Yes, I am going to be the kind of nerd who uses a citation in a blog post. I might as well do it up front:
Chester Dunning, Russia's First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Founding of the Romanov Dynasty (University Park: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001).
Okay. Now that that is out of the way, onward.
Why, you ask, a citation for an academic book about "Russia's first civil war"? It all begins with a holiday: tomorrow, Friday, 4 November, is Russia's День народного единство, or "Day of national unity." If it sounds a little wooden, well, that's because it is. Holidays take time to wear off some of their rough edges and build up traditions. Celebration of this Imperial-era holiday was re-initiated only in 2005 as a way to avoid celebrating the October Revolution, traditionally celebrated with parades on November 7. Thus, the "Day of people's unity" is still in "like-new" condition. Even Russians have no idea what to do with it. A survey cited here suggests that only 23% of Russians actually know what the holiday is for. And that's an improvement.
The history behind it, as the above book suggests, goes back to the days of Muscovy and the establishment of the Romanov Dynasty, which ruled Russia from 1613 to 1917. As with many events in Russian history, it all began with Ivan Groznyi (or "the Terrible," if you will). On his death in 1584, he left behind two sons: Feodor, of limited intelligence, and Dmitrii, a young boy. The elder son reigned for several years, but did not rule. Ruling was the responsibility of his brother-in-law, Boris Gudonov, a nobleman and favorite of Ivan's later years. In addition to the privilege of ruling, he also had the privilege of being hated by many of the boyar (the highest level of Muscovite nobility) families for various reasons of blood, honor, and whatever other reasons rich people hate each other.
You know, in their free time when they are not enserfing peasants. More on that later.
Also, it probably didn't help that Boris got is start in Ivan's proto-secret police.
To make a long story short, Dmitrii Ivanovich mysteriously died in the course of an epileptic fit. (Who let the kid play with a knife? Sounds fishy.) And then Feodor Ivanovich died, childless. Suddenly, all-too-conveniently, Boris is presented with the opportunity to not only rule, but to reign. And so, the Rurikid dynasty having died out, Boris ascended the throne in 1598. And everybody lived happily ever after.
What? Wait. . . this just in: no they didn't.
Actually, for want of a better term, everything went to hell in a hand basket. The subsequent period lasted from 1598, when Boris ascended the throne until 1613, when the boyars got together in a great council and elected one of their own number, Mikhail Romanov, to rule as tsar', autocrat, and all that, etc.
In Russian, it is called "Смутное время," usually rendered in English as the "Time of Troubles." And troubles there were. First on Boris's plate was a young pretender, claiming to be Dmitrii Ivanovich (remember his suspicious death?) but most likely an errant monk of one sort or another. While Boris proclaimed his innocence all along, it's fairly likely that the original Dmitrii was murdered at his orders. Karma will get you like that. In any case, this "Dmitrii" showed up at the head of an army of Poles. Now, that may not sound that scary now, but in the 16th century, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was a powerhouse. It was bad news for Boris. He bowed out (i.e., he was killed) in 1605.
No news on how Natasha fared. [Now that I have my Rocky and Bullwinkle reference out of the way, moving on.]
And this wasn't even the only "false-Dmitrii." Once the first one took the throne and then got himself killed, there were at least a couple of more. After killing this first Dmitrii, the boyar Vasilii Shuiskii seized the throne. And the Swedes got involved. Again, doesn't sound all that frightening, what with their social-democracy and cheap but functional furniture, but in the 16th and 17th centuries, you didn't want to be on their bad side.
And the bad things didn't end there. More invasions, more pretenders, resistance from various Muscovite magnates. I won't bore you with all of the details. Also, it;s because I can't remember them all and I don't have Dunning's book at hand. Hence the citation. The main argument is that the "hooray for national unity" narrative conceals as much as it reveals. For example, the standard narrative downplays the fact that many Russians, from common soldiers to boyars, worked with the foreign invaders and there was just as much conflict among insiders as outsiders: hence "Russia's First Civil War."
What's important is that Russian society was profoundly altered in the process, as its military, political, social, and economic structures could not go back to the way they had been under Ivan. Many peasants, fed up after years of Ivan's increased taxes and curtailment of their traditional freedoms, decided get to out of dodge, fleeing to the south and west and joining nascent Cossack bands. Or to the north and east in to sparsely settled lands of Siberia and the north. Those that stayed behind, they ended up as serfs: The exact moment of transition from semi-free peasant to serfs (which they would remain, in hereditary servitude, until 1861) is debatable, the social chaos of the Time of Troubles certainly didn't help.
So, to make a long story short, the cycle of chaos, war, famine, disease, and violence did not end until 1612. The traditional narrative has it that some well-intentioned folks, led by a nobleman — Dmitrii Pozharskii — and a merchant from Nizhnyi Novgorod — Kuzma Minin — got everyone together and threw the Poles and their allies out of Moscow. The final battle took place (new style) from November 3-6. Hence the November 4 holiday. Also, they have that nifty statue in Red Square.
And I can't go to the archive tomorrow. Thanks, guys, for the guilt-free day off. And that other stuff, too.
Chester Dunning, Russia's First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Founding of the Romanov Dynasty (University Park: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001).
Okay. Now that that is out of the way, onward.
Why, you ask, a citation for an academic book about "Russia's first civil war"? It all begins with a holiday: tomorrow, Friday, 4 November, is Russia's День народного единство, or "Day of national unity." If it sounds a little wooden, well, that's because it is. Holidays take time to wear off some of their rough edges and build up traditions. Celebration of this Imperial-era holiday was re-initiated only in 2005 as a way to avoid celebrating the October Revolution, traditionally celebrated with parades on November 7. Thus, the "Day of people's unity" is still in "like-new" condition. Even Russians have no idea what to do with it. A survey cited here suggests that only 23% of Russians actually know what the holiday is for. And that's an improvement.
The history behind it, as the above book suggests, goes back to the days of Muscovy and the establishment of the Romanov Dynasty, which ruled Russia from 1613 to 1917. As with many events in Russian history, it all began with Ivan Groznyi (or "the Terrible," if you will). On his death in 1584, he left behind two sons: Feodor, of limited intelligence, and Dmitrii, a young boy. The elder son reigned for several years, but did not rule. Ruling was the responsibility of his brother-in-law, Boris Gudonov, a nobleman and favorite of Ivan's later years. In addition to the privilege of ruling, he also had the privilege of being hated by many of the boyar (the highest level of Muscovite nobility) families for various reasons of blood, honor, and whatever other reasons rich people hate each other.
You know, in their free time when they are not enserfing peasants. More on that later.
Also, it probably didn't help that Boris got is start in Ivan's proto-secret police.
To make a long story short, Dmitrii Ivanovich mysteriously died in the course of an epileptic fit. (Who let the kid play with a knife? Sounds fishy.) And then Feodor Ivanovich died, childless. Suddenly, all-too-conveniently, Boris is presented with the opportunity to not only rule, but to reign. And so, the Rurikid dynasty having died out, Boris ascended the throne in 1598. And everybody lived happily ever after.
What? Wait. . . this just in: no they didn't.
Actually, for want of a better term, everything went to hell in a hand basket. The subsequent period lasted from 1598, when Boris ascended the throne until 1613, when the boyars got together in a great council and elected one of their own number, Mikhail Romanov, to rule as tsar', autocrat, and all that, etc.
In Russian, it is called "Смутное время," usually rendered in English as the "Time of Troubles." And troubles there were. First on Boris's plate was a young pretender, claiming to be Dmitrii Ivanovich (remember his suspicious death?) but most likely an errant monk of one sort or another. While Boris proclaimed his innocence all along, it's fairly likely that the original Dmitrii was murdered at his orders. Karma will get you like that. In any case, this "Dmitrii" showed up at the head of an army of Poles. Now, that may not sound that scary now, but in the 16th century, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was a powerhouse. It was bad news for Boris. He bowed out (i.e., he was killed) in 1605.
No news on how Natasha fared. [Now that I have my Rocky and Bullwinkle reference out of the way, moving on.]
And this wasn't even the only "false-Dmitrii." Once the first one took the throne and then got himself killed, there were at least a couple of more. After killing this first Dmitrii, the boyar Vasilii Shuiskii seized the throne. And the Swedes got involved. Again, doesn't sound all that frightening, what with their social-democracy and cheap but functional furniture, but in the 16th and 17th centuries, you didn't want to be on their bad side.
And the bad things didn't end there. More invasions, more pretenders, resistance from various Muscovite magnates. I won't bore you with all of the details. Also, it;s because I can't remember them all and I don't have Dunning's book at hand. Hence the citation. The main argument is that the "hooray for national unity" narrative conceals as much as it reveals. For example, the standard narrative downplays the fact that many Russians, from common soldiers to boyars, worked with the foreign invaders and there was just as much conflict among insiders as outsiders: hence "Russia's First Civil War."
What's important is that Russian society was profoundly altered in the process, as its military, political, social, and economic structures could not go back to the way they had been under Ivan. Many peasants, fed up after years of Ivan's increased taxes and curtailment of their traditional freedoms, decided get to out of dodge, fleeing to the south and west and joining nascent Cossack bands. Or to the north and east in to sparsely settled lands of Siberia and the north. Those that stayed behind, they ended up as serfs: The exact moment of transition from semi-free peasant to serfs (which they would remain, in hereditary servitude, until 1861) is debatable, the social chaos of the Time of Troubles certainly didn't help.
So, to make a long story short, the cycle of chaos, war, famine, disease, and violence did not end until 1612. The traditional narrative has it that some well-intentioned folks, led by a nobleman — Dmitrii Pozharskii — and a merchant from Nizhnyi Novgorod — Kuzma Minin — got everyone together and threw the Poles and their allies out of Moscow. The final battle took place (new style) from November 3-6. Hence the November 4 holiday. Also, they have that nifty statue in Red Square.
And I can't go to the archive tomorrow. Thanks, guys, for the guilt-free day off. And that other stuff, too.
5 comments:
Nice pot shot at Poland. :-P
Love the history lesson...especial Rocky & B reference. Enjoy your day off....maybe you will have time to go to the market and cook something tasty....>:)
Best part of the first False Dmitrii's death? After he was assassinated, they put his ashes into a cannon and fired them toward Poland.
I forgot all about that! Now that's a way to go!
And Kathleen, I didn't mean to be taking shots! It was more just a reminder that the Commonwealth was, in its time, a force to be reckoned with.
Whatevs, Poland still IS a force to be reckoned with! ;-)
Post a Comment