Выбрать главу

17 See Pskovskie letopisi, vol. I, p. 110; T. I. Pashkova, Mestnoe upravlenie v Russkom gosu- darstve vpervoi polovine XVI v. Namestniki i volosteli (Moscow: Drevlekhranilishche, 2000),

p. i54.

18 Makarii (Veretennikov), Zhizn', pp. 67,346-7. Veretennikov seems to believe that Makarii visited Pskov under A. M. Shuiskii, but does not explain the silence of the Pskovian chronicles about such a visit.

19 On Makarii's approach to Pskov, see Makarii (Veretennikov), Zhizn', pp. 64-5.

20 PSRL, vol. xiii, p. 145.

21 PSRL, vol. xiii, p. 145.

22 S.S. Pod"iapol'skii, 'Moskovskii Kremlevskii dvorets XVI v. po dannym pis'mennykh istochnikov', in Batalov et al. (eds.), Drevnerusskoe iskusstvo, p. 113.

23 Sbornik Imperatorskogo Russkogo istoricheskogo obshchestva, vol. lix, p. 228.

Ivan IV's official chronicle also mentions his initial intention to take a wife from abroad. The chronicle's explanation that the ruler abandoned this idea for fear that his and a foreign woman's temperaments would be too different strikes the reader as an attempt to hide the failure of such matrimonial plans.[70]Foreign monarchs were apparently reluctant to conclude a union by marriage with the Muscovite dynasty, whose prestige among its Western and Eastern neighbours had declined during Ivan's minority.[71] Later, Ivan repeatedly tried to find a foreign bride, but succeeded only in marrying the Caucasian Princess Mariia (Kuchenei) in 1561.[72]

To restore the prestige of the dynasty at home and abroad, Ivan embarked on an ambitious and politically controversial plan to be crowned as tsar of all Rus'. Church texts described Old Testament kings as 'tsars' and Christ as the Heavenly Tsar. Muscovite political vocabulary reserved the title of tsar for the rulers of superior status, the Byzantine emperor and Tatar khan. In the Muscovite view, the moral authority of the Orthodox emperor and the political might of the Muslim khan derived from the will of God. Given the strong religious connotation of the title of tsar, it is almost certain that the main driving force behind the coronation was Metropolitan Makarii. Familiar with descriptions of Byzantine imperial coronations, the metropolitan acted as the mastermind of Ivan's coronation, which took place in the Dormition cathedral in the Kremlin on 16 January 1547.[73]

During the coronation, the ruling circles claimed continuity between Ivan's rule and the rule ofthe Byzantine emperors and the Kievan princes. Evenbefore the times of Ivan IV Muscovite ideological texts anachronistically applied the title of tsar to Vladimir I of Kiev and Dmitrii Donskoi of Moscow to proclaim a direct and uninterrupted dynastic continuity from Kiev to Moscow The public declaration of the growing political ambitions of the Muscovite ruler at the 1547 coronation caused an adverse reaction from his western neighbour, Sigismund II of Poland and Lithuania, whose possessions included Kiev and other lands of Kievan Rus'. As a result, the coronation was followed by a long diplomatic struggle between Muscovy and Poland-Lithuania over Ivan IV's new title.[74]

The fact that the ritual ofthe coronation included a considerable Byzantine element, as well as Ivan's aggressive foreign policy after 1547, has generated much debate about whether Ivan's power was of an imperial character. It would be inaccurate to describe Ivan's coronation as imperial in a strict historical sense. In Byzantium, the head of the Church anointed the aspiring emperor, marking thereby his symbolical rebirth into a Christ-like status. Since the act of anointing transformed the ruler into a sacred figure, the emperor was proclaimed holy. The most accurate accounts of Ivan's coronation, however, do not mention anointing.[75] Leaving anointing out of the ritual was probably in the interests of Makarii, who sought to secure his own spiritual authority during the coronation. In his speech at the ceremony, Makarii stressed that the tsar had his own judge in Heaven and that the ruler could enter the heavenly tsardom only by properly fulfilling his tasks of protecting the Christian faith and the Orthodox Church. Such moral prescriptions that urged the ruler to protect the Church and to listen to wise advisers were essential elements of Muscovite political culture.[76]

Ivan's coronation was followed in February 1547 by his marriage to Anastasiia Romanovna, a member of the established boyar clan of the Zakhar'in-Iur'evs. Following in Edward L. Keenan's footsteps, Kollmann sees Ivan's marriage in the context of the 'marriage politics' of senior boyar clans, which were purportedly responsible for running the Muscovite polity and manipulated the ruler in their own interests.[77] However, Ivan's marriage was preceded by a wide search for a royal bride. As mentioned above, a foreign woman was possible and, apparently, even more desirable than a Muscovite one. Among the local candidates were not only daughters of boyars and other members of the court, but also those of provincial rank-and-file cavalrymen and church servitors. The sources suggest that the age, appearance and health of a bride were as important as her pedigree.[78] Ivan's numerous later wives were from a Muscovite elite clan (Mariia Nagaia), from relatively obscure gentry families (Marfa Sobakina, Anna Koltovskaia, Anna Vasil'chikova) and from a foreign dynasty (Mariia Kuchenei). The wide ethnic and social background ofthe royal wives shows that the choice was not only a matter of the 'marriage politics' of a handful of boyar clans. Royal marriages were essential for sustaining the relations between the dynasty and the wide circles of servitors and for maintaining the international relations of the day.

Ivan's coronation and his marriage were major contributions to the strength­ening of his position as the head ofthe dynasty in the Muscovite polity. Though the coronation did not turn Ivan into a sacred ruler, it signified a major trans­formation of Muscovite political institutions. The coronation changed the status of the ruling family and affected its domestic, international and cultural policy. Ivan's old title of grand prince made him primus inter pares among other members of the dynasty. By assuming the title of tsar, Ivan acquired the status of a ruler chosen by God and received supreme authority over other princes and members of the court.

The elevated position of the dynastic head allowed the ruling circles to launch an ideological programme of consolidation of the elite around the figure of the monarch. The main thesis of the official propaganda contrasted the anarchy of the boyar rule during the minority of Ivan with the harmony prevailing under Tsar Ivan. The Church actively contributed to the 'policy of reconciliation', though the role of particular clerics in this process is a matter of controversy. The received wisdom is that the priest Sil'vestr was an influential adviser to the tsar in both spiritual and political matters in the 1550s. Carolyn Johnston Pouncy, however, has argued that Sil'vestr was a well- educated and well-connected person, but was not such an influential adviser as some later sources describe him.[79] Unlike Sil'vestr, Metropolitan Makarii surely had an entree to the closest entourage of the tsar. He was responsible for the formulation of the idea of militant Orthodoxy at the end of the 1540s and early 1550s and participated in administrative and diplomatic affairs. Metropolitan Makarii was probably a key architect of the new ideology, as is apparent from the documents of the so-called Council of a Hundred Chapters (Stoglav). This convocation of top-level ecclesiastics and some elite courtiers was held in i55i to enact measures to improve ecclesiastical life and the morals of the clergy and Church members. In line with Makarii's views expressed during the coronation, the Stoglav defended the interests ofthe clergy, capitalising on the idea of a union between the tsar and the Church.

вернуться

70

PSRL, vol. xiii, p. 450.

вернуться

71

SeeKrom, 'Politicheskiikrizis', i3;A.L.Khoroshkevich,Rossiiavsistememezhdunarodnykh otnosheniiseredinyXVIveka(Moscow: Drevlekhranilishche, 2003), p. 65; Pavlov and Perrie, Ivan, p. 41.

вернуться

72

See Hugh F. Graham, 'PaulJuusten's Mission to Muscovy', RH13 (1986): 44, 89; Jerome Horsey, 'Travels', in Lloyd E. Berry and Robert O. Crummey (eds.), Rude and Barbarous Kingdom. Russia in the Accounts of Sixteenth-Century English Voyagers (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1968), pp. 279-80; Khoroshkevich, Rossiia, p. 275.

вернуться

73

See David B. Miller, 'Creating Legitimacy: Ritual, Ideology, and Power in Sixteenth- Century Russia', RH 21 (1994): 298-302; Pavlov and Perrie, Ivan, pp. 34-6.

вернуться

74

See Jaroslaw Pelenski, 'The Origins of the Official Muscovite Claims to the "Kievan Inheritance"', HUS1 (1977): 29-52; A. L. Khoroshkevich, 'Tsarskii titul Ivana IV i boiarskii "miatezh" 1553 goda', Otechestvennaia istoriia, 1994, no. 3: 23-42.

вернуться

75

For earlier versions of the description of the coronation, see PSRL, vols. xiii, pp. 150-1; xxix (Moscow: Nauka, 1965), pp. 49-50. On the missing elements of the ritual, see A. P. Bogdanov, 'Chiny venchaniia rossiiskikh tsarei', in B. A. Rybakov et al. (eds.), Kul'tura srednevekovoi Moskvy XIV-XVIIvv. (Moscow: Nauka, 1995), p. 217; B. A. Uspenskii, Tsar' i patriarkh:KharismavlastivRossii. Vizantiiskaia model' i ee russkoepereosmyslenie (Moscow: Iazyki russkoi kul'tury, I998), pp. I09-I3 (includes a review ofthe historiography).

вернуться

76

Daniel Rowland, 'Did Muscovite Literary Ideology Place Limits on the Power ofthe Tsar, 1540s-1660s?', RR 49 (1990): 125-55; Sergei Bogatyrev The Sovereign andhis Counsellors: Rit­ualised Consultations inMuscovite Political Culture, i3jos-ijjos (Helsinki: Finnish Academy ofScience and Letters, 2000), pp. 38-98.

вернуться

77

Nancy Shields Kollmann, Kinship and Politics. The Making of the Muscovite Political System, 1345-1547 (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1987), pp. 121-45,174.

вернуться

78

See V D. Nazarov, 'Svadebnye dela XVI veka', VI, 1976, no. 10:118-20.

вернуться

79

Carolyn Johnston Pouncy,' "The blessed Sil'vestr" and the Politics of Invention in Mus­covy, 1545-1700', HUS 19 (1995): 548-72.