Alexey Mikhailovich The quietest(March 19 - February 8) - the second Russian Tsar from the Romanov dynasty (July 14 - January 29), son of Mikhail Fedorovich and his second wife Evdokia.
Biography
Childhood
Until the age of five, the young Tsarevich Alexei remained in the care of the royal “mothers.” From the age of five, under the supervision of B.I. Morozov, he began to learn to read and write using the ABC book, then began reading the Book of Hours, the Psalter and the Acts of the Holy Apostles, at the age of seven he began to learn writing, and at the age of nine, church singing. Over time, the child (11-13 years old) developed a small library; Among the books that belonged to him, mention is made, among other things, of Lexicon and Grammar, published in Lithuania, as well as Cosmography. Among the items of “children’s fun” of the future king are: a horse and children’s armor of “German business,” musical instruments, German maps and “printed sheets” (pictures). Thus, along with the previous educational means, innovations are also noticeable, which were made not without the direct influence of B.I. Morozov. The latter, as is known, dressed the young Tsar with his brother and other children in German dress for the first time. In the 14th year, the prince was solemnly “announced” to the people, and at the age of 16 he ascended the throne of Moscow.
The character and hobbies of Alexei Mikhailovich
With his accession to the throne, Tsar Alexei came face to face with a number of issues that worried Russian life in the 17th century. Little prepared to resolve this kind of issues, he initially listened to the influence of his former uncle B.I. Morozov, but soon he himself began to take an independent part in affairs. In this activity, the main features of his character were finally formed. The autocratic Russian Tsar, judging by his own letters, foreigners (Meyerberg, Collins, Reitenfels, Lisek) and his relations with those around him, had a remarkably gentle, good-natured character, was, according to G. Kotoshikhin, “much quiet.” The spiritual atmosphere in which Tsar Alexei lived, his upbringing, character and reading of church books developed religiosity in him. On Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, the king did not drink or eat anything during all fasts and was generally a zealous performer of church rituals. The veneration of external ritual was also accompanied by an internal religious feeling, which developed Christian humility in Tsar Alexei. “And to me, a sinner,- he writes, - "The honor here is like dust". The royal good nature and humility were sometimes, however, replaced by short-term outbursts of anger. One day, the Tsar, who was being bled by a German “doctor,” ordered the boyars to try the same remedy. Rodion Streshnev did not agree. Tsar Alexei personally “humbled” the old man, but then did not know what gifts to appease him with.
Samuel Collins, an English doctor at the royal court, reports that “His entertainment consists of falconry and hound hunting. It maintains more than three hundred falcon keepers and has the best gyrfalcons in the world, which are brought from Siberia and kill ducks and other game. He hunts bears, wolves, tigers, foxes, or, better said, poisons them with dogs. When he leaves, the East Gate and the inner city wall are locked until he returns. He rarely visits his subjects... When the Tsar goes out of town or into a field of entertainment, he strictly orders that no one bother him with requests.”
Letter from Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich to his cousin, steward Afanasy Matyushkin, written in secret script (gibberish)
In general, the king knew how to respond to other people's grief and joy; remarkable in this regard are his letters to A. Ordin-Nashchokin and Prince N. Odoevsky. Few dark sides can be noted in the character of Tsar Alexei. He had a contemplative, passive rather than a practical, active nature. He stood at the crossroads between two directions, Old Russian and Western, tried them on in his worldview, but did not indulge in either one or the other with the passionate energy of Peter. The king was not only smart, but also an educated man of his age. He read a lot, wrote letters, compiled the Code of the Falconer's Way, tried to write his memoirs about the Polish war, and practiced versification. He was a man of order par excellence; " time for business and fun“(that is, everything has its time) - he wrote; or: " without rank, every thing will not be established and strengthened».
It is known that Alexey Mikhailovich was personally involved in the organization of the army. The staff list of the Reitar regiment, completed by the sovereign himself, has been preserved. The secretary of the Danish embassy, Andrei Rode, testifies that the sovereign was also involved in artillery. As he wrote in his diary: April 11, 1659 “Colonel (Bauman) also showed us a drawing of a cannon, which was invented by the Grand Duke himself (Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich)”. Alexey Mikhailovich was very interested in the European press, which he became acquainted with through translations carried out in the Ambassadorial Prikaz. The tsar personally read one of the articles (that the English who overthrew and executed their king greatly regretted this) to the boyars at a meeting of the Duma. Since 1659, Alexey Mikhailovich tried to establish regular delivery of foreign newspapers to Russia. In 1665, for this purpose, the first regular postal line was organized, connecting Moscow with Riga, and through it with the pan-European postal system. The king showed great interest in various secret writing systems. The newly developed ciphers were used in diplomatic practice. The Secret Affairs Order contained drawings of Egyptian hieroglyphs, made according to the book of Egyptologist A. Kircher. The king's interests included astrology. Following the advice of his doctor Samuel Collins, he allowed himself to bleed based on the recommendations of medical astrology. Alexey Mikhailovich was so fascinated by the starry sky that in the early 1670s. he, through A.S. Matveev, who headed the Ambassadorial Prikaz, asked the Danish resident to get him a telescope. In the last years of his life, the tsar became interested in European music. On October 21, 1674, Alexey Mikhailovich arranged a feast for himself and his loved ones, which was accompanied by very unusual fun: “The Nemchins played argans, and they played surna, and they blew trumpets, and they played surkas, and they beat on krams and kettledrums. in everything."
| Romanov Dynasty (before Peter III) | |||||||
|
| Nikita Ivanovich |
Reign
Marriage. Morozov
The young Tsar greatly submitted to the influence of Boris Morozov. Having decided to get married, in 1647, at a show of brides, he chose Euphemia, the daughter of Raf Vsevolozhsky, as his wife, but abandoned his choice due to intrigues, in which B.I. Morozov himself was probably involved. In 1648, January 16 (26 according to the new style), the tsar married Marya Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya; soon after that, B.I. Morozov married her sister Anna. Thus, B.I. Morozov and his father-in-law I.D. Miloslavsky acquired primary importance at court. By this time, however, the results of B. I. Morozov’s poor internal management had already clearly emerged. By royal decree and boyar verdict on February 7 (17), 1646, a new duty on salt was established. This duty replaced not only the previous salt duty, but also Yam and Streltsy money; it exceeded the market price of salt, the main commodity of consumption, by approximately 1⅓ times and caused strong discontent among the population. Added to this were the abuses of I.D. Miloslavsky and rumors about the tsar’s and ruler’s predilection for foreign customs. All these reasons caused a popular revolt (Salt riot) in Moscow and riots in other cities; On June 1 (11), 1648, the people began to demand from the tsar the extradition of B. Morozov, then they plundered his house and killed the devious Pleshcheev and the Duma clerk Chisty. The tsar hastened to secretly send his beloved B.I. Morozov to the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery, and betrayed Pleshcheev to the people. The new duty on salt was abolished in the same year. After the popular unrest subsided, Morozov returned to the court, enjoyed the royal favor, but did not have primary importance in government.
Patriarch Nikon
Tsar Alexei matured and no longer needed guardianship; he himself wrote to Nikon in 1651, “ that his word became fearful in the palace" “These words, however, were not entirely justified in reality. The king's gentle, sociable nature needed an adviser and friend. Nikon became such a “special”, especially beloved friend. Being at that time a metropolitan in Novgorod, where with his characteristic energy he pacified the rebels in March 1650, Nikon gained the royal trust, was ordained patriarch on July 25, 1652, and began to exert direct influence on state affairs. Among the latter, the government attracted particular attention to foreign relations. Patriarch Nikon was entrusted with carrying out church reform. The reform took place in 1653-1655. and concerned mainly church rituals and books. Baptism with three fingers was introduced, bows from the waist instead of bows to the ground, icons and church books were corrected according to Greek models. Convened in 1654 The Church Council approved the reform, but proposed to bring the existing rituals into conformity not only with the Greek, but also with the Russian tradition.
The new patriarch was a capricious, strong-willed man, and in many ways fanatical. Having received immense power over the believers, he soon came up with the idea of the primacy of church power and invited Alexei Mikhailovich to share power with him. However, the king did not want to tolerate the patriarch for long. He stopped going to patriarchal services in the Assumption Cathedral and inviting Nikon to state receptions. This was a serious blow to the patriarch’s pride. During one of the sermons in the Assumption Cathedral, he announced his resignation from patriarchal duties (while retaining his rank) and retired to the New Jerusalem Resurrection Monastery. There Nikon waited for the king to repent and ask him to return to Moscow. However, the king acted completely differently. He began to prepare a church trial of Nikon, for which he invited Orthodox patriarchs from other countries to Moscow.
For the trial of Nikon in 1666. A Church Council was convened, to which the Patriarch was brought under guard. The tsar stated that Nikon left the church without the tsar’s permission and renounced the patriarchate, thereby making it clear who held the real power in the country. The church hierarchs present supported the tsar and condemned Nikon, blessing his deprivation of the rank of patriarch and eternal imprisonment in a monastery. At the same time, the Council of 1666-1667. supported church reform and cursed all its opponents, who began to be called Old Believers. The participants of the Council decided to hand over the leaders of the Old Believers to the authorities. According to the Council Code of 1649. they were in danger of being burned at the stake. Thus, Nikon’s reforms and the Council of 1666-1667. marked the beginning of a schism in the Russian Orthodox Church.
Military reform
In 1648, using the experience of creating regiments of a foreign system during the reign of his father, Alexei Mikhailovich began army reform.
During the reform of 1648 - 1654, the best parts of the “old system” were strengthened and enlarged: the elite Moscow local cavalry of the Sovereign Regiment, the Moscow archers and gunners. The main direction of the reform was the massive creation of regiments of the new system: reitar, soldiers, dragoons and hussars. These regiments formed the backbone of the new army of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. To fulfill the goals of the reform, a large number of European military specialists were hired. This became possible due to the end of the Thirty Years' War, which created in Europe a colossal market for military professionals for those times.
Affairs in Ukraine. Polish War
Results and achievements of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich
From the internal orders under Tsar Alexei, the following can be distinguished: a ban on Belomest residents (monasteries and persons in state, military or civil service) to own black, taxable lands and industrial and commercial establishments (shops, etc.) in the suburbs; the final attachment of the tax classes, peasants and townspeople, to their place of residence; the transition was prohibited in 1648 not only to the peasant owners, but also to their children, brothers and nephews. (According to the Council Code of the city)
Alexey Mikhailovich (Polish engraving, 1664)
New central institutions were founded, what are the orders: Secret Affairs (no later than 1658), Grain (no later than 1663), Reitarsky (from 1651), Accounting Affairs (mentioned from 1657), engaged in checking the receipt, expenditure and balances of money. , Little Russian (mentioned since 1649), Lithuanian (-), Monastic (-).
In financial terms, several transformations were also made: in 1646 and the following years, a census of tax households was completed with their adult and minor male population, and the unsuccessful above-mentioned attempt was made to introduce a new salt duty; by a decree of April 30, 1653, it was forbidden to collect small customs duties (myt, travel duties and anniversary) or farm them out and it was ordered to be included in the ruble duties collected at customs; At the beginning of 1656 (no later than March 3), due to a lack of funds, copper money was issued. Soon (from 1658) the copper ruble began to be valued at 10, 12, and in the 1660s even 20 and 25 times cheaper than the silver one; the resulting terrible high prices caused a popular revolt (Copper Riot) on July 25, 1662. The rebellion was pacified by the king's promise to punish the perpetrators and the expulsion of the Streltsy army against the rebels. By decree of June 19, 1667. it was ordered to begin building ships in the village of Dedinovo on the Oka River; however, the ship built at the same time burned down in Astrakhan.
In the field of legislation: the Council Code was compiled and published (printed for the first time on May 7-20, 1649) and supplementing it in some respects: New Trade Charter of 1667, New Decree Articles on Robbery and Murder Cases of 1669, New Decree Articles on Estates of 1676 years, military regulations in 1649. Russia also united with Ukraine in 1654.
Under Tsar Alexei, the colonization movement into Siberia continued. The following people became famous in this regard: A. Bulygin, O. Stepanov, E. Khabarov and others. Founded: Simbirsk (1648), Nerchinsk (1658), Irkutsk (1659), Penza (1663), Selenginsk (1666).
Matveev
In the last years of the reign of Tsar Alexei, Artamon Sergeevich Matveev especially rose to prominence at court. Two years after the death of M.I. Miloslavskaya (March 4), the tsar married his relative Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina. On January 22, Matveev, a fan of Western European customs, gave theatrical performances, which were attended not only by the tsar himself, but also by the queen , princes and princesses (for example, November 2, 1672 in the village of Preobrazhenskoye). On September 1, the tsar “announced” his son Fedor to the people as the heir to the throne. On January 30, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich the Quiet died at the age of 47.
Marriages and children
Wedding of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Natalya Naryshkina. 17th century engraving
Alexey Mikhailovich was the father of 16 children from two marriages. Three of his sons subsequently reigned. None of Alexei Mikhailovich's daughters married.
- Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina (3 children):
- Peter (May 30, 1672 - January 28, 1725)
- Natalia (August 1673 - June 1716)
- Theodora (September 1674 - November 1678)
Monuments
The most important works on the history of the reign of Tsar Alexei
- Abolensky Ivan. The Moscow state under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon according to the notes of Archdeacon Pavel of Aleppo. - Kyiv: S.T. Eremeev’s printing house, 1876. - 203 p.
- Berkh V.N. Reign of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, St. Petersburg, 1831.
- Zabelin I. E. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (in “Experiments in the Study of Russian Ancients and History,” vol. I, pp. 203-281; the same in “Otech. Zap.”, vol. 110, pp. 325-378)
- Klyuchevsky V. O. Historical portraits. Articles: “The significance of St. Sergius for the Russian people and state”, “Good People of Ancient Rus'”, “Characteristics of Tsar Ivan the Terrible”, “Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich”, “The Life of Peter the Great before the start of the Northern War”. M., .
- Medovikov P. E.. - M: Printing house of Alexander Semyon, 1854. - 256 p.
- Solovyov S. M. History of Russia, vol. X, XI and XII
- Florya B. N. The Russian state and its western neighbors (1655–1661). M., 2010.
- Platonov S. F. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (in “Historical News” 1886, May, pp. 265-275)
- Presnyakov A. E. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich // Russian autocrats (book of historical essays) / A. E. Presnyakov; Compiled, author of the preface and appendix, Dr. Ist. Sciences A.F. Smirnov; Ed. A. N. Kazakevich; Artist B. A. Lavrov. - M.: Book, 1990. - P. 59-141. - 464 s. - 200,000 copies. - ISBN 5-212-00489-6(region)
- Khmyrov M. D. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and his time (in “Ancient and Modern Russia”, vol. III, 1875)
Notes
Links
To trace the exercise of royal power over such a huge country, let us turn to the reign of one of the autocrats.
In the second half of the 17th century. Alexei Mikhailovich reigned. He ascended the throne in 1645, his era ended in 1676.
During the reign of the second sovereign from the Romanov dynasty, the consequences of the Time of Troubles were finally overcome and the general style of the 17th century was fully defined, rich in events, full of internal contradictions and struggles. The Russian autocrat was also a match for the era: a man faithful to the precepts of antiquity and susceptible to Western influences, kind, but at times extremely hot-tempered and even cruel when, in his opinion, the state’s benefit required it.
Why did contemporaries call the tsar “the quietest”? After all, there was no “silence” either in his stormy reign, or in the lively and receptive character of the sovereign, or in his love for fun and entertainment. Without a doubt, Alexei Mikhailovich was “quieter” than his youngest son Peter the Great, but more active, more energetic and restless than his father Mikhail Fedorovich.
Researchers come to the conclusion that the adjective “quietest” is a “titular element” (although it was not included in the official title), which was related not to the person, but to the rank, not to the character of the monarch, but to his power. Therefore, this unofficial title is proclaimed in the church during the Great Entrance, used in court poetry, and passed on to successors. Fyodor, co-rulers Ivan and Peter Alekseevich are respectively called “the quietest”, and after the death of his elder brother, only Peter I (for example, in the “Rhetorical Hand” by Stefan Yavorsky, Peter is called “the quietest”).
Most likely, in state phraseology, “rebellion” is regularly contrasted with “silence,” and it follows that the “quietest monarch” is the “owner of silence,” a king who knows how to maintain order.
It is with this important reservation that the international relations and foreign policy of the Moscow government should be characterized. It should be noted that the extremely unfavorable circumstances of that time for the Russian state were riots and wars. Foreigners wondered how it could recover from shocks so quickly. This is explained by the selfless efforts of the authorities, who, although not immediately, knew how to achieve the execution of their orders.
All these efforts, which allowed the Moscow state to survive, were, however, capable of completely breaking even a more steadfast tsar than Alexei Mikhailovich. Moreover, the “quietest” had to endure not only government turmoil, but also the loss of loved ones: the death of his first wife Maria Ilyinichna, the early death of three sons. But the tsar did not lose heart or become embittered, retaining his high spiritual qualities, unfeigned religiosity, and the patriarchal-fatherly attitude towards his subjects that so surprised foreigners.
At the same time, researchers rightly express the idea that, despite his passive character, his good-natured and indecisive attitude to the issues of the time, Tsar Alexei greatly helped the success of the reform movement, supported the reformers and created “transformative moods” in society.
The liveliness and activity of character, as well as the love for all kinds of fun, sometimes rude, were passed on to Alexei Mikhailovich’s son Peter the Great.
For the first 5 years, the future king lived in the women's mansion, then he was transferred to his father's half. Alexey’s “uncles” were B.I. Morozov and V.I. Streshnev. At the same time, clerk V. Prokofiev began to teach the heir to the throne to read and write, as was customary at that time, according to the Book of Hours, the Psalter and the Apostle. By the age of ten, he already knew the rite of worship well, sang in the choir and, already as an adult, could easily compete with the monastery charter in his knowledge of the rites of church services.
When Alexei turned 8 years old, he began to live separately from his father in the three-story Teremny Palace, specially built for him. From the age of 14, he began to accompany the sovereign during ceremonial appearances.
On July 13, 1645, the first tsar of the House of Romanov passed away, and on September 18, his wife Evdokia died. So, at the age of 16, Alexey Mikhailovich was left an orphan. It is easy to understand the grief of the young sovereign, who, instead of the 40 days of mourning allotted to him according to church custom, grieved for his parents for a whole year. The royal crown - the cap of Monomakh - was placed on him in the Assumption Cathedral shortly after the end of the mourning, on September 28, 1645.
After the crowning of the kingdom, Alexei Mikhailovich had to immediately get married, since only a married person was considered an adult. Boris Ivanovich Morozov, the royal educator, was in charge of choosing the bride. Of the 200 girls brought to Moscow for the bride, only six were presented to the Tsar. First, the tsar chose the daughter of the Kasimov landowner, Euphemia Vsevolzhskaya. But for unknown reasons, she fainted in the presence of the tsar (Morozov’s enemies claimed that, on his orders, the bride’s hair was pulled too tightly under the aisle). Then Vsevolzhskaya was accused of epilepsy, and the tsar did not dare to marry her. Morozov found him a new bride - the beautiful Maria Miloslavskaya. The royal physician Collins reports that she was the daughter of a poor nobleman who served in the embassy order and served wine to foreigners at feasts, and his daughter, the future empress, was even forced to pick mushrooms and trade them in the market. It is not surprising that Morozov himself married the queen’s sister, thus becoming related to his royal pupil. However, this did not save Morozov from collapse. Now it becomes clear why the tsar was merciful to Boris Ivanovich. An unsuccessful attempt to increase treasury revenues through high duties on salt led to the Salt Riot of 1648, during which the rebels demanded Morozov's execution. The Tsar saved his relative by removing him from Moscow to the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery. After returning to the capital, he continued to enjoy the favor of Alexei Mikhailovich, but no longer played his previous role in management. The first tsar’s adviser and even the “second great sovereign” was the tsar’s “king’s friend” - Novospassky Archimandrite Nikon - in the near future - Metropolitan of Novgorod (from 1650) and Patriarch of All Rus' (from 1652).
The riot of 1648 and the ongoing unrest had two important consequences. In 1649, the Council Code was adopted, which strengthened the position of the Romanovs, created after the Time of Troubles, and significantly improved Russian legislation. According to the government, the publication of the Code was supposed to introduce order and regularity into government and mitigate popular discontent. The second consequence of the Salt Riot was the greater independence of the king: he acquired his own view of things.
The war with Poland for Ukraine in 1654-1656 had an even greater influence on the development of his personality. The king himself set out on a campaign with his troops, having visited Lithuania and Livonia. It was during the war that the tsar’s positive qualities emerged - he showed himself to be a mature politician and a humane person.
The king kept notes about this war. A remarkable feature runs through them - concern for warriors. He understood that it was impossible to do without casualties, but he suggested that the governors conduct business with the least losses and was ready to forgive a lot, but not unnecessary sacrifices. The tsar’s letters contain the following lines: “51 of our people of all ranks were killed, and 35 were wounded; and then I thank God that so many were beaten from three thousand, otherwise everyone is safe, because they ran, and they themselves are crying that such a sin was committed... Rejoice that the people are safe.” You need to have a special kind of soul - to rejoice at the escape of your soldiers, those who escaped. When a foreign officer in Russian service proposed introducing the death penalty for fleeing from the battlefield, the Tsar indignantly refused such a step on the grounds that God did not grant equal courage to everyone, and punishment for this would be cruel.
In the conquered cities, Alexey Mikhailovich was in no hurry to establish his own court, respecting local traditions, and, in particular, he satisfied the petition of the residents of Mogilev, who wanted to live according to Magdeburg law, wear the same clothes, not go to war, etc. The second time he came to Smolensk to stop the looting and pogroms.
The war with Poland lasted until October 1656, when Russia, fearing the excessive strengthening of the Swedes who occupied Poznan, Warsaw and Krakow, concluded a truce with the Poles, starting military operations against Charles X. In contrast to the Polish campaign, which returned to Russia what it had lost in The Time of Troubles allowed Smolensk to take Polotsk and Vilna; the Russian-Swedish war ended with an unfavorable peace in Kardis in 1661, according to which the king ceded all previously conquered areas. These unfavorable conditions were associated with unrest in Little Russia, which joined Russia, and a new war with Poland. After significant defeats in 1659 near Konotop and Chudnov, Russia, thanks to the successful actions of Hetman Bryukhovetsky and Prince Ramodanovsky, managed, however, to take revenge. Internal unrest in Poland contributed to this. In January 1667, in the village of Andrusovo, the warring parties concluded a truce for 13 years. Under this agreement, Russia received Smolensk, Seversk land, the left side of the Dnieper and Kyiv for two years. During the war, the tsar personally visited Vitebsk, Polotsk, Mogilev, Kovno, Grodno, Vilna, and became acquainted with Western customs. Returning to Moscow, he began to make changes to the court environment. Wallpaper (gold leather) and furniture of German and Polish design appeared in the palace.
In the 50-60s. Important changes are also taking place in the internal life of the country - a reform of the Church, the inspiration of which was the Tsar himself, and was carried out at first by the Tsar’s favorite Patriarch Nikon. In 1658, the tsar, who had become much more independent and independent, disagreed with the patriarch, who, offended by the sovereign, voluntarily withdrew from Moscow to the Resurrection New Jerusalem Monastery near Moscow. Until 1666, the church actually remained without a patriarch, which greatly tormented the pious king. Then a Church Council with the participation of eastern hierarchs deprived Nikon of his rank and sentenced him to exile to the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery as a simple monk. The sovereign himself began to take charge of church affairs.
The trials that befell the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich: the Copper Riot, the uprising of 1667, the Stenka Razin movement of 1670, did not change the character of the tsar, did not harden him. Perhaps, S. F. Platonov very accurately described the character of the Tsar in the essay “Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich.”
“The very appearance of the king immediately spoke in his favor and attracted him to him,” writes the historian. “A rare kindness shone in his lively blue eyes; the look of these eyes, according to a contemporary, did not frighten anyone, but was kind and encouraging. The sovereign's face, plump and ruddy, with a light brown beard, was complacently friendly and at the same time serious and important, and his plump (then too plump) figure retained a stately and dignified posture. However, the regal appearance of Alexei Mikhailovich did not awaken fear in anyone: it was felt that it was not the tsar’s personal pride that created this posture, but the consciousness of the importance and holiness of the dignity that God had placed on him.”
There are positive reviews of the Tsar by foreigners, and this is especially significant if we remember that their authors were not friends or admirers of Moscow at all. Apparently, Alexey Mikhailovich seemed to everyone who had the opportunity to get to know him as a bright personality, and surprised everyone with his virtues and pleasantness. Such impressions of contemporaries are confirmed by letters and messages from the tsar himself.
The epistolary legacy of Alexei Mikhailovich contains everything that tells the reader about an unusually receptive and impressionable person. He is interested and concerned about everything equally: political issues, military affairs, the death of the patriarch, gardening, the question of how to sing and serve in church, falconry, theatrical performances, and the riot of a drunken monk in his favorite monastery. .
There are references to the fact that Alexei Mikhailovich was a very hot-tempered person, but just as easily as he became angry, the tsar knew how to forgive and make peace, unless, of course, state interests required long-term disgrace or exile of the culprit of the tsar’s disfavor.
Every grief and misfortune touched the king vividly. So, he consoled Prince Nikita Ivanovich Odoevsky when the latter’s son suddenly died. The prince was in Kazan, and Alexei Mikhailovich sent him a letter, where he developed the idea that the bright death of a person without suffering, “in virtue and in good repentance,” is the mercy of the Lord, which should be rejoiced even in moments of natural grief.
The tsar also found words of consolation for Afanasy Lavrentievich Ordin-Nashchokin, whose son, named Warrior, fled abroad and betrayed the sovereign and the Fatherland. Alexey Mikhailovich even tried to console his father with the hope of the return of his son, who allegedly did not change, but was only carried away by his youth. The Tsar turned out to be right: Afanasyev “little son Voyka” soon returned from distant countries to Pskov, and from there to Moscow. Alexey Mikhailovich at first refused to accept the resignation of his inconsolable father, then he “graced” his son as well. Young Ordin-Nashchokin received forgiveness and, for his father’s faithful service, “was written on the Moscow list with leave to live in his father’s villages.”
The sovereign also loved to have fun. In a letter to Matyushkin, he says: “They are consoled by the fact that I constantly bathe the stolniks every morning in the pond... for those who are not in time for my inspection, I bathe them!” Unlike his son, whose jokes turned into mockery, Alexei Mikhailovich, as a rule, amused himself harmlessly. Therefore, the stewards were deliberately late for the review: after all, after the forced ablution, they were awarded great honor and invited to the royal table.
The king's complacency, gentleness, sociability and cheerful disposition were combined with deep education. He completely mastered not only the biblical and secular knowledge available to the Russian people of his time, but also the book language itself, intricate and flowery in the 17th century, to match the “pattern” of icons and frescoes, architecture and decorative arts. But unlike the scribes of his age, the king never sacrificed clarity of thought for the sake of beauty of form. Behind every phrase in the epistolary and literary experiments of the tsar there is a living and clear thought; apparently, he was used to thinking, used to freely and easily express what he thought, and, moreover, said only what he thought.
Reading contributed to the king's religiosity. His main spiritual interest was the salvation of the soul. He pointed out to anyone guilty that by his actions he was destroying his soul and serving Satan.
The Tsar had a much broader understanding of Orthodoxy than most of his entourage. Jealously guarding the purity of faith, he at the same time considered it not only possible, but also useful to communicate with foreigners, and tried to adopt their technical knowledge and military experience. For the tsar, in the first place in Christianity was religious morality, and not the form and ritual themselves, and this morality was not a dry code of abstract moral rules, but a kind of philosophy of life, manifested in a loving word, in a warm, careful, sensitive attitude towards people. The tsar’s religiosity, strict observance of church fasts, asceticism - all this, it would seem, did not fit well with such a character trait of Alexei Mikhailovich as the love of the beauty of “this world,” clearly manifested in his passion for falconry and agriculture. The Tsar even wrote a special essay, “The Officer of the Falconer’s Path,” where he very subtly discusses the beauty of various hunting birds, the beauty of summer and strike, and the external grace of the hunt itself. The same sense of beauty forced the king to be carried away by the external piety of church service and strictly follow it, sometimes even violating its internal decorum. In the notes of Paul of Aleppo one can see many examples of how the tsar gave orders to the church, establishing order and beauty at such moments when, according to our concepts, he should have remained silent. Alexei Mikhailovich’s aesthetic taste was also reflected in the choice of his favorite places - the Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery in Zvenigorod or the village of Kolomenskoye. The combination of asceticism and a bright outlook on life does not contradict the nature of Alexei Mikhailovich, they are organic in him. Religion and prayer, in his opinion, do not exclude pleasures and amusement. The king did not consider his favorite falconry or looking at strange foreign things a sin, and did not repent of it. Entertainment saves you from the worst sin - sadness and despondency. This is what the tsar writes in “The Falconer’s Way Officer”: “And this field fun greatly consoles sad hearts. Be willing to have fun, be comforted by this good fun... let not all kinds of grief and sorrow overcome you.” Sadness is a sin, it must be treated. The cure is entertainment. But you need to know when to stop this medicine. In the same instruction to falconers, the Tsar reminds: “Truth and justice and merciful love and military formation, never forget the time for business and the hour for fun.” So, the goal of life for Alexei Mikhailovich is the salvation of the soul, and fun is only “consolation”, indulgence in natural human weakness, so as not to commit the grave sin of despondency.
Of course, “there is no man without sin,” the bright sides of Alexei Mikhailovich’s nature were interspersed with shadows. One of the street mischief-makers, embittered by the reforms, Savinka Korepin, chatted in Moscow about the young sovereign that “the tsar is stupid, he sees everything out of the mouths of the boyars Morozov and Miloslavsky: they own everything, and the sovereign himself knows it all, but is silent: the devil has taken his mind.” . The idea that “the king looks out of his mouth” was expressed more than once and later by other contemporaries of the “quietest.”
Indeed, as S. F. Platonov notes, “for all his intelligence, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich was a weak-willed and at times faint-hearted person.” The historian finds confirmation of this idea in the king’s letters. In 1652, he wrote to Nikon that the butler, Prince Alexei Mikhailovich Lvov, was “beating his brow about resignation.” He was an outrageous arbitrator who sat in the Grand Palace Prikaz with impunity for many years. The Tsar was glad that he could get rid of Lvov, and “put Vasily Buturlin in the palace.” With naive boasting, he tells Nikon: “But my word is now terrible in the palace, and (everything) is done without hesitation!” This means that such was the impudence of Prince Lvov that even the king’s word did not seem scary to him, and so great was the sovereign’s weakness that he could not get rid of his butler!
In the absence of a strong and firm will, Alexey Mikhailovich could not take the mood of those around him into his hands, and could not deal abruptly with the culprits. “He could flare up, scold and even hit, but then quickly give up and seek reconciliation. He tolerated Prince Lvov in business, kept his bad father-in-law Miloslavsky close to him, gave vent to Nikon’s immense lust for power because he did not have the strength to fight either official abuses, court influences, or strong characters.”
The historian sees another negative character trait of Tsar Alexei in the fact that the “quietest” “did not know how and did not think to work. He did not know poetry or the joys of work, and in this respect he was the complete opposite of his son Peter. He could live and enjoy among the “small things,” as he called his hunt and as all his other fun could be called. All his energy went into the administration of that “order” that he saw in the centuries-old church and palace life. His entire initiative was limited to the circle of pleasant “innovations” that in his time, but independently of him, began to penetrate the life of the Moscow nobility. Managing the state was not a matter that Tsar Alexei would like to take directly upon himself. For him there were boyars and clerks. First, Boris Ivanovich Morozov ruled for Tsar Alexei, then the time came for Prince Nikita Ivanovich Odoevsky, after him Patriarch Nikon became a temporary worker, ruling not only the saintly affairs, but also the royal ones, Nikon was followed by Ordin-Nashchokin and Matveev. At every moment of Tsar Alexei’s activity, we see around him the proxies who ruled. The king, so to speak, is present at their work, praises them or argues with them, bothers with the circle of actual workers and activists. But he can’t work with them or captivate them....”
Thus, the “quiet” sovereign, unlike his son, did not realize the need for deep reforms in Russian life, significant changes. It seemed to him that everything remained unchanged, stable, in the order and order he so loved. In the reform of the church, he sees not a change in books, rites and rituals, but only their correction in accordance with ancient practice. In the wars for access to the sea - the return of lands lost by Russia during the Time of Troubles. Borrowing “troops of a foreign system”, some military-technical and cultural innovations from the West, and attempting to secularize the church is the path to strengthening the state, and not at all the destruction of traditional culture. And if everything goes according to the established pattern, according to the established order, is it worth interfering in events?
Thus, the king did not feel like a reformer. Hence the inconsistency and indecision of the first attempts at reforms during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich. The reformers, with the possible exception of Ordin-Nashchokin in real politics and Yuri Krizhanich in theory, were not yet aware of the transformations. It seemed to them that they were completing the restoration and restoration of the Muscovite kingdom, begun under Michael. Meanwhile, there is not a single transformation of Peter I that would not have an analogue, albeit weak and pale, during the reign of his father. “This tsar,” writes V. O. Klyuchevsky, “had to stand at the source of the most important internal and external movements. Various relations, ancient and recent, Swedish, Polish, Crimean, Turkish, Western Russian, social, church, as if on purpose, during this reign intensified, met and became confused... and above all of them, as the common key to their solution, stood the basic question: to remain whether to remain faithful to our native antiquity or take lessons from strangers. Tsar Alexei resolved this issue in his own way: in order not to choose between antiquity and innovation, he did not break with the former and did not turn away from the latter.”
This response to the challenge of the time was, of course, inconsistent and contradictory. This explains the dramatic personal outcome with which the king came to the end of his life. The sovereign’s “son’s friend,” the disgraced Patriarch Nikon, was imprisoned, as was his opponent Archpriest Avvakum. Both were known and liked by the king. The Orthodox Church, so beloved and revered by the Tsar, was torn apart by schism. Government troops, shortly before the death of the “quietest” after an 8-year blockade and siege, took the stronghold of the old faith, the Solovetsky Monastery.
However, the king also had consolation. He was married twice: to nee M.I. Miloslavskaya, who gave birth to 13 children (she died on March 4, 1669), and after her death to N.K. Naryshkina, who outlived her husband and gave him a son and two daughters.
Alexei Mikhailovich died in January 1676, having managed to bless his eldest son Fyodor into the kingdom, give the order to release all prisoners from prison, forgive debts, receive communion and unction.
4TH DAY OF TSAR ALEXEY MIKHAILOVICH"
In order to better understand that era and understand the character of the 17th century in Russia, let us trace the life of the “quiet” sovereign not in military campaigns and important state affairs, but in everyday life. The historian A. A. Kiesewetter wrote a special essay entitled “The Day of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich” (M., 1904), in which the usual day of the tsar is traced step by step; Later historians have conducted additional research on this issue.
The Emperor got up at 4 o'clock in the morning and immediately went out to the chamber of the cross, where he read a series of prayers, after which he venerated the festive icon, and the confessor sprinkled him with holy water. Then he went to the queen and went with her to matins. After Matins, the door opened from the inner chambers to the front chamber, where nearby boyars and Duma officials gathered - in caftans made of cloth, satin, or even brocade, in high hats made of sable or black fox fur.
The king talked with them and was told the latest news. He thanked and immediately complimented those who distinguished themselves. They bowed to him in return.
Then the tsar went to mass in the Kremlin cathedrals. He came out in “purple and a crown”, he was surrounded by bells, dressed in white caftans embroidered with silver and high velvet hats embroidered with pearls. The people greeted the king with prostrations. His appearance at mass had a certain meaning: it testified to the stability of the existing order and emphasized the unique unity of the tsar with the people. Mass ended at 10 o'clock, and the tsar retired to the inner chambers to “sit with the boyars,” that is, to engage in state affairs. The boyars sat according to their nobility, the Duma clerks stood, and sometimes, when the meeting dragged on, the tsar allowed them to sit. At the same hours, the sovereign worked in the Secret Order. On holidays, the Duma did not meet, but ambassadors were received or the patriarch and clergy were invited.
The sovereign most often dined alone. Although Alexey Mikhailovich was very abstinent in food, he often fasted, but even on weekdays up to 70 dishes were served to his table. They, like intoxicating drinks, were sent to distinguished boyars. The tsar himself drank kvass, rarely oatmeal or beer. Every dish served to his table was tasted (by the cooks, butlers, stewards, housekeepers, and food handlers) for fear of poison. On holidays the table was luxuriously set. There were always many guests behind him. An invitation to the royal feast was very honorable, although local quarrels often arose between the boyars.
After lunch, the king went falconry or went to rest for 2-3 hours (if he prayed at night). The king's departure was luxuriously furnished: in winter, wide gilded sleighs upholstered in Persian carpets were served. The archers crowded around the sleigh. They cleared the path ahead and dispersed the crowd. The procession was completed by a detachment of residents - a kind of palace guard. In the summer the king rode horseback.
Having returned, the king went to vespers and spent the rest of the day with his family. Alexey Mikhailovich and Marya Ilyinichna had dinner together, then the wanderers and elders were called. In the evenings, the tsar read (Holy Scripture, lives, spiritual words and teachings, chronicles, chronicles and chronographs, ambassadorial notes, books on geography, as well as novels and stories brought from Poland), and even more often he wrote. Sometimes in the evening they went to the Amusement Chamber - a kind of booth theater, where jesters, dwarfs, freaks, and buffoons performed. Over time, jesters and buffoons were replaced by musicians who played organs and cymbals, “bakha-ri and domarchei,” singers and storytellers of folk tales. Later, real performances and European comedies were staged in this chamber. At nine o'clock in the evening the sovereign was already asleep.
Almost every day of Alexei Mikhailovich passed so calmly and measuredly, who did not shy away from constant, persistent government work. Having developed the clownish rank of promotion to falconers, the tsar himself sent a characteristic digression: “Never forget truth and justice and merciful love and the military system: time for business and time for fun.”
Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov (1629-1676) - the second Russian Tsar from the Romanov family. Reigned from 1645 to 1676. He ascended the throne after the death of his father Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov at the age of 16. But it was much easier for the young sovereign than for his father. The Time of Troubles was long over, and the Moscow government enjoyed the universal support of the people.
By nature, the young man was cheerful, witty and lively. He was passionate about falconry and started a theater at court. At the same time, the young man was distinguished by prudence and conscientiousness. He respected his elders, was faithful to his friends, did not break the “old times,” but slowly and gradually mastered and introduced the experience of advanced European countries.
State activities of Alexey Mikhailovich
At first, the young tsar listened to the advice of the boyars in everything. Boris Ivanovich Morozov (1590-1661) had the greatest influence on the sovereign. He was a relative of the young Moscow ruler, since both were married to the Miloslavsky sisters.
However, Morozov turned out to be a bad manager. He abused his position, which aroused universal hostility. In February 1646, on his initiative, a new duty on salt was introduced. It has increased noticeably, which has caused sharp discontent among the population.
Alexey Mikhailovich loved falconry
It's all over salt riot. Mass riots took place both in Moscow and in other cities. Outraged people demanded that the tsar hand over Morozov to them for execution. But the sovereign secretly transported his favorite to the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery.
The duty was canceled, after which popular outrage subsided. Morozov then returned to Moscow, but Alexey Mikhailovich had already ceased to trust him recklessly.
Church reform
The second person who had great influence on the king was Patriarch Nikon (1605-1681). It was with him that the sovereign carried out church reform, which led to a split in the Orthodox Church.
The Muscovite kingdom was focused on expanding its borders. However, this was prevented by differences in the Orthodox faith, and the basis of these differences were church rituals. They were carried out in accordance with the regulations. The Great Russians adhered to the Jerusalem Charter, and the Little Russians honored the Studite Charter. They differed significantly, that is, they differed from each other.
As a result, the Moscow people looked down on those who honored a different charter. And this prevented the expansion of borders and unification with other nations. In such a situation, Moscow could not become the center of Orthodoxy.
Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon at the tomb of St. Philippa
(painting by A. Litovchenko)
Therefore, the king decided, with the help of Nikon, to change the situation. He was a powerful and decisive man, and therefore took up church reform with great determination.
The liturgical books were rewritten. They began to cross themselves not with two, but with three fingers. Serious changes took place in church rituals. However, the reforms frightened many Orthodox Christians. It began to seem to them that some kind of non-Russian faith was being introduced. And the believers split into two irreconcilable camps.
The authorities dubbed adherents of the old rituals or Old Believers schismatics. They resisted Nikonianism in every possible way, which was considered as state resistance and was severely punished.
Old Believers began to be persecuted, humiliated, and killed. And those, faithful to the faith of their fathers and grandfathers, went into the forests and founded monasteries there. When they tried to arrest them, the Old Believers burned themselves.
In 1656, the Holy Council excommunicated all Old Believers from the Orthodox Church. This was a terrible punishment for believers. However, Patriarch Nikon did not escape punishment. His friendship with the king began to crack. The reason was the patriarch’s pride and his passionate desire to influence God’s anointed.
All these attempts went beyond the bounds of decency, and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov broke all relations with the presumptuous ruler. Nikon was deprived of his patriarchal rank and sent into exile to a distant northern monastery. But this disgrace had no effect on church reform.
Silver ruble under Alexei Mikhailovich
Other reforms
The Emperor held military reform. It took place in 1648-1654. During this time, the number of local cavalry, rifle regiments and gunners increased. Hussar, dragoon and reiter regiments were created en masse. Foreign military specialists were recruited.
Was carried out and currency reform. The treasury had accumulated a lot of silver thalers. Since 1654, they began to be minted into rubles. Efimkas, half-efimkas, and copper fifty rubles appeared. Taxes began to be collected in silver, and copper coins were issued from the treasury. This disrupted the financial system and caused the Copper Riot. Overall, the monetary reform was unsuccessful and failed.
During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, the uprising of Stepan Razin occurred. It began in 1667, and in 1671 the rebel chieftain was executed in Moscow.
In 1654, Ukraine was reunified with Russia. The second king of the Romanov dynasty took an active part in this. From 1654 to 1667 there was a war with Poland. It ended with the signing of the Andrusovo Truce. According to it, the cities of Smolensk and Kyiv were transferred to Russia.
Family life of Alexei Mikhailovich
As for family life, it turned out extremely well for the king. He lived for many years in complete harmony with Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya (1624-1669). This woman was distinguished by her beauty, kindness and calmness. She gave birth to 13 children to the sovereign. Of these, 5 are boys and 8 are girls.
Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya
The queen was extremely religious and pious. In a modest carriage, regardless of snow, rain or mud, she often visited holy places, where she prayed long and earnestly.
After her death, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov married for the second time to 20-year-old Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina (1651-1694), the daughter of a simple nobleman. This betrothed gave birth to her first child in 1672, who was named Peter. Subsequently he became a reformer of Russia. In addition to Peter, the wife gave birth to two more children for the sovereign.
Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina
Three sons subsequently reigned. The country was also ruled by daughter Sophia together with Ivan and Peter (triple power). None of the king's daughters married.
In 1676, the Tsar of All Rus' suddenly died. At the time of his death he was 46 years old. It is assumed that he died of a heart attack. The throne was inherited by his 15-year-old son Fyodor Alekseevich (1661-1682).
Alexey Starikov
Abstract on the academic discipline "History of Russia"
on the topic: "The reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov."
Plan
1. Introduction.
3. Copper and salt riots.
5. The last years of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich.
6. Conclusion.
7. List of references.
1.Introduction
Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich led the country in difficult years, when it had not yet fully recovered from the Time of Troubles, and the situation in Russia was more than turbulent. It is no coincidence that contemporaries themselves called this century the “rebellious century.” At the same time, many changes were taking place. Previous principles and ideals were gradually leveled out, and much changed in all spheres of people’s lives. Public consciousness has also undergone considerable transformations. Therefore, the dynasty that came to power was looking for new forms of power and methods of influencing people. Alexey Mikhailovich was a controversial person. Nicknamed “The Quietest,” he, nevertheless, very often fell into anger and was quick to take revenge. In relation to his loved ones, he was gentle and quiet, and in other cases the ruler was distinguished by distrust and suspicion. Being devout and at the same time suspicious, he saw the “evil eye” and witchcraft in everything, which often led to accusations and subsequent punishments of often innocent people.
The reforms carried out by him and his favorite boyar Morozov caused riots and uprisings in the country (Salt and Copper riots, the Peasant War led by Stepan Razin). Considering the constant military clashes with Poland, Sweden, Turkey and the Crimean Tatars, it should be recognized that the period of Alexei Mikhailovich’s reign was unstable and conflict-ridden. All these dramatic events were a kind of test of the strength of the new tsar from the Romanov dynasty. The era of Alexei Romanovich's reign brought another destabilizing phenomenon in Russian society - the Schism associated with the name of Patriarch Nikon (1605 - 1681). Thus, another threat arose, this time directed not at the state, but at the spiritual foundations of Russian life. The paradox of the current situation lies in the fact that the state in such difficult conditions “did not collapse, but, on the contrary, strengthened” [Platonov; 189]. Thus, the period of Alexei Mikhailovich’s reign turned out to be a time of upsurge - creative, political, spiritual, which undoubtedly increases the degree of interest in his personality in our days.
2. Internal structure under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. Serfdom.
Alexei Mikhailovich began to rule the country at the age of sixteen. Like his father, he was not independent in his reign. The main role in governing the state for the first three years was played by boyar B.I. Morozov (1590 - 1661) - teacher of Alexei Mikhailovich. The king's young age, desire for entertainment and early marriage did not allow him to immediately begin state affairs after his crowning. This made it possible for the enterprising Morozov to quickly begin his activities. He began to manage several orders at once that were of decisive importance - financial (Big Treasury), Streletsky order and Foreign order, as well as a monopoly on the drinking business and the pharmacy order. It should be noted that the new king had an excellent education and possessed considerable talents, and therefore was soon able to begin fulfilling his mission as God’s protege.
The main concern of the new sovereign and government was replenishing the treasury. To this end, a decree was issued in 1646 ordering an increase in the duty on salt. This led to the fact that they stopped buying salt (due to its sharp rise in price). As a result, treasury revenues fell sharply. At the same time, they began to collect from the tax-paying population arrears of taxes accumulated over the previous two years. These actions caused extreme discontent among the population.
Increasingly strengthening state power, the tsar eventually began to rely on the administrative and bureaucratic apparatus. The country's governance system was based on Orders - territorial-sectoral bodies of centralized management. Orders that appeared in the 17th century (although they originated during the existence of the Russian centralized state) became the basis of the bureaucratic mechanism of Russia.
Alexey Mikhailovich sought to reform the country's government. One of his largest transformations was the creation of a set of laws of the state - the Council Code.
The Council Code of 1649 is the most important source of law of the 17th century, which covers in detail the work of all branches of law - judicial bodies, legal proceedings, civil, criminal, administrative, family, etc. The Code demarcated feudal possessions (estates and estates), equalized the legal status of peasants and serfs, abolished the “lesson summer”, leveled the personality of the serf peasant and turned it into a commodity. The right to sell peasants and the right to extrajudicial execution against them was secured. Thus, serfdom under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich was finally established. According to S.F. Platonov, “the abolition by the Code of the fixed years allotted for the search for runaway peasants, thereby finally attached them to the land” [Platonov; 191].
The Code also applies to the townspeople. Now this social layer is attached to the suburb. The Posads are turning into a closed class that cannot leave the territory. At the same time, outsiders are prohibited from entering the posad. Thus, the townspeople are isolated and their rights are limited.
Criminal law in the Council Code systematized crimes and punishments in accordance with feudal law. The most serious crime was a crime against God and faith, and then against the king and the authorities, state crimes. This system was completed by crimes against the individual. The punishment system looked terrifying and included cutting off the head, hanging, drowning, burying alive in the ground, pouring molten metal down the throat, burning at the stake, quartering, wheeling, and various corporal punishments. Imprisonment, both urgent and indefinite, has become widespread [Tsechoev; 201 - 202].
The accession of Alexei Mikhailovich to the throne coincided with a new era in the historical existence of Russia. A.N. Bokhanov writes: “The wounds of the Time of Troubles were healed, the Russian House was preserved and restored, all the “uninvited guests” were expelled from its borders, and therefore there was an urgent need to restore order and cleanliness in the administration of the state and Russian life” [Bokhanov; 178]. The aspirations of the young tsar were aimed at strengthening the moral state of the people and at implementing Orthodox laws.
Russia at that time positioned itself as a State-Church, a country in which spiritual priorities were predominant. The meaning of the existence of the human person was his involvement in communication with God. It was kinship in Christ that was defined as the dominant concept of earthly life. “For this reason,” says the prominent historian A.N. Bokhanov, - neither under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, nor before, nor after him, was ethnic nationalism possible” [Bokhanov; 10].
During the reign of the second tsar from the Romanov dynasty, more than one hundred and fifty monasteries were opened, Russian Orthodox culture took off, secular literature was born, secular painting appeared, and even the first comedy performances began to be staged at court. Much less is said about these facts of the reign than about riots and uprisings, but, nevertheless, they were and are confirmed by outstanding domestic historians (V.O. Klyuchevsky, S.F. Platonov, etc.).
Alexey Mikhailovich turned out to be a supporter of church reform, which held the Greek model as its ideal. The sovereign received support from Nikon, who became Patriarch in 1652. Church reform followed soon, after which a schism occurred. In an official letter written in 1653, Nikon ordered the reforms to begin. This process provoked repression against those who were apologists of the old faith. Thus, the association of former like-minded people split. The leader of the opponents of the new was Archpriest Avvakum, who rejected the innovations and turned into an “Old Believer.” Since then, his name has become the personification of the schismatic movement. In turn, Patriarch Nikon became the head of the official - reformist direction of the church. In 1654, with the support of Alexei Mikhailovich, he convened a Church Council. In it, the patriarch shows very extreme positions, without even implying reconciliation of the parties. After the establishment of reforms, Nikon's opponents were persecuted.
Nikon did not behave very ethically towards the Tsar, thereby creating the conditions for breaking ties with him. Nikon actively preached the idea of the revival of Byzantinism. He also desired not only full ecclesiastical power, but also some secular power. The Patriarch did not hide his convictions: “the priesthood of the kingdom is greater than ever” [Lobachev; 117]. Thus, the main reason for the gap between Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon was the latter’s encroachment on the division of secular power.
The patriarch also spoke out against the Council Code of 1649. He was disgusted by the fact that the clergy could be tried by a secular court; he openly called the document a “lawless book.” Protesting against this, Nikon formulated a position that prevented the process of secularization of society, the leadership of spiritual power over secular power. The breakup between Alexei Mikhailovich and Nikon occurred in the summer of 1658. Subsequently, the king forgave the patriarch and showed mercy to him, who was in captivity, and himself asked him for forgiveness.
So, Alexei Mikhailovich’s internal policy was aimed at stopping riots, riots and uprisings. It was the unrest that prompted him to draw up his main document - the Council Code of 1649, which covered all spheres of life - civil, criminal, spiritual and moral.
3. Copper and salt riots.
Dissatisfaction with the established order accumulated and grew, and during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich it manifested itself in a number of riots and open uprisings. The first riots were local in nature and, having caught fire, quickly went out. The situation turned out to be completely different with the latest revolt - the uprising led by Stepan Razin, which covered a fairly wide part of the country.
In 1648, the so-called "salt riot" It was caused by the abuses of senior government officials, namely B.I. Morozov, I.D. Miloslavsky (father-in-law of the Tsar), L.S. Pleshcheev (judge of the Zemsky Prikaz), P.T. Trakhaniotov (head of the Pushkarsky order), N.I. Clean (dumya clerk). The tsar managed to save Morozov with difficulty from the people's anger; Miloslavsky managed to remain in the shadows, but the remaining three had to pay for everyone. Trakhanionov was executed publicly, Pleshcheev was torn to pieces by a crowd, and Chisty was killed in his own home. For several days, Moscow experienced days of real terror. The people were in a hurry to vent their accumulated anger. They searched throughout the city for everyone they considered responsible for their disasters, and when they found them, they robbed them, burned houses and property, and killed them. As contemporaries of what was happening wrote, “the whole world was reeling” [Chistyakova; 12]. The government took quick measures to reconcile with the people: the archers were treated to honey and wine. Miloslavsky fed Moscow hundreds in his house for several days in a row. As a result, the people were promised a reduction in the price of salt and the destruction of monopolies. Only those people who enjoyed a good reputation were put in place of those killed.
Another of the most famous riots that happened during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich was the “copper” (or “money”) riot. It was caused by a fall in the value of copper money (too much was issued, and taxes were levied in silver) - hence its name, and occurred on August 4, 1662. The government and the royal family were forced to go through very unpleasant and difficult moments for the second time. But this time the rioters also had to pay. At the beginning of the rebellion, the tsar was in the church in Kolomenskoye, when a crowd that came running from Moscow demanded the extradition of boyar Miloslavsky - a “money thief”, in their opinion. The okolnichy F.M. also caused dissatisfaction. Rtishchev. He was accused of being the first to suggest the idea of issuing copper money.
Alexey Mikhailovich quickly realized what was going on. He ordered both to hide in the rooms of the queen and princesses, and he himself remained in the church until the end of the service. But the rebels did not give him such an opportunity: they forced him to go out onto the porch and did not let him out until he swore to investigate the matter. At first the crowd calmed down and moved away, but a new one appeared to replace it. This happened at the moment when the sovereign had already mounted his horse to ride to the Kremlin Palace after mass. The new rebels behaved differently. They spoke with threats, without the politeness required before the king. They demanded that the unwanted boyars be handed over to them. We had to call the archers, who dispersed the crowd. G.K. Kotoshikhin (1630 - 1667), being at that time an official of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, left the most valuable evidence of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich. Thus, in particular, he writes that the rebels were mercilessly “beaten, flogged and caught.” And because the rebels were unarmed, they had no choice but to “run and drown themselves in the Moscow River” [Kotoshikhin; 38]. About nine hundred people died in this clash on both sides. Repressions followed: many rebels were put on the wanted list and after being caught, some of them were hanged, and some were exiled to the Volga cities and Siberia. But nevertheless, the rebels achieved the main thing, and in 1663 the minting of copper money was stopped.
The riots were a great test for the young king, forced him to grow up, and allowed him to gain political experience.
4. Accession of Ukraine. War with Poland and Sweden. Civil war led by Stepan Razin.
Carrying out military reforms in the middle of the 17th century, Alexey Mikhailovich made a decision: Russia should return the western and northwestern lands that were seized at the beginning of the century by Sweden and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as a result of the Time of Troubles. The second most important task of the government was to strengthen the southern borders of the country, because there was still a threat of attack by the Turks and Crimean Tatars. The tsar did not exclude from his plan of most important affairs the subsequent development of the Far East and Siberia - a project begun during the time of Ivan the Terrible.
The national liberation struggle of Ukraine led by B.Z. Khmelnitsky (1595 - 1657), which eventually resulted in the war of liberation (1648), was the impetus for declaring war on the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Formally, this happened on October 23, 1653, and military operations began in 1654.
Before this, Ukraine fought for five years with Poland for its independence, relying on the Zaporozhye Sich and calling on Russia for help all this time. The decisive moment came on January 8, 1654. On this day, at the Pereyaslav Rada, the issue of joining Russia was resolved positively. Thus, Russia could start a war because it was called to this action. Ukraine's request for help served as a moral justification.
So, in May - June 1654, the Russian army, together with the Ukrainian Cossacks, crossed the border of Poland and began the liberation of previously occupied lands: Novgorod-Seversk and Smolensk. It was possible to take a significant number of cities, among which were Smolensk, Mstislavl, Mogilev, Vitebsk, Dorogobuzh, Gomel, Novy Bykhov, Polotsk, Chechersk, etc.
In the winter of 1654 - 1655. Polish troops attempt to invade Ukraine, but the joint army of Russia and Ukraine (commanded by V.P. Sheremetev and B.Z. Khmelnitsky) stop this action. The siege of Mogilev by Polish troops also ended in failure. In turn, Russian troops begin an offensive and take Minsk, Grodno, Kaunas, Vilna. In the summer of 1665, access to Brest-Litovsk was made (command was carried out by the Russian prince K.Ya. Cherkassy and Ukrainian colonel I.N. Zolotarenko).
Another important foreign policy event was Sweden's entry into the war. The Swedish army occupied a significant part of the territory of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Boyarin A.L. Ordin-Nashchokin, nominated by Tsar Alexei, made the mistake of assuming that in its current position, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth does not pose any danger to Russia. He now considered Sweden to be his main enemy. In May 1656, a war with Sweden began, and on October 23 of the same year, Russia concluded a temporary agreement to cease hostilities with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In 1655, war broke out between Poland and Sweden. The Russian army decides to take advantage of this situation and launches an offensive in two directions at once - Riga and Izhora. By May 1658, the Russian army occupied a number of cities from Polotsk to Tartu. But it was at this moment that the Polish army, having received a respite, found the strength to fight back and expel the Swedish occupiers from its territory. After this, the Poles announce their refusal to recognize the annexation of Belarusian and Ukrainian lands to Russia and begin military operations in the east of their country. Further, the situation for the Russian troops worsens even more, since the Ukrainian Hetman I.E. Vygovskoy goes over to the side of the enemies and, leading the Ukrainian-Polish-Tatar army, defeats the army of Prince A.N. Trubetskoy and further pursues Russian troops.
These circumstances force Russia to make peace with Sweden. This event took place on December 20, 1658 and went down in history as the Truce of Valiesar. The terms of the treaty allowed Russia to keep the Baltic cities.
In August 1659, Russian troops left Kyiv and dealt Vygovsky a crushing blow. But in the future, Russia was not immune from betrayal on the part of the Ukrainian hetmans. The next traitor was the son of B.Z. Khmelnitsky Yu.B. Khmelnytsky (1641 - 1685). His betrayal made it possible for the Poles to encircle the Russian army operating in Ukraine and force it to capitulate.
The Swedes, taking advantage of this, begin to demand from Russia the return of previously conquered lands. On June 21, 1661, the cities conquered by the Russian army were returned to Sweden (Kardis "eternal peace"). The government under the leadership of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich failed to resolve the Baltic issue.
In 1664, the Russian army again began to push back the Polish troops. Military operations had varying degrees of success, since the forces of both warring sides were practically exhausted. The current situation required peace negotiations, as a result of which Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth signed the Truce of Andrusovo near Smolensk for thirteen and a half years (January 30, 1667). Under the terms of this agreement, Left Bank Ukraine, Chernigov and Smolensk lands were ceded to Russia. Kyiv was also transferred to Russia for a two-year period, which, however, was not returned to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. As for the Zaporozhye Sich, it was divided between Russia and Ukraine, i.e., it was ruled by both of them. The most important condition of the Andrusovo truce should be called a general confrontation with the Tatar and Turkish threat. Thus, the issue of Western Russian lands was half resolved.
In 1672, Türkiye launched an attack on Right Bank Ukraine. Having struck Poland and captured the most important objects - Kamenets and Podolia - Turkey forced the Poles to enter into an agreement, under the terms of which they were obliged to pay tribute to the Turkish Sultan. Thus, a significant part of Right Bank Ukraine found itself under the yoke of Turkish feudal lords. Thus began a new stage in the Ukrainian liberation movement. In this struggle, the Koshe chieftain Ivan Sirko (1610 - 1680) clearly showed himself. In June 1669, he organized a Cossack campaign to the northern coast of the Black Sea. The result of this campaign was the legendary destruction of the Ochakov fortress, which was a stronghold for the Turkish army to attack Ukraine.
In 1675, the government of Alexei Mikhailovich sent troops, which consisted of Don Cossacks and Circassians, to help Sirko. Together with them, Sirko carried out a campaign against the Crimea. They safely crossed Sivash and managed to approach Bakhchisarai. The united army took the city, freeing many slaves along the way, after which they returned to Sich. The Turkish Sultan demanded submission from the Cossacks. The Cossacks’ response is brilliantly depicted in the painting by I.E. Repin "The Cossacks write a letter to the Turkish Sultan." The Turks never managed to conquer the Zaporozhye Sich, although they made similar attempts more than once.
The shocks and trials did not stop there. One of them is the revolt of Stenka Razin, which began in 1670 and lasted almost a year. On the southeastern outskirts and especially on the Don, a large number of fugitive peasants, serfs and settlers converged. They chose Don because they could feel relatively calm there. The old covenants are still in effect: the Don does not extradite anyone, not even a criminal, and even the Moscow government followed these orders. After the Truce of Andrusovo, when Western Ukraine again began to belong to Poland, people also poured from there to the Don. These were the most desperate people - real Cossack poverty, beggars, deprived of any means. They had no choice but to form gangs of robbers and engage in various criminal activities. The situation was aggravated by the fact that the fugitives were often family people, and they needed to feed their children.
That year, no grain was sown on the Don, and therefore the region became agitated. The atmosphere was heating up, and the only thing missing was a leader - a person who could rally the scattered masses and captivate them with the “tempting prospect of easy prey” [Shmurlo; 325]. The Don Cossack S.T. became such a leader. Razin (1630 - 1671). The rebels decided to move to the Volga, and from there to the Caspian Sea. Having mercilessly devastated the Persian coast, Razin’s gang returned to the Volga with rich booty. Having bestowed generous gifts on the Astrakhan authorities, the Razins were able to freely return back to the Don. In Astrakhan, Razin and his gang found themselves more in the position of dear guests than a gang of rebels. The ataman himself generously provided the poor with money, gold and silver. Thus, he easily gained authority among the Astrakhan poor. His Cossacks showed off in front of the townspeople in silk and velvet clothes, boasting of precious stones and pearls and other gifts of the East.
The news of Razin and his more than successful raid on Persia spread throughout the area with incredible speed. The mob rushed towards him from all sides, and very soon he became the head of a squad of three thousand people. He was very generous with everyone, helped the hungry and poor, and gave shelter. N.I. Kostomarov writes: “They called him father, considered him a miracle worker, they believed in his intelligence, strength and happiness” [Kostomarov; 354].
For the second time, Razin led his gang not to Persia, but to Russia, to Russian lands. His goal now was not only robbery. Like his predecessor I.I. Bolotnikov (1565 - 1608), who had previously led his army in order to overthrow the existing system, Razin also set up his poor warriors for a coup, calling for the extermination of nobles, governors, officials and everyone who has anything to do with commanding positions. He lured the crowd by seizing other people's property, changing the royal order, and the idea of equality, and managed to literally electrify the crowd and become a hero.
So, in the spring of 1670, Razin moved to the Volga and captured two cities: Tsaritsyn and Astrakhan. He immediately became famous for his unheard-of cruelties. Then he moved up the river and captured Samara and Saratov. Soon his army was significantly replenished with Cossacks from Yaik and various foreigners (Chuvash, Mordvins, Cheremis). From the Volga the uprising spread inland, covering the Penza, Tambov, and Nizhny Novgorod regions. Its outbreaks begin to occur north of the Volga, in the Galician district, everywhere involving peasants and townspeople in the rebellion. And everywhere the Razins celebrated their movement with murders, fires, violence and robberies.
But despite all this, there was no strength in Razin’s case. The first significant failure near Simbirsk caused serious damage to the cause of the legendary chieftain, and his personality lost its former attractiveness. The government, having shown incredible efforts, nevertheless suppressed the dangerous rebel movement. Razin was executed on the scaffold in 1671. The death of the leader of the largest peasant uprising could not kill the memory of him: Razin grew into a folk hero, about whom folk songs and tales are written. It is significant that all the atrocities of Razin and his Cossacks have faded from the people's memory, and in examples of folk art they sing and speak about him with sympathy and regret. But there is a logic to this. The halo that formed around the personality of Stepan Razin testified to the serious defeat of the entire state system of Russia, to the deepest discord between the lower and upper classes. The cruelty of Razin’s squad indicates the arbitrariness and injustice of the ruling officials, and this was a completely adequate response on the part of the people to social troubles.
5. The last years of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich.
In 1668, the revolt of the Solovetsky Monastery began, which lasted until 1676. The monks, led by Archimandrite Ilya, refused to serve according to the newly printed service books of the Nikon reform. The tsar did not take any action against the rebellious brethren for quite a long time, although his entourage was in the most irreconcilable mood about this. And finally, on December 27, 1667, Alexey Mikhailovich issued a decree to begin the isolation of the Solovetsky Monastery. However, the rebels were in no hurry to give up, showing amazing fortitude and heroism. In 1674, Voivode I.A. arrived in Solovki. Meshcherinov. His detachment of seven hundred people was well armed. Soon its number grows to a thousand archers. On January 22, 1676, a violent clash between the rebels and the army that came to the island began. As a result, the monastery is completely destroyed. And on January 29 of the same year, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich himself dies. But it was not only the forced siege of the Solovetsky Monastery that made the last stage of his reign famous.
On January 22, 1671, the previously widowed tsar married Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina (1651 - 1694). In this marriage, two children were born, one of whom was Peter I. The marriage had a strong influence on the worldview and tastes of Alexei Mikhailovich. Thanks to the transformation of views and the change in the environment of the sovereign, the first Russian theater appeared in Russia. Among the new faces who appeared in his retinue, one should highlight the Lutheran pastor Johann Gregory (1631 - 1675), who, with the blessing of the king, staged a play of his own authorship on a biblical plot with the people recruited for this matter. The theatrical performance delights Alexei Mikhailovich, and his new hobby gives a powerful impetus to the further development of theater in Russia.
The Tsar was also impressed by European music, and he allowed it access to the Russian state. P.V. Sedov writes: “They played argans of nemchins, and surna, and they blew trumpets, and they played maroons, and they hit the kettledrums, and they beat everything” [Sedov; 139]. Thus, thanks to Alexei Mikhailovich, the organ penetrates into Russia for the first time.
However, his fascination with foreign “curiosities” did not prevent the tsar from remaining a Russian man, remaining faithful to the Orthodox principles of the world order. Foreign influences were not allowed into this area.
At the same time, other types of arts are actively developing: architecture, painting, literature (it is assumed that Alexey Mikhailovich himself is the author of several books, in particular, about falconry, of which he was a passionate lover).
During the last stage of the sovereign's reign, a true architectural miracle appeared - the palace in Kolomenskoye, which is considered an unsurpassed masterpiece to this day. It can be argued that the palace in Kolomenskoye is a distinctive sign of the 17th century, just as St. Basil's Cathedral became a symbol of the 16th century. For the emergence of the Kolomna Palace, descendants are obliged to thank Tsarina Natalya Kirillovna, who became its owner. An important fact is that the palace was entirely the work of Russian masters (architects and painters), which refutes, from time to time, the opinion that arises that Russia during this period was a “culturally backward” country.
The Emperor was keenly interested in the foreign press and even made an attempt to arrange the delivery of newspapers from other countries to Russia. As a result of this interest, a special postal line was even organized in 1665 - the first in Russia.
It is impossible not to note the enormous role of Alexei Mikhailovich in expanding the borders of the Russian state and in the development of Siberia. Thanks to the expeditions of E.P. Khabarov (1603 - 1671) and other travelers, the Russian advance reached the Pacific Ocean and finally strengthened there.
Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich developed and enriched Russia's diplomatic and trade relations with other countries, while maintaining national identity and purity of faith. Its role in the cultural progress of the country can hardly be overestimated.
6. Conclusion.
So, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov ruled Russia from 1645 to 1676. His worldview was formed under the influence of the idea of religious and moral improvement of the individual and society, which spread after the end of the Time of Troubles. The first years of his reign were not independent: he was almost completely dependent on his teacher and relative, boyar B.I. Morozova. In a later period, he actively nominated promising figures such as N.I. Odoevsky, A.S. Matveev, A.L. Ordin-Nashchekin. During the Moscow uprising, the sovereign made every effort to save Morozov. If we talk about domestic politics, we should note his direct participation in the preparation and approval of the Council Code of 1648. He supported the line aimed at satisfying the demands of the townspeople and the nobility. Placing the strength of the sovereign's power at the forefront, he elevated any attempt on the life and health of the tsar to the rank of the most serious crimes.
During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, the activity of the Zemsky Sobors and the Boyar Duma faded, and the bureaucracy became more active. He attracted foreigners to Russian service, and thanks to his support, the importance of foreign regiments increased sharply. The sovereign promoted the strengthening of serfdom and suppressed urban uprisings of the mid-17th century and the Peasants' War of 1670 - 1671.
Under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, a split occurred in the Russian Orthodox Church. Being a supporter of Patriarch Nikon, the tsar shared not only the religious dogmas underlying them, but also pursued political goals. Such as: the unification of the church rites of the Russian and Greek churches, which was, from his point of view, a necessary prerequisite for the growth of the authority of the Russian state among the Slavic peoples and, first of all, among those who were under the rule of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
The sovereign pursued an active foreign policy, the most significant success of which was the unification of Russia and Ukraine (1654). He took personal part in military actions (campaigns of 1654 - 1656), in the Russian-Polish war of 1654 - 1667, as a result of which Smolensk, Seversk land with Chernigov and Starodum were returned (Truce of Andrusovo 1667).
Alexey Mikhailovich was not indifferent to everything new, which was clearly manifested in the sphere of art, culture and everyday life. The king managed to expand not only the borders of the state, but also diplomatic and trade relations. Noteworthy are the words of A.N. Bokhanov, who called Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich “the eponym of the era,” in which loyalty to tradition and openness to everything new were intricately combined.
7. List of references.
1. Bokhanov A.N. Tsar Alexey Mikhailovich / A.N. Bokhanov. - M.: Veche, 2012. - 368 p.
2. Gusev G.A. The personality and worldview of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in Russian historiography of the 19th-20th centuries. Abstract of the dissertation for the academic degree of Candidate of Historical Sciences /G.A. Gusev. - M., 2005. - 232 p.
3. Zakharevich A.V. History of the Fatherland / A.V. Zakharevich. - M.: ITK "Dashkov and K˚", 2005. - 755 p.
4. Klyuchevsky V.O. Selected lectures from the “Course of Russian History” / V. O. Klyuchevsky. - Rostov n/d: Phoenix, 2002. - 672 p.
5. Kozhurin K.Ya. Boyarina Morozova /K.Ya. Kozhurin. - M.: Young Guard, 2012. - 380 p.
6. Kostomarov N.I. Riot of Stenka Razin / N.I. Kostomarov. - M.: Charlie, 1994. - 640 p.
7. Kotoshikhin G.K. About Russia, during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich / G.K. Kotoshikhin. - M.: “Russian Political Encyclopedia” (ROSSPEN), 2000. - 272 p.
8. Lobachev S.V. Patriarch Nikon / S.V. Lobachev. - St. Petersburg: Art, 2003. - 424 p.
9. Platonov S.F. Russian history / S.F. Platonov. - M.: Eksmo, 2015. - 432 p.
10. Pushkarev S.G. Review of Russian history / S.G. Pushkarev. - Stavropol: Caucasian region, 1993. - 416 p.
11. Three hundred years of the reign of the Romanov dynasty. Reprint edition. - M.: Association "Inform-Eco", 1990. - 174 p.
12. Tsechoev V.K., Astashin V.E. Domestic history. - M.: ICC “MarT”, Rostov n/a: ICC “MarT”, 2004. - 528 p.
13. Chistyakova E.V., Bogdanov A.P. “Let it be revealed to posterity...” Essays on Russian historians of the second half of the 17th century and their works. - M.: UDN, 1988. - 136 p.
14. Shmurlo E.F. History of Russia 862 - 1917. / E.F. Shmurlo. - M.: Agraf, 1997. - 736 p.
Alexey Mikhailovich Romanov, the eldest son of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov, was born in Moscow on March 19, 1629. He was only 16 years old when his father died in 1645, and Alexei Mikhailovich accepted the crown of the Russian state. And a month later his mother died, and the young king was left an orphan. Despite the fact that he received an excellent education, Alexei Mikhailovich was not yet able to rule on his own. The person closest to the young tsar at this time was his teacher Boris Ivanovich Morozov. Alexei Mikhailovich sincerely loved and respected his mentor, and it is not surprising that in the first years of Alexei Mikhailovich’s reign it was Morozov who ruled the country. The immoderate abuses of Morozov and his relatives, the extremely unsuccessful tax policy that they pursued (they collected huge taxes from people, in particular the salt tax), led to the fact that on June 2, 1648, the so-called “Salt Riot” broke out in Moscow. Several senior government officials were killed during the riot. To pacify the people, Alexei Mikhailovich was forced not only to excommunicate Morozov from government affairs, but also to send him into exile. Meanwhile, the government was faced with many tasks and problems that required the fastest possible solution. First on the list of urgent matters was the creation of a set of state laws, since the existing codes of law were hopelessly outdated. Immediately after the Salt Riot (in 1648), a Zemsky Sobor was convened in Moscow, which adopted the so-called “Cathedral Code,” that is, a set of state laws: land, family, criminal and others. Russian state institutions were guided by the Council Code until the beginning of the 19th century. The second largest and most important reform, the implementation of which was overdue, was church reform. The fact is that during the time of unrest, a large number of inaccuracies and discrepancies accumulated in the church books that the clergy used during services. The correction of the books was carried out gradually, but Patriarch Nikon, who was a confidant of Alexei Mikhailovich, decided to speed up this process (1653 - 1656). Not only the books themselves, but also some aspects of church rituals were subject to correction. A large number of people who preferred the old order of things did not approve of Nikon's reforms. In addition, a dispute arose about how exactly to correct books and rituals and what, in fact, is correct and what is not. Many Moscow priests did not agree with the opinion of the patriarch. All this was aggravated by the fact that Patriarch Nikon claimed not only ecclesiastical, but also secular power, believing that state power, headed by the tsar, should be completely subordinate to church power, headed by the patriarch. Being very close to Alexei Mikhailovich, Nikon had a strong influence on the tsar for a long time. To the point that Alexey Mikhailovich left him to run the country during his absence. Nikon sought to gain more and more power and one day he crossed the line. The tsar and the patriarch quarreled, and in 1658 Nikon was removed from the patriarchal throne and sent into exile. The activities of Patriarch Nikon led to a church schism. In 1666, the Great Council took place in Moscow, which approved all of Nikon’s reforms (although it condemned Nikon himself). As a result, all adherents of the old order of things were called heretics (they themselves called themselves Old Believers, because they advocated the old, that is, uncorrected rituals). As a result of this decision, the Russian Church found itself split. The government had enough problems besides reforms. Some of them concerned internal affairs, and some of them related to relations with other countries. The truce concluded with Poland and the peace with Sweden were extremely unfavorable for Russia. During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, the government tried to correct this state of affairs. In 1653, the Zemsky Sobor considered the issue of reunifying Left Bank Ukraine with Russia (at the request of the Ukrainians, who were then fighting the Poles for independence and hoping to receive protection and support from Russia). The issue was very important for Russia, since such support could provoke another war with Poland, which, in fact, happened. On October 1, 1653, the Zemsky Sobor decided to reunite Ukraine with Russia; On January 8, 1654, the Ukrainian hetman Bogdan Khmelnytsky solemnly proclaimed reunification at the Pereyaslav Rada, and already in May 1654, Russia entered the war with Poland. Russia fought with Poland from 1654 to 1667. During this time, Rostislavl, Dorogobuzh, Polotsk, Mstislav, Orsha, Gomel, Chechersk, Novy Bykhov (1654) were returned to Russia; Smolensk (23.09.1654); Vitebsk, Minsk, Grodno, Vilno, Kovno (1655). From 1656 to 1658, Russia fought with Sweden. Russian troops took Dinaburg, Koknes, Yuriev, Nyenschanz by storm, and besieged Riga and Oreshek. During this war, several truces were concluded on various conditions, but in the end Russia was never able to regain access to the Baltic Sea. Russia itself was uneasy. In 1662, the so-called “Copper Riot” broke out in Moscow, associated with the introduction of copper money into circulation. In 1670 - 1671, a peasant war raged in the country under the leadership of the Cossack Stepan Timofeevich Razin, which was, frankly speaking, not without difficulty. Thus, the period of Alexei Mikhailovich’s reign was filled to the limit with stormy and varied events. But it cannot be said that the king himself took an active part in them. According to the memoirs of contemporaries, Alexey Mikhailovich was a wonderful person; kind, sympathetic, merciful. No wonder he earned the nickname “The Quietest.” The people treated him with love and respect. But for all that, he was a man out of place. He was incapable of governing: he always had the kindest feelings for the people, wished everyone happiness, wanted to see order and improvement everywhere, but for these purposes he could not think of anything other than relying on the existing mechanism of command control in everything. Alexei Mikhailovich died on January 29, 1676 in Moscow and was buried in the Archangel Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin.