РИСИ СУСПІЛЬНО-ПОЛІТИЧНИХ ТРАНСФОРМАЦІЙ У МОСКОВСЬКІЙ ДЕРЖАВІ В XVII СТ.

Ключові слова: Московська держава в XVII ст., династія Романових, самодержавство, абсолютизм, станово-представницька монархія. Анотація На основі новітніх історичних досліджень поданий неупереджений погляд на розвиток Московської держави в XVII ст. через призму соціокультурного, проблемного підходу до суперечливих в історіографії питань, що турбують сьогоднішніх істориків, політиків, звичайних людей України, Росії, інших країн світу і стають предметом численних спекуляцій та маніпуляцій. У результаті проведеного дослідження висвітлено основні риси суспільно-політичних трансформацій у Московській державі в XVII ст., акцентовано увагу на спростування радянських та сучасних російських міфів щодо розвитку централізованої самодержавної моделі Московії, визначаються можливості цивілізаційного вибору Московської держави XVII ст. між станово-представницькою та абсолютистською моделями розвитку. Посилання Andreev, 2003 – Andreev I.L. Aleksey Mihaylovich [Alexey Mikhailovich]. Moskva: Molodaya gvardiya, 2003. 638 s. [in Russian] Ahiezer, 2013 – Ahiezer A., Klyamkin I., Yakovenko I. Istoriya Rossii: konets ili novoe nachalo? [History of Russia: end or new beginning?] / 3-e izd., ispr. i dop. Moskva: Novoe izdatelstvo, 2013. 496 s. [in Russian] Bogdanov, 2009 – Bogdanov A.P. Nesostoyavshiysya imperator Fedor Alekseevich [Failed Emperor Fyodor Alekseevich]. Moskva: Veche, 2009. 320 s. [in Russian] Volodihin, 2013 – Volodihin D.M. Tsar Fedor Alekseevich, ili Bednyiy otrok [Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich, or Poor youth]. Moskva: Molodaya gvardiya, 2013. 267 s. [in Russian] Danilov, 2007 – Danilov A.G. Alternativyi v istorii Rossii: mif ili realnost (XIV–ХІХ vv.) [Alternatives in the history of Russia: myth or reality (XIV – XIX centuries)]. Rostov-na-Donu: Feniks, 2007. 303 s. [in Russian] Zarezin, 2018 – Zarezin M.I. V puchine Russkoy Smutyi. Nevyiuchennyiy uroki istorii [In the abyss of the Russian Troubles. Unlearned history lessons]. Moskva: Veche, 2018. 400 s. [in Russian] Istoriia Rosii, 2013 – Istoriia Rosii (z naidavnishykh chasiv do kintsia XVIII st.) [History of Russia (from ancient times to the end of the XVIII century)]: navch. posib. /avtor-uklad. V.M. Mordvintsev. Kyiv: Znannia, 2013. 346 s. [in Ukrainian] Kozlyakov, 2004 – Kozlyakov V.N. Mihail Fedorovich [Mikhail Fedorovich]. Moskva: Molodaya gvardiya, 2004. 352 s. [in Russian] Kozlyakov, 2017 – Kozlyakov V.N. Boris Godunov. Tragediya o dobrom tsare [Boris Godunov. The tragedy of the good king]. Moskva: Molodaya gvardiya, 2017. 330 s. [in Russian] Lobachev, 2003 – Lobachev S.V. Patriarh Nikon [Patriarch Nikon]. Sankt-Peterburg: Iskusstvo-SPb, 2003. 416 s. [in Russian] Lukin, 2000 – Lukin P.V. Narodnyie predstavleniya o gosudarstvennoy vlasti v Rossii XVII v. [Popular ideas about state power in Russia in the XVII century].Moskva: Nauka, 2000. 296 s. [in Russian] Marchenko, 2015 – Marchenko O.M. Istoriia slovianskykh narodiv. Chastyna persha. Istoriia Rusi, Moskovskoi derzhavy, Rosiiskoi imperii do kintsia XVIII st. Kurs lektsii dlia studentiv vyshchykh navchalnykh zakladiv: Navchalnyi posibnyk [History of Slavic peoples. Part one. History of Russia, the Moscow State, the Russian Empire until the end of the XVIII century. Course of lectures for students of higher educational institutions: Textbook]. Druhe vydannia, pereroblene y dopovnene. Kirovohrad, POLIMED-Servis, 2015. 385 s. [in Ukrainian] Narysy istorii, 2007 – Narysy istorii Rosii [Essays on the history of Russia]: per. z ros. /B.V. Ananich, I.L. Andreiev, Ye.V. Anisimov ta in.; Za zah. red. O.O. Chubariana. Kyiv: Nika-Tsentr, 2007. 800 s. [in Ukrainian] Nefedov, 2004 – Nefedov S.A. Pervyie shagi po puti modernizatsii Rossii: reformyi seredinyi XVII v. [First steps towards modernization of Russia: reforms of the middle of the XVII century] // Voprosyi istorii. 2004. №4. – S. 33–52. [in Russian] Payps, 2012 – Payps R.E. Rossiya pri starom rezhime [Russia under the old regime]. M.: Zakharov. 2012. 480 s. [in Russian] Pisarkova, 2007 – Pisarkova L.F. Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie Rossii s kontsa XVII do kontsa XVIII veka. Evolyutsiya byurokraticheskoy sistemyi [Russian government from the end of the XVII to the end of the XVIII century: the evolution of the bureaucratic system]. Moskva: ROSSPEN, 2007. 743 s. [in Russian] Svetova, 2013 – Svetova E.A. Dvor Alekseya Mihaylovicha v kontekste absolyutizatsii tsarskoy vlasti [The courtyard of Alexei Mikhailovich in the context of the absolutization of the tsarist power]. Moskva: MGU, 2013. 212 s. [in Russian] Sedov, 2006 – Sedov P.V. Zakat Moskovskogo tsarstva: Tsarskiy dvor kontsa XVII veka [The decline of the Moscow kingdom: the royal court at the end of the XVII century]. Sankt-Peterburg: Dmitriy Bulanin, 2006. 604 s. [in Russian] Skryinnikov, 1988 – Skryinnikov R.G. Rossiya v nachale XVII v. Smuta [Russia at the beginning of the XVII century. Troubles]. Moskva: Myisl, 1988. 283 s. [in Russian] Stanislavskiy, 1990 – Stanislavskiy A.L. Grazhdanskaya voyna v Rossii XVII v. [The Civil War in Russia in the XVII century]. Moskva: Myisl, 1990. 270 s. [in Russian] Talina, 1996 – Talina G.V. Tsar Aleksey Mihaylovich: lichnost, myislitel, gosudarstvennyiy deyatel [Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich: personality, thinker, statesman]. Moskva: Magistr, 1996. 144 s. [in Russian] Ulyanovskiy, 2006 – Ulyanovskiy V.I. Smutnoe vremya [Time of Troubles]. Moskva: Evropa, 2006. 448 s. [in Russian] Cherepnin, 1978 – Cherepnin L.V. Zemskie soboryi Russkogo gosudarstva v XVI – XVII vv. [Zemsky Cathedrals of the Russian State in the XVI – XVII centuries]. / Moskva: Nauka, 1978. 420 s. [in Russian] Shokarev, 2013 – Shokarev S.Yu. Smutnoe vremya v Moskve [Time of Troubles in Moscow]. Moskva: Veche, 2013. 320 s. [in Russian]

Should Russian Military Leaders Opt for Tactical Escalation in the Baltic States and Kaliningrad?1

Russia once again pushes its way to emerge as a major power in the international order after losing this status in the modern ‘time of troubles’ in the 1990s. Its political and military strategic leaders demonstrated willingness to employ all instruments of power as means of escalation to achieve this goal. Meanwhile, tactical military commanders are the ones in direct control of military escalation means and therefore their motivations, agility and rationality are also important factor in the Russian escalation processes towards the West. This research will look at these processes through lenses of game and decision-making theories.

On the family and scientific ties of A.A. Lyapunov, Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences

В данной статье, посвященной 110-летию со дня рождения одного из основоположников отечественной кибернетики, члена-корреспондента АН СССР Алексея Андреевича Ляпунова излагается его родословная, восходящая к легендарному князю Рюрику, описываются родственные связи семьи А.А. Ляпунова, входившей в круг российской интеллектуальной элиты конца XIX - начала ХХ вв. Представлен подробный анализ его научной генеалогии с использованием проекта “Математическая генеалогия”. Показано, что в научной генеалогии соавторства А.А. Ляпунова оказались перечислены имена крупнейших математиков континентальной Европы XVII - второй половины XIX вв., а также выдающихся астрономов, физиков, медиков, философов, богословов Православия, католицизма, англиканства и лютеранства. Кроме того, проанализировано научное сотрудничество А.А. Ляпунова, зафиксированное в Collaboration Distance Project. Установлено, что расстояние соавторства члена-корреспондента АН СССР А.А. Ляпунова до наиболее известных математиков и физиков ХХ-XXI вв. составляет 3-5. This article is dedicated to the 110anniversary of the birth of one of the founders of Russian cybernetics, the Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Alexei Andreevich Lyapunov, and examines his family connections and scientific contacts. A.A. Lyapunov was a representative of the noble family of the Lyapunovs, a descendant of Grigory Petrovich Lyapunov who was a prominent politician of the Time of Troubles, bravely denounced False Dmitry I and was executed by the Impostor. In turn, according to the “Russian genealogical book”, G.P. Lyapunov was a descendant of Rurik in the 27generation through the line of Konstantin Galitsky, the younger brother of Alexander Nevsky. The article shows that the encyclopedic knowledge of Aleksey Andreevich Lyapunov was founded yet by family upbringing: the Lyapunov family was closely related by kinship ties with many famous families of the Russian intellectual elite, who created in fact the national science of the late 19th - early 20th centuries: the Sechenovs, the Krylovs, the Kapitsas, the Nametkins. Further in the article, a detailed analysis of the scientific genealogy of A.A. Lyapunov with the usage of the “Mathematical Genealogy” project is carried out. In this “Genealogy” there are the names of many of the greatest mathematicians of continental Europe of the 17- second half of the 19centuries, as well as the outstanding astronomers, physicists, chemists, philosophers, theologians of Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Anglicanism and Lutheranism. On one of the lines, the Lyapunov’s scientific genealogy can be traced up to the Persian mathematicians of the 12century. In addition, the scientific collaboration of A.A. Lyapunov, which is recorded in the Collaboration Distance Project, was analyzed. It was established that the distance of co-authorship of A.A. Lyapunov, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, to the most famous mathematicians and theoretical physicists of the 20-21centuries, including almost all the Abel Prize laureates and a number of Nobel Prize winners in physics, is 3-5

Book review: Rabinovich Yа. N. Southern Pskov settlements in the Time of Troubles

The book about the settlements of the south of the Pskov region in the Time of Troubles was written by a well-known specialist in the history of Russia of the XVII century Ya. N. Rabinovich. It will arouse great interest among researchers and a wide range of readers. The book recreates a complete system picture of the events of the Time of Troubles in the south of the Pskov land. This advantage of the book is determined by the involvement of new material from historical sources, new factography and its conceptual understanding. The study of Ya. N. Rabinovich allows us to supplement the history of the Pskov region. The review contains comments on the structuring of the material and wishes in connection with the need to write a generalizing work on the history of Pskov and the Pskov land in the Time of Troubles, as well as biographical texts.

Voivode of Saratov Prince Fyodor Petrovich Boryatinsky (1648–1650): Controversial pages of the biography

The article for the first time presents a detailed biography of the governor of Saratov, Prince Fyodor Petrovich Boryatinsky. This prince Rurikovich first distinguished himself in battles on the southern borders of the country in the final period of the Time of Troubles after the election of Mikhail Romanov as tsar. In the autumn of 1613, he freed Starodub from the supporters of the Polish prince Vladislav, participated in the campaign against Gomel, and then fought near Dorogobuzh, defended Moscow in 1618. After the Troubles, being already a Moscow nobleman, he served as a voivode in different cities for about 50 years - in the Siberian city of Tara, in the new fortress Atemar, in Saratov, Sevsk, Suzdal.

Belozersk Monasteries in Crisis Years (1570s – 1610s)

Introduction. The article examines the situation of the monasteries of the Belozersk region in the last quarter of the 16th century – the first decade of the 17th century: regional manifestation of crisis phenomena, the reasons for their occurrence, the degree of influence of individual factors (epidemic, famine, foreign invasion). Methods and materials. The topic is disclosed using the methods of historical research (analysis, synthesis, external and internal criticism of documents). The source base was made up of acts and monastic business books, including inventory of property. Analysis. In the last quarter of the 16th century – the first decade of the 17th century the Russian state was going through a deep crisis, which was observed in all aspects of the life of Russian society: political, dynastic, economic and social; it was intensified by the great famine of 1601–1603. During these years monasteries remained centers of economic stability, providing the brethren, servants, ministers and beggars with the necessary products and household items. In the years of famine, grain from the monastic granaries was “loaned” to the peasants for consumption and sowing. The devastation of the monastic economy and the physical destruction of the population began in the Time of Troubles. As a result, the authors came to the following conclusions: the crisis of the last quarter of the 16th century and the Great Famine of the early 17th century did not lead to degradation and disruption of the traditional way of life in the region; the destruction of Belozersk monasteries begins in 1612 and continues until 1618; only the Kirillov Monastery, headed by Abbot Matthew, was able to organize the defense and protect the fortress, preserving the Cyril’s heritage from the Polish-Cossack plunder.

Eschatology and Religiosity of the People in Russia in the 17th Century

The article studies the religiosity of Russian population in the 17th century in order to find out the type of this state of public mind. Special attention is drawn to the acuteness of eschatological expectations in society, which intensified during periods of crises. After the Time of Troubles (Smuta), the Church, trying to bring society out of the spiritual crisis, had been exploiting the “end of the world” topic through publishing relevant texts. This trend was especially noticeable during the time of Patriarch Joseph. The decision of the Moscow Printing House (Pechatnyi Dvor) to extend the amount of eschatological publications was determined not only by the direction of church policy, but also by the request in society, the desire of the population to get a more complete picture of the Christian teaching about the ultimate destinies of the world and man, since the spiritual crisis had presupposed an increase of apocalyptic moods. This desire indicates that the population was characterized by the religiosity of the medieval type. The article scrutinizes in particular the 2nd half of the 17th century, which modern researchers rightly designate as the early Modern era. In a society with such a keen perception of the time, the church reform, initiated in the middle of the century by Patriarch Nikon, was naturally not supported by a part of the population. In the interpretation of the defenders of the Old Belief, the actions of the reformers turned into clear signs of the advent of the kingdom of Antichrist, as it was prophesied in Christian teaching. It was not some peculiarity of the worldview of the opponents of church reform, their behavior adjusted the religiosity of the epoch. To justify these thoughts the position of Patriarch Nikon could be mentioned. Nikon found himself in a situation of disapproval and, arguing to be wrongfully convicted and misunderstood, he also used the eschatological doctrine. Based on the analysis of such facts, the article concludes that the 2nd half of the 17th century was characterized by religiosity of the medieval type.

From the Time of Troubles to the Unity Day: Memory, Forgetting and Re-imaging the Past in Russian History

This article examines how the memory of one of the largest sociopolitical crises in the history of Russia (called the Time of Troubles) modified over 400 years. This process is considered as an example of rethinking the traumatic experience of the past and forming a national-patriotic myth on its basis. Several stages of the evolution of the memory of the Time of Troubles are issued: the XVII century – when the interpretation of these events was mainly religious; the XVIII century – when heroic and patriotic ideas about the time of troubles were formed in accordance with the ideals of classicism; the XIX century – the time of the development of the monarchical myth of the Romanov dynasty coming to power; the XX century – when the peasant war and the struggle against foreign intervention became the main dominant in the understanding of events; Modern Russia and the annual celebration of the National Unity Day – a public holiday established in 2005 in memory of the liberation of Moscow in 1612, the main idea of which is the unification of all peoples on the territory of the Russian Federation. It is noted that for centuries in the cultural memory of Russian society, two layers of ideas about the Time of Troubles coexisted. One of them – negative – was the memory of social upheavals and civil war, the other – positive – the memory of victory and overcoming the Troubles, evoking a sense of national pride and hopes for the future.

Service Tatars in the Diplomatic Service of the Muscovite State: The Baymakov-Rezanov Family

Very little is known about diplomatic professionals specialising in eastern affairs in the Muscovite state until the seventeenth century. The issue has only occasionally been touched upon in some research works. This is explained by the limited number of surviving sources. For this reason, the Baymakov-Rezanov family is unique, as the extant data make it possible to trace the uninterrupted service of this clan’s representatives over the course of a century. This is thanks to cadastres and embassy records from both sides, a few extant documents from the Ambassadorial Prikaz, and the family’s persistent nickname. Ambassadorial service was a family business where traditions were passed from generation to generation, from elder sons to younger ones. Several generations of Baymakov-Rezanovs took part in organising the diplomatic contacts of the Muscovite state with Muslim countries as reconnaissance riders (Rus. stanichniki) and interpreters (Rus. tolmachi). They repeatedly headed diplomatic missions and were very well paid for their work. The examination of their family’s story makes it possible to observe the organisation of diplomatic service from a longer historical perspective. Initially, the technical side of contacts with the countries of the east was organised by princely Tartars, who served the grand prince proper. They were provided with land close to Moscow. Gradually, they started forming smaller groups of specialists, such as translators (Rus. bakshei), tolmachi, stanichniki, and the newly baptised (Rus. novokrescheny). This structure was largely destroyed by the Time of Troubles. This affected the circle of people recruited to the service; it grew considerably and was quite often created in accordance with the demands of the moment. Over time, it was predominated by service Tartars from Meshchera. The classic model of the peripheral staff of the Ambassadorial Prikaz, consisting of translators and tolmachi, only formed in the mid-seventeenth century as inherited positions dwindled significantly.