Message on the topic of Vasily 3. Vasily III

Vasily Ivanovich
(at baptism the name Gabriel was given)
Years of life: March 25, 1479 - December 4, 1533
Reign: 1505-1533

From the family of Moscow Grand Dukes.

Russian Tsar. Grand Duke of Moscow and All Rus' in 1505-1533.
Prince of Novgorod and Vladimir.

Eldest son of Sophia Palaiologos, niece of the last Byzantine emperor.

Vasily III Ivanovich - short biography

According to existing marriage arrangements, the children of the Grand Duke of Moscow and the Byzantine princess Sophia could not occupy the Moscow throne. But Sophia Paleologue did not want to come to terms with this. In the winter of 1490, when the heir to the throne, Ivan the Young (the eldest son from his first marriage), fell ill, a doctor was called in on Sophia’s advice, but he died 2 months later. Poisoning was suspected at court, but only the doctor was executed. The new heir to the throne was the son of the deceased heir, Dmitry.

On the eve of Dmitry's 15th birthday, Sophia Paleologus and her son hatched a plot to kill the official heir to the throne. But the boyars exposed the conspirators. Some supporters of Sophia Paleolog were executed, and Vasily Ivanovich was put under house arrest. With great difficulty, Sophia managed to restore a good relationship with her husband. The father and his son were forgiven.

Soon the positions of Sophia and her son became so strong that Dmitry himself and his mother Elena Voloshanka fell into disgrace. Vasily was proclaimed heir to the throne. Until the death of the Grand Duke of Moscow, Vasily Ivanovich was considered the Grand Duke of Novgorod, and in 1502 he also received from his father the great reign of Vladimir.

Prince Vasily III Ivanovich

In 1505, the dying father asked his sons to make peace, but as soon as Vasily Ivanovich became the Grand Duke, he immediately ordered Dmitry to be put in a dungeon, where he died in 1508. The accession of Vasily III Ivanovich to the grand-ducal throne caused discontent among many boyars.

Like his father, he continued the policy of “gathering lands”, strengthening
grand ducal power. During his reign, Pskov (1510), the Ryazan and Uglich principalities (1512, Volotsk (1513), Smolensk (1514), Kaluga (1518), and the Novgorod-Seversky principality (1523) went to Moscow.

The successes of Vasily Ivanovich and his sister Elena were reflected in the agreement between Moscow and Lithuania and Poland in 1508, according to which Moscow retained his father’s acquisitions in western lands outside Moscow.

Since 1507, constant raids of the Crimean Tatars on Rus' began (1507, 1516–1518 and 1521). The Moscow ruler had difficulty negotiating peace with Khan Mengli-Girey.

Later, joint raids of Kazan and Crimean Tatars on Moscow began. The Prince of Moscow in 1521 decided to build fortified cities in the area of ​​the “wild field” (in particular, Vasilsursk) and the Great Zasechnaya Line (1521–1523) in order to strengthen the borders. He also invited Tatar princes to Moscow service, giving them vast lands.

Chronicles indicate that Prince Vasily III Ivanovich received the ambassadors of Denmark, Sweden, and Turkey, and discussed with the Pope the possibility of war against Turkey. At the end of the 1520s. relations between Muscovy and France began; in 1533, ambassadors arrived from Sultan Babur, a Hindu sovereign. Trade relations connected Moscow with Italy and Austria.

Politics during the reign of Vasily III Ivanovich

In his domestic policy, he enjoyed the support of the Church in the fight against the feudal opposition. The landed nobility also increased, and the authorities actively limited the privileges of the boyars.

Years of reign of Vasily III Ivanovich was marked by the rise of Russian culture and the widespread spread of the Moscow style of literary writing. Under him, the Moscow Kremlin turned into an impregnable fortress.

According to the stories of his contemporaries, the prince was of a harsh disposition and did not leave a grateful memory of his reign in folk poetry.

The Grand Duke of Moscow and All Rus' Vasily Ivanovich died on December 4, 1533 from blood poisoning, which was caused by an abscess on his left thigh. In agony, he managed to become a monk under the name of Varlaam. He was buried in the Archangel Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin. 3-year-old Ivan IV (the future Tsar the Terrible) was declared heir to the throne. son of Vasily Ivanovich, and Elena Glinskaya was appointed regent.

Vasily was married twice.
His wives:
Saburova Solomonia Yurievna (from September 4, 1506 to November 1525).
Glinskaya Elena Vasilievna (from January 21, 1526).

Biography

Internal affairs

Unification of Russian lands

Foreign policy

Annexations

Marriages and children

Vasily III Ivanovich (March 25, 1479 - December 3, 1533) - Grand Duke of Moscow in 1505-1533, son of Ivan III the Great and Sophia Paleologus, father of Ivan IV the Terrible.

Biography

Vasily was the second son of Ivan III and the eldest son of Ivan's second wife Sophia Paleologus. In addition to the eldest, he had four younger brothers:

• Yuri Ivanovich, Prince of Dmitrov (1505-1536)
• Dmitry Ivanovich Zhilka, Prince of Uglitsky (1505-1521)
• Semyon Ivanovich, Prince of Kaluga (1505-1518)
• Andrei Ivanovich, Prince of Staritsky and Volokolamsk (1519-1537)

Ivan III, pursuing a policy of centralization, took care of transferring all power through the line of his eldest son, while limiting the power of his younger sons. Therefore, already in 1470, he declared his eldest son from the first wife of Ivan the Young as his co-ruler. However, in 1490 he died of illness. Two parties were created at court: one grouped around the son of Ivan the Young, the grandson of Ivan III Dmitry Ivanovich and his mother, the widow of Ivan the Young, Elena Stefanovna, and the second around Vasily and his mother. At first, the first party gained the upper hand; Ivan III intended to crown his grandson as king. Under these conditions, a conspiracy matured in the circle of Vasily III, which was discovered, and its participants, including Vladimir Gusev, were executed. Vasily and his mother Sophia Paleolog fell into disgrace. However, the grandson's supporters came into conflict with Ivan III, which ended in the grandson's disgrace in 1502. On March 21, 1499, Vasily was declared Grand Duke of Novgorod and Pskov, and in April 1502, Grand Duke of Moscow and Vladimir and All Rus', autocrat, that is, he became co-ruler of Ivan III.

The first marriage was arranged by his father Ivan, who first tried to find him a bride in Europe, but ended up choosing from 1,500 girls presented to the court for this purpose from all over the country. The father of Vasily Solomonia's first wife, Yuri Saburov, was not even a boyar. The Saburov family descended from the Tatar Murza Chet.

Since the first marriage was barren, Vasily obtained a divorce in 1525, and at the beginning of the next (1526) year he married Elena Glinskaya, daughter Lithuanian prince Vasily Lvovich Glinsky. Initially, the new wife also could not get pregnant, but eventually, on August 15, 1530, they had a son, Ivan, the future Ivan the Terrible, and then a second son, Yuri.

Internal affairs

Vasily III believed that nothing should limit the power of the Grand Duke, which is why he enjoyed the active support of the Church in the fight against the feudal boyar opposition, harshly dealing with all those who were dissatisfied. In 1521, Metropolitan Varlaam was exiled due to his refusal to participate in Vasily’s fight against Prince Vasily Ivanovich Shemyachich, the Rurik princes Vasily Shuisky and Ivan Vorotynsky were expelled. The diplomat and statesman Ivan Bersen-Beklemishev was executed in 1525 because of criticism of Vasily’s policies, namely because of open rejection of Greek novelty, which came to Rus' with Sophia Paleologus. During the reign of Vasily III, the landed nobility increased, the authorities actively limited the immunity and privileges of the boyars - the state followed the path of centralization. However, the despotic features of government, which were fully manifested already under his father Ivan III and grandfather Vasily the Dark, only intensified even more in the era of Vasily.

In church politics, Vasily unconditionally supported the Josephites. Maxim the Greek, Vassian Patrikeev and other non-covetous people were sentenced at Church Councils to death penalty, who are to be imprisoned in monasteries.

During the reign of Vasily III, a new Code of Law was created, which, however, has not reached us.

As Herberstein reported, at the Moscow court it was believed that Vasily was superior in power to all the monarchs of the world and even the emperor. On the front side of his seal there was an inscription: “Great Sovereign Basil, by the grace of God, Tsar and Lord of All Rus'.” On back side it read: “Vladimir, Moscow, Novgorod, Pskov and Tver, and Yugorsk, and Perm, and many lands of the Sovereign.”

The reign of Vasily is the era of the construction boom in Rus', which began during the reign of his father. The Archangel Cathedral was erected in the Moscow Kremlin, and the Ascension Church was built in Kolomenskoye. Stone fortifications are being built in Tula, Nizhny Novgorod, Kolomna, and other cities. New settlements, forts, and fortresses are founded.

Unification of Russian lands

Vasily, in his policy towards other principalities, continued the policy of his father.

In 1509, while in Veliky Novgorod, Vasily ordered the Pskov mayor and other representatives of the city, including all the petitioners who were dissatisfied with them, to gather with him. Arriving to him at the beginning of 1510 on the feast of Epiphany, the Pskovites were accused of distrust of the Grand Duke and their governors were executed. The Pskovites were forced to ask Vasily to accept themselves into his patrimony. Vasily ordered to cancel the meeting. At the last meeting in the history of Pskov, it was decided not to resist and to fulfill Vasily’s demands. On January 13, the veche bell was removed and sent to Novgorod with tears. On January 24, Vasily arrived in Pskov and dealt with it in the same way as his father did with Novgorod in 1478. 300 of the most noble families of the city were resettled to Moscow lands, and their villages were given to Moscow service people.

It was the turn of Ryazan, which had long been in Moscow’s sphere of influence. In 1517, Vasily called to Moscow the Ryazan prince Ivan Ivanovich, who was trying to enter into an alliance with the Crimean Khan, and ordered him to be put into custody (after Ivan was tonsured a monk and imprisoned in a monastery), and took his inheritance for himself. After Ryazan, the Starodub principality was annexed, in 1523 - Novgorod-Severskoye, whose prince Vasily Ivanovich Shemyachich was treated like the Ryazan principality - he was imprisoned in Moscow.

Foreign policy

At the beginning of his reign, Vasily had to start a war with Kazan. The campaign was unsuccessful, the Russian regiments commanded by Vasily’s brother, Prince of Uglitsky Dmitry Ivanovich Zhilka, were defeated, but the Kazan people asked for peace, which was concluded in 1508. At the same time, Vasily, taking advantage of the turmoil in Lithuania after the death of Prince Alexander, put forward his candidacy for the throne of Gediminas. In 1508, the rebellious Lithuanian boyar Mikhail Glinsky was received very cordially in Moscow. The war with Lithuania led to a rather favorable peace for the Moscow prince in 1509, according to which the Lithuanians recognized the capture of his father.

Began in 1512 new war with Lithuania. On December 19, Vasily Yuri Ivanovich and Dmitry Zhilka set out on a campaign. Smolensk was besieged, but it was not possible to take it, and the Russian army returned to Moscow in March 1513. On June 14, Vasily set out on a campaign again, but after sending the governor to Smolensk, he himself remained in Borovsk, waiting for what would happen next. Smolensk was again besieged, and its governor, Yuri Sologub, was defeated in the open field. Only after that Vasily personally came to the troops. But this siege was also unsuccessful: the besieged managed to restore what was being destroyed. Having devastated the outskirts of the city, Vasily ordered a retreat and returned to Moscow in November.

On July 8, 1514, the army led by the Grand Duke again set out for Smolensk, this time his brothers Yuri and Semyon walked with Vasily. A new siege began on July 29. The artillery, led by gunner Stefan, inflicted heavy losses on the besieged. On the same day, Sologub and the clergy of the city came to Vasily and agreed to surrender the city. On July 31, the residents of Smolensk swore allegiance to the Grand Duke, and Vasily entered the city on August 1. Soon the surrounding cities were taken - Mstislavl, Krichev, Dubrovny. But Glinsky, to whom the Polish chronicles attributed the success of the third campaign, entered into relations with King Sigismund. He hoped to get Smolensk for himself, but Vasily kept it for himself. Very soon the conspiracy was exposed, and Glinsky himself was imprisoned in Moscow. Some time later, the Russian army, commanded by Ivan Chelyadinov, suffered a heavy defeat near Orsha, but the Lithuanians were never able to return Smolensk. Smolensk remained a disputed territory until the end of the reign of Vasily III. At the same time, residents of the Smolensk region were taken to the Moscow regions, and residents of the regions closest to Moscow were resettled to Smolensk.

In 1518, Shah Ali Khan, who was friendly towards Moscow, became the Khan of Kazan, but he did not rule for long: in 1521 he was overthrown by his Crimean protege Sahib Giray. In the same year, fulfilling allied obligations with Sigismund, the Crimean Khan Mehmed I Giray announced a raid on Moscow. Together with him, the Kazan Khan came out from his lands; near Kolomna, the Crimeans and Kazan people united their armies together. Russian army under the leadership of Prince Dmitry Belsky, it was defeated on the Oka River and was forced to retreat. The Tatars approached the walls of the capital. Vasily himself at that time left the capital for Volokolamsk to gather an army. Magmet-Girey did not intend to take the city: having devastated the area, he turned back to the south, fearing the Astrakhan people and the army gathered by Vasily, but taking a letter from the Grand Duke stating that he recognized himself as a loyal tributary and vassal of the Crimea. On the way back, having met the army of governor Khabar Simsky near Pereyaslavl of Ryazan, the khan began, on the basis of this letter, to demand the surrender of his army. But, having asked the Tatar ambassadors with this written commitment to come to his headquarters, Ivan Vasilyevich Obrazets-Dobrynsky (this was Khabar’s family name) retained the letter, and dispersed the Tatar army with cannons.

In 1522, the Crimeans were again expected in Moscow; Vasily and his army even stood on the Oka River. Khan never came, but the danger from the steppe did not pass. Therefore, in the same 1522, Vasily concluded a truce, according to which Smolensk remained with Moscow. The Kazan people still did not calm down. In 1523, in connection with another massacre of Russian merchants in Kazan, Vasily announced a new campaign. Having ruined the Khanate, on the way back he founded the city of Vasilsursk on Sura, which was supposed to become a new reliable place of trade with the Kazan Tatars. In 1524, after the third campaign against Kazan, Sahib Giray, an ally of the Crimea, was overthrown, and Safa Giray was proclaimed khan in his place.

In 1527, the attack of Islam I Giray on Moscow was repelled. Having gathered in Kolomenskoye, Russian troops took up defensive positions 20 km from the Oka. The siege of Moscow and Kolomna lasted five days, after which the Moscow army crossed the Oka and defeated the Crimean army on the Sturgeon River. The next steppe invasion was repulsed.

In 1531, at the request of the Kazan people, the Kasimov prince Jan-Ali Khan was proclaimed khan, but he did not last long - after the death of Vasily, he was overthrown by the local nobility.

Annexations

During his reign, Vasily annexed Pskov (1510), Smolensk (1514), Ryazan (1521), Novgorod-Seversky (1522) to Moscow.

Marriages and children

Wives:

• Solomonia Yuryevna Saburova (from September 4, 1505 to November 1525).
• Elena Vasilievna Glinskaya (from January 21, 1526).

Children (both from his second marriage): Ivan IV the Terrible (1530-1584) and Yuri (1532-1564). According to legend, from the first, after the tonsure of Solomonia, a son, George, was born.

After the death of Grand Duke Ivan III in 1505, Vasily III took the grand-ducal throne. He was born in 1479 in Moscow and was the second son of Ivan III and Sophia Paleologus, the niece of the last Byzantine emperor. Vasily became heir to the throne after the death of his older brother Ivan in 1490. Ivan III wanted to transfer the throne to his grandson Dmitry Ivanovich, but shortly before his death he abandoned this intention. Vasily III in 1505 married Solomonia Saburova, who came from an Old Moscow boyar family.

Vasily III (1505-1533) continued his father’s policy of creating a unified Russian state and expanding its borders. During his reign, the last Russian principalities were annexed, which had previously formally retained their independence: in 1510 - the lands of the Pskov Republic, in 1521 - the Ryazan principality, which in fact had long been completely dependent on Moscow.

Vasily III consistently pursued a policy of eliminating appanage principalities. He did not fulfill his promises to provide inheritance to noble immigrants from Lithuania (princes Belsky and Glinsky), and in 1521 he liquidated the Novgorod-Seversky principality - the inheritance of Prince Vasily Ivanovich, the grandson of Shemyaka. All other appanage principalities either disappeared as a result of the death of their rulers (for example, Starodubskoye), or were liquidated in exchange for the provision of high places to the former appanage princes at the court of Vasily III (Vorotynskoye, Belevskoye, Odoevskoye, Masalskoye). As a result, by the end of the reign of Vasily III, only the appanages that belonged to the brothers of the Grand Duke - Yuri (Dmitrov) and Andrei (Staritsa), were preserved, as well as the Kasimov principality, where pretenders to the Kazan throne from the Chingizid dynasty ruled, but with very limited rights of princes (they were it was forbidden to mint their own coins, judicial power was limited, etc.).

The development of the local system continued, the total number of service people - landowners - was already about 30 thousand.

Basil III supported the expansion of the political role of the church. Many churches were built with his personal funds, including the Kremlin Annunciation Cathedral. At the same time, Vasily III completely controlled the church. This is evidenced, in particular, by his appointment of Metropolitans Varlaam (1511) and Daniel (1522) without convening a Local Council, that is, in violation of the norms of church law. This happened for the first time in the history of Rus'. And in former times, princes played an important role in the appointment of metropolitans, archbishops and bishops, but at the same time church canons were necessarily observed.

The accession of Varlaam to the metropolitan throne in the summer of 1511 led to the strengthening of the position of non-covetous people among the highest church hierarchs. By the beginning of the 20s, Vasily III lost interest in non-covetous people and lost hope of depriving the church of its land holdings. He believed that much more benefits could be derived from an alliance with the Josephites, who, although they held tightly to church possessions, were ready for any compromise with the Grand Duke. In vain Vasily III asked Metropolitan Varlaam, a non-covetous man by his convictions, to help him fraudulently lure to Moscow the last Novgorod-Seversk prince Vasily Shemyachich, who, without the metropolitan's safe conduct, resolutely refused to appear in the capital. Varlaam did not make a deal with the Grand Duke and, at the insistence of Vasily III, was forced to leave the metropolitan see. On February 27, 1522, the more accommodating abbot of the Valaam Monastery, Josephite Daniel, was installed in his place, becoming an obedient executor of the will of the Grand Duke. Daniil issued a “metropolitan letter of protection” to Vasily Shemyachich, who, upon entering Moscow in April 1523, was captured and imprisoned, where he ended his days. This whole story caused a storm of indignation in Russian society.

Vasily III was remembered by his contemporaries as a powerful man, who did not tolerate objections, who single-handedly accepted major decisions. He dealt harshly with those he disliked. Even at the beginning of his reign, many supporters of Prince Dmitry Ivanovich (grandson of Ivan III) fell into disgrace; in 1525, opponents of the divorce and second marriage of the Grand Duke, among them were the then leader of the non-covetous Vassian (Patrikeev), a prominent church figure, writer and translator Maxim Greek (now canonized), prominent statesman and diplomat P.N. Bersen-Beklemishev (he was brutally executed). In fact, Vasily’s brothers and their appanage yards were in isolation.

At the same time, Vasily III sought to substantiate the allegedly divine origin of the grand ducal power, relying on the authority of Joseph Volotsky, who in his works acted as an ideologist of strong state power and “ancient piety” (canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church), as well as on the ideas of “The Tale of princes of Vladimir”, etc. This was facilitated by the increased authority of the Grand Duke in Western Europe. In the treaty (1514) with the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian III, Vasily III was even named king.

Vasily III carried out an active foreign policy, although not always successful. In 1507-1508 he waged a war with the Principality of Lithuania, and Russian troops suffered a number of serious defeats in field battles, and the result was the preservation of the status quo. Vasily III managed to achieve success in Lithuanian affairs thanks to the events that unfolded in the lands subject to Lithuania.

At the court of the Grand Duke of Lithuania Alexander Kazimirovich, the Glinsky princes, who descended from Mamai and owned vast lands in Ukraine (Poltava, Glinsk), enjoyed enormous influence. Sigismund, who replaced Alexander, deprived Mikhail Lvovich Glinsky of all his posts. The latter, together with his brothers Ivan and Vasily, raised a rebellion, which was hardly suppressed. The Glinskys fled to Moscow. Mikhail Glinsky had extensive connections at the court of the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian (it was the largest empire of that time, including almost half of Europe). Thanks to the mediation of Glinsky, Vasily III established allied relations with Maximilian, who opposed Poland and Lithuania. The most important success of Vasily III's military operations was the capture of Smolensk after two unsuccessful assaults. The war continued until 1522, when a truce was concluded through the mediation of representatives of the Holy Roman Empire. Although Lithuania did not recognize the loss of Smolensk, the city became part of the Russian state (1514).

The eastern policy of Vasily III was quite complex, where the central factor was the relationship of the Russian state with the Kazan Khanate. Until 1521, under the khans Mohammed Edin and Shah Ali, Kazan was a vassal of Moscow. However, in 1521, the Kazan nobility expelled the protege of Vasily III of Kasimov Khan Shah-Ali and invited the Crimean prince Sahib-Girey to the throne. Relations between Moscow and Kazan have deteriorated sharply. The Kazan Khanate essentially abandoned obedience to the Russian state. Both sides began using military force. The Kazan raids resumed, that is, military campaigns on Russian lands, organized by the top of the Kazan Khanate to capture booty and prisoners, as well as an open demonstration of force. In 1521, Kazan military leaders took part in the great Crimean campaign against Moscow; Kazan troops made 5 raids on the eastern regions of the Russian state (Meshchera, Nizhny Novgorod, Totma, Uneka). Kazan raids were also undertaken in 1522 (two) and in 1523. To defend the eastern border, in 1523 the Russian fortress Vasilsursk was built on the Volga at the mouth of the Sura. However, Moscow did not abandon its attempts to restore its control over the Kazan Khanate and return the obedient Shah Ali Khan to the Kazan throne. For this purpose, a number of campaigns were made against Kazan (in 1524, 1530 and 1532), however, they were not successful. True, in 1532 Moscow still managed to place Khan Jan-Ali (Yenaley), Shah-Ali’s brother, on the Kazan throne, but in 1536, as a result of another palace conspiracy, he was killed, and Safa-Girey became the new ruler of the Kazan Khanate - representative of the Crimean dynasty, hostile to the Russian state.

Relations with the Crimean Khanate also worsened. Moscow's ally, Khan Mengli-Girey, died in 1515, but even during his lifetime, his sons actually got out of the control of their father and independently carried out raids on Russian lands. In 1521, Khan Magmet-Girey inflicted a serious defeat on the Russian army, besieged Moscow (Vasily III was even forced to flee the city), later Ryazan was besieged, and only the skillful actions of the Ryazan governor Khabar Simsky (who successfully used artillery) forced the khan to retreat back to Crimea. Since that time, relations with Crimea have become one of the most pressing problems of Russian foreign policy for centuries.

The reign of Vasily III was almost marked by a dynastic crisis. Vasily’s marriage to Solomonia Saburova was childless for more than 20 years. The dynasty of Moscow princes could be interrupted, especially since Vasily III forbade his brothers Yuri and Andrei to marry. In 1526, he forcibly tonsured Solomonia into a monastery and the next year married Princess Elena Vasilyevna Glinskaya, who was half her husband’s age. In 1530, the fifty-year-old Grand Duke gave birth to a son, Ivan, the future Tsar Ivan IV.

Russian state under Vasily III

In the first half of the 16th century. Russia has experienced an economic boom. Our land, the Russian scribe wrote, was freed from the yoke and began to renew itself, as if it had passed from winter to quiet spring; she again achieved her ancient greatness, piety and tranquility, as under the first Grand Duke Vladimir. The prosperity of the country was greatly facilitated by the cessation of Tatar raids. A long war between the Great Horde and Crimea, which fell into vassal dependence on Ottoman Empire, absorbed the forces of the Tatar world. A Moscow protege has established himself in Kazan. The governors of Ivan III made campaigns beyond the Urals and into Siberia. The alliance between Russia and Crimea lasted for several decades, until the Crimeans destroyed the remnants of the Great Horde.

Peace on the southern borders gave Ivan III a free hand. In 1501, his commanders defeated the Livonian Order. As soon as the Russian regiments began the siege of Smolensk, the knightly army attacked Pskov. Unlike Novgorod, Pskov had neither a vast territory nor a large population. The Pskov “republic” could not maintain significant military forces and relied on the help of Moscow. The war with the Order weakened the forces of the “republic”.

A kind of dual power has long been established in Pskov. The prince sent from Moscow ruled the city together with the Pskov veche. This management system was fraught with frequent misunderstandings and conflicts. In the eyes of Vasily III, the procedure for “inviting” a prince from Moscow to the Pskov table had long ago turned into an empty formality, and he decided to abolish it. The Moscow authorities sent Prince I.M. Repnya-Obolensky to Pskov. The Pskov chronicler wrote down with irritation that the boyar Repnya settled in the city without any invitation from Mr. Pskov - “he came to Pskov without duty and sat down to reign.” The priests did not even have time to meet him “from the cross” in the field. Not without ridicule, the Pskovites nicknamed the prince Naidena - a foundling. The Pskovites “found” him right in the princely residence. Repnya was “fierce with people” and quickly brought matters to a break. Having provoked a conflict, Vasily III began to prepare the conquest of Pskov. In the fall of 1509, he arrived in Novgorod at the head of a large army. Having learned about the sovereign's campaign, the Pskov veche sent mayors and boyars to Novgorod. Along with the gifts, they presented the Grand Duke with a complaint against Repnya. Vasily III tried to lull the vigilance of the Pskovites. He assured the ambassadors that he would “grace and harrow his fatherland” Pskov. The Pskovites did not know any guilt behind themselves and easily abandoned suspicions about the threat of Moscow conquest. Following the mayors and merchant elders, “black people” and other complainants flocked to Novgorod. All this corresponded to the secret intentions of the sovereign. Encouraging the petitioners, Vasily III announced: “You, pitiful people, are saving up for the Baptism of the Lord, and I am giving justice to you all.” At the appointed time, all Pskov residents, under pain of execution, were ordered to appear at the sovereign’s court. The “best people” were invited into the wards, the “young people” were left to wait under the windows. In the ward, the Pskov residents fell into the hands of armed guards. They were told without further words: “Take him, de, to be God and the Grand Duke.” The rest of the Pskovites were enumerated and handed over to Moscow landowners, owners of Novgorod courtyards. If you believe the Moscow chronicles, the sovereign intervened in Pskov affairs in order to protect the people, “before there were riots and resentment and violence in Pskov by black, petty people from the Pskov mayors and boyars.” Meanwhile, the Pskov veche, which expressed the opinion of the people, complained primarily about the violence of the Moscow authorities in the person of Repni.

The unrest in Pskov began after the lawless arrest of Pskov elected officials and petitioners. Having gathered at the meeting, the people “began to think about whether to put up a shield against the sovereign, or whether to lock themselves in the city.” Pskov had powerful fortifications and could withstand a long siege. Since the elected authorities of Pskov were held hostage in Novgorod, the veche dispersed without making any decision. Meanwhile, Vasily III ordered negotiations to begin with the arrested Pskov ambassadors. The Pskovites had the experience of Novgorod before their eyes, and it was not difficult for them to imagine their future. But they were under guard and had to submit to force. The Moscow boyars notified the mayors that the sovereign intended to abolish the veche order in Pskov and introduce viceroyal administration. If these demands were accepted, the authorities guaranteed the Pskov boyars the inviolability of their property. Negotiations with those arrested were apparently informal in nature and were not widely publicized. Therefore, the Pskov chronicles do not report anything about the capitulation of the mayors. The report on the negotiations ended up only on the pages of the Moscow chronicle.

Having imposed his will on the posadniks, Vasily III immediately sent a clerk to Pskov. The Pskov veche met for the last time. The clerk demanded that the veche bell be removed, that elected offices be abolished, and that two governors be accepted in the city. At the same time, he did not mention a word about the guarantees received by the Pskov boyars in Novgorod. The veche expressed complete submission to the sovereign. At dawn on January 13, 1510, the veche bell was thrown to the ground. Observing this scene, the Pskovites “began to cry for their antiquity and their own will.”

Arriving in Pskov, Vasily III announced to the boyars, merchants and living people that they must immediately leave the city because of the “many complaints” against them from the Pskovites. 300 families were evicted. The estates confiscated from them were distributed on the estate to Moscow service people. The Pskovites were expelled from the Middle City, where there were more than 1,500 households. A thousand Novgorod landowners settled in empty courtyards. The citadel, surrounded by a powerful fortress wall, turned into a stronghold of Moscow rule. The Pskovites helped Moscow crush Novgorod. Now they had to share the same share. The thriving city has gone through difficult days. Many townspeople scattered to the villages in search of food. A lot of time passed before the wanderers returned to their native places: “they began to accumulate in Pskov, as they were dispersed.”

The defeat of the sons of Akhmat Khan by the Crimeans changed the situation on the southern Russian borders. With the disappearance of the Great Horde, the alliance between Russia and Crimea lost ground. The Crimean Khanate tried to extend its influence to the Muslim yurts of the Lower Volga region. The Polish king Sigismund began the war with Russia in alliance with Crimea, Kazan and the Livonian Order. The war was short-lived and ended with the conclusion of an “eternal peace” in 1508. The continued invasions of the Crimeans into Russian borders gave Vasily III a reason to resume the war with Poland. In 1512–1513 Moscow governors unsuccessfully besieged Smolensk twice. In 1514, the siege of Smolensk was resumed. This time the campaign of the Russian army was preceded by secret negotiations with the Russian population of Smolensk and the command of the mercenary companies defending the fortress. The initiative for negotiations belonged to the Lithuanian magnate Prince M. Glinsky. He fled to Moscow after an unsuccessful uprising against King Sigismund in 1508. With a small detachment, Glinsky arrived in the vicinity of Smolensk in April 1514, a month before the arrival of the main forces. Heavy artillery began shelling the fortress on July 29, and on July 30 the city raised a white flag. The Smolensk governor G. Sologub and the bishop appeared in the Grand Duke’s tent for negotiations. But there they were immediately arrested and put “as guards.” Meanwhile, Glinsky completed negotiations with the mercenary commanders. They were offered honorable terms of surrender. Finally, the Smolensk boyar M. Pivov came to Vasily III with a delegation that included Smolensk boyars, townspeople and black people. In advance, on July 10, the autocrat approved the text of the charter to Smolensk. The Smolensk delegation familiarized itself with the letter and declared their transfer to Moscow citizenship. The charter of 1514 assigned the Smolensk boyars their estates and privileges. Smolensk townspeople traditionally paid a tax of one hundred rubles to the Lithuanian treasury. The charter guaranteed the abolition of this exaction.

On July 30, the fortress opened its gates to the Moscow governors. Residents of Smolensk were registered and sworn in, the zholners were rewarded and released to Poland. Vasily III undertook to transfer Smolensk to Glinsky, but did not fulfill his promise. Then Glinsky started secret negotiations with the king and promised him to return the city. On the advice of Glinsky, Sigismund sent Hetman K. Ostrogsky with the main forces to Orsha. Glinsky himself was preparing to move to the royal camp to participate in the Lithuanian campaign against Smolensk. In the battle of Orsha, two noble Moscow commanders substituted and lost the battle. Ostrogsky's success emboldened Moscow's opponents in Smolensk. The local bishop notified the Lithuanians that he would open the fortress gates for them as soon as they launched an assault. However, the plot failed. The first to be arrested was Glinsky, who never managed to get to Orsha. The bishop was then taken into custody. His accomplices, the Smolensk boyars, were hanged on the walls of the fortress. Having 6 thousand soldiers, Ostrozhsky did not dare to attack.

The “Troubles” in Smolensk led to the fact that the charter lost its validity. All mentions of her were carefully erased from Moscow documents and chronicles. Many Smolensk boyars and nobles, who were not at all involved in the conspiracy, lost their estates and were resettled to the districts outside Moscow, where they received estates.

The protracted war between Russia and Poland has enormously strengthened the military position of Crimea. After the death of Mengli-Girey, a longtime ally of Ivan III, Muhammad-Girey established himself on the throne. The Horde began to pursue a more active foreign policy. The Crimean invasions caused great devastation to the Russian and Lithuanian lands. In 1519, the Crimean Horde defeated the army of Hetman K. Ostrozhsky. A year later, Crimea and Poland agreed on a joint military action against Russia.

For three years, the Kazan throne was occupied by Shigaley. In the spring of 1521, the local nobility overthrew him, transferring the throne to the Crimean Gireys. The Moscow governor was robbed and expelled from Kazan, many of his servants were killed. The coup in Kazan accelerated subsequent events. Muhammad-Girey received no help from the Turks. But an experienced Lithuanian commander and a detachment took part in the Crimean raid on Rus'.

In the summer of 1521, the Khan bypassed the Russian regiments assembled on the Oka River in Serpukhov and broke through to the outskirts of Moscow.

The invasion took Vasily III by surprise. Having entrusted the defense of Moscow to his son-in-law, the Tatar prince Peter, Grand Duke fled to Volokolamsk. On the way, as the Austrian envoy wrote, he had to hide in a haystack. Waiting for the arrival of troops from Novgorod and Pskov, the Grand Duke ordered negotiations to begin with the Crimean Khan. Treasurer Yu. D. Trakhaniot, who was with the treasury in the capital, sent rich gifts to the Crimean Khan. Having accepted the gifts, Muhammad-Girey promised to lift the siege and go to the Horde, “if Vasily undertakes by letter to be an eternal tributary of the king (Crimean Khan - R.S.), as his father and ancestors were.” The Crimeans stood near Moscow for two weeks, and during this time the required letter was delivered to the “tsar”. The reliability of the above news from S. Herberstein is beyond doubt. In the Russian Discharge Records it is noted that during the Tatar attack on Moscow, “then the Crimean Tsar took the letter given to the Grand Duke, as a tribute to the Grand Duke and an exit to be given to him.”

According to the assumption of G.V. Vernadsky, the letter of citizenship was drawn up not by Vasily III, but by the governor of Moscow, Tsarevich Peter. The Moscow sovereigns did not sign their decrees and letters. The signature was replaced by the state seal, the custodian of which was the treasurer Yu. Trakhaniot. The prince and the treasurer could issue a charter in the absence of the sovereign. But without the knowledge and permission of Vasily III, who was located not far from Moscow, they would hardly have decided to take such a step. The compliance of Vasily III was explained by the fact that the situation in the Moscow region was becoming more and more complicated. The governors stationed in Serpukhov bickered among themselves instead of acting. The young and less experienced governor, Prince D. F. Belsky, refused to listen to the advice of senior governor I. M. Vorotynsky and others. Vasily III sent his brother Prince Andrey with specific regiments to Moscow. But the Tatars prevented the Russians from uniting their forces. Having received the required letter from Vasily III, Muhammad-Girey went to Ryazan. During their stop near Ryazan, the Tatars traded with the Russians for several weeks. Nobles and wealthy people could ransom their loved ones from captivity. Muhammad-Girey informed the Ryazan governor about the letter issued to him by Vasily III, and demanded that he supply the horde with food from the reserves stored in the fortress. The voivode asked to show him the sovereign's charter. As soon as the document was delivered to the fortress, the Ryazan people drove the Tatars away from the city walls with cannon fire. Following this, the horde left for the steppes on August 12, 1521.

Vasily III recognized himself as a tributary of Crimea, which meant the restoration of the Horde's power over Russia. But new Horde yoke lasted several weeks. Khan Mohammed-Girey was killed by the Nogais. His successor demanded that Moscow pay the “exit” in the amount of approximately 1,800 rubles. However, his advances were decisively rejected by the Russians.

Vasily III tried to relieve himself of responsibility for the defeat and shift the blame to the boyars. He approximately punished the governor I.M. Vorotynsky by imprisoning him.

One of the most ancient principalities of North-Eastern Rus' was the Ryazan principality. By the middle of the 15th century. it fell into the orbit of Moscow's influence. Ryazan Prince Vasily was brought up at the Moscow court and was married to the sister of Ivan III. His grandson, Prince Ivan Ivanovich, sought to restore independence to his principality. According to some reports, he tried to find support in Crimea. The threat of a Crimean attack sealed the fate of the last of the Ryazan Grand Dukes. In 1520, Vasily III lured his cousin to Moscow and subjected him to house arrest. The prince was accused of matchmaking with the khan's daughter. During the days of the Crimean attack, Ivan Ivanovich fled from Moscow to Ryazan. They speculate about his conspiracy with the Tatars. Be that as it may, Muhammad-Girey, having left the outskirts of Moscow, made a quick transition to the walls of Ryazan. Moscow governors steadfastly defended Ryazan, and the prince had to head to Lithuania, where his life ended. Ryazan was annexed to the possessions of the Moscow crown. The unification of the Great Russian lands was completed.

Basic principles domestic policy Vasily III was formed at the time when he received Novgorod the Great from his father to rule. The struggle for the throne entered a decisive phase, and all the prince’s thoughts were focused on strengthening his military support - the Novgorod local militia. To do this, he tried to expand the fund of state land property formed in Novgorod. By the end of the 15th century. 964 sons of boyars received estates in Novgorod. At the beginning of the 16th century. 1,400 boyar children already served in the Novgorod militia. Having overthrown Dmitry, Vasily III did not abandon the policy developed in the domain and extended it to the entire state.

The formation of the noble military service class, dependent on the throne, had a profound impact on the development of the Russian state as a whole. Rus' was moving further and further away from the West. According to R. Crami, in the West the monarch and his vassals were bound by an agreement, in Russia the monarch subjugated the nobles with compulsory service. The stated concept contradicts the facts. The Moscow autocrats did not have sufficient power to forcefully impose on the nobility and nobility the principle of compulsory service from the land. Like Western sovereigns, they could not do without a “social contract.” The basis for the agreement was the violent and rapid restructuring of the land ownership system, which brought enormous benefits to the Moscow nobility. For centuries, patrimony dominated in Rus', providing the old boyars with a certain independence in relation to the sovereign. The expropriation of the Novgorod boyars changed the whole situation. Novgorod and Pskov were not inferior in territory to the former Principality of Moscow. Therefore, the transformation of the boyars confiscated here into the property of the state - the estate - immediately provided state property with a leading place in the land tenure system. In the 16th century the fund of manorial lands continued to grow rapidly. As a result, the treasury was able to allocate state property to not individuals, not individual groups, but the entire class of Moscow service people. The fund of confiscated lands was so large, and the number of Moscow nobles was so limited, that the authorities even gave estates to fighting serfs from the disbanded boyar retinues. With an abundance of land, a system developed in which the treasury began to allocate estates to the children and grandchildren of nobles as soon as they reached adulthood and entered the service. Having turned into a tradition, this order did not receive legislative registration, which was typical for the Muscovite kingdom and its jurisprudence. The essence of the “social contract” was that the treasury took upon itself the obligation to provide the nobles with the land necessary for their service. In turn, the nobles agreed to compulsory service.

The distribution of estates did not lead to the equalization of the aristocracy and the ordinary nobility. In addition to the estates, the nobility received large estates, many times larger than the estates of the district boyar children, for whom the estate often remained the only source of income.

A necessary condition for the extension of the local system to the central districts of the Moscow State was the creation there of a large fund of state lands. The treasury replenished this fund at the expense of “black” volosts, secular estates, etc. Ivan III and Vasily III issued “codes” (law or practical orders) that the patrimonial owners of Tver, Ryazan, Obolensk, Beloozero should not sell their estates to “out-of-towners” and “they were not allowed to enter the monasteries without a report (special permission from the monarch”). Members of the three largest princely houses - Suzdal, Yaroslavl and Starodubsky were forbidden to sell hereditary estates to anyone “without the knowledge of the Grand Duke.” Only the direct heirs of the deceased prince could acquire a princely estate. It is believed that the “codes” of Ivan III and his son were aimed “at preserving the remnants of appanage antiquity” (V.B. Kobrin). But it’s hard to agree with this. The ban on landowners selling estates “without reporting” and limiting the circle of buyers of estates placed land transactions under the control of the monarch. Any violation of the “report” procedure to the sovereign led to the alienation of the estate to the treasury. In the central districts, the state avoided mass confiscations of boyar estates, but the government’s intrusion into the sphere of private (patrimonial) property began. The Treasury set out to assert its exclusive right to the heritage of appanage antiquity - the richest princely and boyar estates.

Ivan III started, and Vasily III completed the formation of the local system in Russia. The basis of the system was the state land ownership. Violence like characteristic Moscow political culture and the creation of a colossal fund of state lands sharply strengthened the autocratic tendencies of the monarchy. The Austrian ambassador S. Herberstein gave the new Russian order a devastating assessment. Vasily III, according to the ambassador, far surpasses all the monarchs of the world in power, he oppresses all his subjects equally with cruel slavery, he took away all the fortresses from the princes and other nobility.

In relation to appanage princes, Vasily III pursued the same policy as Ivan III. The eldest of the appanage princes, Andrei Bolshoi Uglitsky, was killed in prison in 1494. Vasily III not only did not free his cousins- the children of Andrei Bolshoi, but kept them “shackled” for many years in the Pereyaslavl prison. Vasily III took away the inheritance and took into custody Prince Dmitry Shemyachich, the ruler of the Novgorod-Seversky principality. The autocrat repeatedly took away inheritances from the Vorotynskys, Volskys, and Glinskys.

Following tradition, the Moscow sovereign replenished his Duma with representatives of the most aristocratic families. But the rights of the appanage and other aristocracies were steadily limited. The right of departure, based on a centuries-old tradition, was finally destroyed not by a legislative act, but by the practice of sovereign opals and crucifixion records. The princes, suspected of intending to leave Russia, promised under oath to faithfully serve the sovereign and nominated numerous guarantors.

Having usurped power against the will of the Boyar Duma, Vasily III retained distrust of the powerful Moscow aristocracy throughout his life. He did not show leniency even to relatives suspected of treason or insufficiently submissive. Under Ivan III, Danila Kholmsky, who came from the appanage princes of Tver, gained the glory of the conqueror Akhmat Khan. His son Vasily Kholmsky married in 1500 the sister of Vasily III, who, however, soon died. Due to his relationship with the grand ducal family and the merits of his father, Prince Vasily could lay claim to the highest post in the Duma. However, kinship with the overthrown Tver branch of the dynasty inspired suspicion in the autocrat. In 1509, Dmitry the grandson was killed in prison. A year before this, V. Kholmsky was arrested and exiled to Beloozero, where he soon died.

Vasily III had confidence in the youngest of the brothers, Andrei. With him he made the Pskov campaign. The older brothers Yuri, Dmitry and Semyon were ordered to remain in their inheritances and thus lost the reason to demand participation in the division of the conquered land. Brother Semyon was preparing to flee to Lithuania in 1511, and only the metropolitan’s intercession saved him from disgrace and prison.

Ivan III matched the heir Vasily with the Danish princess Elizabeth, asking for help in choosing a bride for his daughter, the Grand Duchess of Lithuania. The efforts did not bring success. The Orthodox kingdoms in the Balkans were destroyed by the Turkish conquest, and marriage with a heterodox woman was considered undesirable. In the end, the Greeks from Sophia’s entourage suggested a way out for the prince, citing examples from the history of the Byzantine imperial house. They advised conducting a census of brides throughout the state and choosing a bride for the heir and co-ruler of Ivan III at the bridesmaid ceremony. There were rumors that Vasily's adviser Yu. Trakhaniot hoped to marry him to his own daughter. A marriage with her would have completely turned the Moscow dynasty into a “Greek” one, which hardly added to her popularity. The question of marriage was being decided at a time when Ivan III was paralyzed, and supporters of Dmitry the grandson did not abandon their intentions to return the Moscow crown to him.

In the summer of 1505, scribes “began to elect princesses and boyars.” 500 girls were brought to Moscow to participate in the shows. Vasily III chose Solomonia Saburova. The Saburovs were known to Vasily due to their service in his Novgorod inheritance. The bride's father, Yu. K. Saburov, served as governor of Korela, which was part of the Novgorod appanage of Vasily III. Having lost their hereditary estates, the whole nest of Saburovs moved to estates in Novgorod. The bride's relatives did not belong to the aristocracy, and therefore could not lay claim to the boyar title. According to some reports, Solomonia’s father held the rank of okolnik.

The marriage was unsuccessful; the couple had no children. By right of seniority, the throne after the death of childless Vasily should have been taken by the appanage prince Yuri. Yuri's claims caused growing concern in the grand ducal family. In 1523, Vasily III for the first time began to “think” with the boyars about his divorce from his barren wife.

The divorce was contrary to Moscow traditions, and the clergy did not hide their disapproval of the monarch's actions. The latter had to turn to the learned Athonite monks for a blessing. But the monks spoke out against the divorce being prepared. Having secured the support of Metropolitan Daniel, Vasily III on November 23. 1525 ordered the beginning of a search for the witchcraft of Solomonia. Brother Grand Duchess testified that she kept a fortune teller and sprinkled her husband’s “ports” with enchanted water, apparently to return his love. A week later, the culprit was forcibly tonsured a nun and sent to the Pokrovsky nunnery in Suzdal.

After the divorce, the monarch married Princess Elena Glinskaya. According to the observation of A. A. Zimin, the second marriage divided the life of Vasily III into two periods. During the period of marriage with Solomonia, symbolizing a certain political program, the sovereign relied on the circle of Old Moscow boyars, “who expressed the interests of wide circles of the nobility.” The marriage with Glinskaya brought with it a sharp turn in the political line of Vasily III, which led to the rise of the princely aristocracy. With all the importance of marriages in the grand ducal family, their influence on political development should not be exaggerated. Despite her princely title, Glinskaya did not belong to the circle of the ruling aristocracy of Russia. She was an orphan, and her uncle M. Glinsky was sentenced to life imprisonment for high treason. After the wedding of Vasily III and Glinskaya, her uncle was under arrest and supervision for another 1 year.

Following the divorce, Vasily III ordered a list of brides to be drawn up, but at the same time to search for their relationship, “so that the girl would not be from the Shchenyatev and Pleshcheev tribe.” The ban on participation in shows extended to families belonging to the first-class Moscow nobility. According to his father, Shchenyatev came from the Patrikeev family, and according to his mother, from the princes of Suzdal. The Pleshcheevs stood out among the old Moscow untitled nobility. The circle of kinship between these two families was very wide. Thus, already at the first stage of the show, the attitude of the sovereign towards his nobility was revealed. It is not possible to confirm with facts the thesis about the strengthening of the aristocracy at the end of the life of Vasily III. “The Moscow sovereign,” wrote the Austrian ambassador S. Herberstein in his Notes, “does not trust his nobility and makes an exception only for the children of boyars, that is, noble persons with a more modest income; such persons, oppressed by their poverty, he usually receives annually to himself and supports him by assigning a salary.” The widespread distribution of estates helped overcome the crisis caused by the process of fragmentation of the boyars and the impoverishment of the children of the boyars - the lowest layer of landowners. The development of the state estate land fund remained the core of Vasily III's policy throughout his life.

The reign of Vasily III led to the strengthening of autocratic orders in Russia. The courtier of Ivan III, I. Beklemishev, condemnedly said that Vasily III did not show respect for antiquity, and did business not with the Boyar Duma, but with elected advisers in his personal office. “Now, dei,” said Beklemishev, “our sovereign, locked up, is doing all sorts of things at the bedside.” Under Ivan III, Beklemishev himself served “at the bedside,” in other words, in the personal office of the sovereign. But under Vasily III, the importance of the said office grew enormously. The main persons who carried out affairs in the chancellery were not the highest titled dignitaries of the state, but the sovereign's advisers, noble in the eyes of natural princes, like M. Yu. Zakharyin and the son of the boyar Yu. Shigona-Podzhogin. The collapse of the traditional system foreshadowed the death of Russia. “Which land,” said the political freethinker, “rearranges its customs, and that land does not last long, but here we have the old customs of the great prince, otherwise he expects good for us.”

By the 16th century The monasteries owned vast, prosperous patrimonial estates in the center and north of Russia. The secularization of these estates would allow the Moscow authorities to finally form a comprehensive fund of state lands in the center of the state, which could be used to provide estates for all members of the Moscow court. Social thought could not help but respond to the needs of the time.

The Church Council of 1503 decisively rejected projects for the secularization of lands near Moscow monasteries. Nevertheless, after the aforementioned council, Russian “non-acquisitiveness” entered its heyday. The monks collected taxes from the peasants, bargained, and indulged in usury. Excessive enrichment of monasteries, the practice of donating estates and treasures to monasteries gave rise to renewed debate about the nature of monasticism.

Russian “non-covetousness” owed its emergence to two elders - Nil Sorsky and Vassian Patrikeev. Neil Sorsky focused on issues of moral improvement of the individual. A student of Nile Vassian, in the world Prince Vasily Kosoy Patrikeev, made a brilliant career at the court of his uncle Ivan III. At the age of 30, he experienced disgrace and was forcibly tonsured at the Kirill-Belozersky Monastery. The monastic prince succeeded in studying the Holy Scriptures and over time became one of the best church writers in Russia. But, having put on his cassock, he continued to look at the world through the eyes of an experienced politician.

The appointments of church hierarchs very accurately reflected the success of non-covetous people in the first years of the reign of Basil III. In 1506, Elder Varlaam was summoned from the Trans-Volga deserts and appointed archimandrite of the capital's Simonov Monastery. In May 1509, the Grand Duke ordered the removal of Serapion from the Novgorod archbishopric. On April 30, 1511, Simon was ordained Metropolitan. Both saints were directly responsible for the failure of the government's project to secularize church lands at the council of 1503.

The resignation of two senior hierarchs led to a complete renewal of church leadership. On August 3, 1511, Simon's Archimandrite Varlaam, known for his closeness to non-covetous people, became metropolitan. Mindful of the sharp clash between Ivan III and Gennady, Vasily III forbade the holy council to send a new archbishop to Novgorod. The Novgorod department remained vacant for seventeen years.

Vassian Patrikeev was on friendly terms with Varlaam. It was Varlaam who in 1509 summoned the prince to Moscow and settled him in the Simonov Monastery. Over time, Patrikeev became one of the most influential persons at the grand ducal court. The scribe Mikhail Medovartsev characterized the meaning of the prince-monk this way: he is “a great temporary man, with the great prince of his neighbor.” Taking advantage of the patronage of the monarch and the support of the head of the church, Vassian made sharp attacks on Joseph of Volotsky. Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery broke with the appanage sovereign and came under the patronage of Vasily III. But this did not change the sovereign’s attitude towards Sanin. In 1512, Joseph complained to the Grand Duke's butler that he was subjected to "blasphemy and slander" by Vassian, but could not justify himself due to the sovereign's prohibition. In conclusion, the abbot humbly asked the boyar to “sorrow” Vasily III for him.

The debate between Vassian and Joseph led to renewed disputes about the monastic villages. Composed at a later time, the story “The Debate of Joseph” sets out the following dialogue between two famous church figures. Sanin allegedly reproached Vassian for teaching the sovereign to take away “villages” from monasteries and churches. Vassian answered him with the words: “This, Joseph, do not lie to me, that I command the Grand Duke to take away from the monasteries of the village and from the secular churches.”

The Debate was a monument to journalism. The tendentiousness of this work was reflected not in the fabrication of information about Vassian’s speech against monastic land ownership, but in the coverage of the nature of this speech. Non-covetous people never “ordered” the sovereign to take away church lands for the treasury. Those who retired from the world and took a monastic vow, Neil argued, “are not worthy of having villages.” Vassian Patrikeev followed the teachings of his teacher. The most characteristic feature of Russian non-covetousness was the rejection of violence as a means of correcting monasticism. Secularization could become a saving measure only when the monks themselves came to realize its necessity.

The Russian Church has maintained close ties with the Orthodox Greek monasteries on Mount Athos. Under Vasily III, Moscow scribes worked to correct and translate liturgical books. To help them, the educated theologian Maxim (Mikhail) the Greek, invited to Moscow by the Grand Duke, arrived from Athos. Maxim came from the noble Byzantine family of Trivolis. In 1492 he went to study in Italy and spent ten years there. In Florence, he met the outstanding philosopher Marsilino Ficino, witnessed the fall of the Medici tyranny and the triumph of Savonarola. After his death, Maxim left to complete his education in Venice. In Italy he converted to Catholicism, and upon returning to Athos he returned to Orthodoxy. In the person of Maxim, educated Russia for the first time encountered an encyclopedist who had acquired deep and multifaceted knowledge at Italian universities. The principles of Renaissance philological science, which guided Maxim in his translations, were the most advanced for their time.

While in Russia, Maxim wrote many original compositions. His interpretations of ancient church writers became one of the few sources from which Russian people could draw a variety of information, including ancient mythology.

Maxim the Greek did not allow himself to be drawn into the strife that tormented the Russian Church. This allowed him to translate church works and correct old Russian books for many years.

At the beginning of the 16th century. supporters of church union did not stop their activities in Moscow. One of them was the physician Nikola Bulev, invited by the Greeks from Rome. According to the testimony of the monks of the Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery. Bulev wrote a letter to Joseph Volotsky's brother Vassian. In the letter, he defended the idea of ​​unity of faith and “led” true Russian Orthodoxy “to the Latin union.” Counting on the support of the Greeks, the life physician asked Maxim the Greek to outline the history of the division of the Christian Church in order to enlighten the Russians. The philosopher had the highest opinion of Boolean's amazing wisdom, but sharply condemned his adherence to Catholicism.

Dmitry Maly Trakhaniot enjoyed great influence at the Moscow court. His son Yuri Trakhaniot made a brilliant career in Moscow. As treasurer, he headed the grand ducal treasury, one of the main government departments. In addition, the Greek became a printer, or custodian state seal. The Austrian ambassador called him the main adviser to Vasily III, “a man of outstanding learning and versatile experience.” Yu. Trakhaniot inherited from his father his sympathy for the union. The ambassador of the Prussian order, D. Schonberg, had long conversations with the treasurer about the union of churches. From these conversations, the ambassador gained the impression that the Russians agreed to a union with the Catholic Church. Schonberg immediately reported his impressions to Rome. The imperial ambassador Francesco da Collo then talked with N. Bulev and also concluded that Moscow was ready to accept the union.

The Pope in 1519 conveyed to Vasily III an offer to accept the title of king and join the church union with the entire land. The Moscow Grand Duke rejected the offer.

Vasily III consciously tried to create in the West the idea that Russia was ready to join the anti-Turkish league. At the same time, he actively worked for peace and an alliance with the Porte. the main objective his diplomatic game was to use the alliance with the empire for a war with Poland. But surrounded by the Grand Duke there were people who sincerely wanted rapprochement with the Catholic West. Among them were the Greeks.

The Moscow hierarchs forgave the Greeks for their sympathy for the idea of ​​uniting the Christian world, while they saw the Catholics as allies in the cause of eradicating Judaism in Europe. After the massacre of heretics, the situation changed. During the reign of Vasily III, cultural ties with Italy were increasingly reduced, and interest in the achievements of the Western world fell. The planned turn towards the West never took place.

The position of the Greeks in Moscow was somewhat ambiguous. According to tradition, Moscow scribes continued to see them as their teachers. At the same time, supporters of the national church refused to submit to the authority of the Patriarch of Constantinople.

The idea of ​​the superiority of Russian Orthodoxy over Greek gained many supporters in Russia after the fall of the Byzantine Empire. In 1514–1521 The monk of the Pskov Eliazar monastery Philotheus addressed Vasily III with an important message. Following the thesis about the divinely established unity of the entire Christian world, Philotheus argued that the first world center was old Rome, followed by new Rome - Constantinople, and in Lately in their place became the third Rome - Moscow. “Two Romes have fallen (fallen),” Philotheus asserted, “and the third stands, but there will not be a fourth.” Philotheus’s concept was based on the idea of ​​a certain “indestructible Roman kingdom” that developed in the era of Augustus, to which the actions and earthly life Christ. “Great Rome” retained its physical existence, but lost its spiritual essence, being captivated by Catholicism. The Greek kingdom became the stronghold of Orthodoxy, but it fell under the rule of the “infidels.” The collapse of the two kingdoms cleared the way for the Moscow Orthodox kingdom. The idea of ​​the global role of Moscow in the mouth of Filofey had more of a sacred than an imperial meaning (N.V. Sinitsyna).

In a message to the sovereign clerk Misyur Munekhin, Philotheus clarified his idea as follows: the Greek kingdom was “ruined” due to the fact that the Greeks “betrayed the Orthodox Greek faith in Latinism.” The Russian court was impressed by discussions about the exclusive historical mission of Moscow. But it is not possible to find evidence that Filofei’s theories acquired the character of Moscow official doctrine. Basil III was Greek on his mother's side and was proud of his kinship with the Byzantine imperial dynasty. The Greeks close to the grand ducal court met the attacks on the Byzantine church with understandable indignation. Vasily III's mother was raised in Italy. Vasily himself, not alien to the spirit of Greek-Italian culture, patronized Maxim the Greek and encouraged his work in correcting Russian books. Doubts about the orthodoxy of the Greek faith put him in a delicate position.

According to the observation of P. Pascal and V. Vodov, in “Russian Christianity” the version of Christian ideas and texts acquired a pronounced national character. Over the 500 years of its existence, Russian church culture inevitably had to acquire some original features. Another circumstance is no less significant. Initially, the Byzantine church followed the Studite Charter, which became the basis of the Russian one. However, in the XII–XIII centuries. In Byzantium, the Jerusalem Charter prevailed. The Greek metropolitans of Moscow, Photius and Cyprian, started a reform with the aim of introducing this charter in Rus', but did not complete the matter. The break with Constantinople after the Union of Florence perpetuated ancient Byzantine features in Russian church culture. Among other things, the old Slavic translations of Greek books contained many errors and distortions. It was not difficult for such learned theologians as Maxim the Greek, armed with the method of philological criticism, to detect these errors.

Among Moscow's educated monks, Maxim's activities initially aroused sympathy, especially since the Grand Duke himself patronized the Greek. However, in 1522, Maxim the Greek criticized the procedure for electing Moscow Metropolitan Daniel, which changed the attitude of the authorities towards him. After refusing to sign the Union of Florence, Russian metropolitans stopped going “for appointments” to Constantinople. Maxim could not come to terms with the blatant violation of the rights of the head of the universal Orthodox Church. Daniel was elected to the Moscow metropolis without the blessing of the patriarch, and therefore in violation of the law. Maxim the Greek argued that the decision of the Moscow Council not to accept appointments to the metropolitanate “from the Patriarch of Constantinople, like a filthy king in the region of godless Turks,” was erroneous. The learned monk refuted the idea of ​​the “destruction” of Greek Orthodoxy under the rule of the Turks and defended the idea of ​​​​the incorruptible purity of the Greek Church. The philosopher bluntly said that he considered the election of Daniel to be “disorderly.”

The learned Greeks tried to return the Russian Church to the Greek fold. The Orthodox saw in their harassment an attack on the independence of the Moscow church. Disputes about the “purity” and “violation” of the Greek faith prompted learned Greeks to speak more and more harshly about the “delusions” of the Muscovites and errors in their liturgical books. In turn, Moscow monks, defending the orthodoxy of old Russian books and rituals, began to accuse the Greeks of heresy.

Vasily III understood how important the support of the Moscow Orthodox Church was for him, and when life confronted him with the choice of being considered a supporter of Greek “charm” or the head of the true Orthodox kingdom, he did not hesitate for long. A certain Mark the Greek worked in Moscow as a doctor and merchant. Russian diplomats worked in Constantinople for the Sultan to allow his wife to travel to Rus'. Subsequently, Constantinople tried to rescue Mark himself from Russia. Mark conducted confidential conversations with the sovereign, from which it follows that he was one of the court doctors. According to S. Herberstein, Mark the Greek was the first to dare to make harsh remarks to Vasily III about the grave errors of Russian Orthodoxy. For this he was immediately taken into custody and disappeared without a trace. Y. Trachaniot also tried to defend the beauty of the Greek faith, and at the same time rescue Mark from trouble. For this he was removed from all positions. However, the monarch punished his favorite only for show. Very soon he was returned to the court and, due to his illness, was allowed to be carried on a stretcher “upstairs” to the sovereign’s rooms.

Metropolitan Varlaam did not show due firmness towards the Greeks. The Greeks declared the installation of Daniel illegal without the sanction of the patriarch, for which they were persecuted by the new metropolitan. Daniel first of all tried to get rid of Maxim the Philosopher. The Osifans learned about the dubious past of the Greek, who converted to Catholicism while studying in Italy. Among the zealots of Moscow antiquity, suspicions arose that Maxim was spoiling old Russian liturgical books. The Orthodox were convinced of the sanctity and immutability of every letter and line of these books. Perhaps the most famous calligrapher of his time, Mikhail Medovartsev, vividly conveyed the feeling of shock that he experienced when correcting church texts at the direction of Maxim: “I smoothed out (erased - R.S.) two lines, and I began to hesitate to look ahead... I can’t... smooth out , a great trembling caught me and horror attacked me.”

Joseph Sanin honored the spirit and letter of scripture. His students far surpassed their teacher in teaching. Metropolitan Daniel treated the activities of a foreign translator with extreme disapproval. During judicial trial Maxim admitted: “...he said that here in Rus' (sacred - R.S.) books are not straight, and the translators spoiled some books, they did not know how to translate them, and the scribes spoiled other books, otherwise they need to be translated.”

The Osifites tried at any cost to discredit the Greek in the eyes of the monarch. At the trial, three witnesses testified that the Philosopher was engaged in witchcraft: “With the magical tricks of the Hellenic you wrote vodka on your hands,” and when the sovereign was angry with the monk, “he will teach the Grand Duke not to answer, but against the Grand Duke he puts his hand, and the Prince the great anger towards him of that hour will quench and teach him to laugh.”

Maxim the Greek had a sharp mind, extensive theological knowledge and was fluent in the techniques of rhetoric. It is unknown how the trial would have ended if the judges had allowed a free debate. Through the efforts of Daniel, the debate at the council was reduced to petty quibbles in the spirit of Joseph Volotsky. Correcting the Colored Triodion by order of Vasily III, Maxim the Greek introduced a correction to the Ascension service. Instead of “Christ ascended into heaven and sat at the right hand of the Father,” he wrote: “having sat at the right hand of the Father.” The Orthodox taught that Christ sits eternally at the “right hand of the Father.” From the corrected text it followed that “graying” was a fleeting state in the past - “like Christ’s sitting at the right hand of the Father, passing and past.” During interrogations, Maxim defended his correction, denying “diversity” in the texts. But later he admitted the error of his writing and explained the matter by insufficient knowledge of the Russian language.