The Zemsky Sobor was convened in. Zemsky Sobor
WHAT ARE ZEMSKY SOBRAS
Zemsky Sobors are the central class-representative institution of Russia in the mid-16th and 17th centuries. The appearance of zemstvo councils is an indicator of the unification of Russian lands into a single state, the weakening of the princely-boyar aristocracy, the growth of the political importance of the nobility and, in part, the upper classes of the town. The first Zemsky Sobors were convened in the mid-16th century, during the years of intensified class struggle, especially in cities. Popular uprisings forced the feudal lords to rally to pursue policies that strengthened state power and the economic and political position of the ruling class. Not all Zemsky Sobors were properly organized class-representative assemblies. Many of them were convened so urgently that there could be no question of choosing local representatives to participate in them. In such cases, in addition to the “consecrated cathedral” (the highest clergy), the Boyar Duma, the capital’s servicemen and commercial and industrial people, persons who happened to be in Moscow on official and other business spoke on behalf of the district servicemen. There were no legislative acts defining the procedure for selecting representatives to the councils, although the idea of them arose.
The Zemsky Sobor included the Tsar, the Boyar Duma, the entire Consecrated Cathedral, representatives of the nobility, the upper classes of the townspeople (merchants, large merchants), i.e. candidates of the three classes. The Zemsky Sobor as a representative body was bicameral. The upper chamber included the Tsar, the Boyar Duma and the Consecrated Council, who were not elected, but participated in it in accordance with their position. Members of the lower house were elected. The procedure for elections to the Council was as follows. From the Discharge Order, the governors received instructions on elections, which were read to the residents of the cities and peasants. After this, class elective lists were compiled, although the number of representatives was not fixed. Voters gave instructions to their elected representatives. However, elections were not always held. There were cases when, during an urgent convening of a council, representatives were invited by the king or officials in places. In the Zemsky Sobor, a significant role was played by the nobles (the main service class, the basis of the royal army), and especially merchants, since the solution of monetary problems to provide funds for state needs, especially defense, depended on their participation in this state body and military. Thus, in the Zemsky Sobors a policy of compromise between various layers of the ruling class was manifested.
The regularity and duration of meetings of the Zemsky Sobors were not regulated in advance and depended on the circumstances and the importance and content of the issues discussed. In some cases, the Zemsky Sobors functioned continuously. They resolved the main issues of foreign and domestic policy, legislation, finance, and state building. Issues were discussed by estate (in chambers), each estate submitted its written opinion, and then, as a result of their generalization, a conciliar verdict was drawn up, accepted by the entire composition of the Council. Thus, government authorities had the opportunity to identify the opinions of individual classes and groups of the population. But in general, the Council acted in close connection with the tsarist government and the Duma. Councils were held on Red Square, in the Patriarchal Chambers or the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin, and later in the Golden Chamber or the Dining Hut.
It must be said that the zemstvo councils, as feudal institutions, did not include the bulk of the population - the enslaved peasantry. Historians suggest that only a single time, at the council of 1613, was apparently attended by a small number of representatives of the Black Sowing peasants.
In addition to the name “Zemsky Sobor”, this representative institution in the Moscow state had other names: “Council of the Whole Earth”, “Cathedral”, “General Council”, “Great Zemstvo Duma”.
The idea of conciliarity began to develop in the middle of the 16th century. The first Zemsky Sobor was convened in Russia in 1549 and went down in history as the Council of Reconciliation. The reason for its convocation was the uprising of the townspeople in Moscow in 1547. Frightened by this event, the tsar and feudal lords attracted not only boyars and nobles to participate in this Council, but also representatives of other segments of the population, which created the appearance of involving not only gentlemen, but also the third estate, thanks to which the dissatisfied were somewhat calmed.
Based on available documents, historians believe that about 50 Zemsky Councils took place.
The Hundred-Capital Council of 1551 and the Council of 1566 had the most complex and representative structure.
At the beginning of the 17th century, during the years of mass popular movements and the Polish-Swedish intervention, the “Council of the Whole Earth” was convened, a continuation of which was essentially the Zemsky Sobor of 1613, which elected the first Romanov, Mikhail Fedorovich (1613-45), to the throne. During his reign, zemstvo councils operated almost continuously, which did a lot to strengthen the state and royal power. After Patriarch Filaret returned from captivity, they began to gather less frequently. Councils were convened at this time mainly in cases where the state was in danger of war, and the question of raising funds or other issues arose domestic policy. Thus, the cathedral in 1642 decided the issue of surrendering Azov, captured by the Don Cossacks, to the Turks in 1648-1649. After the uprising in Moscow, a council was convened to draw up the Code; the council in 1650 was devoted to the issue of the uprising in Pskov.
At meetings of zemstvo councils, the most important state issues were discussed. Zemstvo councils were convened to confirm the throne or elect a king - councils of 1584, 1598, 1613, 1645, 1676, 1682.
The reforms during the reign of the Elected Rada are associated with the Zemstvo Councils of 1549, 1550, with the Zemstvo Councils of 1648-1649 (at this Council there was the largest number of local representatives in history), the conciliar decision of 1682 approved the abolition of localism.
With the help of Z. s. the government introduced new taxes and modified old ones. Z.s. discussed the most important issues foreign policy, especially in connection with the danger of war, the need to gather an army, and the means of waging it. These issues were discussed constantly, starting with Z. s. 1566, convened in connection with the Livonian War, and ending with the councils of 1683-84 on “eternal peace” with Poland. Sometimes on W. s. Issues that were not planned in advance were also raised: at the council of 1566, its participants raised the question of abolishing the oprichnina, on Z. s. 1642, convened to discuss issues about Azov, - about the situation of Moscow and city nobles.
Zemsky Sobors played important role in the political life of the country. The tsarist power relied on them in the fight against the remnants of feudal fragmentation; with their help, the ruling class of feudal lords tried to weaken the class struggle.
Since the middle of the 17th century, the activities of Z. s. gradually freezes. This is explained by the affirmation of absolutism, and is also due to the fact that the nobles and partly the townspeople achieved satisfaction of their demands with the publication of the Council Code of 1649, and the danger of mass urban uprisings weakened.
The Zemsky Sobor of 1653, which discussed the issue of reunification of Ukraine with Russia, can be considered the last. The practice of convening zemstvo councils ceased because they played a role in strengthening and developing the centralized feudal state. In 1648--1649. the nobility achieved satisfaction of its basic demands. The aggravation of the class struggle encouraged the nobility to rally around the autocratic government, which ensured its interests.
In the second half of the 17th century. the government sometimes convened commissions of representatives of individual classes to discuss matters that directly concerned them. In 1660 and 1662--1663. guests and elected officials from the Moscow tax authorities were gathered for a meeting with the boyars on the issue of the monetary and economic crisis. In 1681 - 1682 one commission of servicemen examined the issue of organizing troops, another commission of trading people considered the issue of taxation. In 1683, a council was convened to discuss the issue of “eternal peace” with Poland. This cathedral consisted of representatives of only one service class, which clearly indicated the dying of class-representative institutions.
THE LARGEST ZEMSKY Cathedrals
In the 16th century, a fundamentally new government body arose in Russia - the Zemsky Sobor. Klyuchevsky V.O. wrote about the cathedrals: “a political body that arose in close connection with local institutions of the 16th century. and in which the central government met with representatives of local societies.”
Zemsky Sobor 1549
This cathedral went down in history as the “Cathedral of Reconciliation”. This is a meeting convened by Ivan the Terrible in February 1549. His goal was to find a compromise between the nobility, who supported the state, and the most conscious part of the boyars. The cathedral had great importance for politics, but his role also lies in the fact that he opened a “new page” in the system of government. The Tsar’s adviser on the most important issues is not the Boyar Duma, but the all-class Zemsky Sobor.
Direct information about this cathedral has been preserved in the Continuation of the Chronograph of the 1512 edition.
It can be assumed that the council of 1549 did not deal with specific disputes about lands and serfs between the boyars and the boyars’ children or the facts of violence inflicted by the boyars on petty employees. Apparently, the discussion was about the general political course in Grozny’s early childhood. Favoring the dominance of the landowning nobility, this course undermined the integrity of the ruling class and exacerbated class contradictions.
The record of the cathedral is protocol and schematic. It is impossible to discern from it whether there were debates and in what directions they went.
The procedure of the council of 1549 can to some extent be judged by the charter of the Zemsky Sobor of 1566, which is close in form to the document underlying the chronicle text of 1549.
Stoglavy Cathedral 1551.
Klyuchevsky writes about this council: “In the next 1551, for the organization of church administration and the religious and moral life of the people, a large church council was convened, usually called Stoglav, after the number of chapters in which its deeds were summarized in a special book, in Stoglav. At this council, by the way, the king’s own “scripture” was read and a speech was also made by him.”
The Stoglavy Council of 1551 is a council of the Russian Church, convened on the initiative of the Tsar and the Metropolitan. The Consecrated Cathedral, the Boyar Duma and the Elected Rada participated in it in full. It received this name because its decisions were formulated in one hundred chapters, reflecting the changes associated with the centralization of the state. Based on local saints revered in individual Russian lands, an all-Russian list of saints was compiled. Rituals were unified throughout the country. The Council approved the adoption of the Code of Law of 1550 and the reforms of Ivan IV.
The Council of 1551 acts as a “council” of church and royal authorities. This “council” was based on a community of interests aimed at protecting the feudal system, social and ideological domination over the people, and suppressing all forms of their resistance. But the advice often cracked, because the interests of the church and the state, the spiritual and secular feudal lords did not always coincide in everything.
Stoglav - a collection of decisions of the Stoglav Cathedral, a kind of code legal norms the internal life of the Russian clergy and its reciprocity with society and the state. In addition, Stoglav contained a number of family law norms, for example, it consolidated the power of the husband over his wife and the father over children, and determined the age of marriage (15 years for men, 12 for women). It is characteristic that the Stoglav mentions three legal codes according to which court cases were decided between church people and laity: Sudebnik, the royal charter and Stoglav.
Zemsky Sobor of 1566 on the continuation of the war with the Polish-Lithuanian state.
In June 1566, a Zemsky Sobor was convened in Moscow on war and peace with the Polish-Lithuanian state. This is the first Zemstvo Sobor from which an authentic document (“charter”) has reached us.
Klyuchevsky writes about this council: “... was convened during the war with Poland for Livonia, when the government wanted to know the opinion of the officials on the question of whether to reconcile on the terms proposed by the Polish king.”
The Council of 1566 was the most representative from a social point of view. Five curiae were formed on it, uniting different segments of the population (clergy, boyars, clerks, nobility and merchants).
Electoral council and council on the abolition of Tarkhanov in 1584
This council decided to abolish church and monastic tarkhanov (tax benefits). The charter of 1584 draws attention to the dire consequences of the Tarkhans' policy for the economic situation of service people.
The council decided: “for the sake of military rank and impoverishment, the Tarkhans should be dismissed.” This measure was temporary in nature: until the sovereign’s decree - “for now, the land will be settled and the tsar’s inspection will help in everything.”
The goals of the new code were defined as the desire to combine the interests of the treasury and service people.
The Council of 1613 opens a new period in the activities of zemstvo councils, into which they enter as established bodies of class representation, playing a role in public life, actively participating in resolving issues of domestic and foreign policy.
Zemsky Sobors 1613-1615.
During the reign of Mikhail Fedorovich. It is clear from known materials that in a situation of unabated open class struggle and unfinished Polish and Swedish intervention, the supreme power needed the constant assistance of the estates in carrying out measures to suppress the anti-feudal movement, restore the country's economy, which was severely undermined during the Time of Troubles, replenish the state treasury, and strengthen the military forces , solving foreign policy problems.
Council of 1642 on the issue of Azov.
It was convened in connection with an appeal to the government of the Don Cossacks, with a request to take Azov, which they had captured, under their protection. The Council was supposed to discuss the question: whether to agree to this proposal and, if agreed, with what forces and with what means to wage war with Turkey.
It is difficult to say how this council ended, whether there was a conciliar verdict. But the cathedral of 1642 played a role in further measures to protect the borders of the Russian state from Turkish aggression, and in the development of the class system in Russia.
Since the middle of the 17th century, the activities of Z. s. gradually fades away, because the cathedral of 1648-1649. and the adoption of the “Conciliar Code” resolved a number of issues.
The last of the cathedrals can be considered the Zemsky Sobor on peace with Poland in 1683-1684. (although a number of studies talk about the cathedral of 1698). The task of the council was to approve the “resolution” on “eternal peace” and “union” (when it is worked out). However, it turned out to be fruitless and did not bring anything positive to the Russian state. This is not an accident or simple bad luck. A new era had arrived, requiring other, more efficient and flexible methods for solving foreign policy (as well as other) issues.
If cathedrals at one time played a positive role in state centralization, now they had to give way to the class institutions of emerging absolutism.
CATHEDRAL CODE OF 1649
In 1648-1649 the Lay Council was convened, during which the Cathedral Code was created.
The publication of the Council Code of 1649 dates back to the reign of the feudal-serf system.
Numerous studies by pre-revolutionary authors (Shmelev, Latkin, Zabelin, etc.) provide mainly formal reasons for explaining the reasons for drawing up the Code of 1649, such as, for example, the need to create unified legislation in the Russian state, etc.
However, the real reasons that caused the convening of the Zemsky Sobor and the creation of the Code were historical events that period, namely the strengthening of the class struggle of the exploited people against the serf owners and merchants.
The question of the role of class representatives in the creation of the Code of 1649 has long been the subject of research. A number of works quite convincingly show the active nature of the activities of the “elected people” at the council, who presented petitions and sought their satisfaction.
The preface to the Code provides official sources that were used in the preparation of the Code:
1. “Rules of the holy apostles and holy fathers,” i.e., church decrees of ecumenical and local councils;
2. “City laws of the Greek kings”, i.e. Byzantine law;
3. Decrees of former “great sovereigns, tsars and great princes of Russia” and boyar sentences, collated with old codes of law.
satisfied the requirements of the main support of tsarism - the masses of the serving nobility, securing for them the right to own land and serfs. That is why tsarist legislation not only allocates a special chapter 11, “The Court of Peasants,” but also in a number of other chapters repeatedly returns to the issue of the legal status of the peasantry. Long before the approval of the Code by tsarist legislation, although the right of peasant transition or “exit” was abolished, in practice this right could not always be applied, since there were “timetables” or “decree years” for bringing a claim for fugitives; tracking down the fugitives was mainly the job of the owners themselves. Therefore, the question of abolishing school years was one of the fundamental issues, the resolution of which would create for the serf owners all the conditions for the complete enslavement of broad sections of the peasantry. Finally, the question of the serfdom of the peasant family: children, brothers and nephews was unresolved.
Large landowners sheltered the fugitives on their estates, and while the landowners sued for the return of the peasants, the period of “lesson years” expired. That is why the nobility, in their petitions to the tsar, demanded the abolition of “lesson years,” which was done in the code of 1649. Issues related to the final enslavement of all layers of the peasantry, the complete deprivation of their rights in socio-political and property status are mainly concentrated in Chapter 11 of the Code.
The Council Code consists of 25 chapters, divided into 967 articles, without any specific system. The construction of the chapters and articles of each of them was determined by the socio-political tasks facing legislation during the period of further development of serfdom in Russia.
For example, the first chapter is devoted to the fight against crimes against the fundamentals of the doctrine of the Orthodox Church, which was the bearer of the ideology of the serfdom. The articles of the chapter protect and secure the integrity of the church and its religious practices.
Chapters 2 (22 articles) and 3 (9 articles) describe crimes directed against the personality of the king, his honor and health, as well as crimes committed on the territory of the royal court.
Chapters 4 (4 articles) and 5 (2 articles) include in a special section such crimes as forgery of documents, seals, and counterfeiting.
Chapters 6, 7 and 8 characterize new elements of state crimes related to treason, criminal acts of persons in military service, and the established procedure for the ransom of prisoners.
Chapter 9 covers financial issues relating to both the state and private individuals - feudal lords.
Chapter 10 deals primarily with legal issues. It covers in detail the norms of procedural law, which generalize not only previous legislation, but also the broad practice of the feudal judicial system of Russia in the 16th - mid-17th centuries.
Chapter 11 characterizes the legal status of serfs and black-footed peasants, etc.
PERIODIZATION OF THE HISTORY OF ZEMSKY SOBRAH
History of Z. s. can be divided into 6 periods (according to L.V. Cherepnin).
The first period is the time of Ivan the Terrible (from 1549). Councils convened by royal power. 1566 - council convened on the initiative of the estates.
The second period can begin with the death of Ivan the Terrible (1584). This was the time when the preconditions for civil war and foreign intervention were taking shape, and a crisis of autocracy was emerging. The councils mainly performed the function of electing the kingdom, and sometimes became an instrument of forces hostile to Russia.
It is characteristic of the third period that zemstvo councils under the militias turn into the supreme body of power (both legislative and executive), decider domestic and foreign policy. This is the time when Z. s. played the largest and most progressive role in public life.
The chronological framework of the fourth period is 1613-1622. The councils act almost continuously, but already as an advisory body under the royal power. Many questions of current reality pass through them. The government seeks to rely on them when carrying out financial measures (collecting five-year money), restoring the damaged economy, eliminating the consequences of the intervention and preventing new aggression from Poland.
Fifth period - 1632 - 1653. Councils meet relatively rarely, but big questions internal politics (drawing up the code, uprising in Pskov (1650)) and external (Russian-Polish, Russian-Crimean relations, annexation of Ukraine, the question of Azov). During this period, speeches by class groups intensified, presenting demands to the government, in addition to cathedrals, also through petitions.
The last period (after 1653 and before 1683-1684) is the time of fading of cathedrals (a slight rise marked the eve of their fall - the beginning of the 80s of the 18th century).
CLASSIFICATION OF ZEMSKY SOBRAS
Moving on to the problems of classification, Cherepnin divides all cathedrals, primarily from the point of view of their socio-political significance, into four groups:
1) Councils convened by the king;
2) Councils convened by the king on the initiative of the estates;
3) Councils convened by estates or on the initiative of estates in the absence of the king;
4) Councils electing the kingdom.
The majority of cathedrals belong to the first group. The second group should include the council of 1648, which gathered, as the source directly states, in response to petitions to the king by people of “high ranks,” as well as, probably, a number of councils during the time of Mikhail Fedorovich. The third group includes the council of 1565, at which the issue of the oprichnina was raised, the “sentence” of June 30, 1611, the “council of the whole earth” of 1611 and 1611-1613. Electoral councils (the fourth group) met for the election and approval of the kingdom of Boris Godunov, Vasily Shuisky, Mikhail Romanov, Peter and Ivan Alekseevich, and also, probably, Fyodor Ivanovich, Alexei Mikhailovich.
Of course, there are conditional points in the proposed classification. The cathedrals of the third and fourth groups, for example, are close in purpose. However, establishing who and why the council was convened is a fundamentally important basis for classification, helping to understand the relationship between the autocracy and the estates in an estate-representative monarchy.
If we now take a closer look at the issues dealt with by the councils convened by the tsarist authorities, then, first of all, we must single out four of them, which approved the implementation of major government reforms: judicial, administrative, financial and military. These are the cathedrals of 1549, 1619, 1648, 1681-1682. Thus, the history of zemstvo councils is closely connected with the general political history of the country. The given dates fall on the key moments in her life: the reforms of Grozny, the restoration of the state apparatus after the civil war of the early 17th century, the creation of the Council Code, the preparation of Peter the Great's reforms. The fate of the political structure of the country was devoted, for example, to the meetings of the estates in 1565, when Ivan the Terrible left for Alexandrov Sloboda, and the verdict passed by the Zemsky Sobor on June 30, 1611, in the “stateless time” (these are also acts of general historical significance ).
Electoral councils are a kind of political chronicle, depicting not only the change of persons on the throne, but also the social and state changes caused by this.
The content of the activities of some zemstvo councils was the fight against popular movements. The government directed councils to fight, which was carried out using means of ideological influence, which were sometimes combined with military and administrative measures used by the state. In 1614, on behalf of the Zemsky Sobor, letters were sent to the Cossacks who had abandoned the government with an exhortation to come into submission. In 1650, the representative of the Zemsky Sobor itself went to rebellious Pskov with persuasion.
The most frequently discussed issues at the councils were foreign policy and the tax system (mainly in connection with military needs). Thus, the biggest problems facing the Russian state were discussed at the meetings of the councils, and somehow the statements that this happened purely formally and the government could not take into account the decisions of the councils are not very convincing.
CONCLUSIONS
There was no special archival fund where the documents of the zemstvo councils were deposited. They are extracted, first of all, from the funds of those institutions of the 18th century that were in charge of organizing the convening and holding of councils: the Ambassadorial Prikaz (which included the Tsar's archive of the 16th century), the Discharge, and the Quarters. All documents can be divided into two groups: monuments depicting the activities of the cathedrals, and materials for the election of delegates.
Zemsky Sobors of the 16th-17th centuries, of course, played a significant role in the history of the development of the Russian state (in political and social life), since they were one of the first representative institutions in Russia. Many of them left a number of legal monuments (such as the Council Code of 1649, “Stoglav” and a number of others), which are of great interest to historians.
Thus, the role of the Zemsky Sobor of 1648-1649. in the evolution of autocracy is as significant as the council of 1549. The latter stands at its initial stage, the first marks the final forms of centralization. Depending on the participation of zemstvo councils in the election of the tsar, an assessment of the legality of their occupation of the throne is given. During popular uprisings, the Zemstvo Sobor was one of the supreme state bodies (it had both legislative and executive prerogatives).
Tsars were elected at the councils: in 1584 - Fyodor Ioannovich, in 1598 - Boris Godunov, in 1613 - Mikhail Romanov, etc.
Many historians have participated and are participating in the work on the history of the development of zemstvo cathedrals in the 16th and 17th centuries; this is a rather interesting topic. There are many articles and monographs on this topic, in the works of such famous historians as V.O. Klyuchevsky, S.M. Solovyov, cathedrals of the 16th-17th centuries also receive significant attention.
Zemsky Sobors are the Russian version of class-representative democracy. They differed fundamentally from Western European parliaments in the absence of a war of “all against all.”
According to the dry encyclopedic language, the Zemsky Sobor is the central estate-representative institution of Russia in the mid-16th-17th centuries. Many historians believe that zemstvo councils and estate-representative institutions of other countries are phenomena of the same order, subordinate general patterns historical development, although each country had its own specific features. Parallels are visible in the activities of the English Parliament, the States General in France and the Netherlands, the Reichstag and Landtags of Germany, Scandinavian Rikstags, and Diets in Poland and the Czech Republic. Foreign contemporaries noted the similarities in the activities of the councils and their parliaments.
It should be noted that the term “Zemsky Sobor” itself is a later invention of historians. Contemporaries called them “cathedral” (along with other types of meetings), “council”, “zemsky council”. The word “zemsky” in this case means state, public.
The first council was convened in 1549. It adopted the Code of Law of Ivan the Terrible, approved in 1551 by the Stoglavy Council. The Code of Law contains 100 articles and has a general pro-state orientation, eliminates the judicial privileges of appanage princes and strengthens the role of central state judicial bodies.
What was the composition of the cathedrals? This issue is examined in detail by the historian V.O. Klyuchevsky in his work “Composition of representation at zemstvo councils” ancient Rus'", where he analyzes the composition of the councils based on the representation of 1566 and 1598. From the council of 1566, dedicated to the Livonian War (the council advocated its continuation), a verdict letter, a complete protocol with a list of names of all ranks of the council, have been preserved. total number at 374 people. The members of the cathedral can be divided into 4 groups:
1. Clergy - 32 people.
It included the archbishop, bishops, archimandrites, abbots and monastery elders.
2. Boyars and sovereign people - 62 people.
It consisted of boyars, okolnichy, sovereign clerks and other senior officials with a total of 29 people. The same group included 33 simple clerks and clerks. representatives - they were invited to the council by virtue of their official position.
3. Military service people - 205 people.
It included 97 nobles of the first article, 99 nobles and children
boyars of the second article, 3 Toropets and 6 Lutsk landowners.
4. Merchants and industrialists – 75 people.
This group consisted of 12 merchants of the highest rank, 41 ordinary Moscow merchants - “Muscovite trading people,” as they are called in the “conciliar charter,” and 22 representatives of the commercial and industrial class. From them the government expected advice on improving the tax collection system, in conducting commercial and industrial affairs, which required trade experience, some technical knowledge that the clerks and indigenous governing bodies did not possess.
In the 16th century, Zemsky Sobors were not elective. “Choice as a special power for an individual case was not recognized then a necessary condition representation,” wrote Klyuchevsky. - A metropolitan nobleman from the Pereyaslavl or Yuryevsky landowners appeared at the council as a representative of the Pereyaslavl or Yuryevsky nobles because he was the head of the Pereyaslavl or Yuryevsky hundreds, and he became the head because he was a metropolitan nobleman; He became a metropolitan nobleman because he was one of the best Pereyaslavl or Yuryev servicemen ‘for the fatherland and for the service’.”
From the beginning of the 17th century. the situation has changed. When dynasties changed, new monarchs (Boris Godunov, Vasily Shuisky, Mikhail Romanov) needed recognition of their royal title by the population, which made class representation more necessary. This circumstance contributed to some expansion of the social composition of the “elected”. In the same century, the principle of forming the “Sovereign Court” changed, and nobles began to be elected from the counties. Russian society, left to its own devices during the Time of Troubles, “involuntarily learned to act independently and consciously, and the idea began to arise in it that it, this society, the people, political accident“How Moscow people are used to feeling, not aliens, not temporary inhabitants in someone’s state... Next to the sovereign’s will, and sometimes in its place, another political force now more than once stood - the will of the people, expressed in the verdicts of the Zemsky Sobor.” , wrote Klyuchevsky.
What was the election procedure?
The convening of the council was carried out by a letter of conscription, issued by the tsar to well-known persons and localities. The letter contained the agenda items and the number of elected officials. If the number was not determined, it was decided by the population itself. The draft letters clearly stipulated that those subject to election were “ the best people”, “kind and intelligent people”, to whom “the sovereign’s and zemstvo’s deeds are a custom”, “with whom one could talk”, “who would be able to tell of insults and violence and ruin and with which the Moscow state would be replenished” and “would arrange Moscow State, so that everyone comes to dignity,” etc.It is worth noting that there were no requirements for the property status of candidates. In this aspect, the only limitation was that only those who paid taxes to the treasury, as well as people who served, could participate in the elections held by estate.
As noted above, sometimes the number of elected people to be sent to the council was determined by the population itself. As noted by A.A. Rozhnov in the article “Zemsky Councils of Moscow Rus': legal characteristics and significance”, such an indifferent attitude of the government to the quantitative indicators of popular representation was not accidental. On the contrary, it obviously flowed from the latter’s very task, which was to convey the position of the population to the Supreme Power, to give them the opportunity to be heard by it. Therefore, the determining factor was not the number of persons included in the Council, but the degree to which they reflected the interests of the people.
Cities, together with their counties, formed electoral districts. At the end of the elections, minutes of the meeting were drawn up and certified by all those participating in the elections. At the end of the elections, a “choice in hand” was drawn up - an election protocol, sealed with the signatures of voters and confirming the suitability of the elected representatives for the “Sovereign and Zemstvo Cause”. After this, the elected officials with the voivode’s “unsubscribe” and the “election list in hand” went to Moscow to the Rank Order, where the clerks verified that the elections were being held correctly.
Deputies received instructions from voters, mostly verbal, and upon returning from the capital they had to report on the work done. There are known cases when attorneys, who were unable to achieve satisfaction of all the requests of local residents, asked the government to issue them special “protected” letters that would guarantee them protection from “all bad things” from disgruntled voters:
“The governors in the cities were ordered to protect them, the elected people, from the city people from all sorts of bad things so that your sovereign’s decree was taught by the cathedral Code on the petition of the zemstvo people not against all articles”
The work of the delegates at the Zemsky Sobor was carried out mainly free of charge, on a “social basis”. Voters provided the elected officials only with “reserves”, that is, they paid for their travel and accommodation in Moscow. The state only occasionally, at the request of the people’s representatives themselves, “complained” them for performing parliamentary duties.
Issues resolved by the Councils.
1. Election of the king.Council of 1584. Election of Fyodor Ioannovich.
According to the spiritual year of 1572, Tsar Ivan the Terrible appointed his eldest son Ivan as his successor. But the death of the heir at the hands of his father in 1581 abolished this testamentary disposition, and the tsar did not have time to draw up a new will. So his second son Fedor, having become the eldest, was left without a legal title, without an act that would give him the right to the throne. This missing act was created by the Zemsky Sobor.
Council of 1589. Election of Boris Godunov.
Tsar Fedor died on January 6, 1598. The ancient crown - the Monomakh cap - was put on by Boris Godunov, who won the struggle for power. Among his contemporaries and descendants, many considered him a usurper. But this view was thoroughly shaken thanks to the works of V. O. Klyuchevsky. A well-known Russian historian argued that Boris was elected by the correct Zemsky Sobor, that is, which included representatives of the nobility, clergy and the upper classes of the townspeople. Klyuchevsky’s opinion was supported by S. F. Platonov. The accession of Godunov, he wrote, was not the result of intrigue, for the Zemsky Sobor chose him quite consciously and knew better than us why he chose him.
Council of 1610. Election of the Polish king Vladislav.
The commander of the Polish troops advancing from the west to Moscow, Hetman Zholkiewski, demanded that the “Seven Boyars” confirm the agreement between the Tushino Boyar Duma and Sigismund III and recognize Prince Vladislav as the Moscow Tsar. The “Seven Boyars” did not enjoy authority and accepted Zolkiewski’s ultimatum. She announced that Vladislav would convert to Orthodoxy after receiving the Russian crown. In order to give the election of Vladislav to the kingdom a semblance of legality, a semblance of a Zemsky Sobor was quickly assembled. That is, the Council of 1610 cannot be called a full-fledged legitimate Zemsky Sobor. In this case, it is interesting that the Council in the eyes of the then boyars was necessary tool to legitimize Vladislav on the Russian throne.
Council of 1613. Election of Mikhail Romanov.
After the expulsion of the Poles from Moscow, the question arose about electing a new tsar. Letters were sent from Moscow to many cities of Russia on behalf of the liberators of Moscow - Pozharsky and Trubetskoy. Information has been received about documents sent to Sol Vychegodskaya, Pskov, Novgorod, Uglich. These letters, dated mid-November 1612, ordered representatives of each city to arrive in Moscow before December 6, 1612. As a result of the fact that some of the candidates were delayed in arriving, the cathedral began its work a month later - on January 6, 1613. The number of participants in the cathedral is estimated from 700 to 1500 people. Among the candidates for the throne were representatives of such noble families as the Golitsyns, Mstislavskys, Kurakins, and others. Pozharsky and Trubetskoy themselves put forward their candidacies. As a result of the elections, Mikhail Romanov won. It should be noted that for the first time in their history, black-growing peasants took part in the Council of 1613.
Council of 1645. Approval of Alexei Mikhailovich on the throne
For several decades, the new royal dynasty could not be sure of the firmness of its positions and at first needed the formal consent of the estates. As a consequence of this, in 1645, after the death of Mikhail Romanov, another “electoral” council was convened, which confirmed his son Alexei on the throne.
Council of 1682. Approval of Peter Alekseevich.
In the spring of 1682, the last two “electoral” zemstvo councils in Russian history were held. At the first of them, on April 27, Peter Alekseevich was elected tsar. On the second, May 26, both became kings youngest son Alexei Mikhailovich, Ivan and Peter.
2. Issues of war and peace
In 1566, Ivan the Terrible gathered the estates to find out the opinion of the “land” about the continuation Livonian War. The significance of this meeting is highlighted by the fact that the council worked in parallel with the Russian-Lithuanian negotiations. The estates (both nobles and townspeople) supported the king in his intention to continue military operations.
In 1621, a Council was convened regarding the violation by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of the Deulin Truce of 1618. In 1637, 1639, 1642. estate representatives gathered in connection with the complications of Russia’s relations with the Crimean Khanate and Turkey, after the capture by the Don Cossacks Turkish fortress Azov.
In February 1651, a Zemsky Sobor was held, the participants of which unanimously spoke out in favor of supporting the uprising of the Ukrainian people against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but no concrete assistance was provided then. On October 1, 1653, the Zemsky Sobor made a historic decision on the reunification of Ukraine with Russia.
3. Financial issues
In 1614, 1616, 1617, 1618, 1632 and later zemstvo councils determined the amount of additional fees from the population and decided on the fundamental possibility of such fees. Councils 1614-1618 made decisions on “pyatina” (collection of a fifth of income) for the maintenance of service people. After this, the “Pyatiners” - officials who collected taxes, traveled around the country, using the text of the conciliar “verdict” (decision) as a document.
4. Domestic policy issues
The very first Zemsky Sobor, which we have already written about, was dedicated precisely to internal issues - the adoption of the code of law of Ivan the Terrible. The Zemsky Sobor of 1619 resolved issues related to the restoration of the country after the Time of Troubles and determining the direction of domestic policy in the new situation. The Council of 1648 - 1649, caused by massive urban uprisings, resolved issues of relations between landowners and peasants, determined the legal status of estates and estates, strengthened the position of the autocracy and the new dynasty in Russia, and influenced the solution of a number of other issues.
On next year after the adoption of the Council Code in Once again The cathedral was convened to stop the uprisings in Novgorod and Pskov, which were not possible to suppress by force, especially since the rebels retained fundamental loyalty to the monarch, that is, they did not refuse to recognize his power. The last “Zemstvo Council”, which dealt with issues of domestic policy, was convened in 1681-1682. It was dedicated to carrying out the next reforms in Russia. The most important of the results was the “conciliar act” on the abolition of localism, which provided a fundamental opportunity to increase the efficiency of the administrative apparatus in Russia.
Duration of the cathedral
Meetings of the council members lasted for different periods of time: some elected groups deliberated (for example, at the council of 1642) for several days, others for several weeks. The duration of the activities of the gatherings themselves, as institutions, was also uneven: issues were resolved either in a few hours (for example, the council of 1645, which swore allegiance to the new Tsar Alexei), or within several months (councils of 1648 - 1649, 1653). In 1610-1613 The Zemsky Sobor, under the militias, turns into the supreme body of power (both legislative and executive), deciding issues of domestic and foreign policy and operating almost continuously.Completing the history of cathedrals
In 1684, the last Zemsky Sobor in Russian history was convened and dissolved.He decided on the issue of eternal peace with Poland. After this, the Zemsky Sobors no longer met, which was the inevitable result of the reforms carried out by Peter I of the entire social structure of Russia and the strengthening of the absolute monarchy.
The meaning of cathedrals
From a legal point of view, the tsar's power was always absolute, and he was not obliged to obey zemstvo councils. The cathedrals served the government an excellent remedy find out the mood of the country, get information about the state of the state, whether it can incur new taxes, wage war, what abuses exist, and how to eradicate them. But the councils were most important for the government in that it used their authority to carry out measures that under other circumstances would have caused displeasure, and even resistance. Without the moral support of the councils, it would have been impossible to collect for many years those numerous new taxes that were imposed on the population under Michael to cover urgent government expenses. If the council, or the whole earth, has decided, then there is nothing left to do: willy-nilly, you have to fork out beyond measure, or even give away your last savings. It is necessary to note the qualitative difference between zemstvo councils and European parliaments - at the councils there was no parliamentary war of factions. Unlike similar Western European institutions, the Russian Councils, possessing real political power, did not oppose themselves to the Supreme Power and did not weaken it, extorting rights and benefits for themselves, but, on the contrary, served to strengthen and strengthen the Russian kingdom.Application. List of all cathedrals
Quoted from:1549 February 27-28. About reconciliation with the boyars, about the viceroyal court, about judicial and zemstvo reform, about the compilation of the Code of Laws.
1551 from February 23 to May 11. On church and state reforms. Drawing up the “Cathedral Code” (Stoglava).
1565 January 3. About the messages of Ivan the Terrible from Alexandrova Sloboda to Moscow with the notification that due to “treasonable deeds” he “left his state.”
1580 no later than January 15. On church and monastic land ownership.
1584 not later than July 20. On the abolition of church and monastic tarkhanov.
May 15, 1604. About the break with the Crimean Khan Kazy-Girey and the organization of a campaign against his troops.
1607 February 3-20. On the release of the population from the oath to False Dmitry I and on the forgiveness of perjury against Boris Godunov.
1610 no later than January 18. On sending an embassy from Tushino to Smolensk on behalf of the Zemstvo Council for negotiations with King Sigismund III about zemstvo affairs.
February 14, 1610. A response act on behalf of King Sigismund III, addressed to the Zemsky Sobor.
1610 July 17. About the dethronement of Tsar Vasily Shuisky and the transfer of the state until the election of the Tsar under the authority of the boyar government (“seven boyars”), headed by the boyar Prince. F.I. Mstislavsky.
1610 August 17. Judgment record on behalf of the Zemsky Sobor with Hetman Zholkiewski on the recognition of the Polish prince Vladislav as the Russian Tsar.
1611 no later than March 4 (or from the end of March) to the second half of the year. The activities of the “council of all the earth” during the first militia.
1611 June 30. “Sentence” (constitutive act) of “the whole earth” on state structure and political orders.
October 26, 1612. The act of recognition by the Polish invaders and members of the boyar duma who were with them in the siege in Moscow of the sovereignty of the Zemsky Sobor.
1613 no later than January to May. On the election of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov to the kingdom.
1613 until May 24. About sending collectors of money and supplies to the cities.
1614 until March 18. On the suppression of the movement of Zarutsky and the Cossacks.
1614 until April 6. On the collection of five-point money.
September 1614 1. About sending an embassy to the rebel Cossacks with an exhortation to submit to the government.
1615 until April 29. On the collection of five-point money.
1617 until June 8. On the collection of five-point money.
1618 until April 11. On the collection of five-dollar money.
1637 around September 24-28. About the attack of the Crimean prince Safat-Girey and the collection of dates and money for the salaries of military men.
1642 from January 3 to January 17. Appeal to the Russian government of the Don Cossacks regarding the admission of Azov to the Russian state.
1651 February 28. O Russian-Polish relations and about Bogdan Khmelnitsky’s readiness to transfer to Russian citizenship.
1653 May 25, June 5(?), June 20-22(?), October 1. About the war with Poland and the annexation of Ukraine.
Between 1681 November 24 and 1682 May 6. Council of the sovereign's military and zemstvo affairs (on military, financial and zemstvo reforms).
1682 May 23, 26, 29. About the election of John and Peter Alekseevich to the kingdom, and Princess Sophia as the supreme ruler.
There are 57 cathedrals in total. One must think that in reality there were more of them, and not only because many sources have not reached us or are still unknown, but also because in the proposed list the activities of some cathedrals (during the first and second militias) had to be indicated in general, in while more than one meeting was probably convened, and it would be important to note each of them.
Need for reforms
The most important milestone in political development was the uprising in Moscow, which occurred shortly after the coronation of Grozny. In 1547 there was an unusually dry summer. Fires have become more frequent in Moscow. The largest of them destroyed most wooden city. Several thousand residents died in the fire, tens of thousands were left homeless and foodless. Rumors arose that the fires were caused by arson and witchcraft. The authorities took the most savage measures against the “lighters”: they were tortured and during torture they talked about themselves, after which they were executed. On the second day after the “great fire,” a boyar commission was formed to punish those responsible for the disaster. On June 26, the boyars gathered people in front of the Assumption Cathedral and found out who was setting Moscow on fire. The mob accused Anna Glinskaya of arson. The people came out of obedience and carried out reprisals against the boyar Yu. V. Glinsky. On June 29, the mob moved to Vorobyovo, demanding that the Tsar’s grandmother Anna Glinskaya be handed over for execution. But the uprising was dispersed and its instigators were punished.
In 1547-1550, unrest occurred in other cities. The situation of its people worsened further due to the poor harvest of 1548-1549.
“Popular uprisings showed that the country needs reforms. Further development of the country required the strengthening of statehood and centralization of power.”
Moscow completed the unification of Russian lands at the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries. It turned out to be impossible to manage a vast state with the help of archaic institutions and institutions that developed in small principalities during the period of fragmentation. The All-Russian Code of Law of 1497 is hopelessly outdated. The source of constant discontent among the boyar children was the boyar court, famous for its abuses. Only with the help of noble detachments could popular unrest be stopped. These facts also tell us about the need for Russian reforms.
Thus, it is clear that in the middle of the 16th century Russia needed to strengthen statehood and centralize power. The need for reforms in governing the country was obvious.
The new level of political organization of the country that had developed by the middle of the 16th century had to correspond to new state institutions- class and representative institutions that defended the interests large regions. The Zemsky Sobor became such a body.
In February 1549, the tsar gathered for a meeting the boyar duma, the Consecrated Cathedral (the top of the church) and the highest representatives of the boyars and nobility - the first Zemsky Sobor. The Tsar accused the boyars of the abuses and violence that they committed during his childhood, and reminded them of how they mocked him. Then he called to forget all grievances and act together for the common good. Hence the name of the Council – “Cathedral of Reconciliation”. At the Council they announced the planned reforms and the preparation of a new Code of Law. By the decision of the Council, the nobles were released from court by the boyar-governors and given them the right to be tried by the Tsar himself.
The Council of 1549 was the first Zemsky Council, that is, a meeting of class representatives with legislative functions. Its convocation reflected the establishment of an estate-representative monarchy in Russia. However, the first Council was not yet of an elective nature and representatives of the urban trade and craft population and peasants were not present there. However, both of these categories of the population did not play a major role at the councils in the future. The emergence of an estate-representative monarchy meant that now all the most important permissions would be sanctioned by representatives of the ruling class.
It is necessary to indicate the meaning of the term “Zemsky Sobor”. Soloviev saw in this term a sign of the power of the people opposing the tsar. According to Cherepnin’s definition, the Zemsky Sobor is “an estate-representative body single state created in opposition to feudal law."
At the Zemsky Sobor of 1550, a new Code of Law was adopted, which incorporated (in contrast to the rather archaic Code of Law of 1497) the norms of all the main sections of the then law. The fundamental innovation was the proclamation in the final articles of two norms: the continuity of development of legislation, as well as the public nature of the entry into force of the Code of Law. It takes into account judicial practice.
The new Code of Laws fully met the needs of the time. For example, it introduced penalties for bribery for the first time. In the new legislative document rules of law appear that still exist, and the local government institutions that appeared earlier in 1551 received statutory charters, that is, “subscribed to the Code of Law.” Later, new codes were also published that supplemented the Code of Laws.
The norms for the peasant transition on St. George’s Day were confirmed and clarified, and the “elderly” limit was increased; the power of the feudal lord over the peasants is strengthened: the master is made responsible for the crimes of the peasants; The Code of Law applies to newly annexed lands. The privileges of monasteries not to pay taxes to the treasury have been eliminated. It is forbidden to serve boyar children as slaves; Punishments were introduced for boyars and bribe-taking clerks.
Thus, in the middle of the 16th century, a class-representative monarchy in the person of the Zemsky Sobor began to take hold in Russia, which received support thanks to the publication of the new Code of Laws
The first Zemsky Sobors
Since ancient times in Rus' it was customary to resolve important issues as a whole, that is, “conciliarly.” An association appanage principalities into a single centralized state did not eradicate this tradition.
Under Ivan the Terrible, the first zemstvo councils began to gather, the prototype of which can be considered the city councils that existed in major cities. They were convened by the Moscow government to solve the most significant problems.
Officially, the first Zemsky Sobor was convened in 1549. Already at that time, the tsar’s power was absolute, and he was not obliged to listen to participants in zemstvo councils. However, the far-sighted Ivan the Terrible understood that thanks to the cathedrals it was possible to obtain information about the real state of affairs in the state. It is also important that the tsar enjoyed the support of the boyars and nobles, who assisted in the adoption of laws weakening the feudal aristocracy. It was necessary measure to strengthen absolute royal power.
Initially, the first zemstvo councils included only representatives of the ruling class of the entire Russian land. Under Ivan the Terrible, cathedrals were not yet elective; they became such only at the beginning of the 17th century.
Each zemstvo cathedral included members of the Boyar Duma and the Consecrated Cathedral, as well as zemstvo people. The Boyar Duma consisted exclusively of representatives of the feudal aristocracy, and the Consecrated Council of representatives of the highest clergy. Both of these authorities were required to attend the council in full force. Zemstvo people were formed from representatives different groups population from various areas.
Each council traditionally opened with the reading of an introductory letter with a list of issues for discussion. Zemsky Sobors were authorized to resolve issues of domestic policy and finance, as well as foreign policy issues. The right to open the cathedral was granted to the king or clerk. After this, all participants in the cathedral left for a meeting. It was customary for each class to sit separately.
The most important issues were resolved through voting, which was held in “chambers” - rooms specially designated for this purpose. Often the Zemsky Sobor ended with a joint meeting of all its participants, and closed with a gala dinner.
During the reign of Ivan the Terrible, many important decisions were made at the first zemstvo councils. At the council of 1549, the Code of Law was adopted, approved already in 1551. The cathedral of 1566 was dedicated to the Livonian War. Ivan the Terrible advocated its continuation, and the participants of the cathedral supported him. In 1565, the cathedral met to listen to a message from Ivan the Terrible, in which it was reported that the tsar had departed for Alexandrovskaya Sloboda and left his state as a result of “treasonable deeds.” It becomes clear that a variety of state affairs were actually discussed at the councils.
The main decisions taken at the zemstvo councils of Ivan the Terrible were aimed at strengthening the absolute royal power. Participants in the councils most often did not dare to contradict the tsar, preferring to support him in everything. Despite this, the convening of zemstvo councils became a significant milestone in the improvement state system management.
Zemsky Sobor is important stage in the development of Russia. Veche orders have always existed in our country, but there were periods when all independence was curtailed. And Ivan the Terrible revived the possibility of gathering the majority of classes.
The Zemsky Sobor included representatives of the following classes: members of which participated in the Zemsky Sobor in full force; the consecrated cathedral, from them there were only the highest church hierarchs; elected people from the service, Moscow and city nobility, archers, Cossacks and gunners; elective from (Chernososhny and Slobodsky) and from the cloth hundred and living room. The Council of the first convocation was called the “Cathedral of Reconciliation.”
The first Zemsky Sobor was convened in order to acquaint the meeting participants with the reforms of the new body of Ivan the Terrible - As is known, the reforms of the Rada included the creation and introduction of a new code of law, as well as the development of the order system and the strengthening of the central government.
Over time, the functions of the estate representative body also developed. Thus, by the end of the 16th century, participants in this meeting received the right to approve the accession to the throne of a new monarch. In those years, it was customary for new rulers to receive the approval of the people, which was expressed by the Zemsky Sobors.
The history of the development of this body is multifaceted: there were periods when its role was completely lost, and there were also times when the fate of the state depended on its decision. Time of Troubles is the main example of the latter period.
The most important Zemsky Sobors
The first council was convened on Red Square, after which the meetings moved to the chambers of the Kremlin. From the mid-16th to the end of the 17th century, about 50 meetings were held, including those that changed the course of the history of our country.
The Council approved the controversial candidacy of Boris Godunov to the throne. There were many rumors about his involvement in the Uglich drama, but, oddly enough, he received the approval of elected officials. The most famous and large-scale is the year that was held in the Assumption Cathedral.
As you know, the council approved a new dynasty on the Russian throne and brought it to power young Mikhail Romanova. It is worth noting that during his reign the young king constantly convened these meetings to solve various problems. The meeting in 1632/1634 was convened to resolve the issue of war with Poland. At this time, a new “war” tax was established - five-year money. The meeting of 1648/1649 was convened after a sudden outbreak in Moscow. The problems of outdated legislation were discussed there.
It was then that the decision was made to introduce the Council Code - a new set of laws of Russia. The last Zemsky Sobor was convened in 1653. At this meeting it was decided to join Cossack army and Little Russia into Russia.
Significance in history
The Zemsky Sobor marked the beginning of the formation of an estate-representative monarchy in Russia. But the growth of absolutist tendencies among subsequent monarchs significantly weakened the role of the organ.