by Riazanovsky
Their new ruler's manners upset the Muscovites. False Dmitrii repeatedly failed to observe the established traditions and etiquette. He would not attend church services, and did not take a nap in the afternoon, but instead wandered on his own in the city, dressed as a Pole. The Polish entourage of the tsar proved still more disturbing: these Poles, loud and prominent, generally despised the Russians, who in turn suspected and hated them as enemies and heretics. But the main argument against False Dmitrii, in the opinion of Platonov and many other specialists, rested simply in the fact that he had already served his purpose. The boyars had utilized him successfully against the Godunovs and now made arrangements to dispose of him in his turn.
It would seem that almost immediately after False Dmitrii's victory Basil Shuisky and his brothers began to spread rumors to the effect that the new tsar was, after all, an impostor. Caught and condemned to death, they were instead exiled and, after several months, entirely pardoned by the clement tsar - a sure sign in the opinion of some specialists that False Dmitrii believed himself to be the true heir to the throne. The next important event of the reign, the tsar's marriage, served to increase tensions. In November 1605 in Cracow, False Dmitrii became engaged to Marina Mniszech. The tsar's proxy for the ritual, Athanasius Vlasiev, surprised those in attendance by refusing to answer the ceremonial question as to whether the tsar had promised to marry anyone else, on the ground that he had no instructions on the subject. Marina came to Moscow on May 2, 1606, and the wedding was celebrated on May 8. Marina, however, remained a Catholic, and she brought with her another large group of Poles. Arguments and clashes between the Poles and the Russians increased.
Having prepared the ground, Prince Basil Shuisky, Prince Basil Golitsyn, and other boyars on the night of May 26 led into Moscow a very large military detachment stationed nearby. Their coup began under the slogan of saving the tsar from the Poles, but as it progressed the tsar himself was denounced as an impostor. The defenders of the palace were overwhelmed.
False Dmitrii tried to escape, but was handed over to the rebels and death by a guard of the streltsy, apparently after they had been persuaded by the mother of Prince Dmitrii of Uglich, the nun Martha, that their tsar was an impostor. Theodore Basmanov and two or three thousand other Russians and Poles perished. The Patriarch Ignatius was deposed.
Both the Godunovs and their rival had thus disappeared from the scene. Prince Basil Shuisky became the next tsar with no greater sanction than the wishes of his party and the endorsing shouts of a Muscovite crowd. The new ruler made certain revealing promises: he would not execute anyone without the decision of the boyar duma; innocent members of a family would not suffer because of a guilty relative; denunciations would not be given credence without a careful investigation; and false informers would be punished. Although historians who see in Basil Shuisky's declaration an effective limitation of autocracy seem to overstate the case, the tsar's assurances did reflect his ties to the boyars as well as the efforts of the latter to obtain minimal guarantees against the kind of persecution practiced by such rulers as Ivan the Terrible and Boris Godunov. Moreover, it appears that the boyars acquired a certain freedom under the new monarch and often behaved willfully and disobediently in their relations with him.
The government tried its best to assure the people that False Dmitrii had been an impostor who had won the throne by magic and had forced the nun Martha and others to recognize him as the authentic prince. The body of False Dmitrii was exposed in Red Square and then burned, and the ashes were fired from a cannon in the direction of Poland. In addition to this, and to Basil Shuisky's and Martha's denunciations of False Dmitrii, another novel attempt at persuasion was made: in June 1606 Prince Dmitrii of Uglich was canonized and his remains were brought to Moscow.
The Social Phase
Basil Shuisky's elevation to tsardom may be said to mark the transition in the Time of Troubles from the dynastic to the social phase. Not that dynastic issues lost their importance: in fact, the contest for the throne remained a basic aspect of the Time of Troubles to the end. But the social conflict became dominant. We have already seen how social discontent assisted False Dmitrii and how mobs in Moscow were significant in the struggle for the seat of power. With the deposition and murder of False Dmitrii, authority in the land was further weakened, whereas the forces of discontent and rebellion grew in size and strength. Indeed, the Russians had seen four tsars - Boris and Theodore Godunov, False Dmitrii, and Basil Shuisky - within thirteen and a half months, and the once firm government control and leadership had collapsed in intrigue, civil war, murder,
and general weakness. Then too, whatever advantages the changes brought to the boyars, the masses had gained nothing, and their dissatisfaction grew. In effect, Basil Shuisky's unfortunate reign, 1606-10, had no popular sanction and very little popular support, representing as it did merely the victory of a boyar clique.
Opposition to the government and outright rebellion took many forms. An enemy of Basil Shuisky, Prince Gregory Shakhovskoy, and others roused southern Russian cities against the tsar. Disorder swept towns on the Volga, and in Astrakhan in the far southeast the governor, Prince Ivan Khvoro-stinin, turned against Basil Shuisky. Similarly in other places local authorities refused to obey the new ruler. The political picture in the Muscovite state became one of extreme disorganization, with countless local variations and complications. Rumors persisted that False Dmitrii had escaped death, and people rallied to his mere name. Serfs and slaves started numerous and often large uprisings against their landlords and the state. On occasion they joined with native tribes, such as the Finnic-speaking Mordva, who on their part also sought to overturn the oppressive political and social system of Muscovite Russia.
The rebellion in the south, led by Shakhovskoy and by Bolotnikov, presented the gravest threat to the government and in fact to the entire established order. Ivan Bolotnikov was a remarkable person who was thrown into prominence by the social turmoil of the Time of Troubles: a slave, and a captive of the Tatars and the Turks from whom he escaped, he rallied the lower classes - the serfs, peasants, slaves, fugitives, and vagabonds - in a war against authority and property. Bolotnikov's manifestoes clearly indicate the importance of the social issue, not simply of the identity of the ruler, as a cause of this rebellion. The masses were to fight for their own interests, not for those of the boyars. In October 1606, the southern armies came to the gates of Moscow, where, however, they were checked by government forces commanded by the tsar's brilliant young nephew, Prince Michael Skopin-Shuisky. Perhaps inevitably, the rebels split. The gentry armies of Riazan, led by the Liapunov brothers, Procopius and Zachary, and those of Tula, led by Philip Pashkov, broke with the social rebel Bolotnikov and even in large part went over to Basil Shuisky's side. The tsar also received other reinforcements. In 1607 a huge government army invested the rebels in Tula and, after a bitter four-month siege and a partial flooding of the town, forced them to surrender. Shakhovskoy was exiled to the north; Bolotnikov was also exiled and, shortly afterwards, dispatched.
It should be noted that Shakhovskoy and Bolotnikov claimed to act in the name of Tsar Dmitrii, although they had no such personage in their camp. Later they did acquire a different pretender, False Peter, who claimed to be Tsar Theodore's son, born allegedly in 1592, although this son never
existed. False Peter was hanged after the capture of Tula. As order collapsed and disorganization spread, more and more pretenders appeared. The cossacks in particular produced them in large numbers and with different names, claiming in that strange manner, it would seem, a certain legal sanction for their bands and movements. But it was another False Dmitrii, the second, who became a national figure. Although he emerged in August, 1607, shortly before the fall of Tula, and thus too late to join Shakhovskoy and Bolotnikov, he soon became a center of attraction in his own right.
The new False Dmitrii, who claimed to be Prince Dmitrii of Uglich and also the Tsar Dmitrii who defeated the Godunovs and was dep
osed by a conspiracy of the boyars, resembled neither. In contrast to the first pretender, he certainly realized that he was an impostor, and his lieutenants also had no illusions on that score. Nothing is known for certain about the second False Dmitrii's identity and background. The earliest mention in the sources locates him in a Lithuanian border town, in jail. Yet, in spite of these unpromising beginnings, the new pretender quickly gathered many supporters. After the defeat of Shakhovskoy and Bolotnikov he became the focal point for forces of social discontent and unrest. He attracted a very large following of cossacks, soldiers of fortune, and adventurers, especially from Poland and Lithuania, including several famous Polish commanders. Marina Mniszech recognized him as her husband and later bore him a son; the nun Martha declared him her child.
Basil Shuisky made the grave mistake of underestimating his new enemy and of not acting with vigor in time. In the spring of 1608 the second False Dmitrii defeated a government army under the command of one of the tsar's brothers, Prince Dmitrii Shuisky, and approached Moscow. He established his headquarters in a nearby large village called Tushino - hence his historical appellation, "The Felon of Tushino." Prince Michael Skopin-Shuisky again prevented the capture of the capital, but he could not defeat or dislodge the pretender. A peculiar situation arose: in Tushino the second False Dmitrii organized his own court, a boyar duma, and an administration, parallel to those in Moscow; he collected taxes, granted lands, titles, and other rewards, judged, and punished. Southern Russia and a number of cities in the north recognized his authority. Moscow and Tushino, so close to each other, maintained a constant clandestine intercourse. Many Russians switched sides; some families served both rulers at the same time. The second False Dmitrii suffered a setback, however, when his forces tried to capture the well-fortified Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery, one of the gateways to northern Russia. A garrison of 1,500 men, reinforced later by another 900, withstood for sixteen months the siege of a force numbering up to 30,000 troops. Also, the Felon of Tushino's rule in those northern
Russian cities which had recognized his authority proved to be ephemeral once they had a taste of his agents and measures.
In his desperate plight, Basil Shuisky finally, in February 1609, made an agreement with Sweden, obtaining the aid of a detachment of Swedish troops 6,000 strong, commanded by Jakob De la Gardie, in return for abandoning all claims to Livonia, ceding a border district, and promising eternal alliance against Poland. Throughout the rest of the year and early in 1610, Prince Michael Skopin-Shuisky, assisted by the Swedes, cleared northern Russia of the Felon of Tushino's troops and bands, lifted the siege of the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery, and finally relieved Moscow of its rival Tushino neighbor. The pretender and a part of his following fled to Kaluga. After his departure, and before the entire camp disbanded, the Russian gentry in Tushino asked King Sigismund III of Poland to let his son Wladyslaw, a youth of about fifteen, become the Russian tsar on certain conditions.
Sigismund III granted the request and signed an agreement in February 1610 with Russian emissaries from Tushino, who by that time had ceased to represent any organized body in Russia. The Polish king had become deeply involved in Russian affairs in the autumn of 1609, when he declared war on the Muscovite state on the ground of its anti-Polish alliance with Sweden. His advance into Russia, however, had been checked by a heroic defense of Smolensk. It would seem that from the beginning of his intervention Sigismund III intended to play for high stakes and obtain the most from the disintegration of Russia: his main goal was to become himself ruler of Russia as well as Poland. The invitation to Wladyslaw, however, gave him an added opportunity to participate in Muscovite affairs.
In March 1610 the successful and popular Prince Michael Skopin-Shuisky triumphantly entered Moscow at the head of his army. But his triumph did not last long. In early May he died suddenly, although he was only about twenty-four years old. Rumor had it that he had been poisoned by Dmitrii Shuisky's wife, who wanted to assure the throne to her husband after the death of childless Tsar Basil. New disasters soon followed. The Polish commander, Stanislaw Zolkiewski, defeated Dmitrii Shuisky when the latter tried to relieve Smolensk, and marched on Moscow. In the area occupied by Polish troops, the population swore allegiance to Wladyslaw. At this turn of events, the Felon of Tushino too advanced again on Moscow, establishing himself once more near the capital. In July 1610 Basil Shuisky finally lost his throne: he was deposed by an assembly of Muscovite clergy, boyars, gentry, and common people, and forced to become a monk. The boyar duma in the persons of seven boyars, with Prince Theodore Mstislavsky as the senior member, took over the government, or what there was left of it. The interregnum was to last from 1610 to 1613.
The National Phase
The national phase of the Time of Troubles began after Sweden, and especially Poland, became involved in Russian affairs. Wladyslaw's candidacy to the Muscovite throne, supported by various groups in Russia, tended to deepen and complicate the national issue. The eventual great rally of the Russians found its main inspiration in their determination to save the country from the foreign and heretical Poles. The increasing prominence of the national and religious struggle also explains the important role of the Church during the last years of the Time of Troubles. Yet, needless to say, dynastic and social issues retained their significance during those years. In fact any neat classification of the elements which, together, produced the fantastically complicated Time of Troubles is of necessity arbitrary and artificial.
The condition of the country prevented the calling of a zemskii sobor. Yet some decision had to be taken, and urgently. At the gathering of Muscovite boyars, clergy, and ranking service gentry opinions differed. Those proposed for the throne included Prince Basil Golitsyn, and a boy, Michael Romanov, Metropolitan Philaret's son; however, the candidacy of the Polish prince Wladyslaw, which found backing especially among the boyars, prevailed. Probably Wladyslaw profited from a general lack of enthusiasm for another boyar tsar. But, more importantly, he was one of the only two strong and active candidates in the field, the other being the Felon of Tushino who was supported by the lower classes in Russia and probably in Moscow itself. In late August 1610, the Muscovites reached an agreement with the Polish commander Zolkiewski concerning the invitation to Wladyslaw to rule Russia; Russian conditions, which stressed that Wladyslaw was to become Orthodox, resembled in most respects those offered to the Polish prince earlier by the Tushino group, although they acquired a boyar, rather than gentry, coloring. Ten days later Moscow swore allegiance to Wladyslaw. An impressive embassy headed by Prince Basil Golitsyn, Metropolitan Philaret, and other dignitaries departed for Sigismund Ill's headquarters near Smolensk to confirm the new arrangement with the Polish king. The Felon of Tushino fled again to Kaluga, while Zolkiewski's troops entered Moscow.
At this point, when the Muscovite state appeared finally to be settling its affairs and obtaining a firm government, another reversal occurred: unexpectedly Sigismund III rejected the Russian offer. He objected especially to the conversion of Wladyslaw to Orthodoxy and to the lifting of the siege of Smolensk. But - beyond these and other specified issues - his real intention was to become the Russian ruler himself and without conditions. No agreement could be reached. Finally, contrary to international usage,
Sigismund III arrested the Russian representatives, except those few who endorsed his claims, and sent them to Poland where they were to remain for nine years. Then he proceeded openly to develop his campaign to win the Russian throne by arms, diplomacy, and propaganda.
The autumn of 1610 saw the Muscovite state in utterly desperate straits. The Poles were again enemies of the Russians, and they held Moscow as well as a large area in the western part of the country. The Swedes had declared war on the Russians after Moscow had sworn allegiance to Wladyslaw. They advanced in the north, threatened Novgorod, and before long claimed the Muscovite throne for their own candidate, Prince Philip. With the collapse of Wladyslaw's candidacy, the Felon of Tushin
o again increased his following, much of eastern Russia turning to him for leadership. In numerable bands of lawless men were roaming and devastating the land. Yet - as if to illustrate the Russian proverb "there is no evil, but that it brings some good" - at least the issues gradually became clearer. Sigismund Ill's rejection of the arrangement to put Wladyslaw on the Russian throne eliminated one major alternative for the Russians. More important still, Swedish and especially Polish aggression led to a national rally. Moreover, the cause of Russian unity received an unexpected and mighty boost in December 1610 when the Felon of Tushino was killed by one of his men in a settlement of personal accounts.
In the absence of a tsar and because of the impotence of the boyar duma and other branches of government in Polish-occupied Moscow, the Church headed the rally. Patriarch Hermogen in Moscow declared the Russians released from allegiance to Wladyslaw; and through trusted emissaries he sent manifestoes to other towns, urging them to organize an army and liberate the capital. The patriarch's appeals had a strongly religious as well as national character, for the Poles were Catholic, and Hermogen feared especially the extension of the Uniate jurisdiction to Muscovite territories - a subject to be discussed later when we deal with the Ukraine. Other clerics and laymen joined the patriarch in trying to arouse the people. The first response came from Riazan, where Procopius Liapunov formed an army of gentry, peasants, certain remnants of Skopin-Shuisky's troops and other elements. As Liapunov's army marched on Moscow in early 1611, it was joined by other forces, including even former troops of the Felon of Tushino who came from Kaluga, notably a mixed group commanded by Prince Dmitrii Trubetskoy, and the cossacks led by Ivan Zarutsky. It should be noted that this so-called first national army, headed by Procopius Liapunov, Trubetskoy, and Zarutsky, acted also as the government of the Muscovite state. In particular, it contained a council of representatives who concerned themselves with state legislation and policy as well as with the more immediate demands of the campaign.