gradually became larger, and later doctors diagnosed “blood poisoning.” It became clear that the sovereign could no longer be saved. Vasily behaved very courageously in the face of impending death.
The last will of the ruler was:
- Securing the throne to the heir - three years of age;
- Take monastic vows.
No one doubted Ivan’s right to the throne, but many opposed Vasily’s tonsure. But Metropolitan Daniel managed to smooth out this situation, and at the beginning of December, when the sovereign was already very ill, he was tonsured. Then, on December 3, he already passed away.
The reign of Vasily III became an important stage in the final unification of Russian lands and their centralization. Many historians speak of his reign as transitional, but this is far from true.
The reign of Vasily 3 briefly video
Years of reign: 1505 - 1533
From the biography
- Son of Ivan 3 and Sophia Paleologus - nieces of the last Byzantine emperor, father of the future Tsar Ivan the Terrible (b. 1530)
- He is called “the last collector of the Russian land,” since the last semi-independent Russian principalities were annexed during his reign.
- In the treaty of 1514 With Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian 1- was the first to be named king.
- Idea " Moscow-Third Rome"- is a political ideology that denotes the global significance of Moscow as a political and religious center. According to theory, Roman and Byzantine Empire fell because they deviated from the true faith, and the Muscovite state is the “third Rome,” and there will not be a fourth Rome, since Muscovite Rus' stood, stands and will stand. The theory was formulated by a Pskov monk Filofey in his messages to Vasily 3.
- For your information: in 395 the Roman Empire split into Western and Eastern. The Western Roman Empire fell in 476, breaking up into a number of independent states: Italy. France, Germany, Spain. The Eastern Empire - Byzantium - fell in 1453, in its place the Ottoman Empire was formed.
- Josephites these are representatives of the church-political movement that was formed during the reign of Vasily 3. These are followers Joseph Volotsky. They advocated strong church power, the influence of the church in the state, and monastic and church land ownership. Philotheus was a Josephite. Vasily 3 supported them in the fight against the opposition.
- Non-covetous - sought to restore the shaky authority of the church, which was caused by the desire of the clergy to take possession of more and more land. At the head - Neil Sorsky. They are for the secularization of church lands, that is, returning them to the Grand Duke.
The struggle between the non-covetous people and the Josephites, which began under Ivan 3, testified to the complex relationship between the princes and the church and the constant competition for supremacy in power. Vasily 3 relied on the church opposition, and at the same time understood that relations with the church began to become complicated.
Historical portrait of Vasily III
Activities
1.Domestic policy
| Activities | results |
| 1. Completion of the formation of a centralized state. | 1510 - annexation of Pskov. The veche system was abolished. Led by Moscow governors. 1513 - annexation of Volotsk. 1514 - annexation of Smolensk. In honor of this, the Novodevichy Convent was built in the city - a copy of the Moscow Kremlin. 1518 - annexation of Kaluga. 1521 - annexation of Ryazan and Uglich. 1523 - annexation of the Novgorod-Seversky Principality. Unification based on a new ideology "Moscow is the third Rome." Author – Filofey. |
|
Support for non-covetous people, and then for the Josephites in the fight against the feudal opposition. |
|
The prince had the highest court, was the supreme commander-in-chief, and all laws were issued in his name. Limiting the privileges of the boyars, relying on the nobility, increasing the land ownership of the nobles. |
|
A new authority appeared - the Boyar Duma, with which the prince consulted. The tsar himself appointed boyars to the Duma, taking into account localism. Clerks began to play an important role. They carried out office work. Local governors and volosts governed. The position of city clerk appeared. |
2. Foreign policy
| Activities | results |
| 1.Defense of the borders of Russia in the southeast from the raids of the Crimean and Kazan khans. | 1521 - raid of the Crimean Khan on Moscow. Constant raids of Mengli-Girey - in 1507, 1516-1518, 1521. Vasily 3 negotiated peace with difficulty. In 1521 - began to build fortified cities on the borders with these khanates in the “wild field”. |
|
1507-1508, 1512-1522 - Russian-Lithuanian wars, as a result: Smolensk was annexed, western lands conquered by Ivan 3, his father. But the defeat near Orsha in 1514 |
| 3.Establishing peaceful trade relations with countries. | Under Vasily 3, good trade relations between Russia and France and India, Italy, and Austria developed. |
RESULTS OF ACTIVITY
- Under Vasily 3, the process of forming a centralized state was completed.
- A unified state ideology was created that contributed to the unification of the country.
- The church continued to play an important role in the state.
- The grand ducal power increased significantly.
- The public administration system was further improved, and a new government body emerged - the Boyar Duma.
- The prince pursued a successful policy in the west; many western lands were annexed.
- Vasily 3 held back the raids of the Crimean and Kazan khans with all his might, and managed to negotiate peace with them.
- Under Vasily 3, Russia's international authority significantly strengthened. Trade relations were carried out with many countries.
Chronology of the life and work of Vasily III
| 1505-1533 | Reign of Vasily 3. |
| 1510 | + Pskov |
| 1513 | + Volotsk. |
| 1514 | + Smolensk. Construction of the Novodevichy Convent. |
| 1518 | + Kaluga |
| 1521 | + Ryazan. Uglich |
| 1507, 1516-1518, 1521 | Raids of the Crimean and Tatar khans. |
| 1521 | The raid of the Crimean Khan Mengli-Girey on Moscow. |
| 1507-1508,1512-1522 | Wars with Lithuania. |
| 1514 | Defeat near Orsha in the war with Lithuania. |
| 1523 | + Novgorod -Seversky. |
| 1533 | The death of Vasily 3, his three-year-old son Ivan, the future Ivan the Terrible, became the heir. |