Ivan maybe not so terrible The western world always like to make assumptions on outsiders who governments are run differently. A clear example of this is the outlook on Ivan IV or more famously know as Ivan the terrible. This is from tales from him murdering many of people in very creatively gruesome ways. Also in ways travelers who met with Ivan IV the saw a man calling his elites as slaves and making them bow before him like he was some sort of God. In the Russian point of view Ivan is not seen in such a negative light. There are many of argument that historians ponder and argue. To fully understand why this is we need to first look at what his views and beliefs were during his reign, then secondly see what the actual government structure …show more content…
during his rule, and finally make the conclusion of why Russian people do not view Ivan IV as terrible. During Ivan IV time as Tsar he had many of changes and accomplishment that he could claim.
One change was that he was one of the first Tsars that actually believed in Christianity and that he was the judge against those who sinned. This comes from the fact that at a young age the Tsar was seeing boyars doing actions that he deemed as wrong. The Tsar did not agree with this from what we can see in a letter to his former friend, now trader prince Kurbsky “Then they attacked towns and towns and villages, tortured the people most cruelly, brought much misery upon them, and mercilessly pillaged the possessions of the inhabitants” (Zenkovsky 375). This is examples of before his power and how the boyars pillage the poor and slaughter the poor. This then brought change when Ivan IV took over. The boyars began to get judge like all the rest as stated in the same letter “Inspired by God, undertook to rule our own realm and, with the aid of Almighty God, we ruled our realm in peace and undisturbed.” (Zenkovsky 375). This is statement that show the Tsar a deeply religious man was going to change the dynamic of how socially people were treated. This is going to be to seeing how Ivan IV created new structures in the government. As well as how this change and shift or ruling would then change the outlook of the …show more content…
people. Some of the most impactful things that happened during Ivan IV reign usually centered around structures and reforms to how the Muscovy government was run. One of things Ivan was a real standing army, well close to a standing army. This was called the Streltsy; this was members of an army elite. He used this to govern his districts. This provide more order and stability to the realm in which he ruled. The Streltsy also allowed for Muscovy to expand boarders more effectively and reign in any rebellions that would arise like that in Novgorad. This kind of improvements is one that strengthen Muscovy as a nation. Another implementation that the Ivan IV created was the Oprichniki which was a police force used to control the boyars. They killed a lot and tortured a lot of people at which they please. After seeing this thought the Tsar realized it was enough and disbanded it. (Kaiser 153). Ivan IV also created a group named the oprichnina who was composed of boyars who were arrange in order of power not by money but birth right. (Kaiser 151). He used these men as almost a counseling committee were they told him opinions with him have the final say. The Tsar also using the birth right created a lot of in fighting between the boyars. This created space for less ideas of over throwing him because they were dealing among themselves. Also with this in fighting we can see a lot of death of collateral damage thus not hurting the Tsar credibility but the boyars. Also the Tsar did something smart to stop bad perception on his reign by creating local administration appointed by the people. So if they did not like who was governing over them that was not seen as his fault he would collect the money no matter who governed the local populous. Tsar Ivan IV to the Russian people is a very interesting person because even though he slaughtered many and was cruel he is seen as not that bad.
One aspect of this could be that he was deeply religious. Because if you look to the fact that he truly believed he was doing God’s work. This could have effected how people view him because he was deeply in bed in the church and when we see this in other past events usually people look past the things many leaders did. An example of this is the crusades, and how many people still argue that it was justified. Also looking back on how Muscovy was run during the period before Ivan IV took power we can see a lot less order and many deaths and fights between the boyars. While yes there was this during Ivan IV reign there was still more order or perception of order. When looking from the outside it is easy to assume that this was solely ran by one mad man but looking internally we can see that the boyars really did hold a lot of weight with what happened. This could be a reason why we view Ivan IV differently they do because it is easier to judge if you believe he had full power but if you add in the factor of other parties advising or doing atrocity too you start to not be so definite on his cruelty. Also the boyars dealt with most of the common folk or controlled or ruled over them more than he did. He also used the way they developed local administration with people choosing who governed over themselves. This shows to the people
that he would not be the cause of their grievances. Which I believe helps keep a positive outlook on the government. So it is safe to assume that because of the fact that he little contact with anyone outside of his people that Russian people would have an indifferent view on him. He while doing so much in reality the perception must have been the idea that he was not the cause of the problems. Ivan IV is widely known as Ivan the terrible to the western world. This is not the case if we look at it from the Russian perspective. We can conclude that a lot of factors played into to why Ivan IV did what he did, and why he was not viewed the same way as outsiders see him. He was very critical and aggressive towards boyars because of how the boyars acted when he was orphaned. Also this is why he changed governmental structures but not really the power of the boyars he just controlled them more. With the power the boyars still had they were scene more as the wrong doers to the people. Because of all these factors we can conclude this is why Russian people see Ivan as not that terrible.
Through these decrees we see how Russian social class is very stratified and there are more high official roles but more people in poverty. Russia still had to serfs until 1861. Also the state of the Russian economy was probably very limited to do the fact that there was no manufacturing company to provide for the empire. The Russian economy was very isolated and they go to areas where they can trade. With Russia’s subsistence economy, they were not able to specialize in other areas.
He was not popular with those who supported the Tsar because he made him look like a “weak autocrat unable to control his wife or hold onto his moral and political authority.” This weak, inept image of the Tsar created by Rasputin is supported by one of his ministers stating that “he did not like to send Rasputin away, for if Alexei died, in the eyes of the mother, he would have been the murderer of his own son.” This shows how great an impact Rasputin had over the Tsar and the
Both monarchs had a royal background and were put in power with high expectations to continue the stability that the country possessed. Citizens aspire for all government officials to keep the peoples best interest in mind. But sadly, due to Ivan’s brutal childhood, he grew up observing and learning from the mannerisms of the corrupt elite. Ivan predominately gained power through fear and with this tactic was the first to exercise a despotism in Russia. One example of this is the story of the peasants who disturbed Ivan during one of his retreats. They came to him to complain of their governor who they believed was unjust but Ivan was so upset that they had troubled him with such a petty matter that he punished them. The men had their hands tied behind their backs, boiling hot alcohol poured on their heads and then their beards lit on fire with a candle. Apprehension and terror were Ivan’s main tools for keeping his people under control. Despite his totalitarian state of mind, Ivan believed that his decisions were still best for the country and the only way to keep it safe was by leaving it in constant fear. Although not always the most rational, the czar still made the suitable choices to keep the kingdom together. Similar to Ivan, Charles was not always under the influence of his mental disability. During his 42
m taking place in Russia, some aspects of life stayed the same. Generally in Russia, there was some kind of repression occurring. Although the Duma was meant to represent the people of Russia, the tsar still had the power to simply over rule any decisions. Also, the average peasant life was not much better than pre emancipation as they were crippled by redemption payments. In conclusion, Russia changed immensely between 1856 and 1894.
I can use this source in my research project to defend why Czar Nicholas II is innocent to the abuse of power of the office of Czar.It reveales to me that even thouch Nicholas struggled with being the new Czar he truly did a lot for Russia to improve in learning abilities.Above all else, Nicholas loved Russia first and then his family; He thought the fate of the two was inseparable. No one knew the fault of the Romanov Dynasty better than him. Czar Nicholas sincerely felt his responsibility for the country, He thought that his destiny was within the country he ruled. I think it was really difficult for him but it was the only way to admit his mistakes and to say "sorry" to his people.
It was due to its great resources and population that Russia was able to compete with the other world powers in war and in commerce. Russia did not have the succession of leaders that supported industrialization like Japan did. Therefore, Russia, with Alexander II as czar, made few reforms to encourage industrialization. It was only through the multiple peasant revolts that Russia began to change. Both of these nations experienced changes in government, an increase in economic strength and transportation, and radical changes in the structure of the social classes.
Why does the story begin with the death? Most books use mystery in the beginning and announce the death at the end. But Tolstoy used a different chronology, he started with the death of Ivan and then uses a flashback to show the reader what really happened. Also he chooses to start with the death to make the story seem real and not fictional. At Ivan’s funeral, nobody seemed devastated by the loss of Ivan, which gave the reader an understanding of how little Ivan’s life meant to the people even the ones close to him. Later in the reading, but before his death Ivan questions how he lived his mortality life and what if he lived his life properly. Before his death he had come to the realization that his death would benefit all the others around him. "The Death of Ivan Ilyich" begins with the death of Ivan in order to get it out of the way. In essence the
Ivan IV and Hitler were both rulers of their societies because they had supporters to get them there. People like to follow someone who reflects confidence in everything they do.
In conclusion, Ivan the Terrible has impacted the world through his conquest and expansion of land, building of the St. Basil Cathedral, his influence in Joseph Stalin, and his strong political structure he set up. Ivan was a rutheless ruler that made some incredible advancements to modernize Russia, some that still are influential today. He was a major part in turning Russia from a medevial nation state into the beginnings of the Russian Empire.
The Slavophile and westernizer conflict is an inherent cultural question that Russians must answer about their country. Russian thinkers have long been fragmented between the Westernizer and the Slavophile viewpoint. Both disagreed about the true nature of the country as well as its relation with the West. It is a problem that has plagued Russia for centuries, and continues to do so to this day. Adopting the mindset of recognizing this conflict is essential to better understanding Russian history as well as the motives and thought processes of Russian leaders today.
The government and reform; the actual character of Nicholas II hindered his time in office, for example his outlooks on situations meant he did not trust a lot of his advisors, he was also seen to have been very lazy with respects to making decisions, other observations included him being, weak, timid and lacked guts. This all adds up to a very weak leader that is vulnerable to opposition, due to his tunnel vision and un-ability to see the main needs of the country. The duma was another challenge to the tsar; after the 1905 revolution the tsar had set up an elected body called the duma, this was a way of showing the public that he could be open minded in that delegating decisions to other people, looking back in hindsight this would also be seen as a challenge to the tsar as he never gave the duma any real power, and were easily dissolved, this meant that people were further angered and he was receiving opposition from all sides, it did however hold off opposition for a small period of time in order for the tsar to retain his power. Other individuals had an influence to the challenges facing the tsar, Nicholas had brought some new people in to try and conquer some problems, these included Rasputin who he had originally appointed to become saviour of family, he managed to influence the tsar in many of his decisions, this inevitably caused there to be conflict as the he was relying on Rasputin to relay details of the state of the country, these were not accurate which meant that tsar could not act upon opposition. Other people did help the tsar for example stolypin and his reforms.
Although Stalin had been tyrannical and crazy, he made Russia seem stronger, and is still seen as a good person today. Many people look at him like he was a murderous person, but other look at him as the man who made Russia better. He was a great leader, in a way, but that only depends on what the Russians believed in, and whether or not they (or someone they know) worked for Stalin.
The Bolsheviks had a very negative view of the royal family, their reason for this is because Tsar Nicholas ll still was a threat to returning to power even though he abdicated. The family servants view the royal family in the highest regard and loyalty, their reason for this is that the servants had been practically working for the Romanovs for their whole life, that was their job and they weren’t going to leave even if that meant dying with the royal family. The kitchen boy has a positive view on the Romanovs, his reason for this thinking is that he knew Tsar Nicholas was not the best ruler but he understood that the Tsar loved and cared for his country and his family to the end.
Before the word for the usual brutality of a leader came about, called Communism, Ivan IV was born on August 25,1530. His abnormal behavior started to show after the death of his parents; both deaths occured before he hit the early age of 9. Ivan bore witness to a lot of horrible things like murder and beatings of people who didn't comply to the Boyars requests. He was molested along with his deaf-mute brother, Yuri. Ivan took out his anger on animals by "ripping hair and feathers off, piercing the eyes, and slitting open their bodies. When he became ruler, he sent 100,000 troops to beseige the Tartar and not too long later he launches an attack on Novgorod. His Oprichniki rode around wearing black and on black horses abducting priests and even murdering them in front of their congregation. He turned on his daughter-in-law and attacked her because she was "immodestly dressed" and caused her to miscarry her baby. When his son stood up to protect her, Ivan killed him. His son was the heir to the throne and now Ivan didn't have an heir. Finally his reign of terror ended when he had a heart a attack while waiting to play chess.
Consequently they were not susceptible to some of the Tsars. discrimination. Also the Nobility who made up just one 1% of the 128. million population owned 25% of the land therefore meaning they had a large amount of power within the country. To try and console his power. The Tsar banned all political parties, thus allowing him to do what ever he wanted to.