Alexey Romanov years of reign. Quiet Sovereign Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov. Characteristics of the board. Fight for the throne

“But, whatever you say, not a single king can marry for love,” she once sang Alla Pugacheva. The ironic words of this song are fully consistent with historical truth - European kings and Russian tsars very rarely had the opportunity to choose life partners to their liking.

A royal marriage is, first of all, a way to strengthen the ruling dynasty and the opportunity to create the necessary political alliances. Whether the spouses like each other does not matter at all.

Alexey Mikhailovich Quiet, second representative of the dynasty Romanovs on the Russian throne, he formally chose his first wife himself, but in reality the choice was made for him by influential associates.

Alexei Mikhailovich ascended the throne at the age of 16 and, of course, fell under the complete influence of well-born boyars, the most prominent figure of whom was his teacher Boris Ivanovich Morozov.

In 1647, a review of the royal brides took place in Russia - a similar custom came to the country from Byzantium. Before appearing before the Tsar, 200 girls were pre-selected by the boyars and then examined by a doctor. The doctor had to give an opinion on whether the girl was capable of giving birth to a healthy heir.

Maria comes on as a substitute

From among the finalists, Alexey Mikhailovich chose Euphemia Vsevolozhskaya, daughter of the Kasimov landowner Raf Vsevolozhsky. However, when they began to prepare the girl for the wedding, she suddenly fainted. Boris Morozov immediately declared the girl sick, and she was immediately removed from the royal chambers.

According to historians, this whole scene played out not without the help of the royal educator, who needed to eliminate the unfavorable candidate. Instead of her, the daughter of the royal steward was presented to the king's eyes. Ilya Miloslavsky Maria.

The girl was five years older than the groom, but had a huge advantage in the eyes of Morozov - her father, like all the Miloslavskys, belonged to the Morozov court party.

After the Tsar's wedding, Morozov married the Tsarina's sister Anna Miloslavskaya, becoming not just Alexei Mikhailovich’s mentor, but also his relative.

Did Alexey love his wife? In any case, over time he got used to it, and it suited him quite well. It turned out that the young king was a very temperamental man, so the queen was almost constantly in an interesting position.

Over 21 years of marriage, she gave birth to Alexei Mikhailovich 13 children - 5 boys and 8 girls. True, boys born from Maria Miloslavskaya, were not distinguished by good health: Dmitry and Simeon died in early childhood, Alexei lived only until he was 16 years old, and Fyodor and Ivan, who nevertheless tried on the royal crown, also lived short lives full of illnesses.

Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya died on March 13, 1669 from puerperal fever, five days after the birth of her last child, daughter Evdokia. The girl did not survive, living for two days and dying three days before her mother.

Artamon's friend's pupil

Alexei Mikhailovich turned 40 years old in the year of the queen’s death. He was no longer young for that time, but not quite old either. Widowhood of monarchs in Rus' was not welcomed, so the question arose about a new marriage of the sovereign.

Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina, Russian queen. Photo: reproduction

Boris Morozov was no longer alive by that time, but the Miloslavsky court party was in force. The prospect of a new marriage worried the relatives of Alexei Mikhailovich’s first wife. Firstly, the Miloslavskys were aware of the state of health of the princes and were worried that the birth of a healthy boy from a new wife could lead to a revision of the entire order of succession to the throne. Secondly, along with the new queen, a competing court party could gain access to the king with the unpleasant prospect of the Miloslavskys losing warm and “bread” places in the structures of government.

During this period, the person closest to the king was replaced by Artamon Sergeevich Matveev, one of the first Russian “Westernizers”, who willingly adopted foreign innovations and introduced the Tsar to them.

Alexei Mikhailovich and Artamon Matveev could even be called friends. And after the death of his wife, the widowed king, seeking consolation, often came to his friend’s house.

One day at Matveev’s, the king drew attention to a young girl whose face seemed very pleasant. Alexey Mikhailovich reproached his friend: why, they say, have you until now hidden the fact that you have a beautiful daughter?

Matveev explained: Natasha is not a daughter, but a pupil. Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina was the daughter of a small nobleman Kirill Poluektovich Naryshkin and his wife, Anna Leopoldovna. Artamon Matveev, a distant relative of Natasha, took the girl from her parents to raise her. This practice was quite common in the 17th century.

Winning number 36

Historians of the times of the Russian Empire, describing the acquaintance of the tsar and Natalya Naryshkina, argued that after Alexei Mikhailovich began to make hints about matchmaking, the frightened boyar Matveev began tearfully begging to free him and his pupil from such a high honor, fearing that envious people would ruin the girl’s life.

It's unlikely that this was actually true. With such modest behavior, Artamon Matveev would never have risen so high on the power ladder of the Russian state. It seems that Matveev understood all the risks, but also understood the enormous prospects of a possible marriage.

In 1670, a new bridal show was officially announced, to which Natalya Naryshkina also received an invitation. The Miloslavsky clan put up a whole scattering of candidates for the competition to replace the deceased queen, but Alexey Mikhailovich decisively rejected all of them.

After looking through 70 candidates, the tsar decisively settled on “candidate number 36” - she was Natalya Naryshkina.

The Miloslavskys, feeling that power was beginning to slip out of their hands, used the old trick, declaring that the girl was obviously sick and, if she did not die immediately, she would not be able to give birth to an heir.

However, as already mentioned, Morozov’s teacher was not alive, and no one could seriously influence Alexei Mikhailovich, forcing him to reconsider his decision.

On February 1, 1671, 19-year-old Natalya Naryshkina was married to Alexei Mikhailovich, who was almost 42 years old.

Artamon Matveev headed the Ambassadorial Prikaz and actually became the head of the Russian government.

Queen with a "Western" slant

Alexey Mikhailovich, who in his second marriage received the rare opportunity to choose the one he really wanted as his wife, doted on his young wife and spoiled her in every possible way.

Young Natalya, although she received a good education in the Matveevs’ house, was not distinguished by her outstanding statesmanship or the makings of a politician. Queen Natalya was kind and gentle in character, and at the same time she was excellent at conveying to her husband thoughts and ideas that were beneficial to the Naryshkin clan.

In 1672, Natalya Naryshkina gave birth to a boy, who was named Peter. To the great joy of the father and to the extreme irritation of the Miloslavskys, the baby was born strong and healthy.

After the birth of his son, Alexey Mikhailovich was ready to carry his wife in his arms. She was allowed something that queens had not been allowed to do before. Brought up in the house of Artamon Matveev and imbued with the “Western” spirit, Natalya Kirillovna attended all festive ceremonial services in cathedrals herself, and in the summer she rode in an open carriage, which previously was simply unacceptable, which caused embarrassment to many.

Natalya gave birth to her husband two more daughters - Natalya and Theodora. The second daughter, unfortunately, died at the age of three.

In an effort to please his wife, Alexei Mikhailovich ordered the construction of a “Comedy Chamber” in the Kremlin and opened a theater.

But the Kremlin chambers were a burden to Natalya. Together with her children, she preferred to spend time outside the city, in the royal villages of Izmailovo, Kolomenskoye, Vorobyovo and Preobrazhenskoye.

Fight for the throne

The couple could have had more children, but in early February 1676, Alexei Mikhailovich died before his 47th birthday.

The happy time of Queen Natalia is over - for the Miloslavskys she turned into the hated leader of a hostile clan. The eldest living son of Alexei Mikhailovich, Fyodor Alekseevich, ascended the throne, after which the dowager queen and her children were removed from the capital.

As already mentioned, Natalya felt much better and more confident outside the city than in Moscow, so she endured the years of Tsar Fedor’s reign relatively calmly.

But in the spring of 1682, Fedor died childless, and the dispute for the throne flared up with renewed vigor. There were two applicants - 15-year-old Ivan and 9-year-old Peter. Ivan had more rights, but his health indicated that his reign would not be long. Against this background, healthy and vigorous Peter seemed a more promising candidate, and the boyar Duma supported him.

The Miloslavskys decided to take extreme measures, raising a Streltsy revolt. The Naryshkins were accused of trying to poison Tsarevich Ivan.

The Streltsy burst into the Kremlin, where the killings of representatives of the Naryshkin clan began. Artamon Matveev, the queen’s two brothers Afanasy and Ivan, and a number of other noble boyars, as well as rifle chiefs who did not support the rebellion, died. The queen's elderly father was exiled to a monastery.

Both Natalya herself and little Peter experienced a terrible shock these days. It is possible that the outbursts of rage of the adult Pyotr Alekseevich were a consequence of the horror suffered at the age of 9.

Sometimes it seemed that the queen and her children would also become victims of the angry crowd, but they were still not touched. As a result, it was announced that both Ivan and Peter would ascend to the throne, and Princess Sophia would become regent.

Mother of the first emperor

Natalya Naryshkina and her children again found themselves in exile, but this time the situation was tense. Everyone understood that this was not the end - upon reaching adulthood, Peter received all rights to the throne, and the Miloslavsky party was aware that the young tsar would not miss the opportunity to get even for his murdered relatives.

As you know, the struggle between Peter and Sophia ultimately ended in the victory of the former in 1689. The Naryshkins again gained access to state power, since the 17-year-old tsar was more interested in the amusing fleet on Lake Pleshcheyevo and the amusing army.

Natalya Kirillovna, despite the “Westernization” received in the house of Artamon Matveev, did not approve of Peter’s hobbies and did not understand. But at the same time, she loved her son very much and was sad when he went on long trips.

Pyotr Alekseevich was also strongly attached to his mother. Under her influence, his first marriage took place - marriage to Evdokia Lopukhina.

The political storms and upheavals that Natalya Naryshkina experienced after the death of her husband affected her health. In the last years of her life she suffered from heart disease. On February 4, 1694, at the age of 42, the mother of the first Russian emperor died.

This loss seriously affected my son. Pyotr Alekseevich finally took state power into his own hands, making it clear to relatives and close boyars that from now on they would only be obedient executors of his will.

The era of Peter the Great began - a grandiose period in Russian history, which, of course, would never have happened without his mother.

- the second Tsar of Moscow from the House of Romanov, the son of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich and his second wife Evdokia Lukyanovna (Streshneva). Alexei Mikhailovich was born in 1629 and from the age of three was raised under the guidance of boyar Boris Ivanovich Morozov, an intelligent and educated man for that time, slightly inclined towards “new” (Western) customs, but cunning and self-interested. Being with Tsarevich Alexei continuously for 13 years, Morozov acquired a very strong influence on his pet, who was distinguished by his complacency and affection.

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. Late 1670s

On July 13, 1645, 16-year-old Alexei Mikhailovich inherited the throne of his father, and, as can be seen from the certificate Kotoshikhina, indirectly confirmed by some other indications (for example, Olearia), followed by the convening of the Zemsky Sobor, which sanctioned the accession of the new sovereign - a sign that, according to the views of people of the 17th century, the suffrage of the land, expressed in the act of electing Mikhail Romanov to the kingdom in 1613, did not cease with the death of the first tsar from the new Romanov dynasty. According to Kotoshikhin, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, like his father, was elected to the throne by people of all ranks of the Moscow state, however, without limiting (public or secret) his royal power due to a purely subjective reason - the personal character of the young tsar, who was reputed to be “much quiet” and who retained for himself not only in the mouths of his contemporaries, but also in history the nickname “the quietest.”

Consequently, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich ruled more autocratically than his father. The habit and need to turn to the zemshchina for assistance, inherited from the Time of Troubles, weakened under it. Zemstvo councils, especially full ones, are still convened, but much less frequently, especially in the later years of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov, and the command principle in state life little by little takes precedence over the zemstvo council. The king finally becomes the embodiment of the nation, the focus from which everything comes, and to which everything returns. This development of the autocratic principle corresponds to the external environment of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich: a previously unheard-of development of court splendor and etiquette, which, however, did not eliminate the simple-minded, patriarchal treatment of the tsar with his entourage.

Not immediately, however, Alexei Mikhailovich could raise his power to an unattainable height: the first years of his reign are reminiscent of the events of Ivan the Terrible’s youth or the difficulties that Tsar Mikhail had to struggle with at first. After the death of his mother (August 18 of the same 1645), Alexei Mikhailovich completely submitted to the influence of Morozov, who no longer had rivals. The latter, in order to strengthen his position, managed to resolve the issue of the tsar’s marriage in the sense he desired, arranging his marriage with the daughter of his faithful assistant, Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya. This marriage took place on January 16, 1648, after the bride, originally chosen by Alexei Mikhailovich himself (Vsevolozhskaya), was eliminated under the pretext of epilepsy. Morozov himself married the sister of the new queen.

The Tsar's father-in-law Miloslavsky and Morozov, taking advantage of their position, began to nominate their relatives and friends, who did not miss the opportunity to make money. While young Alexei Mikhailovich, relying in everything on his beloved and revered “second father,” did not delve into matters personally, discontent accumulated among the people: on the one hand, the lack of justice, extortion, the severity of taxes, the salt duty introduced in 1646 (cancelled at the beginning of 1648), in conjunction with crop failure and bestial mortality, and on the other hand, the ruler’s favor towards foreigners (closeness to Morozov and the influential position of the breeder Vinius) and foreign customs (permission to consume tobacco, which was made the subject of a state monopoly) - all this in May 1648 led to a bloody catastrophe - the “salt riot”.

The direct appeal of the crowd on the street to Alexei Mikhailovich himself, to whom complaints did not reach in any other way due to the rude interference of Morozov's minions, broke out in a riot that lasted several days, complicated by a strong fire, which, however, served to stop further unrest. Morozov was saved from the rage of the crowd and hidden in the Kirillov Belozersky Monastery, but his accomplices paid even more: the Duma clerk Nazar the Chisty, killed by the rebels, and the hated heads of the Zemsky and Pushkar orders, Pleshcheev and Trakhaniot, who had to be sacrificed by handing them over for execution, and the first was even torn from the hands of the executioner and barbarously killed by the crowd itself. When the excitement subsided, Alexey Mikhailovich personally addressed the people on the appointed day and touched them with the sincerity of his promises so much that the main culprit of what happened, Morozov, for whom the tsar asked, could soon return to Moscow; but his reign ended forever.

Salt riot in Moscow 1648. Painting by E. Lissner, 1938

The Moscow revolt echoed in the same year with similar outbreaks in distant Solvychegodsk and Ustyug; in January 1649, new, suppressed attempts at indignation, again against Morozov and Miloslavsky, were discovered in Moscow itself. Much more serious were the riots that broke out in 1650 in Novgorod and Pskov, where at the beginning of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, grain was bought up to pay the Swedes part of the agreed amount for defectors from the regions that went to Sweden under the Stolbovsky Treaty of 1617. The rise in price of bread exported abroad gave rise to rumors about the betrayal of the boyars, who were in charge of everything without the knowledge of the tsar, who were friends with foreigners and, at the same time, plotting with them to starve out the Russian land. To pacify the riots, it was necessary to resort to exhortations, explanations and military force, especially regarding Pskov, where the unrest stubbornly continued for several months.

However, in the midst of these unrest and turmoil, the government of Alexei Mikhailovich managed to carry out legislative work of very significant importance - the codification of the Council Code of 1649. In accordance with the long-standing desire of Russian trading people, in 1649 the English company was deprived of its privileges, the reason for which, in addition to various abuses, was the execution of King Charles I: English merchants were henceforth allowed to trade only in Arkhangelsk and with the payment of the usual duties. The reaction against the beginning of rapprochement with foreigners and the assimilation of foreign customs was reflected in the renewal of the ban on the tobacco trade. Despite the efforts of the English government after the Stuart restoration, the previous benefits to the British were not renewed.

But the restriction of foreign trade within the state led to unforeseen consequences in the subsequent years of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, when the wars with Poland and Sweden required extreme strain on payment forces: the treasury had to collect the largest possible reserves of silver coins, and meanwhile a strong reduction in the supply of silver was discovered , previously supplied by English merchants in bullion and in specie, which was then re-coined. The government of Alexei Mikhailovich resorted from 1655 to issuing copper money, which was supposed to circulate on a par and at the same price with silver, which, however, soon turned out to be impossible, since, paying salaries in copper, the treasury demanded that fees and arrears be paid in silver, and excessive issues of copper coins and without that, making the exchange a fiction, led to a rapid depreciation of the exchange rate. Finally, the production of counterfeit money, which also developed on an enormous scale, completely undermined confidence in the new means of payment, and an extreme depreciation of copper followed and, consequently, an exorbitant rise in the price of all purchased items. In 1662, the financial crisis erupted in a new rebellion in Moscow (“Copper Riot”), from where a crowd rushed to the village of Kolomenskoye, Alexei Mikhailovich’s favorite summer residence, demanding the extradition of the boyars considered guilty of abuses and general disaster. This time the unrest was pacified by armed force, and the rebels suffered severe retribution. But the copper money, which had been in circulation for a whole year and had fallen in price by 15 times its normal value, was then destroyed.

Copper riot. Painting by E. Lissner, 1938

The state experienced an even more severe shock in 1670-71, when it had to endure a life-and-death struggle with the Cossack freemen, who found a leader in the person of Stenka Razin and carried away the masses of black people and the Volga foreign population. The government of Alexei Mikhailovich, however, turned out to be strong enough to overcome the aspirations hostile to it and to withstand the dangerous struggle of a social nature.

Stepan Razin. Painting by S. Kirillov, 1985–1988

Finally, the era of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov also marks a grave crisis in the church life of the Russian people, the beginning of a century-long bifurcation caused by Nikon’s “innovations”, but rooted in the very depths of the people’s worldview. The church schism openly expressed the Russian people's commitment to their own national principles. The mass of the Russian population began a desperate struggle to preserve their shrine, against the influx of new, Ukrainian and Greek influences, which were felt more and more as the end of the 17th century approached. The harsh repressive measures of Nikon, persecution and exile, which resulted in an extreme aggravation of religious passions, the exalted martyrdom of “schismatics” mercilessly persecuted for their adherence to Russian customs, to which they responded with voluntary self-immolations or self-burials - this is, in general terms, a picture of the situation created by the ambition of the patriarch, who started his reform most of all for the purpose of personal self-aggrandizement. Nikon hoped that the fame of the cleanser of the Russian Church from imaginary heresy would help him advance to the role of heads of the entire Orthodox world , to become higher than his other patriarchs and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich himself. Nikon's unheard-of power-hungry ambitions led to a sharp clash between him and the complacent king. The patriarch, who during one of the periods of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich had unlimited influence on the tsar and the entire course of state affairs, the second “great sovereign”, the closest (after the removal of Morozov) friend and adviser to the monarch, quarreled with him and left his throne. The unfortunate conflict ended with a cathedral court in 1666-1667, which deprived the patriarch of his holy orders and condemned him to imprisonment in a monastery. But the same council of 1666-1667 confirmed Nikon’s main cause and, having imposed an irrevocable anathema on his opponents, finally destroyed the possibility of reconciliation and declared a decisive war on the schism. It was accepted: for 8 years (1668 - 1676) the tsarist commanders had to besiege the Solovetsky Monastery, one of the most revered national shrines, which has now become a stronghold of national antiquity, take it by storm and hang the captured rebels.

Alexey Mikhailovich and Nikon at the tomb of St. Metropolitan Philip. Painting by A. Litovchenko

Simultaneously with all these difficult internal events of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, from 1654 until the very end of his reign, external wars did not stop, the impetus for which was given by events in Little Russia, where Bogdan Khmelnitsky raised the banner of religious-national struggle. Bound at first by the unfavorable Peace of Polyanovsky, concluded under his father, who in the early years maintained friendly relations with Poland (a plan for common actions against Crimea), Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov could not abandon the centuries-old traditions of Moscow, its national tasks. After some hesitation, he had to act as a decisive intercessor for the Orthodox Russian southwest and take Hetman Bogdan with all of Ukraine under his hand, which meant war with Poland. It was difficult to decide to take this step, but not to take advantage of the favorable opportunity to realize long-standing cherished aspirations, to push Little Russia away from itself with the risk that it would rush into the arms of Turkey, would mean renouncing its mission and committing political recklessness that is difficult to correct. The issue was resolved at the Zemstvo Council in 1653, after which the Ukrainians took the oath to Tsar Alexei at the Rada in Pereyaslavl (January 8, 1654), and Little Rus' officially came under the rule of the Moscow Tsar on conditions that ensured its autonomy. The war that immediately opened, in which Alexey Mikhailovich took a personal part, was marked by brilliant, hitherto unprecedented successes of Moscow weapons, the conquest of Smolensk, captured in the Time of Troubles and finally taken over the world in 1654, all of Belarus, even native Lithuania with its capital Vilna ( -). The Moscow sovereign adopted into his title the title of “autocrat of all Great, Lesser and White Rus',” as well as the Grand Duke of Lithuania.

Pereyaslav Rada 1654 Painting by M. Khmelko, 1951

The age-old dispute seemed close to being resolved; Poland, which had already incurred a victorious Swedish invasion, was on the verge of destruction, but it was the joint actions against it of two enemies, who were by no means allies, but rather interfered with each other and laid claim to the same prey (Lithuania), that served to save Rech Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The intervention of Austria, friendly and of the same faith to the Poles, interested in supporting Poland against an overly strengthened Sweden, managed, with the help of Allegretti’s embassy, ​​to persuade Alexei Mikhailovich to a truce with Poland in 1656, with the retention of what he had won and with the deceptive hope of the future election of himself to the Polish throne. Even more importantly, the Austrians and Poles managed to induce the tsar to war with Sweden, as a much more dangerous enemy. This new war with the Swedes, in which Alexei Mikhailovich also personally participated (from 1656), was very untimely until the dispute with Poland received a final resolution. But it was difficult to avoid it for the reasons stated above: believing that in the near future he would become the king of Poland, Alexei Mikhailovich even turned out to be personally interested in preserving it. Having started the war, Alexei Mikhailovich decided to try to implement another long-standing and no less important historical task of Russia - to break through to the Baltic Sea, but the attempt was unsuccessful and turned out to be premature. After initial successes (the capture of Dinaburg, Kokenhausen, Dorpat), they had to suffer complete failure during the siege of Riga, as well as Noteburg (Oreshka) and Kexholm (Korela). The Kardis Peace of 1661 was a confirmation of Stolbovsky, i.e. everything taken during Alexei Mikhailovich’s campaign was given back to the Swedes.

Such a concession was forced by the unrest that began in Little Russia after the death of Khmelnitsky (1657) and the renewed Polish war. The annexation of Little Russia was far from being durable: displeasure and misunderstandings were not slow to arise between the Russians and Ukrainians, who were in many ways very different from each other and still not well acquainted with each other. The desire of the region, which voluntarily succumbed to Russia and Alexei Mikhailovich, to keep its administrative independence intact from it, met with the Moscow tendency towards the possible unification of management and all external forms of life. The independence granted to the hetman not only in the internal affairs of Ukraine, but also in international relations, was difficult to reconcile with the autocratic power of the Russian Tsar. The Cossack military aristocracy felt freer under the Polish order than under the Moscow one, and could not get along with the tsarist governors, about whom, however, the common people, who were more drawn to the same faith in tsarist Moscow than to the gentry Poland, had more than once reason to complain. Bogdan already had troubles with the government of Alexei Mikhailovich, could not get used to the new relationship, and was very dissatisfied with the end of the Polish and the start of the Swedish war. After his death, the struggle for the hetmanship opened, a long chain of intrigues and civil strife, vacillations from side to side, denunciations and accusations, in which it was difficult for the government not to get entangled. Vygovsky, who seized the hetmanship from the too young and incapable Yuri Khmelnitsky, a nobleman by origin and sympathies, secretly transferred himself to Poland on the most apparently tempting terms of the Gadyach Treaty (1658) and, with the help of the Crimean Tatars, inflicted a strong defeat on Prince Trubetskoy near Konotop (1659) . Vygovsky’s case nevertheless failed due to the lack of sympathy for him among the ordinary Cossack masses, but the Little Russian unrest did not end there.

Hetman Ivan Vygovsky

At the same time, the war resumed with Poland, which had managed to get rid of the Swedes and now broke recent promises to elect Alexei Mikhailovich as its king in the hope of Ukrainian unrest. There was no longer any talk about the election of Tsar Alexei to the Polish throne, which had previously been promised only as a political maneuver. After the first successes (Khovansky’s victory over Gonsevsky in the fall of 1659), the war with Poland went far less successfully for Russia than in the first stage (defeat of Khovansky by Charnetsky at Polonka, betrayal of Yuri Khmelnitsky, disaster at Chudnov, Sheremetev in Crimean captivity - 1660 g.; loss of Vilna, Grodno, Mogilev - 1661). The right bank of the Dnieper was almost lost: after the refusal of the hetmanship of Khmelnytsky, who became a monk, his successor was also Teterya, who had sworn allegiance to the Polish king. But on the left side, which remained behind Moscow, after some unrest, another hetman appeared, Bryukhovetsky: this was the beginning of the political bifurcation of Ukraine. In 1663 - 64 The Poles fought with success on the left side, but could not take Glukhov and retreated with heavy losses beyond the Desna. After long negotiations, both states, extremely tired of the war, finally concluded in 1667 the famous Truce of Andrusovo for 13 and a half years, which cut Little Russia in two. Alexey Mikhailovich received Smolensk and Seversk land lost by his father and acquired left-bank Ukraine. However, on the right bank, only Kyiv and its immediate surroundings remained behind Russia (at first, ceded by the Poles only temporarily, for two years, but then not given back by Russia).

This outcome of the war could in some sense be considered successful by the government of Alexei Mikhailovich, but it was far from meeting initial expectations (for example, regarding Lithuania). To a certain extent, satisfying the national pride of Moscow, the Andrusov Treaty greatly disappointed and irritated the Little Russian patriots, whose fatherland was divided and more than half returned under the hated dominion from which it had tried for so long and with such efforts to escape (Kiev region, Volyn, Podolia , Galicia, not to mention White Rus'). However, the Ukrainians themselves contributed to this with their constant betrayal of the Russians and throwing from side to side in the war. The Little Russian unrest did not stop, but even became more complicated after the Truce of Andrusovo. The hetman of the right-bank Ukraine, Doroshenko, who did not want to submit to Poland, was ready to serve the government of Alexei Mikhailovich, but only under the condition of complete autonomy and the indispensable unification of all of Ukraine, decided, due to the impossibility of the latter condition, to come under the hand of Turkey in order to achieve the unification of Little Russia under its authority. The danger that threatened both Moscow and Poland from Turkey prompted these former enemies to conclude an agreement on joint actions against the Turks at the end of 1667. This treaty was then renewed with King Michael Vishnevetsky in 1672, and the Sultan's invasion of Ukraine followed in the same year. Mehmed IV, which was joined by the Crimean Khan and Doroshenko, the capture of Kamenets and the conclusion by the king of a humiliating peace with the Turks, which however did not stop the war. The troops of Alexei Mikhailovich and the left bank Cossacks in 1673 - 1674. successfully operated on the right side of the Dnieper, and a significant part of the latter again submitted to Moscow. In 1674, right-bank Ukraine experienced the horrors of Turkish-Tatar devastation for the second time, but the hordes of the Sultan again withdrew without uniting Little Russia.

On January 29, 1676, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich died. His first wife died already on March 2, 1669, after which Alexei, extremely attached to his new favorite, boyar Artamon Matveev, married a second time (January 22, 1671) to his distant relative Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina. Soon she gave birth to a son from Alexei Mikhailovich - the future Peter the Great. Already earlier, in the first years of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, European influences penetrated into Moscow under the auspices of Morozov. Then the annexation of Little Russia with its schools gave a new strong impetus towards the West. It resulted in the appearance and activity of Kiev scientists in Moscow, the founding by Rtishchev of the St. Andrew's Monastery with a learned fraternity, the activity of Simeon of Polotsk, a tireless writer of poetry and prose, a preacher and mentor of the elder royal sons, in general, the transfer of Latin-Polish and Greco-Slavic scholasticism to new soil . Further, the favorite of Alexei Mikhailovich Ordin-Nashchokin, the former head of the embassy department, is an “imitator of foreign customs”, the founder of posts for foreign correspondence and the founder of handwritten chimes (the first Russian newspapers); and the clerk of the same order, Kotoshikhin, who fled abroad, the author of a famous essay on contemporary Russia, also seems to be an undoubted and ardent Westerner. In the era of Matveev’s power, cultural borrowings became even more noticeable: from 1672, foreign and then their own “comedians” appeared at the court of Alexei Mikhailovich, and the first theatrical “actions” began to take place. The tsar and the boyars acquired European carriages, new furniture, in other cases foreign books, friendship with foreigners, and knowledge of languages. Smoking tobacco is no longer persecuted as before. The seclusion of women comes to an end: the queen already travels in an open carriage, is present at theatrical performances, the daughters of Alexei Mikhailovich even study with Simeon of Polotsk.

The proximity of the era of decisive transformations is clearly felt in all these facts, as well as in the beginning military reorganization in the appearance of regiments of the “foreign system”, in the decline of the moribund localism, in the attempt to organize a fleet (the shipyard in the village of Dednov, the ship “Eagle”, burned by Razin on the lower Volga; the idea of ​​purchasing the Courland harbors for Russian ships), in the beginning of the construction of factories, in the desire to break through to the sea in the west. The diplomacy of Alexei Mikhailovich little by little spreads to the whole of Europe, up to and including Spain, while in Siberia Russian rule had already reached the Great Ocean, and the establishment on the Amur led to the first acquaintance and then a clash with China.

Yenisei region, Baikal region and Transbaikalia during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich

The reign of Alexei Mikhailovich represents an era of transition from old Rus' to new Russia, a difficult era, when backwardness from Europe made itself felt at every step by failures in the war and sharp turmoil within the state. The government of Alexei Mikhailovich was looking for ways to satisfy the increasingly complex tasks of domestic and foreign policy, was already aware of its backwardness in all spheres of life and the need to take a new path, but did not yet dare to declare war on the old isolation and tried to get by with the help of palliatives. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich was a typical man of his era, combining a strong attachment to the old tradition with a love of useful and pleasant innovations: still standing firmly on the old soil, being an example of ancient Russian piety and patriarchy, he is already raising one foot to the other shore. A man of a more lively and active temperament than his father (Alexei Mikhailovich’s personal participation in campaigns), inquisitive, friendly, welcoming and cheerful, at the same time a zealous pilgrim and faster, an exemplary family man and a model of complacency (albeit with strong temper at times) - Alexey Mikhailovich was not a man of strong character, was deprived of the qualities of a transformer, was capable of innovations that did not require drastic measures, but was not born to fight and break, like his son Peter I. His ability to become strongly attached to people (Morozov, Nikon, Matveev ) and his kindness could easily lead to evil, opening the way to all sorts of influences during his reign, creating all-powerful temporary workers and preparing in the future the struggle of parties, intrigues and disasters like the events of 1648.

Alexei Mikhailovich's favorite summer residence was the village of Kolomenskoye, where he built himself a palace; favorite pastime is falconry. Dying, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich left a large family: his second wife Natalya, three sisters, two sons (Fedor and Ivan) and six daughters (see Princess Sophia) from his first wife, son Peter (born May 30, 1672) and two daughters from his second wife. Two camps of his relatives through two different wives - the Miloslavskys and the Naryshkins - did not hesitate after his death to begin a struggle among themselves, rich in historical consequences.

Literature on the biography of Alexei Mikhailovich

S. M. Solovyov, “History of Russia since ancient times,” vol. X – XII;

N. I. Kostomarov, “Russian history in the biographies of its main figures,” vol. II, part 1: “Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich”;

V. O. Klyuchevsky, “Course of Russian History”, Part III;

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich remained in history with the nickname “the quietest”. What does it mean?

It would seem that the answer lies on the surface. It is generally believed that the second Romanov was so nicknamed for his gentle kindness. Indeed, the king was a good-natured man. However, he was not at all “quiet” in this sense of the word - neither in his nature nor in his deeds. Let us first consider his character.

If the second Romanov showed a certain “quietness,” it was only in the first years of his reign, when he was young. But his natural temper quickly made itself felt. The king easily lost control and gave free rein to his tongue and hands. So, once, having quarreled with Patriarch Nikon, he publicly cursed him as a man and a son of a bitch. In general, Alexey Mikhailovich knew how to swear in a very inventive and sophisticated way, not like today’s foul-mouthed people with their wretched high school vocabulary. Here, for example, is the letter the tsar sent to the treasurer of the Savvino-Storozhevsky monastery, Father Nikita, who, having drunk, got into a fight with the stationed archers: “From the tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich of All Rus' to the enemy of God and the hater of God and the seller of Christ and the destroyer of the miracle-working house and the like-minded Satan , the damned enemy, the useless spy and the evil, nosy villain, Treasurer Mikita.”

This was the king's language. Let's talk about hands now. Once the issue of war with Poland was discussed in the Duma, and the Tsar’s father-in-law, Boyar Miloslavsky, who had never been on a campaign, unexpectedly announced that if the Tsar appointed him governor, he would bring him the Polish King himself as a prisoner. This impudent boasting so outraged the king that he slapped the old man in the face, tore his beard and kicked him out of the room. And this is the quietest king? Hardly.
Archpriest Avvakum denounces: “...And the enemy of God darkened that king, and besides, he magnifies, flatteringly, in the transference: “Let him remember our most pious, quietest, most autocratic sovereign, so-and-so, great, - more than all the saints from the ages! The Lord God is in his kingdom, always, and now, and ever, and unto ages of ages.”

But the king turned out to be different, not the quietest at all: “And the king, he sings, at that time it seems and seems like he really is, there is no holier than him! And where is more than that pride!” etc.

As for affairs, during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich there was least peace and quiet. The king demanded that his henchmen serve tirelessly. Remembering “his incessant work,” boyar Artamon Matveev noted that “this has never happened before.” And according to Archpriest Avvakum, the king “has made a lot of messes in this life, like a goat galloping over the hills and driving the wind.” And when could Alexei Mikhailovich rest, if during his reign rebellion followed rebellion, war after war. Contemporaries themselves called the 17th century the “rebellious century.”

But it is precisely this last circumstance that provides the key to the correct understanding of the nickname “The Quietest.” Its origins lie in the ancient formula “peace and quiet,” which symbolized a well-ordered and prosperous state. Prayer for “peace and silence”, for “peace and silence, and prosperity” since the time of Boris Godunov in the “sovereign cup” (a special verbal and musical genre). Impostors and rebels, according to the terminology of that time, were “debauchers of silence.”

Alexei Mikhailovich precisely “calmed down” Russia, torn apart by riots and splits. One document from that time says that after the death of Mikhail Fedorovich, Monomakh’s hat was put on by “his noble son, the most pious, quietest, most autocratic great sovereign, tsar and grand duke Alexei Mikhailovich. Then, under his sovereign hand, piety was firmly observed throughout the entire kingdom, and all Orthodox Christianity shone with serene silence.”

This is the meaning our ancestors put into the epithet “quietest” - it was an official sovereign title that had to do with the rank, and not the character of the king. It is also present in the inscription of the mourning “voice of the last to the Lord God of the most pious, quiet, most illustrious Sovereign Tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich who reposed in the Lord.”

And such a “quiet” sovereign, by the way, was officially not only Alexei Mikhailovich, but also his sons, successors on the throne: first Fyodor Alekseevich, then the brothers Ivan and Peter, and then for 30 years only Peter, whom you would certainly suspect of “ quiet" behavior and excessive gentleness.
On June 18, 1676, on the day of Fyodor Alekseevich’s coronation, Simeon of Polotsk presented him with “The Good Glasle Gusl” - a book dedicated to “the newly reigned most pious, quiet, most illustrious Great Sovereign.”

In 1701, the professor of the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy, the Miracle monk Job, who compiled the “Primer, Socrates’ recitation of Christian teaching,” indicated in the preface that he worked for the glory of “the most clear and powerful... Peter Alekseevich.” Peter is simply called “the quietest” in the inscription of “The Rhetorical Hand” by Stefan Yavorsky - more precisely, in its Russian translation, owned by Feofan Prokopovich. In the Trilingual Lexicon, he translated “quietest” as serenissimus, which epithet was used in the title of Roman emperors. And this finally debunks the myth that Alexey Mikhailovich earned the nickname “the quietest” from his contemporaries thanks to his meekness and humility.

References:
Klyuchevsky V.O. Alexey Mikhailovich (in the course "Lectures on Russian history").
Panchenko A. About Russian history and culture. St. Petersburg, 2000. pp. 17-21.

The son of Mikhail Fedorovich, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (Quiet) (born March 19, 1629, died January 29, 1676), did not live long. Having received the throne by right of inheritance at the age of 16, he professed faith in the chosenness of the king and his power. Distinguished, like his father, by his gentleness and meekness of character, he could also show temper and anger. Contemporaries depict his appearance: fullness, even corpulence of figure, low forehead and white face, plump and rosy cheeks, light brown hair and a beautiful beard; finally, a soft and shy look (Fig. 2).

Rice. 2

In his palace possessions, the tsar was a zealous owner, strictly making sure that his serfs regularly fulfilled their duties and made all kinds of payments. From his first wife M.I. Miloslavskaya, Alexey Mikhailovich had 13 children; from the second - N.K. Naryshkina - three children. Many of them died early. Three of his sons became tsars (Fedor, Ivan and Peter), his daughter Sophia became regent for the young tsar brothers (Ivan and Peter).

On June 1, 1648, an uprising broke out in Moscow - the Salt Riot. The rebels held the city in their hands for several days and destroyed the houses of the boyars and merchants.

Following Moscow, in the summer of 1648, a struggle between townspeople and small service people unfolded in Kozlov, Kursk, Solvychegorsk, Veliky Ustyug, Voronezh, Narym, Tomsk and other cities of the country.

Almost throughout the entire reign of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, the country was gripped by small and large uprisings of the urban population. It was necessary to strengthen the country's legislative power, and at the beginning of 1649 a new set of laws was adopted - the Council Code.

If the immediate reason for the creation of the Council Code of 1649 was the uprising of 1648 in Moscow and the aggravation of class and estate contradictions, then the underlying reasons lay in the evolution of the social and political system of Russia and the processes of consolidation of the main classes - estates of that time: peasants, serfs, townspeople and nobles - as well as the beginning of the transition from an estate-representative monarchy to absolutism. These processes were accompanied by a noticeable increase in legislative activity, the desire of the legislator to subject to legal regulation the maximum volume of aspects and phenomena of social and state life.

The Council Code consisted of 25 chapters, which included 967 articles. It systematized, at a higher level of legal technology than previous legislation, the legal norms that had been in force previously. In addition, there were new legal norms that appeared mainly under pressure from the nobility and black-tax settlements. For convenience, the chapters are preceded by a detailed table of contents indicating the contents of the chapters and articles.

As a code of law, the Code of 1649 in many respects reflected the trends in the further development of feudal society. In the economic sphere, it consolidated the path of formation of a single form of feudal land ownership based on the merger of its two varieties - estates and estates.

In the social sphere, the Code reflected the process of consolidation of the main classes - estates, which led to a certain stabilization of society and at the same time caused an aggravation of class contradictions and an intensification of class struggle, which, of course, was influenced by the establishment of the state system of serfdom. No wonder since the 17th century. The era of peasant wars opens.

In the Code, “the main attention is paid to the nobility, as the dominant military-service and landowning class: almost half of all articles of the Code directly or indirectly concern its interests and relations. Here, as in its other parts, the Code tries to stay on the basis of reality.” *.

Under Alexei Mikhailovich, Russia's possessions expanded in the east, in Siberia, and in the west. Active diplomatic activity is being carried out. Much has been done in the field of domestic policy. A course was pursued to centralize control and strengthen the autocracy. The backwardness of the country dictated the invitation of foreign specialists in manufacturing, military affairs, first experiments, attempts at transformation (establishing schools, regiments of the new system, etc.).

During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich in 1653, Patriarch Nikon carried out church reforms.

Patriarch Nikon (in the world Nikita Minov) was an outstanding personality. A personal friend and adviser to Alexei Mikhailovich, he was elected patriarch in 1652. He began to strive to ensure that Russia, the Russian Orthodox Church, became the center of world Orthodoxy. Alexey Mikhailovich supported the patriarch, since the government had plans to unite the Orthodox churches of Ukraine and the Balkan countries with the Russian Church.

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.

He was almost 25 years older than Alexei Mikhailovich; this difference in years made it easier for him to influence the king. This was not the friendship of peers, but the influence of a very smart, active and remarkably eloquent man of venerable years on the soft, impressionable soul of the young tsar... Nikon was a practitioner, Alexei Mikhailovich was an idealist.

Being an extremely ambitious man, Nikon sought to gain more and more power and one day he crossed the line. During the wars of 1654-1658. the tsar was often absent from Moscow and, therefore, was far from Nikon and did not restrain the patriarch’s lust for power with his presence. Returning from his campaigns, he began to feel burdened by his influence. The tsar and the patriarch quarreled, and in 1658 Nikon was removed from the patriarchal throne. Nikon's enemies took advantage of the tsar's cooling towards him and began to treat the patriarch disrespectfully. The proud soul of the archpastor could not bear the insult; On July 10, 1658, he renounced his rank and left for the Resurrection Monastery.

The Emperor, however, did not soon decide to end this matter. Only in 1666, at a spiritual council chaired by the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch, Nikon was deprived of his bishopric and imprisoned in the Belozersky Ferapontov Monastery.

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, since they stood for the old, that is, uncorrected rituals). As a result of this decision, the Russian Church found itself split.

But by this time, different church statutes had been established in Moscow and Constantinople - the order of performing church services. The fact is that at the time of Russia’s adoption of Orthodoxy, two church statutes were in force in Byzantium. They were completely equal. Rus' adopted one of them, and Byzantium later settled on the other. In addition, Russian and Byzantine church books contained discrepancies, since Russian church books were copied by hand.

So, Patriarch Nikon sought to ensure that the Russian Church played the role in the Orthodox world that the Constantinople Church played, i.e. became the heiress of Constantinople. But for this it was necessary to switch to the Greek church charter, to bring the texts of liturgical books in accordance with Greek models. Printing provided such an opportunity.

In 1653 Nikon began to carry out reform. The Russian Church began to switch to the Greek church charter, liturgical books began to be brought into line with the Greek ones.

But the reforms caused a sharp protest from part of society - the boyars, the clergy, and the people. Supporters of the old rituals refused to recognize Nikon’s reforms and called for a return to the pre-reform order. Outwardly, the differences boiled down to:

• v according to which models - Greek or Russian - should we unify church books,
• v make the sign of the cross with two or three fingers,
• v how to make a religious procession - along the direction of the sun or against the direction of the sun.

At the same time, famine and pestilence struck the country. The people considered these disasters to be God's punishment for departing from the faith of their ancestors. Thousands of peasants and townspeople fled to the Pomeranian North, the Volga region, the Urals, and Siberia. The split was also supported by representatives of some noble boyar families, in particular, the relatives of the first wife of Alexei Mikhailovich, Tsarina Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya, boyar F.P. Morozova and her sister E.P. Urusova. The noble sisters were shackled, subjected to terrible torture, and then exiled to Borovsk, where they died in an earthen prison. Archpriest Avvakum and his supporters were exiled to the North in the city of Pustozersk. There they spent 14 years in an earthen prison in the permafrost zone. But Habakkuk did not renounce his faith. For this, he and his like-minded people were burned at the stake.

Patriarch Nikon also fell out of favor with the tsar. In 1666, at a church council, he was removed from the post of patriarch and exiled to Vologda. After the death of Alexei Mikhailovich, Nikon was allowed to return from exile. In 1681 he died near Yaroslavl.

Since then, the united Russian Church has been split into two - the Russian Orthodox Church (Nikonian) and the Russian Orthodox Old Believer Church.

In 1654, a significant event in Russian history took place - Russia returned Left Bank Ukraine.

The reunification of Ukraine with Russia was of great importance for both states:

• v liberated the people of Ukraine from national and religious oppression, saved them from enslavement by Poland and the Ottoman Empire, contributed to the formation of the Ukrainian nation;
• v contributed to the strengthening of Russian statehood. It was possible to return the Smolensk and Chernigov lands. This made it possible to begin the fight for the Baltic coast. In addition, the prospect of expanding Russia's ties with other Slavic peoples and Western states opened up.

Another important event of this era was the uprising led by Stepan Razin.

Stepan was born around 1630. He visited Moscow three times (in 1652, 1658 and 1661), and on the first of these visits he visited the Solovetsky Monastery. The situation on the Don was heating up. In 1667, with the end of the war with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, new parties of fugitives poured into the Don and other places. Famine reigned on the Don. In search of a way out of a difficult situation in order to get their daily bread, the poor Cossacks at the end of winter - beginning of spring 1667. unite into small bands, move to the Volga and Caspian Sea, and rob merchant ships. They are broken up by government troops. But the gangs gather again and again. Stepan Razin becomes their leader.

In August they appear in Astrakhan, and the local governors, having made them promise to faithfully serve the Tsar, hand over all ships and guns, and release the servicemen, let them go up the Volga to the Don.

In early October, Razin returned to the Don. His daring Cossacks, who acquired not only wealth, but also military experience, settled on an island near the town of Kagalnitsky.

Dual power was established on the Don. Affairs in the Don Army were managed by a Cossack foreman, led by an ataman, who was stationed in Cherkassk. She was supported by homely, wealthy Cossacks. But Razin, who was with Kagalnik, did not take into account the military ataman Yakovlev, his godfather, and all his assistants.

The number of Razin rebel troops forming on the Don is growing rapidly. At the beginning of May 1670 Razin is removed from the camp. Razin captures Tsaritsyn, Astrakhan, Smbirsk. The flames of the uprising cover a vast territory: the Volga region, Trans-Volga region, many southern, southeastern, and central counties. Slobodskaya Ukraine, Don. The main driving force is the masses of serfs. Actively participating in the movement are the lower classes of the city, working people, barge haulers, small serving men (urban archers, soldiers, Cossacks), representatives of the lower clergy, all sorts of “walking” people, “homeless” people. The movement includes Chuvash and Mari, Mordovians and Tatars.

The lovely letters sent out by Razin and other leaders stirred up new layers of the population to revolt. According to a foreign contemporary, up to 200 thousand people took part in the movement at that time. Many nobles fell victim to them, their estates burned down.

Frightened by the scale of the uprising, which was called war in documents of the time, the authorities mobilized new regiments. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich himself arranges a review of the troops. He appoints the boyar Prince Yu. A. Dolgoruky as commander-in-chief of all forces, an experienced commander who distinguished himself in the war with Poland, a stern and merciless man. He makes Arzamas his bet. The royal regiments are coming here, repelling attacks from rebel troops along the way, giving them battles.

Both sides suffer significant losses. However, slowly and steadily the resistance of the armed rebels is being overcome. Government troops are also gathering in Kazan and Shatsk.

Stepan Razin was captured on April 14, 1671. in Kagalnik, homely Cossacks led by K. Yakovlev. Soon he was brought to Moscow and, after torture, executed on Red Square, and the fearless leader in his last, death hour “did not reveal weakness of spirit with a single breath.” The uprising he led became the most powerful movement of the “rebellious century.” And one of the events of the era of the reign of the first Romanovs.

On March 19, 1629, the second king of the new Russian royal dynasty, Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov, was born. The historical portrait of this ruler paints the image of a fairly intelligent, skillful and tolerant monarch.

The youth of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov

The biography is very interesting. His mother was E.L. Streshneva is the daughter of low-ranking small-scale boyars. Until the age of five, Alexey was under the supervision of numerous mothers and nannies. Boyarin B.I. Morozov became the mentor of the young tsar. By the age of six, the king had mastered reading and writing; the first books he read were: the Book of Hours, the Acts of the Apostles, and the Psalter. Alexey fell in love with reading so much that by the age of 12 he had his own children's library. Among his favorite books is Cosmography, Lexicon and Grammar, published in the Principality of Lithuania. Among his toys were children's armor made by German masters, musical instruments, and printed sheets (pictures). Alexey Mikhailovich also loved outdoor activities; from childhood he was fond of falconry, and in adulthood he even wrote a treatise on falconry. The biography of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov indicates the enormous influence that the guardian had on his ward. By the age of fourteen, young Alexei Mikhailovich was introduced to the people, and at sixteen, after the death of his father and mother, he ascended the throne.

The first years of the reign

The reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov began in 1645. The youth and inexperience of the ruler at first was so great that all important and pressing issues of government were concentrated in the hands of B.I. Morozov. But the excellent education and talent of the ruler made themselves felt, and soon Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov himself began to make government decisions. his reign of those years outlines all the complexities and contradictions of the domestic and foreign policies of Rus'. The active involvement of foreign advisers in governing the country gave rise to reforms.

At this time, the character of the king emerges. An educated, benevolent and calm person - this is how Alexey Mikhailovich Romanov looked in the eyes of his contemporaries. The Tsar received the nickname “The Quietest” quite deservedly. But if necessary, he could show will, determination, and sometimes even cruelty.

Cathedral Code

Romanov laid the foundation for the creation of the Council Code - the first set of laws of the Russian state. Before this, judging in Rus' was guided by various, often self-contradictory decrees, extracts and orders. The king was prompted to adopt the code by the new duties on salt. The instigators suggested that the sovereign put in order the rules of salt trade and convene the Zemstvo Assembly. At that moment, the tsar was forced to make concessions, but after the adoption of the Code, the Zemsky Sobor lost its powers and was soon dissolved.

The king's marriage

Soon after ascending the throne, a bride was found for the king. She turned out to be Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya - a girl from an old and noble boyar family. At that time, tsars did not look for brides abroad, but chose wives from successful boyar houses. Several boyar families fought for the opportunity to become related to the royal family. In the Assumption Cathedral, during prayer, the king saw the maiden Maria of the Miloslavsky family. It is unlikely that this meeting was accidental.

Be that as it may, this marriage turned out to be successful and long-lasting. Until her death, the king revered his queen, was an exemplary family man and had thirteen children with her, three of them later became rulers of the country.

Church schism

The influence of the church at the beginning of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich was so great that the title of “great sovereign” was awarded. Thus, the king recognized the equality of power between himself and the ruler of the church. But this caused discontent among the boyars, since Nikon demanded from them complete obedience and absolute non-interference in church affairs. But, as time has shown, such management had its significant drawbacks.

Nikon considered that he had the right to tell the tsar how to carry out state affairs. The influence of the aristocracy and boyars on the tsar decreased. The origins of such influence should be sought in the upbringing that Alexey Mikhailovich Romanov received. The historical portrait and notes of contemporaries show us the image of a very God-fearing, religious person. There was only one way to reduce Nikon's influence. At the beginning of 1658, the archpriest of the Kazan Cathedral addressed the Tsar with a direct question: “How long do you tolerate this to God’s enemy?” And for the tsar there were no more humiliating reproaches than those that infringed on his royal power and doubted the authority of the autocracy. Confrontation was inevitable and eventually led to a split. The formal reason was the insult of Nikon by the boyars, after which he loudly stepped away from the rank of patriarch and went into a monastery. In 1666, he deposed Nikon and officially deprived him of his rank. Since then, the rule of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov has become truly autocratic, and he even extends his power to the Church.

Politics of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov

Foreign relations were of particular interest to the king. The request of the Cossack centurion Khmelnytsky to stop the Polish intervention was heard by the autocrat. The Zemsky Sobor of 1653 accepted the Ukrainian Cossacks as citizenship and promised them military support. In May 1654, Russian troops set out on a campaign and occupied Smolensk. By order of the tsar, in the spring of 1654 military operations were continued, and the cities of Kovno, Brodno and Vilno became Russian.

The Swedish War was started, which ended in defeat. The Troubles in Ukraine, which began shortly after the death of Khmelnytsky, required the resumption of hostilities with Poland. On January 8, 1654, the Pereyaslav Rada finally confirmed the entry of Ukraine into Russia. Much later, in 1667, Poland agreed to new borders, and the treaty on the annexation of Ukraine to Russia began to be recognized internationally. The southern borders of the state were successfully defended, cities such as Nerchinsk, Irkutsk, and Seleginsk were built.

Rebellious Age

Many decisions related to the expansion of the country’s territory were personally made by Alexey Mikhailovich Romanov. A historical portrait of the autocrat of all Rus' would be incomplete without awareness of the severe internal contradictions and tensions that he encountered during his reign. It is no coincidence that the 17th century would later be called “Rebellious” because of the constant uprisings that outraged the state. Particularly worth noting is the rebellion of Stepan Razin, which took a lot of time and effort to suppress.

The tsar's economic policy encouraged the creation of manufactories and the expansion of foreign trade. The Tsar patronized Russian trade, protecting his domestic market from foreign goods. There were also miscalculations in economic policy. The rash decision to equate the value of copper money with silver money caused popular grumbling and led to the devaluation of the ruble.

The last years of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich

After the death of his beloved wife, the king married again. His chosen one was the one who gave him three children, including the future Emperor Peter 1.

The Tsar paid great attention to education and instructed the Ambassadorial Decree to translate foreign literature and various scientific works into Russian. Among those close to the king there were many who read the books of ancient writers, had their own libraries and were fluent in foreign languages. The king’s second wife was fond of theater, and her own small theater was specially created for her at the palace. Alexey Mikhailovich died at the age of 47.

Results of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov

The results of the reign of this king can be described as follows:

• Autocracy strengthened - the power of the tsar was no longer limited by the Church.
• The peasants were completely enslaved.
• The Council Code arose, which became the beginning of judicial reforms in Russia.
• As a result of the reign of this king, the border of the Russian state expanded - Ukraine was annexed, and the development of Siberia began.