In May-June 1537, the Russian state almost became the scene of a bloody civil strife: the Staritsky appanage Prince Andrey Ivanovich rebelled against the young Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich (the future Ivan the Terrible) and his mother Elena. Contemporaries had to wait with horror for the denouement: the terrible feudal war of the middle of the XV century - the confrontation between Vasily II the Dark and the Galician princes-was too memorable at that time. The historian also follows with interest the complex twists and turns of the struggle between the central government and the appanage prince. But the Staritsky mutiny itself was only a link in a long chain of events. Let's go back a few years.
The reason for the troubles was the death of Vasily III on the night of December 3 to 4, 1533. His death was not unexpected either for the Grand Duke or for close relatives and boyars. On September 21, 1533, Vasily III, together with his wife Elena Glinskaya and two sons, Ivan and Yuri, went to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery to pray, and from there left for the Lamsky Portage, in the village of Svyatoslav. Ozeretskoe for " fun " (hunting). Back in August, Vasily was going to the Portage, but the sudden news that the troops of the Crimean Khan Saip-Giray were marching to Ryazan distracted him from the trip. On the Drag, the Grand Duke fell ill: a sore appeared on his leg, "there is no pus in it, but the bagrov itself." At first, Vasily III tried not to pay attention to the pain, but gradually the general state of health worsened: he could hardly move, barely reached the bathhouse, and with "great need" took food in the bed mansions .1
Soon doctors Nikolai Bulev and Feofil arrived from Moscow. After consulting with the Grand Duchess's uncle, Prince M. L. Glinsky, they began to apply wheat flour with honey and onions baked to the "sore"; the sore became "red", but the pain did not decrease. At times, Vasily felt better, but not for long. From the sore, pus began to come out "little by little and as big as it is, as it is up to half a foot and along the pelvis." It may seem strange to a modern person that the sovereign was treated in this way. However, at the current level of medicine, even death from a cold was commonplace. At the same time, the Grand Duke was the most famous not only in Russia, but also in Europe, the German scientist Nikolai Bulev. The Imperial Ambassador to Russia, Fr. da Collo remembered him as "a professor of medicine and the most thorough in all the sciences." 2 However, neither Boolev's scholarship nor his methods of treatment helped Vasily III. In those days, they had no idea what an infection, blood poisoning, was. Every disease was treated by ancient methods. An envoy of the Papal Curia, A. Possevino, who visited Moscow in 1582, later noted in his notes that " patients almost do not take any medicine, except for vodka, as well as water in which the relics of saints are immersed."3
Fearing an early death, Vasily sent the lawyer Ya. Mansurov and the deacon Lesser Putyatin to Moscow to secretly take out the spiritual letters of his father and grandfather, which he needed to compile his own spiritual history . He had a lot to worry about-
1 PSRL. T. 34. Moscow, 1978, p. 18.
2 Zimin A. A. Russia on the threshold of the new time, Moscow, 1972, pp. 350-358.
3 Possevino A. Istoricheskie sochineniya o Rossii XVI v. [Historical Works on Russia of the XVI century].
4 PSRL. Vol. 34, p. 18.
page 100
to rest. Death is just around the corner. Who will replace him on the throne? The eldest, Ivan, is three years old, and the youngest, Yuri, is one year old. True, they still had a young mother, Elena, but there were still Vasily's brothers, the appanage princes Yuri and Andrey. The real danger was the Dmitrov Prince Yuri. Vasily III had no children from his first marriage to Solomonia Saburova. All these years, Yuri had hoped that after the death of his older brother, he would inherit the throne. In 1526, Vasily III divorced his wife "for the sake of infertility" and married the young Elena Glinskaya. According to the chronicle, the Grand Duke liked her for her beauty and wisdom, worthy of a sovereign. Four years later, Vasily had his first child, Ivan, the long-awaited heir who made his father happy and buried Yuri's dreams of the throne. The birth of the heir further strained relations between the brothers: unlike Andrei Staritsky, Yuri did not even come to the christening of the newborn. On August 24, 1531, the" final " charter of Vasily and Yuri was drawn up, which specifically stipulated that Yuri renounces claims to the grand ducal throne .5
But the autumn of 1533 made adjustments: the sovereign's illness rekindled the hopes of the Dmitrov prince that had already been extinguished. What if the heir doesn't live long? After all, children at that time often died. The youngest son of Vasily III, Yuri, already inspired fears, which were later justified when it was revealed that he was deaf and dumb. Meanwhile, the appanage prince is 43 years old, he is an experienced warrior and a clever politician and, of course, can revive the opposition .6 Everyone still remembered the conflict between the Dmitrov Prince and Vasily III over the departure of the Shuisky princes to Yuri in 1526.7 His father clearly understood all the disadvantages of the situation of the future Ivan IV: more than once he talked with the boyars about the will and "how to live and rule after his reign." Fear for his son and the hereditary rights of the dynasty now forced Vasily to secretly send to Moscow for spiritual letters, secretly conduct conversations with the boyars, secretly write a spiritual one. When Yuri arrived at the Portage, Vasily tried to hide his illness from him and soon sent him to Dmitrov, although he "did not want to go" 8 .
Vasily III, apparently, spoke to the boyars about the danger posed by his brother. Otherwise, it is difficult to explain why Yuri was not admitted to the Grand Duke's inner Duma. We do not know exactly the content of these conversations, but the veil of secrecy is revealed by the important testimony of Prince A. M. Kurbsky. Being the grandson of V. M. Tuchkov, an active participant in these meetings, Kurbsky knew what was happening in November-December 1533. In his well-known pamphlet against Ivan the Terrible, The Stories of the Grand Duke of Moscow, he wrote that Vasily and his" law-breaking wife", not wanting Yuri to inherit the throne, " commanded his wife and his cursed adviser, soon after his death to kill him (Yuri. - A. Yu.)"9 .
In other words, according to Kurbsky, Vasily before his death made an oral order to the boyars to kill the" very courageous and good-natured " Prince Yuri 10 . A week after the death of Vasily III, Yuri was captured and thrown into prison on charges of plotting against Ivan IV. In August 1536, he died, according to the chronicle, "a painful death."
The relationship between Vasily III and his other brother, Andrey Ivanovich 11 , who, according to the will of Ivan III, was to receive the Staritsa as an inheritance, was different,
5 DDG. M.-L. 1950, N 101, p. 416-420; Zimin A. A. Uk. soch., p. 377.
6 PSRL. Vol. 29. M. 1965, p. 10; Zimin A. A. Ivan the Terrible's reforms. M. 1960, p. 227; Kashtanov S. M. Sotsial'no-politicheskaya istoriya Rossii kontsa XV - pervoi poloviny XVI v. M. 1967, p. 276-304.
7 Veselovsky S. B. The last appanages in North-Eastern Russia. In: Historical Notes. 1. 22, p. 105.
8 PSRL. Vol. 4, part ! issue. 3. l. 1929, p. 555.
9 Works of Prince Kurbsky-RIB. T. XXXI. SPb. 1914, pp. 130-131.
10 Tikhomirov M. N. Knyaz Yuri Ivanovich Dmitrovsky, In: Russian State of the XV-XVII centuries, Moscow, 1973, pp. 155-169.
11 Polosin I. I. Sotsial'no-politicheskaya istoriya Rossii XVI - nachala XVII v. Socio-political history of Russia in the XVI-early XVII centuries.
page 101
Aleksin and Vereya. However, the execution of this order depended entirely on Prince Vasily. Andrey did not immediately become an old prince. In the first years of the reign of Vasily III, he was often with the Grand Duke. In 1510. they entered Pskov together, participated in the Smolensk campaign in 1513, and on Vasily's third campaign against Smolensk, Andrey was left governor in Moscow. After the death of the appanage Prince Semyon of Kaluga in 1518, Vasily III, finally convinced of the loyalty of his younger brother, lets him go to the inheritance. And later they repeatedly led the regiments stationed on Kolomna together, continued to go on a pilgrimage to monasteries together. As a special favor, Vasily III allowed Andrey Staritsky to marry in 1533 (fearing the transfer of dynastic rights to the side branches of the Moscow Grand ducal house, Vasily forbade his brothers to marry until the birth of Ivan and Yuri). Efrosinia Khovanskaya became the Staritsa Princess. Andrey also accompanied the Grand Duke on his last trip to the monasteries. Now, on the Drag, they were going to hunt as usual, but illness confused the plans of the Grand Duke. The Staritsky prince took part in the discussion of problems that arose: about the heir, the guardianship council, the will 12 . Vasily III trusted him more than Yuri. But is it only because Andrey was more obedient and patient? It is not known how the relationship between the Staritsky prince and Vasily III would have developed if Andrey had been in the place of Yuri: in the position of a younger brother who does not pretend to anything, it is easier to maintain friendship with the grand Duke. Now, however, the arrest of Yuri and especially his death in 1536 put Andrey in a different position.
According to the apt expression of V. O. Klyuchevsky, "the appanage prince was a seditious person, if not by nature, then by position." 13 The beginning of the conflict between the Staritsky prince and the government of Elena , as evidenced by the Resurrection Chronicle 14, dates back to January 1534. On the fortieth day after the death of Vasily III, Andrew began to ask the Grand Duchess for an increase in his patrimony of new cities in addition to "his father's blessing and through a spiritual letter" 15 . Elena refused, but before Andrey left for Staritsa, she honored him, as before it happened after the death of grand dukes, giving him "from above". However, Andrey was dissatisfied with the cups, horses and fur coats received from her as a gift, and upon arrival in Staritsa "taught... the anger of derzhati is that they didn't give him a fatherland." This situation, described in the Resurrection Chronicle, nevertheless raises doubts about its authenticity. It is not clear how Andrey, after Yuri's arrest, could suddenly, at the most inopportune moment, claim possessions that did not belong and were not bequeathed to him. And what a generosity of Moscow: in response to the claims of the impudent appanage prince, to give it! This is not typical of medieval society, which did not forgive such encroachments.
Science offered a different explanation for the requirements of Prince Staritsky. "Indeed, Andrey Ivanovich claimed lands beyond ("through") those that went to him according to the spiritual charter of Ivan III, since he based his claims on the will of Vasily III " 16. Perhaps Andrew's demands were not groundless, because they were based on the will of Basil III, which has not come down to us. It is surprising that the rest of the spiritual letters of the Grand dukes have been preserved (if not in the original, then in the list), while the spiritual letters of Basil III are only mentioned in chronicle texts .17
According to the Resurrection Chronicle, the culprits of the quarrel between Andrew and the government were some "dashing people" who in January 1534, upon the return of the appanage prince from Moscow, began to say that the Grand Duchess was going to arrest him and put him in prison. In the prince's position at the time, believe it
12 Presnyakov A. E. Testament of Basil III. In: Collection of articles on Russian history devoted to S. F. Platonov. Pg. 1922, pp. 71-80.
13 Klyuchevsky V. O. Kurs russkoi istorii [Course of Russian History], vol. 2, part 2, Moscow, 1957, p. 133.
14 About her, see: Levina S. A. Voskresenskaya letopis XVI v.-Trudy Moskovskogo istoriko-archivnogo instituta, 1957, vol. XIII, pp. 402-407.
15 PSRL. Vol. VIII. SPb. 1859, p. 292.
16 Zimin A. A. Knyazheskie dukhovnye gramoty nachala XVI v. Princely spiritual letters of the beginning of the XVI century In: Istoricheskie zapiski, vol. 27, p. 286.
17 Presnyakov A. E. Uk. soch., p. 71; PSRL. vol. 34, pp. 18-20; vol. 4, part 1, issue 3, p. 557; vol. VI. SPb. 1853, p. 268.
page 102
it was not difficult, considering the conflict that had taken place in Moscow over the land that he was supposed to inherit under the will of his older brother. The content of the Staritsky conversations became known in Moscow. Fearing premature clashes, Elena sent Prince I. V. Shuisky and deacon Lesser Putyatin to the Staritsa to admonish Andrey that "the words are wrong, but Grand Duke Ivan and his mother Grand Duchess Elena have no evil thoughts in their minds." Andrey believed the messengers and returned to Moscow, where he complained about the rumors that he was allegedly going to be arrested. Elena answered: "And we have no evil in our hearts about you, but tell us those people who are making trouble among us, so that there will be no evil among us in the future." Andrey did not betray these people and said evasively that "an opinion came to him"18. When he got home, he seemed to calm down. However, the Resurrection Chronicle reports that Andrew still "did not put aside his opinion and fear." He was again "accosted by dashing people" with conversations about the insidious plans of the Grand Duchess. Someone later reported in Moscow about the prince's desire to escape from Staritsa. The official Resurrection Chronicle notes that Elena did not believe this, since "many untruths were said between them in advance."
There is another source about the Staritsky revolt - "memory" of the Russian envoy Savin Oslyabyev-Yemelyanov, who was sent to the German Empire on December 23, 1537, two weeks after Andrey's death. In particular, he was given instructions on what to say about the fate of Andrey. "And they will ask Savin: and Prince Andrew is now where, and what is his business?.. and Savina govoriti: as God's will remained, our sovereign's father, the great Sovereign Vasili, was no longer in his stomach, and the sovereign granted his son, our sovereign Grand Duke Ivan, with all his power; and Prince Andrew kissed our sovereign's cross, that he should serve our sovereign directly, and not think of anything dashing; and he taught our sovereign great things. to do unrighteousness, and to plot against the sovereign himself, and to get the states under him. " 19 From this first official news of the Staritsky mutiny, it is clear that at first the blame for what happened was laid only on Andrey. Only after a few years, the official version of the" capture "was modified in the Resurrection Chronicle: the main culprits of the quarrel were unknown "dashing people".
New developments have escalated the conflict. At the beginning of 1537, the lands of the Nizhny Novgorod Uyezd were attacked by Kazan troops. Relations with the Kazan Khanate became hostile after a coup in September 1535, when Vasily III's henchman, Khan Yanalei of Kazan, was assassinated. Instead of him, the conspirators took the Crimean tsarevich Safa-Giray as khan. In December 1535, the government of Elena Glinskaya, in response to this "treason", released Shigaley, Yanaley's brother, in the hope of making him khan of Kazan and thus restoring "friendly" relations .20 The government of Elena Glinskaya demanded the participation of Andrei Ivanovich in the war with Kazan. They sent for him to Staritsa, but he said he was ill and did not go. A doctor was sent to the shire. After examining the patient, he reported in Moscow that the disease was mild. This time messengers were sent to Staritsa and instructed, officially learning about the prince's health, to secretly find out why he did not go to the capital. When they returned, they told Elena about the mysterious people who did not always live with him, but "they say secretly that the prince lies behind what he does not dare to go to Moscow" 21.
Andrey's "Punitive Speeches" issued to his representatives before they left for Moscow have been preserved. This document contained instructions - "instructions" to the ambassadors on what to say during the negotiations. It turns out that the envoys went to Staritsa more than once. The first person to visit there after doctor Feofil was the son of the boyar Prince V. F. Obolensky. Andrey complained to him about his illness and asked him to tell him that he would not be able to come. Elena did not believe it and sent a new person to Staritsa. "And you, sire, -
18 PSRL. Vol. 34, p. 171.
19 AZR. T. 2. SPb. 1848, N 175, p. 321.
20 PSRL. Vol. VII, p. 291.
21 Ibid.
page 103
Andrey wrote to Ivan IV in his "Punishing Speeches": "after that he sent us his son, the boyar Prince Vasily Semyonovich Serebreny, and you, sire, ordered us to go to your house, and we ordered you, to your sovereign, with him, that we should go to you, to the sovereign, in our own country." yehati's illnesses are not small " 22 . The Staritsky prince understood that a second refusal to go to Moscow was fraught with undesirable consequences, which frightened him with unknown well-wishers. And the appanage prince decided to send to Moscow his parliamentarian, Prince Yuri Andreevich Peninsky-Bolshoy, to beat Elena with his forehead, so that the grand Duke "would not hold his wrath." But Elena was relentless and sent a new representative to Staritsa, Prince B. D. Shchepin-Obolensky, with an ultimatum demand "to go to yourself, with a great ban... It's one-person, no matter how much it costs."
Staritsky Prince got into a difficult situation: now he can not refuse. The Grand Duke, on whose behalf Elena acts, demands it personally, despite the illness. But this time, too, Andrey did not overcome his fear and sent Prince F. D. Pronsky instead. In the" Punitive Speeches " that he brought, the appanage prince ironically responded to Elena's ultimatum: "And before this, sire, it did not happen that we were dragged to you, the sovereign, on a stretcher."23 . It is difficult to say whether Andrey was really ill. Perhaps he wanted to make the slight indisposition more serious, so as not to go to Moscow and not repeat the fate of Yuri Ivanovich. After all, it was really dangerous to go: In Moscow, Andrei was already considered an intruder, as can be seen from the instructions to the envoy S. Oslyabyev-Yemelyanov: "The Merciful God that he (Andrey. - A. Yu.) deliberately destroyed his thoughts: then the emperor was told that he did not think well. " 24 Whatever it was, Shchepin-Obolensky, who was in the Staritsa, wasted no time in acting as he was prescribed. An unofficial source, The Tale of the Capture of the Appanage Prince Andrey Ivanovich Staritsky, states that he was ordered, on behalf of the Grand Duke, to send the Staritsky voivode Yu .A. Obolensky-Peninsky - Bolshoy to Kolomna, "and with him many children of the boyars."25
The Obolensky princes served both the Grand Duke and Andrew 26 . This is not surprising, if we recall the family tree of the Obolenskys and its branches. They were one of the first families to enter the service of the Grand Duke while retaining the princely title. In the last quarter of the 15th century, about a dozen Obolenskys served under the Moscow and appanage dukes .27 Thus, Vasily Nikitich Obolensky, the ancestor of the Kurlyatev princes, was a boyar of Prince Andrey Vasilyevich Uglitsky; his brother Peter served in the lot of Boris Volotsky; from the Obolensky family came the princes Nogotkov, Strigin, Telepnev, Repnin, Peninsky, Shchepin, Yaroslavov, Kashin; at the court of the Staritsky prince served brothers Ivan, Yuri Bolshoy and Yuri The lesser Peninsky-Obolensky (Ivan and Yuri the Lesser are boyars; Yuri the Greater, although older than the Lesser, stood on the hierarchical ladder below the younger brother, being a butler. His rapid promotion to the Lesser service was due to his marriage to his own sister, Princess Efrosinia Khovanskaya of Staritsa). The main participant in the suppression of the Staritsky rebellion, temporary worker and favorite of Elena Ivan Fedorovich Ovchina-Telepnev-Obolensky, as well as B. D. Shchepin-Obolensky, who was sent to the Staritsa, were second cousins of Obolensky, who served in the lot of Andrew. In fact, one family name was divided between the warring camps, which did not prevent each of its members from faithfully serving their overlord.
So, B. D. Shchepin-Obolensky in Staritsa carried out an assignment for Elena. He managed to send his second cousin Yu. A. Peninsky-Bolshoy to Kolomna. The government of Elena attached great importance to this action. Not by accident.-
22 SGGiD. ch. 2. Moscow, 1819, N 30, p. 37.
23 Ibid., p. 38.
24 AZR. T. 2, N 175, p. 321.
25 Tikhomirov M. N. Little-known chronicle monuments of the XVI century. In: Russkoe letopisanie [Russian Chronicle], Moscow, 1979, pp. 220-224.
26 Zimin A. A. Udelnye knyazi i ikh dvory v vtoroi polovine XV i pervoi polovine XVI v. Specific princes and their courts in the second half of the 15th and first half of the 16th centuries In: Istoriya i genealogiya [History and Genealogy], Moscow, 1977, p. 180.
27 Veselovsky S. B. Issledovaniya po istorii klassa sluzhilykh zemlevladeltsev [Research on the history of the class of servicemen]. Moscow, 1969, pp. 434-437.
page 104
Pin-Obolensky was ordered to follow the dispatch of the troops and at the same time learn about their numbers . Elena was more concerned about Andrey's behavior and the possibility of an armed conflict with him than about the khan's raids on the southern borders of the state. The Vologda-Perm chronicle describes the government's plans as follows: "Grand Duchess Elena Zdumav z boyars imati Prince Ondrej Ivanovich... and an ambassador after him to Staritsa " 29 . Andrey, trying to settle the conflict, sends F. D. Pronsky to Moscow with the clerk Var an Grigoriev, who brought Elena "Punishing Speeches" as a response of the Staritsky prince to the government's ultimatum.
"The Story" reports that in the village of Pavlovsky, 30 versts from Moscow, Andrei's envoys were met by a detachment of I. F. Karpov. The unknown author of the" Story " wrote: "And Yasha Prince Fyodor and led him to Moscow and announced him to the Grand Duke. And the great Prince ordered Prince Fyodor to be planted inside the city on the knyazho on the Ondreev courtyard on Ivanovich. " 30 When did this happen? In the "Story" there is a date of departure of the envoys-April 12, but it is not specified when they arrived in Moscow. Staritsa is located 160-180 km (depending on the road) from Moscow. It takes several days of driving to cover this distance. The "Story" indirectly points to the extreme possible date of the arrival of Andrei's envoys in Moscow - after the news of Pronsky's arrest, the news of Andrei's flight follows: "On the same Mayan summer in 2, at the sacrifice of the relics of the holy righteous martyrs of the passion-bearers of the God-loving Russian princes Boris and Gleb, Prince Ondrej Ivanovich went from his fatherland from the Staritsa, having suffered from his great insults, and was his first camp in the Novotorzhsky district in Bernovo in the Vasilyev village of Maly" 31 . The Staritsky prince fled, unable to withstand the strain of the last few months. The withdrawal of his troops from Staritsa and the hostile behavior of Shchepin-Obolensky showed him that there was no hope of settling relations with the government in peace. Did Andrey know about the fate of Pronsky, who was sent to Moscow? Is it a coincidence for that era that Andrew fled on May 2, the Orthodox holiday of Princes Boris and Gleb, "innocently killed" in the XI century by their brother Svyatopolk, nicknamed in Russia for the treachery of the Cursed? Before leaving Staritsa on the memorial day of "saints" Boris and Gleb, Andrey could hint that he did not want to repeat the ill-fated fate of the martyred princes.
Let's try to reconstruct the outline of events that preceded the flight of the appanage prince. F. C. Pronsky and Vargan Grigoriev left Staritsa on April 12 and arrived in Moscow before May 2. The Resurrection Chronicle describes the events somewhat differently: Pronsky had not yet arrived in Moscow, when Prince V. F. Goluboy-Rostovsky secretly sent his servant to the Grand Duke at night with the message that Andrey was fleeing from Staritsa in the morning. 32 The credibility of this news is reinforced by the fact that in the "Story", which is not connected with the official chronicle, there is the same message: "And in advance Sobya he still sent his servant Erepa from the city of Staritsa to Moscow to the Grand Duke dyak to Fyodor to Mishurin with the news that Prince Ondrej Ivanovich had come from Staritsa"33 . Consequently, on the night of May 2, V. F. Goluboy sent his servant Yerema to Moscow to report to the government about Andrey's impending flight. But why, according to the official version, has Pronsky not yet arrived in Moscow? After all, we are talking about May 1. Did he not have three weeks to travel 180 kilometers?
According to the "Story", Pronsky was met in Pavlovsk by a detachment of I. F. Karpov, specially sent from Moscow. There was no delay in the journey, and the envoys quickly arrived in Moscow. A servant from Prince Goluby informed I. F. Ovchina-Obolensky of the appanage prince's decision to flee, probably on May 4 or 5. This may have made the Government's situation more difficult. You can't take drastic action until you know exactly what's going on in the shire. What if the servant made a mistake or at the last moment Andrey vspom-
28 Tikhomirov M. N. Maloizvestnye letopisnye pamyatniki [Little-known chronicle monuments], p. 222.
29 PSRL. T. 26. Moscow-L. 1959, p. 317.
30 Tikhomirov M. N. Maloizvestnye letopisnye pamyatniki [Little-known chronicles of the Monument], p. 222.
31 Ibid.
32 PSRL. Vol. VII p. 293.
33 Tikhomirov M. N. Maloizvestnye letopisnye pamyatniki [Little-known chronicle monuments], p. 222.
page 105
did you break your oath and not dare to challenge Moscow? From the Resurrection Chronicle, we learn about the decision of Elena and the boyars to send Andrey's spiritual father, Protopop Semion, Bishop Dosifey of Krutitsa, and Archimandrite Philotheus to Staritsa with an official and, it seems, belated statement that "there is no evil in the thought (of the government. - A. Yu.)". No matter how hard Elena tried to dress up in the toga of a good and just ruler, her treachery was noticed even through the official Resurrection chronicle: in case the appanage prince "does not believe, but runs", troops led by N. V. and I. F. Obolensky were simultaneously sent to Staritsa. 34
In Moscow, F. D. Ironsky and Vargan Grigoriev appeared before Elena. We don't know what they were talking about. It is only known that in response to the "Punitive Speeches" brought from Andrey, Elena assured the envoys in writing that "there is no opinion of anyone on Nebo." The cross was kissed on behalf of the government by boyar I. V. Shuisky, dvoretsky I. Y. Shigona and clerk Lesser Putyatin35 . Such an answer could have been received by Andrew's envoys before the news of the appanage Prince's decision to flee became known in Moscow from a servant of Prince Goluby. This once again confirms the idea that Pronsky did not stay on the road and arrived in Moscow before May 2. The government of Elena did not believe in a positive outcome of negotiations with the Staritsky prince: as early as April 29, a draft version of the "Punitive Speeches" addressed to Andrey 36 was drawn up on behalf of the clergy listed above . The date of April 29 on the document was then crossed out and put another-May 5. This new text of the " Punitive Speeches "was already written taking into account the information received from the messenger from Staritsa, and differed from the previous one in that it was now compiled on behalf of the Grand Duke. 37 The ecclesiastical mission did not leave Moscow until May 5. The departure could take place on May 5 or 6. At this time, Andrew was already approaching Novgorod (according to the Novgorod II archival Chronicle): "In the same Mayan summer, on the 6th day, there was an earthquake in Veliky Novgorodi from Prince Ondrea Ivanovich, the Grand Duke's brother" 38 . According to the official version, after sending troops to collect Andrei, Elena also ordered to send a "meeting" to Pronsky. As can be seen from here, the official chronicle confuses various events: the arrival of Andrew's envoys in Moscow, which took place before May 2, and the sending of Grand ducal troops to Staritsa on May 5 or 6.
Did the official source accidentally make a mistake, or did a certain political trend manifest itself in this? It should be noted that the official point of view has changed. According to the above-mentioned diplomatic instructions to the envoy Oslyabyev-Yemelyanov, the government, having learned of Andrey's flight, immediately sent troops in pursuit. The source does not mention any attempts to negotiate with the help of the clergy. About further events, the Resurrection Chronicle tells that as soon as Pronsky was arrested, the son of the boyar Sudok Satinus fled from Pavlovsky to Staritsa, who informed the appanage prince about the fate of the messengers and that the Grand Duke's troops were moving towards Staritsa in order to arrest Andrey. At the same time, another boyar son, Ya.Verigin, arrived in Staritsa from Volok and told Andrey that the Obolensky troops had come to Volok "with many people", "and they are going to kill you". Andrey was frightened, did not believe in Elena's good intentions and fled, taking with him the boyars, nobles and family.
Who was to blame for this "great jam"? The official point of view is clear, although convincing only at first glance: "dashing people" who quarreled Andrey with the government; otherwise, there was a misunderstanding, because Elena did not intend to arrest Andrey. The appanage prince may have wanted to escape (which is his fault), but he fled only because he misunderstood the good will of the government. This external reliability in explaining the reasons for the flight of the appanage prince deceived even such a major historian as I. I. Smirnov39 . He described the events of the Staritsky revolt mainly according to the official source, attracting the "Story" only
34 PSRL. Vol. VIII, p. 293.
35 SGGiD. ch. 2, N 31, p. 39.
36 TSGADA, f. 375, op. 1537, d. 1.
37 SGGiD. Ch. 2, N 32, p. 40; AI. T. 1. SPb. 1841, N 139, p. 201.
38 PSRL. T. 30. M. 1965, p. 204.
39 Smirnov I. I. Ocherki politicheskoi istorii Russkogo gosudarstva 30-kh 50-kh godov XVI veka [Essays on the political history of the Russian State in the 30s and 50s of the XVI century].
page 106
as additional material. This resulted in an inaccurate picture of events. But why can't we accept the official chronicle's version? Andrey left his residence on May 2. Sending troops to Staritsa, as we have already found out, took place no earlier than May 5 or 6. Around May 6, Andrey was near Novgorod. The events described in the Resurrection Chronicle could not have taken place, because by the time the Obolenskys left Moscow (May 5 - 6) Andrey was already absent from Staritsa; therefore, neither Verigin nor Dmitriev were in a position to inform him of the approach of the Moscow troops to Staritsa.
It is easy to declare this news unreliable. But this is not enough to understand why we find contradictory facts in the official source. Could a contemporary who knew about the events not only from written data, but also from the stories of eyewitnesses, so distort their course? Let's try to look at the messages of the Resurrection Chronicle from different points of view. Elena could not send a detachment to meet Pronsky at the same time as sending troops to Staritsa, if only because the government's "Response Speeches" addressed to the appanage prince were preserved. It was noted above that the negotiation procedure was conducted in an atmosphere of peace40 . The Grand Duke's boyars kissed the cross and swore that they were faithful to the agreement with Andrew. What would they be talking about if the official chronicle turned out to be right? Pronsky, according to an official source, was supposed to be arrested and brought to Moscow. By this time, Moscow would have already known about Andrey's flight. Could the government, in such a situation, assure the envoys of their loyalty to the oath and still kiss the cross?
But all these are just arguments against such a chronology of events. F. D. Pronsky actually arrived in Moscow before Andrey's departure from Staritsa, which is what the author of the "Story"wrote about. If so, then the official source carries additional interesting information: according to the "Story", it is not fully clear whether Pronsky was arrested in Pavlovsk, or the exiled detachment only accompanied him to Moscow? If we make a chronological "correction" to the message of the Resurrection Chronicle, it turns out that Elena ordered the arrest of Andrew's messengers. Such an arrest before May 2 would have had a different political connotation: Andrew could not yet have known that Moscow troops would be sent to Staritsa, and Elena did not yet know that the Staritsa prince was planning to escape. The diplomatic game that Elena had started paid off: both sides were testing each other and at the same time waiting to see who would be the first to break down. But it wasn't a fight of equals. Elena did everything possible to weaken the forces of the Staritsky Shire as much as possible, and only after that did she decide to show her plans. Satinus could have informed the Staritsky Prince about Pronsky's arrest in Pavlovsk (of course, before May 2, when Moscow still did not know about Andrey's plans). Satinus ' message destroyed all the plans of the appanage prince for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Was fear the reason for the flight? Or a sense of hopelessness? Probably both. Andrey didn't want to wait to be dealt with like Yuri. Yuri had no chance to escape, but Andrey could run.
Having already left Staritsa, he still did not decide where to go next: to Lithuania via Torzhok or to Novgorod 41 . We do not know what guided the appanage prince in choosing the direction. Ya. Verigin, who informed Andrey about the movement of the Grand duke's troops to Staritsa, could have informed him in a different, more plausible situation (when the prince was already outside his residence) about the progress of the Obolensky troops. Such a message from the servant could significantly affect the choice of direction of movement. Prince Golub secretly fled from Bernov to Moscow, who had previously warned Elena about Andrey's decision through his servant. V. F. Golub was not the last to leave Andrey's camp, not believing in the success of his enterprise: several boyar children fled to the third camp. One of them, Andrey Valuev, was caught. The Staritsky prince ordered the fugitive to be tortured to find out which of the conspirators still remained. Valuev was stripped and thrown into the water. The water in northern Russia is still cold in May, and such torture was not easy. Not for long der-
40 SGGiD. ch. 2, N 31, p. 39.
41 PSRL. Vol. VIII, p. 294.
page 107
Valuev was pressed and, according to "Novella", showed "on many" 42 . Unexpectedly, the appanage prince ordered to stop this case. It is difficult to say why Andrey did not take preventive measures against new shoots. Perhaps Valuev, saving his life, simply deceived the prince, pointing out "many"? It is also possible that Andrey did not want to start an investigation at such a moment for fear of causing confusion in the ranks of the Staritsky people.
At the same time, the departure of Andrei from Staritsa became known in Kolomna, where the Staritsa troops led by Yu. A. Peninsky-Bolshoy were stationed. The "Story" tells that he wept all night, praying before the image of the Savior for his overlord, and in the morning of the next day secretly ran to him .43 It wasn't easy to do that. It was necessary to cross the Volga River and follow the route that the Grand Duke's troops had already been sent. On the Berezai River, before reaching Yedrog Yama, Leninsky caught up with his prince. Andrey was overjoyed at the servant's arrival, gave him many gifts, and did "great honor to him before all." The appanage prince had much to thank the butler for: few people believed in the success of the mutiny; it was obvious that Andrew's military strength was weaker than that of Moscow. Leninsky also knew this. It took a lot of courage to take such a step. On the other hand, the voivode's example of loyalty strengthened the ranks of the Staritsa nobles for a while.
On May 6, 1537, the troops of the appanage prince were located 60 versts from Novgorod . The Novgorod chronicle reports that the terrified inhabitants hastily "encircled" the city on the Trade Side and erected fortifications in human growth. The defense was led by the viceroy Prince Boris Gorbaty and deacons Yakov Shishkin and Rusin Kurtsov 43 . Andrey wanted to attract Novgorod landowners to his side, for which he sent letters to different parts of the world stating:: "The great prince is small, but the state is held by the boyars, and who do you serve? And I am glad to pay you " 46 . Some of the landlords came to see him. Prince I. S. Yaroslavsky "and many others"joined Andrey's side47 . This was reported in Moscow. Elena, seeing Andrew's letters to the Novgorodians brought to her, immediately sent a messenger to Ovchina-Obolensky with instructions to move to Novgorod as soon as possible .48 Upon arriving there, Ovchina was to take the Novgorodians to the Grand Duke and defend the city together with the townspeople. In Moscow, they were very frightened by how exactly and with what slogans Prince Staritsky wanted to attract opposition forces under his banner. Elena and the boyars could not immediately find out whether Andrew's letters were successful, or whether the bulk of the servicemen did not support him. Therefore, the instruction of Elena (in the transmission of the chronicle) was cautious and overestimated the strength of the rebellious prince: "And Prince Andrew will come to Novugorod, and Prince Mikita, strengthening himself with people and with the governors, but stand against Prince Andrew as much as God helps, and do not let him burn the posad" 49 .
But Andrey found himself in a desperate situation. From Novgorod, where the Grand Duke's troops were not yet present, a detachment of voivode I. N. Buturlin, equipped with artillery, was sent to meet him. 50 Near the Zayatsky Yam under Lyutovaya Gora, 60 versts from Novgorod, the Obolensky troops overtook the Staritsky prince and tried to attack him from the rear, but I. B. Kolychev, who was standing guard, did not allow the enemy to bypass him . Sources give conflicting information about what happened next. If, according to the "Story", Ovchina-Obolensky was the first to launch an offensive and at the same time was the initiator of negotiations with the appanage prince, then, according to the Resurrection Chronicle, Andrew himself went to Ovchina; when he saw the Grand Duke's regiments, he was afraid and was the first to "refer" to the negotiations and "ask the truth" from Ovchina.,
42 Tikhomirov M. N. Maloizvestnye letopisnye pamyatniki [Little-known chronicle monuments], p. 222.
43 Ibid., p. 223.
44 Zimin A. A. Ivan the Terrible's Reforms, p. 246.
45 PSRL. Vol. VI, part I, p. 302.
46 PSRL. T. XIII. M. 1965, p. 95.
47 Correspondence of Ivan the Terrible with Andrey Kurbsky, L. 1979, p. 76.
48 PSRL. Vol. VIII, p. 294.
49 PSRL. Vol. XIII, p. 95.
50 Novgorod Chronicles, St. Petersburg, 1879, p. 69.
51 Tikhomirov M. I. Maloizvestnye letopisnye pamyatniki [Little-known chronicle monuments], p. 222.
page 108
that the grand Duke will not be able to capture him, and great opals will not be placed on him. " 52 According to the diplomatic instructions, "Prince Andrew was trampled underfoot, and his princess and children and all the people were caught and brought to our great sovereign." 53 As we can see, the official version, changing, recognized such obvious facts, which it could not fail to recognize. A. A. Zimin, interpreting these contradictions, preferred the version of the Resurrection Chronicle, believing that the strongest party was the Moscow voivodes, so Andrey 54 was more interested in negotiations . From the point of view of common sense, this is logical: the strongest side dictates the conditions. But there was no armed clash. Therefore, we should speak more about the potential force than the real one.
So, on the day of the meeting of the two armies, which the author of the Story (who must be a great hunter) called "stravka", Ovchina promised Andrey on behalf of the government that on arrival in Moscow he would be forgiven, released to the shire, and everything would be forgotten .55 The meeting took place in the evening, and both sides decided to postpone the negotiations until the morning. The next day, in a solemn atmosphere, the Moscow voivodes "Dasha told the truth to Prince Ondrey Ivanovich and kissed the cross on the fact that Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich and his mother Grand Duchess Elena let Prince Ondrey Ivanovich go to his fiefdom and leave his boyars and their boyar children unharmed" 56 . It is noteworthy that the voivodes give the "truth" and kiss the cross on behalf of the government. This indicates the consistency of the actions of the voivodes with the plans of Elena. This is how the events in the "Story"are described. The Resurrection Chronicle tells it differently: the government did not make any promises; Ovchina, having exceeded his authority and "not having exchanged words" with the Grand Duke, "gave Prince Andrey the truth and came to Moscow with Prince Andrey together."
The term "truth" is used in sources in the sense of an oath promise. According to the official chronicle, since Ovchina gave the "truth" from himself without the knowledge of the government, Elena imposed a "verbal disgrace"on her favorite57 . According to the" Story "Ovchina not only gave the "truth", but also kissed the cross. Breaking the kiss of the cross was condemned by medieval morals as a mortal sin. Nevertheless, most political intrigues were carried out precisely through treacherous violations of the obligations sanctified by the church. The Resurrection Chronicle did not mention that Ovchina kissed the cross. This shows a certain political tendency: of course, it is not good to break the "truth", but to break the kiss of the cross is much more terrible, it is already a grave sin. For violating the "truth" - only verbal disgrace. The Rostov chronicle emphasizes: "Prince Ivan Fyodorovich and Prince Vasilei Fyodorovich vows of greatness and all sorts of truth and an honest cross between themselves to kiss: go to Prince Andrew and to your lot and serve him to the sovereign Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich of all Russia with faith and truth, and the sovereign Prince the great grants him as God puts it in his heart" 58 . The Vologda-Perm chronicle expresses itself more definitely: "Both Prince Veliki and the Grand Duchesses sent their boyar Prince Mikita Vasilyevich Obolensky Lame and their boyar equerry Prince Ivan Fyodorovich Obolensky Telepnev Ovchinu for him, and ordered him to be called to go to Moscow, and the great prince would grant him and give him fiefdoms... And Prince Nikita and Prince Ivan Obolensky kissed the cross of Prince Ondrej on the fact that they had granted it to the sovereign Grand Duke Ivan Vasilyevich and his mother Grand Duchess Elena and given him fiefdoms, and did not move it with anything. " 59
From the above excerpts, it is clear that Ovchina did not take obligations to the appanage prince without permission, but received instructions from the government: in case of negotiations, promise Andrey freedom and forgiveness. Medium-sized tricks were used.-
52 PSRL. Vol. VIII, p. 294.
53 AZR. T. 2, N 75, p. 321.
54 Zimin A. A. Ivan the Terrible's Reforms, p. 247.
55 Tikhomirov M. N. Maloizvestnye letopisnye pamyatniki [Little-known chronicle monuments], p. 223.
56 Ibid., p. 224.
57 PSRL. Vol. VIII, p. 294.
58 Shakhmatov A. A. On the so-called Rostov Chronicle, Moscow, 1904, p. 161.
59 PSRL. T. 26, p. 318.
page 109
a century-old diplomatic casuistry, ranging from political threats and ecclesiastical anathema to false cross-kissing. This kind of diplomacy was more suitable for the government than an open battle, in which chance and the personal courage of the soldiers would decide everything. The return to Moscow was painful. One of Andrew's stewards, Prince Shikh Chernyatinsky," having seen his sovereign nezgoda", tried to lay down the kiss of the cross, "fearing to be caught by the grand Duke and not getting himself a champion of anyone else" 60 . Near Moskovsky posad, Chernyatinsky tried for the second time to get away from the appanage prince. At this point, the text of the Novella ends: "Ivan the Clever will deny him that word." 61
On June 1, the rebels, accompanied by Moscow voivodes, arrived in Moscow. According to the Vologda-Perm Chronicle, the Staritsky prince "was not even in the eyes of the Grand Duke": he was immediately captured and thrown into prison. 62 His wife and son were put in the Bersenyev yard 63 . The Staritsky boyars were first tortured, then executed with the death penalty (they were beaten with a whip on the square) and then put in a Coal Strelnitsa,"and the metropolitan asked for the death penalty" 64. 30 The Novgorod boyar children who took part in the "zamyatna" were hanged on the Novgorod road "not together and to Novagorod"65 . The executions lasted until October 66 .
That was the end of the Staritsky mutiny. Andrey did not live long in prison. On December 10, 1537, he died a " painful death." Before burying him, it was necessary to wipe off the traces of iron shackles on the body of the deceased. He was placed in the tomb of the grand and appanage dukes - the Archangel Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, but at the end where the disgraced were buried, next to his brother Yuri, who died in the same prison. A little more lived Elena, who died in April 1538. The boyars, who hated Ovchina-Obolensky, imprisoned him and starved him to death on the sixth day after the death of the Grand Duchess. A new stage in the political history of the Russian state of the 16th century began - the time of boyar rule. Efrosinia Khovanskaya and her son Vladimir were released, as well as the boyars of Andrei 67 . A new Staritsky lot was also formed, which later turned out to be the last lot in Russia.
The revolt of Prince Staritsky in May-June 1537 was a struggle of contenders for power in an already unified state. In this battle for the throne, the question of the personality of the sovereign, and not the fate of Russia, was decided. The content of Andrey's slogans can hardly be called reactionary or demagogic. What would have happened if the Novgorodians had supported Andrey, united their forces to defeat the Grand Duke's troops, occupied Moscow, and proclaimed Andrey the new Grand Duke? Both options (the defeat of the appanage prince or his victory) imply one final result - the liquidation of the Staritsky inheritance. In historical reality, the "capture" of the appanage prince, his boyars and nobles automatically led to the abolition of the Staritsky Principality. With the victory of Andrew, instead of the young Ivan IV, an adult grand duke would sit on the throne. His lot would naturally enter the domain. In other words, regardless of a particular person on the Moscow throne, the historical process has already objectively dictated the success of centralization, the success of merging Russian feudal estates into a single Russia.
60 Tikhomirov M. N. Maloizvestnye letopisnye pamyatniki [Little-known chronicle monuments], p. 224.
61 PSRL. T. 34, p. 25.
62 PSRL. T. 26, p. 318.
63 PSRL. Vol. VIII, p. 294.
64 AZR. T. 2, N 175, p. 321.
65 PSRL. Vol. VIII, p. 294.
66 PSRL Vol. 4, part 1, issue 3, p. 616.
67 PSRL. Vol. 34, p. 26.
page 110
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2014-2025, LIBRARY.EE is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of Estonia |