Similar institutions arose both in Western Europe and in the Moscow state. However, the causes and consequences of their activities were radically different. If in the first case class assemblies served as an arena for resolving political issues, as a battleground for power, in Russia at such meetings, mainly administrative tasks were solved. In fact, the sovereign got acquainted with the needs of the common people through such events.
In addition, such gatherings arose immediately after the unification of states, both in Europe and in Muscovy; therefore, this body coped with the formation of an integral picture of the state of affairs in the country.
The Zemsky Sobor of 1613, for example, played a revolutionary role in the history of Russia. It was then that Mikhail Romanov was seated on the throne, whose family ruled the country for the next three hundred years. And it was his descendants who brought the state from the backward Middle Ages to the forefront at the beginning of the twentieth century.
Zemsky Cathedrals in Russia
Only the conditions created by the estate-representative monarchy allowed such an institution as the Zemsky Sobor to arise and develop. 1549 was an outstanding year in this regard. Ivan the Terrible gathers people to eliminate local corruption. The event was called the Cathedral of Reconciliation.
The word itself at that time had the meaning of “nationwide”, which determined the basis of the activity of this body.
The role of Zemsky Sobors was to discuss political, economic and administrative issues. In fact, it was the king’s connection with the common people, passing through the filter of the needs of the boyars and the clergy.
Although democracy did not succeed, the needs of the lower classes were nevertheless taken into account more than in Europe, permeated through with absolutism.
All free people took part in such events, that is, only serfs were not allowed. Everyone had the right to vote, but the sovereign made the actual and final decision.
Since the first Zemsky Sobor was convened at the will of the king, and the effectiveness of his activities was quite high, this practice was strengthened.
However, the functions of this institution of power periodically changed depending on the situation in the country. Let's take a closer look at this issue.
The evolution of the role of the cathedral from Ivan the Terrible to Mikhail Romanov
If you remember something from the textbook “History, Grade 7”, without a doubt, the period of the 16th – 17th centuries was one of the most intriguing, from the tsar-child-killer to the time of troubles, when the interests of various noble families clashed and arose from scratch folk heroes like Ivan Susanin.
Let's see what exactly happened at this time.
The first Zemsky Sobor was convened by Ivan the Terrible in 1549. He has not yet been a full-fledged secular council. The clergy took an active part in it. At this time, ministers of the church are completely subordinate to the king and serve more as a vehicle of his will to the people.
The next period includes the dark time of the Time of Troubles. It continues until the overthrow of Vasily Shuisky from the throne in 1610. It was during these years that the significance of Zemsky Sobors changed dramatically. Now they are serving the idea that the new aspirant to the throne is promoting. Basically, the decisions of such meetings at the time went against the strengthening of statehood.
The next stage was the "golden age" for this institution of power. The activities of the Zemsky Sobors combined legislative and executive functions. In fact, this was the period of the temporary rule of the “parliament of tsarist Russia.
After the emergence of a permanent ruler, the period of restoration of the state after the collapse begins. It was at this time that qualified advice was needed for the young and inexperienced king. Therefore, cathedrals play the role of an advisory body. Their participants help the ruler to understand financial and administrative matters.
For nine years, starting in 1613, the boyars manage to streamline the collection of five-fold money, prevent the re-invasion of the Polish-Lithuanian troops, and also restore the economy after the Time of Troubles.
Since 1622, over a decade, not a single cathedral was held. The situation in the country was stable, therefore there was no special need for it.
Zemsky Sobors in the 17th century increasingly assume the role of a regulatory body in the sphere of domestic, but more often foreign policy. The accession of Ukraine, Azov, Russian-Polish-Crimean relations and many issues are resolved precisely through this tool.
Since the second half of the seventeenth century, the significance of such events has fallen noticeably, and by the end of the century it has ceased altogether. The most notable were two cathedrals - in 1653 and 1684.
At the first, the Zaporizhzhya army was accepted into the Moscow state, and in 1684 the last gathering took place. It decided the fate of the Commonwealth.
On this the history of Zemsky cathedrals ends. Peter the Great especially contributed to this with his policy of establishing absolutism in the state.
But let's take a closer look at the events of one of the most important cathedrals in the history of Russia.
The background of the cathedral in 1613
After the death of Fyodor Ivanovich in Russia, the Time of Troubles came. He was the last of the descendants of Ivan the Terrible. His brothers died earlier. The eldest, John, as scientists believe, fell at the hands of his father, and the youngest, Dmitry, disappeared in Uglich. He is considered dead, but there are no reliable facts of his death.
Thus, from 1598, complete confusion begins. Consistently ruled in the country, Irina, the wife of Fedor Ioannovich, and Boris Godunov. Further, the son of Boris, Theodore, False Dmitry the First and Vasily Shuisky visited the throne.
This is a period of economic decline, anarchy and the invasion of neighboring armies. In the north, for example, the Swedes operated. The Kremlin, with the support of part of the population of Moscow, included Polish troops led by Vladislav, the son of Sigismund the Third, the Polish king and the Lithuanian prince.
It turns out that the 17th century in the history of Russia played an ambiguous role. The events unfolding in the country forced the people to come to a common desire to get rid of ruin. There were two attempts to expel imposters from the Kremlin. The first was led by Lyapunov, Zarutsky and Trubetskoy, and the second was headed by Minin and Pozharsky.
It turns out that the convocation of the Zemsky Sobor in 1613 was simply inevitable. If it weren’t for a similar turn of events, who knows how history would have developed and what would be the situation in the state today.
Thus, in 1612, Pozharsky and Minin, at the head of the people's militia, expelled the Polish-Lithuanian troops from the capital. All prerequisites were created to restore order in the country.
Convocation
As we know, Zemsky Sobors in the 17th century were an element of government (as opposed to spiritual). Secular authorities needed advice, which largely repeated the functions of the Slavic veche, when all free men of the clan converged and resolved pressing issues.
Prior to this, the first Zemsky Sobor of 1549 was still joint. It was attended by representatives of the church and secular authorities. Later, only the metropolitan spoke from the clergy.
This happened in October 1612, when, after the expulsion of the Polish-Lithuanian troops that occupied the heart of the capital of the Kremlin, they began to put the country in order. The army of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which occupied Moscow, was liquidated quite simply because the hetman Khotkevich ceased to support it. In Poland, they already realized that in the current situation they won’t win.
Thus, after the cleansing of all external occupation forces, it was necessary to establish normal, strong power. To do this, messengers were sent to all parts of the country and volost with a proposal to join the selected people to the general cathedral in Moscow.
However, due to the fact that the state was still devastating and not very calm, the townspeople could only gather in a month. Thus, the Zemsky Sobor of 1613 was convened on January 6.
The only place that could accommodate all the people who came was the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin. According to various sources, their total number ranged from seven hundred to one and a half thousand people.
Candidates
The consequence of such chaos in the country was a large number of people wishing to sit on the throne. In addition to the primordially Russian princely surnames, rulers of other countries joined the election race. Among the latter, for example, were the Swedish prince Karl and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Vladislav. The latter was not at all embarrassed by the fact that he had only been washed out of the Kremlin a month ago.
The Russian nobility, although it presented its candidacy for the Zemsky Sobor in 1613, did not have much weight in the eyes of the public. Let's see which of the representatives of princely families sought power.
The Shuiskys, as the famous descendants of the Rurikovich dynasty, were undoubtedly confident enough in the victory. However, the danger that they, and Godunovs, who found themselves in a similar situation, would begin to take revenge on past offenders who had overthrown their ancestors, was very high. Therefore, the chances of their victory were meager, since many of the voters were related to those who could suffer from the new rulers.
The Kurakins, Mstislavl and other princes, who had once collaborated with the Kingdom of Poland and the Principality of Lithuania, although they made an attempt to join the government, failed. The people did not forgive them for betrayal.
The Golitsins could well rule the Moscow kingdom if their most powerful representative had not languished in captivity in Poland.
The Vorotinsky did not have a bad past, but for secret reasons, their candidate, Ivan Mikhailovich, recused himself. The most plausible version of his participation in the "Seven Boyarschina" is considered.
And, finally, the most suitable candidates for this vacancy are Pozharsky and Trubetskoy. In principle, they could have won, as they distinguished themselves during the Time of Troubles, knocked out Polish-Lithuanian troops from the capital. However, in the eyes of the local nobility, their not very prominent pedigree failed them. In addition, the composition of the Zemsky Sobor was not unfoundedly afraid of the subsequent "purge" of the participants in the Semiboyarschina, with which these candidates were most likely to start a political career.
Thus, it turns out that it was necessary to find a previously unknown, but at the same time rather noble descendant of the princely family, capable of leading the country.
Official motives
Many scientists were interested in this topic. Is it a joke to determine the real course of events during the formation of the foundation of modern Russian statehood!
As the history of Zemsky cathedrals shows, together people were able to make the most correct decisions.
Judging by the records of the protocol, the first decision of the people was to exclude from the list of candidates all foreign applicants. Neither Vladislav nor the Swedish royal Karl could now participate in the "race".
The next step was the selection of a candidate from local representatives of the nobility. The main problem was that most of them have compromised themselves over the past ten years.
Semiboyarschina, participation in the uprisings, support of the Swedish and Polish-Lithuanian troops - all these factors have largely played against all candidates.
Judging by the documents, in the end there was only one that we did not mention above. This man was a descendant of the family of Ivan the Terrible. He was the nephew of the last legitimate Tsar Theodore Ivanovich.
Thus, the election of Mikhail Romanov was the most correct decision in the eyes of the majority of voters. The only difficulty was lack of nobility. His family came from the boyar of the Prussian princes Andrei Kobyl.
Next, we will talk about the events that led to the well-known turn of history.
The first version of events
The 17th century in the history of Russia was of particular importance. It is from this period that we know such names as Minin and Pozharsky, Trubetskoy, Godunov, Shuisky, False Dmitry, Susanin and others.
It was at this time, by the will of fate, or, perhaps, with God's finger, that the soil was formed for the future empire. If it were not for the Cossacks, which we will talk about a little later, the course of history would most likely be completely different.
So, what became Mikhail Romanov profitable?
According to the official version set forth by many respected historians, such as Cherepnin, Degtyarev and others, there were several factors.
Firstly, this applicant was quite young and inexperienced. His inexperience in government affairs would allow the boyars to become "gray cardinals" and in the role of advisers to be actual kings.
The second factor was his father's involvement in events related to False Dmitry II. That is, all defectors from Tushino could not be afraid of revenge or punishment of the side of the new king.
In addition, Patriarch Filaret, his father, enjoyed authority in the spiritual life of the Moscow kingdom, and most monasteries supported this candidacy.
Of all the applicants, only this genus was least associated with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth during the "Seven Boyars", so the patriotic feelings of the people were completely satisfied. Still: a boyar from the family of Ivan Kalita, who has a high priestly clergyman among his relatives, an adversary of the oprichnina, and also a young and “povadny”, as Sheremetyev described him. Here are the factors, according to the official version of the events, that influenced the accession of Mikhail Romanov.
The second version of the cathedral
Opponents consider the following factor as the main motive for choosing the mentioned candidate. Sheremetyev rather strongly sought power, but the direct way could not reach it because of the lack of class. In view of this, as history teaches us (Grade 7), he developed an unusually active activity to popularize Mikhail Romanov. Everything was profitable for him, because his chosen one was a simple, inexperienced young man from the hinterland. He did not understand anything in public administration, nor in metropolitan life, nor in intrigue.
And to whom will he be grateful for such generosity and whom will he listen first of all when making important decisions? Of course, those who helped him take the throne.
Thanks to the activity of this boyar, most of those who gathered at the Zemsky Sobor in 1613 were prepared for making the “right” decision. But something went wrong. And the first results of the voting are declared invalid "due to the absence of many voters."
The decisive vote is postponed three weeks in advance. And at this time, many important events take place in both opposing camps.
The boyars, who opposed such a candidate, made an attempt to get rid of Romanov. A detachment of Polish-Lithuanian soldiers was sent to eliminate the objectionable applicant. But the future king was saved by the previously unknown peasant Ivan Susanin. He led the punishers into the swamp, where they safely and perished (along with the national hero).
Shuisky, on the other hand, develops a slightly different front of activity. He begins to contact with the atamans of the Cossacks. It is believed that it was this force that played a major role in the accession of Mikhail Romanov.
Of course, you should not belittle the role of Zemsky Sobors, but without the active and urgent actions of these detachments, the future king would have virtually no chance. It was they who actually forcefully seated him on the throne. We will talk about this below.
The last attempt of the boyars to avoid the victory of Romanov was his exit to the people, so to speak, “to the bride”. However, judging by the documents, Shuisky was afraid of failure, due to the fact that Mikhail was a simple and illiterate person. He could discredit himself if he began to hold a speech in front of voters. That is why tough and urgent actions were needed.
Why did the Cossacks intervene?
Most likely, due to the active actions of Shuisky and the approaching failure of his company, as well as due to the attempt of the boyars to “dishonestly deceive” the Cossacks, the following events occurred.
The value of Zemsky cathedrals, of course, is great, but aggressive and brute force is often more effective. In fact, at the end of February 1613 there was a semblance of an assault on the Winter Palace.
Cossacks broke into the Metropolitan’s house and demanded that the people be convened for discussion. They unanimously wished to see Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov as their king, "a man from a kind root who is a good industry and the honor of the family."
A frightened clergyman convened the boyars, and under pressure a unanimous decision was made to reign on this candidate.
Cathedral vow
This is actually the protocol that the Zemsky cathedrals in Russia made up. The delegation delivered a copy of such a document on March 2 to Kolomna to the future tsar with his mother. Since Mikhail was only seventeen at that time, it is not surprising that he was frightened and immediately flatly refused to ascend the throne.
However, some scholars of this period argue that this move was later corrected, since the cathedral vow actually repeats the document read to Boris Godunov. "To affirm the people in thought of the modesty and godly fear of their king."
Be that as it may, Mikhail was persuaded. And on May 2, 1613, he arrives in the capital, where he is crowned July 11 of that year.
Thus, you and I met with such a unique and hitherto only partially studied phenomenon in the history of the Russian state, like Zemsky Sobor. The main point that defines this phenomenon today is a fundamental difference from the veche. No matter how similar they are, but several features are fundamental. Firstly, the veche was local, and the cathedral was state. Secondly, the former possessed all power, while the latter was still more an advisory body.