PARADOX OF BORIS GODUNOV'S FATE: THE CHOSEN TSAR, UNLOVED BY THE PEOPLE. CHARITY OF THE MONARCH IN TIME OF TROUBLES

ABSTRACT

The article is devoted to the analysis of the personality of Tsar Boris Godunov. His life path is described: from the son of a landowner to the first elected Tsar. Special attention is paid to the reforms adopted during the reign of Godunov, his contribution to the history of Russia and charitable activities in times of poverty and hunger. His image in culture, the attitude of the people to the elected sovereign are considered. On the basis of these sources Boris Godunov's assessment as the ruler by his contemporaries and historians is shown, two characters are contrasted: the Tsar the murderer, the traitor and the Tsar the patriot loving the people opening Imperial coffers during the great famine. The author refutes the popular opinion about the Tsar as an unsuccessful and indifferent monarch.

Keywords: Boris Godunov, Tsar, monarch, charity, The time of troubles, hunger, reforms.

A tradition has developed in Russia for a long time - to give historical personalities "nicknames". This was especially true of our rulers: "Vladimir the Red Sun", "Ivan the Terrible", "Alexander the Peacemaker". At the mere mention of these "popular names", images of the great monarchs immediately pop up in our head. They participated in military campaigns, expanded the territory of the country, sought to make their homeland powerful and bring it to a new level. Moreover, they developed education and health care, allocated colossal funds for the construction of educational institutions, hospitals and churches, did charity work.

However among the monarchs there are truly mysterious personalities, about whom we know not so much, whom we find it difficult to call "enlighteners" and "the great". Boris Godunov can be included in the "list" of such rulers. Boris Godunov is a "loser tsar", "regicide", these "names" were assigned to the monarch. People didn't love the tsar therefore they gave him such "nicknames". This monarch leave behind Time of Troubles, monarchist crisis, pretenders, intervention, unfinished wars. Seemingly enough reasons for popular hatred and constant riots. But was he really so formidable and insidious?

In order to answer this question and find out whether his reforms are connected with charity, let us turn to the article dedicated to Boris Godunov in the sixth volume of the Orthodox Encyclopedia. The future ruler was born in 1552, in the family of a landowner, belonged to the younger branch of the Kostroma noble family, lost his father early, therefore he was brought up by uncle D.I. Godunov, who had the rank of bed at the court of Tsar Ivan the Terrible. Boris Godunov began service in 1567, when he was admitted to the oprichnina court of Ivan IV. In 1578 he received the boyar dignity. In 1575 his sister Irina Godunova married Tsarevich Fyodor. Despite his high rank and kinship with the royal family, Boris Godunov did not receive administrative or military appointments.

In 1584, Ivan the Terrible dies, and the "reign" of his son Fyodor I Ioannovich begins. The new tsar was weak in health and mind, and therefore was unable to bear the "royal burden." His weakness and trust served as a pretext for conspiracies between the boyars, their attempts to grab the biggest and tidiest morsel - the power. The closest were Boris Godunov and his sister Irina Godunova, she is also the wife of Fedor. During his reign, Fedor I Ioannovich was allegedly under the tutelage of the Godunovs, and despite the fact that according to the documents he was a tsar, Boris Godunov ruled the country and, moreover, ruled quite competently and successfully. It was a difficult time for him, because the country, due to the oprichnina, was not an integral state, but was divided into two territories, needed constant defense, which was difficult to achieve, since the state was in ruin after the many years of the Livonian War, the treasury was empty. But thanks to the efforts of Boris Godunov, a feasible taxation rate was introduced, the development of the lordly economy began, which contributed to the gradual overcoming of ruin; resumed stone construction; contributed to the development of new territories; the construction of cities, fortresses. Thus, Samara, Tsaritsyn, Saratov, Voronezh and Kursk, later Belgorod and Oskol were founded; the fortresses of the White City and the Wooden City in Moscow, stone fortresses in Astrakhan, Kazan and Smolensk, the Tsarev-Borisov fortress in the Wild Fields were built, the fortress on the Terek was revived. Boris Godunov also achieved great success in foreign policy: he achieved the return of Novgorod suburbs to Russia, captured by the Swedes, strengthened Russia's position in the south: dependence on Russia of the Great Nogai Horde was restored, allied relations with the Kabardian princes were renewed, and permanent diplomatic relations with the Kakhetian kingdom were established. The conquest of the Siberian Khanate was completed. Boris Godunov played an important role in the establishment of the Patriarchate in Russia, strove to make Moscow the center of the Christian world. So in 1598-1599 the construction of the magnificent Church of the Resurrection of the Lord on the Cathedral Square of the Kremlin was began.  It was modeled on the temple in Jerusalem. The construction was interrupted by the death of the tsar. Boris Godunov actively contributed to the founding of monasteries and temples on the territory of the Volga region and in Siberia. Boris Godunov combined sincere piety and concern for the interests of Orthodoxy with a desire for rapprochement with Western states and an interest in the achievements of Western culture. The ruler sent agents abroad not only to hire foreign specialists, but also to invite teachers to Moscow. At the beginning of the 17th century, a large group of boyar children was sent to Western Europe "for the science of different languages ​​and literacy." [3]

Nevertheless, despite the success in governing the state, the common population did not like Godunov long before his real appointment as ruler in 1598. What is the real reason for the hatred of certain sections of the population is not fully known. Either the ban on the transition of peasants played a role, accompanied by the massive return of the fugitives to their former places, and the establishment of a five-year term for detecting the peasant and townspeople in 1597, or the accusation of the murder of Tsarevich Dmitry and the illegal seizure of power. Tsarevich Dmitry, the younger brother of Fedor I, was the next direct heir, but in 1591, in Uglich, he was killed under unclear circumstances. It was thanks to this incident that the "notoriety" about Boris Godunov began to circulate. He was called a criminal, a "regicide", and in 1598 he was also accused of the short, imminent death of Tsar Fyodor I Ioannovich, after which all power passed into the hands of Boris Godunov. Added fuel to the fire and the fact that in fact Godunov did not come from a noble family, was not Rurikovich, and, therefore, interrupted the centuries-old tradition of succession to the throne from father to son. The people rebelled: a boyar, a murderer, a criminal, a traitor was chosen as tsar, more and more accusations and rumors were poured into him. It was rumored that he was the instigator of fires in Moscow and other cities, that he led the Tatars to Moscow.

These accusations are still the subject of debate for historians. There are many articles confirming and refuting the version of the murder of Tsarevich Dmitry by Godunov. So the chronicle of the time of the Romanovs accuses him of murder, since the tsarevich prevented Godunov from reigning. This version was also shared by Iisak Massa, a Dutch merchant, traveler and diplomat who witnessed the Time of Troubles. For the first time, the Russian historian M.P. Pogodin spoke in defense of Boris Godunov, who convinced many historians of the twentieth century that the death of the tsarevich was accidental, and Godunov had no need to commit crimes, because the tsarevich was considered the illegitimate son of Ivan the Terrible according to the church charter. Vladislav Nazarov, a Russian historian and senior researcher at the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, also adheres to this position. In his opinion, over the fifteen years of Boris Godunov's rule, the country has noticeably risen: the oprichnina was finally eliminated, the size of the army increased, the entire organization of military affairs in the state was streamlined, in the course of the "posad structure" privileged urban settlements and courtyards of church corporations were returned to the taxable communities of townspeople. secular nobility. The historian claims that until 1601 the reign of Boris Godunov both as a tsar's brother-in-law and as a tsar was successful, he did a colossal work at that time. [1]

What happened in 1601? A sharp cold snap led to widespread crop failure, and in 1601-1603 a severe famine reigned in the state, which claimed the lives of thousands and hundreds of thousands of people. Social tension grew, the number of rioters and hungry people also grew. Then the tsar went to the greatest mercy and opened the Tsar's grain bins in Moscow for the hungry and the poor, and also daily allotted 30 thousand rubles for alms. However, Boris Godunov's attempts to fight hunger and its consequences were unsuccessful. Bread was sorely lacking, and the number of hungry people increased, having learned about the free distribution of bread, people came to Moscow from the farthest corners of the country. The situation was aggravated by the people who acted against the tsar, trying to cash in, enrich themselves on the common people's grief. People who suffered severely from deprivation believed that God punished the country for the sins of its ruler in such a way. Trying to reduce social tension, Boris Godunov temporarily allowed the transition of the peasants, but this turned the lower strata of the nobility against him. The need for food both in the lower strata of the population and in the ranks of the army, which continued to defend the southern borders in the Wild Field. Discontent flared up throughout the country, so when the impostor False Dmitry I appeared in the Commonwealth, posing as the miraculously escaped Tsarevich Dmitry, the servants of the south recognized him as their ruler and raised an uprising against Boris Godunov. In the midst of the struggle with the rebels, the king died unexpectedly from a blow. [2]

Despite the extensive and largely successful activities of Boris Godunov, the image of a murderer tsar, a loser tsar, a traitor tsar remains widespread in culture. This is how he appears before us in the tragedy of Alexander Pushkin "Boris Godunov", and in the opera of the same name by M. Mussorgsky, and in the tragedy of A. K. Tolstoy "Tsar Boris", as well as in the German opera composer I. Mattezon, which is called "Boris Godunov, or the Throne achieved by deceit".

The beginning of the reign of Boris Godunov is called unsuccessful. However, was he a failure? After all, the years of his reign fell on a difficult time, which would later be called the Troublesome. The once great state is in ruin, experiencing the consequences of the war and oprichnina, the only direct heir in the Rurik line, Tsarevich Dmitry, dies, which means that the centuries-old tradition of transferring the throne from father to son is interrupted, the country is engulfed in famine, riots break out everywhere. It cannot be said that the tsar was pitiful and weak. He endured the hardships of the times with dignity, believed in the prosperity of his beloved power, was actively involved in domestic and foreign policy and did not renounce the state even in times of famine, and he cannot but arouse respect and distribution of government bread for the starving people. You can call it a great moral act, an act of charity, or the duty of every ruler to support and protect his people. But isn't it also the duty, the duty of every person - to help his neighbor? Accusing Godunov of the Time of Troubles, famine, we underestimate its significance in the history of our country and forget about fifteen years of successful domestic and foreign policy of the state, an attempt to restore its former greatness.

References:

1. Nazarov, V. Boris Godunov had no reason to kill Tsarevich Dmitry [electronic resource] / Vladislav Nazarov // access mode: https://lenta.ru/articles/2015/03/29/godunov/ (date of access: 5.12.19)
2. Platonov, S. Boris Godunov / Sergei Platonov. - Moscow: Agraf, 1999.-- 252 p.
3. Orthodox encyclopedia. - Moscow: Church Scientific Center "Orthodox Encyclopedia", 2003. - Vol. VI: "Bondarenko - Bartholomew of Edessa". - 752 p.