A. M. Panchenko | Boyarynya Morozova - symbol and personality
Boyarynya Morozova - symbol and personality
The memory of the nation strives to give each major historical character an integral, complete look. Proteism is alien to the memory of the nation. She kind of "sculpts" her characters. Sometimes such a “statue” can only be talked about conditionally: it exists as a kind of “national sensation”, consisting of various facts, assessments, emotions, exists as a cultural axiom that does not need proof and most often is not fixed in the form of a clear formula. But in some cases, the "statue" of a historical figure is directly cast into a verbal or plastic form. This happened to the noblewoman Fedosya Prokopyevna Morozova, who remained in the memory of Russia as V.I.Surikov wrote it.
Analyzing controversies and rumors about this canvas (it was the main event of the fifteenth traveling exhibition), N. P. Konchalovskaya, Surikov's granddaughter, cites, among others, V. M. Garshin's opinion: “Surikov's painting presents this wonderful woman with surprising vividness. Anyone who knows her sad story, I am sure, will forever be conquered by the artist and will not be able to imagine Fedosya Prokopyevna otherwise, as she is depicted in his painting. " It is difficult for contemporaries to be impartial, and their predictions do not come true often. But Garshin turned out to be a good prophet. Over the nearly one hundred years that separate us from the fifteenth exhibition of the Itinerants, Surikovskaya Morozova has become the "eternal companion" of every Russian person. “Otherwise,” it is really impossible to imagine this woman of the 17th century, ready for torment and death for the sake of the cause of the rightness of which she is convinced. But why exactly Surikov Morozova became an iconographic canon and a historical type?
First of all, because the artist was faithful to the historical truth. To be convinced of this, it is enough to compare the composition of Surikov's painting with one of the scenes of the Extensive Edition of the Tale of Boyar Morozova, which is published and researched by A. I. Mazunin in this book. What we see in the picture happened on November 17 or 18, 1671 (7180, according to the old account, "from the creation of the world"). The noblewoman had been in custody for three days "in the people's mansions in the basement" of her Moscow home. Now she was "laid with a chain on her neck," put on the wood-bed and taken to prison. When the sleigh drew level with the Chudov Monastery, Morozova raised her right hand and, "clearly depicting the folding of the finger (Old Believer two-fingered. - AP), lifting high, often fencing with a cross, and often ringing the headdress." It was this scene of the Tale that the painter chose. He changed one detail: the iron "chagrin", the collar worn by the boyaryn, was attached with a chain to the "chair" - a heavy stump of wood, which is not in the picture. Morozova was not only "the glands were heavily lined", but also by the "inconvenience of a chair," and this block of wood lay next to her on the logs. People of the XIX century. they knew the shackles of a different device (they were described in detail in The House of the Dead by Dostoevsky). The artist, apparently, here decided not to deviate from the customs of his time: the canvas is not a book, you cannot attach a real commentary to it.
However, fidelity to the ancient Russian source still does not fully explain the fate of "Boyarynya Morozova", its role not only in Russian painting, but in Russian culture in general. In his beautiful canvases about other outstanding people, Surikov also did not sin against the truth, but the characters of these canvases are "imaginable" in other guises, "differently." Of course, we voluntarily or involuntarily compare the heroes of Suvorov's Crossing the Alps and Menshikov in Berezovo with their lifetime portraits. But after all, from Ermak Timofeevich and from Stenka Razin they did not write "parsuns", so there is no possibility for comparison, and yet neither Surikov's Ermak, nor Surikov's Razin became canonical "statues."
The fact is that long before Surikov, in the national consciousness, the boyarynya Morozova turned into a symbol - into a symbol of that popular movement, which is known under the not entirely accurate name of the split. In essence, this movement has two symbols: Archpriest Avvakum and Boyarynya Morozova, spiritual father and spiritual daughter, two fighters and two victims. But there were many thousands of warriors and sufferers at the beginning of the schism. Why Habakkuk remained in historical memory is understandable. Habakkuk is brilliant. He had a completely exceptional gift of speech - and therefore a gift of persuasion. But why did Russia choose Morozova?
In Surikov's painting, the noblewoman turns to the Moscow crowd, to the commoners - to the wanderer with a staff, to the old beggar woman, to the holy fool, and they do not hide their sympathy for the noble prisoner. And so it was: we know that the lower classes rose up for the old faith, for which the encroachment of the authorities on the time-honored ceremony meant an encroachment on the whole way of life, meant violence and oppression. We know that strangers, beggars, and holy fools found bread and shelter in the house of the boyaryn. We know that the people of her class blamed Morozova just for her adherence to the "simpletons": "I took you into the house ... the holy fools and other such ... holding on to their teachings." But there was one more person, to whom on that November day Morozov stretched out two fingers, for whom she rattled with chains. This man is Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The Miracle Monastery was located in the Kremlin. The boyaryn was taken near the sovereign's palace. “I’m a saint, as if the tsar is looking at the transition,” writes the author of the Tale, and writes most likely from the words of Morozova herself, to whom he was very close and with whom he had a chance to talk in prison (very interesting considerations about the author's personality are given in A.I. Mazunin's research). It is not known whether the tsar was looking at the boyaryn from the palace passages, under which the sleigh was traveling, or not. But there is not the slightest doubt that thoughts about her directly haunted Alexei Mikhailovich. For the tsar, she was a stumbling block: after all, it was not about an ordinary disobedient woman, but about Morozova. To understand how loud it sounded in the 17th century. this name, it is necessary to make a genealogical excursion into distant times.
When, in 1240, Prince Alexander Yaroslavich defeated the Swedes on the Neva, then in this battle “six brave men, like a man ... strong,” distinguished themselves in this battle, which is described in the Life of Alexander Nevsky. One of them, Gavrilo Aleksich, chasing the enemies, in the heat of battle drove along the gangway onto a Swedish ship, and “overthrew him from the board with a horse into the Neva. By the mercy of God, the release is completely unharmed, and packs of hustle, and fought with the governor himself in the midst of their regiment. " Another knight, Misha (aka Mikhail Prushanin), "walk with your squad on the ships and destroy three ships." Of the six "brave" we chose these two senior warriors (or boyars, which is one and the same), since in the 17th century. the destinies of their later descendants again intertwined and came into contact with the fate of the noblewoman Morozova.
Under the grandson of Alexander Nevsky, Ivan Danilovich Kalita, the first prince of the Moscow inheritance, who received the label for the great reign, the descendants of these knights move to Moscow and give rise to the largest boyar families. From Gavrila Aleksich, who, according to the genealogies, was the great-grandson of Ratsha, came the Chelyadnins, Fedorovs, Buturlins, Pushkins. From Misha Prushanin - Morozovs, Saltykovs, Sheins. In terms of fame and position, only two or three boyar clans could compete with these surnames - such as the clan of Alexander Zern (Velyaminov-Zernovs, Saburovs and Godunovs) and the clan of Andrei Kobyla, whose fifth son, Fedor Koshka, became the ancestor of the Romanovs and Sheremetevs.
When in the XV century. the end of the inheritance came, in Moscow, henceforth the capital city of all Russia, a stream of Rurikovich poured into the service of Ivan III. But several of the most prominent lines of the untitled boyars withstood the influx of princes, did not lose their "honor and place." In the eyes of the people of the era of the oprichnina, Ivan the Terrible was opposed not so much by his peer and former friend, but then by the rebel and fugitive Kurbsky, who came from the princes of Yaroslavl appanages, as the son of Gavrila Aleksich in the ninth generation, the richest boyar Ivan Petrovich Fedorov, who was fit for the tsar as a father. And it is no coincidence that in 1567, "crowned anger", suspecting a conspiracy of this man respected by all for justice, who had the highest rank of equestrian and headed the Zemshchyna government, set up the reprisal against him as a scene of rivalry. Grozny ordered Fedorov to be dressed in royal barmas, to give him a scepter and to put him on the throne. Then the tsar "by God's will," bowing at his feet and paying all the honors according to the palace tradition, stabbed the mumbled tsar with his own hands.
There is nothing strange in the fact that Ivan the Terrible, who was proud of the antiquity of his family and raised him through Rurik to the very emperor Augustus, saw a rival in a man without a princely title. Our ancestors had their own concepts of nobility, which were very different from our concepts. Being a descendant of Rurik or Gediminas - in itself, it did not mean much. “In Muscovite Russia, the place of a person on the ladder of service ranks ... was determined not only by origin, but also by the combination of a person's serviceability and services, taking into account his gentility, that is, the service level of his“ parents ”, relatives in general, and first of all his direct ancestors - father, grandfather, etc. along the straight and nearest lateral lines. " The ancestors of IP Fedorov “were so 'great' and well known to everyone that in various acts they were called by name and patronymic and did not use any family nickname”. Most of the princes could not even think about equalizing with them, for title and nobility in the eyes of ancient Russian society are not at all the same thing.
Let us show this with the example of Prince D.M. Pozharsky, who came from the younger line of the Old Dub princes. Recognized by all Russian people, "from tsar to kennel," the savior of the fatherland, this national hero experienced a lot of humiliation. Every now and then he lost parochial disputes, because his father and grandfather "lost their honor", serving as city clerks and laborers. Prince D.M. Pozharsky was of Rurik blood, but thin. For us, such a combination looks like an oxymoron, but in the old days they distinguished the noble princes from the “noble” princes. Once Pozharsky did not want to serve as a "place below" Boris Saltykov, a distant relative of the Morozovs. He beat his forehead against the dishonor of Tsar Mikhail, and the descendant of Rurik, the savior of Russia, was "given over by his head" to the descendant of Misha Prushanin.
These ancient Russian concepts of gentility explain why it cannot be considered a historical incongruity that after the Troubles the escheat throne went to the untitled, but "great" "Cat family", that the Monomakh hat was on the head of Mikhail Romanov. Whether fate was more favorable to the Fedorovs or to the Morozovs, they could also become the founders of a new dynasty.
Morozovs in the XV-XVI centuries. retained an exceptionally high position. In a half-century period from Ivan III to Troubles, up to thirty Duma members, boyars and okolnichy came out of this surname. Although the disgrace and executions of Grozny did not bypass the Morozovs (in the 60s the boyar Vladimir Vasilyevich "dropped out", in the 70s - his cousin, the famous voivode boyar Mikhail Yakovlevich - people of the generation of IP Fedorov); although by the time of the accession of the Romanovs there were only a few representatives of this family, which was destined to be suppressed in the 17th century, but it was the time of the reign of the first two Romanovs that was the time of greatest success for the Morozovs.
Two of them, brothers Boris and Gleb Ivanovich, in their youth were sleeping bags of their peer Mikhail Fedorovich, that is, "home, room, the closest people." This appointment, apparently, they received by kinship and property with the Romanovs. Suffice it to say that one of their relatives was the great-grandfather of Tsar Mikhail's mother, and two other relatives, the Saltykovs, were his cousins. Boris Ivanovich Morozov was granted a boyar status in 1634, in connection with his appointment as an uncle to Tsarevich Alexei Mikhailovich. When in 1645 Alexei was married to the state in the seventeenth year, his pestun became a temporary worker, a "strong man." As they said then, the king "looked out of his mouth."
In June 1648, a rebellion broke out in Moscow, "the mob began to stir up against the boyars" - and above all against Boris Morozov. But this did not particularly harm him: the tsar with tears "begged" his breadwinner from the world. The uncle firmly held his pupil in his hands and himself, using all the dexterity and influence, chose for him a bride from the artistic Miloslavsky, Maria Ilyinichna. At the wedding, Boris Morozov played the first role - he was with the sovereign "in his father's place." Ten days later, another wedding took place: Boris Morozov, a widower and an elderly man, married a second marriage to the tsarina's sister Anna and became the tsar's brother-in-law. From his completely exceptional position, he got everything he could. In 1638 Boris Morozov owned more than 300 peasant households. This is a good, but common condition for a boyar of that time. Fifteen years later, he had 7254 households, twenty times more! This is unheard of wealth. Only the Tsar's uncle Nikita Ivanovich Romanov had the same number of households and one of the Cherkassky princes, Yakov Kudenetovich. All other boyars, titled and untitled, were inferior to Boris Morozov many times over. The career of Gleb Ivanovich Morozov, a completely ordinary man, is, as it were, a reflection of the career of his older brother. They started the same way - with the sleeping bags of the tsar and the uncles of the princes. But Tsarevich Ivan Mikhailovich, to whom Gleb Morozov was assigned, made a boyar on this occasion, died as a minor. From that time on, the advancement of Gleb Morozov slowed down and depended entirely on the success of his brother. Like the last one, he also married a second time and also to an artistic woman - to the 17-year-old beauty Fedosya Prokopyevna Sokovnina. The Sokovnins, the Likhvin and Karachev boyar children, found themselves among the Moscow nobility by their close relationship with the Miloslavskys. Fedosya Prokopyevna was most likely married off to Gleb Morozov "from the palace." She became a "visiting boyarynya" of the queen (it was a great honor), who always treated her in a kindred way and, while she was alive, always stood up for her before the king.
Boris Morozov died in 1662 childless. His fiefdom was succeeded by his younger brother, who himself was a very sufficient person (2,110 households according to the painting in 1653). Almost simultaneously with Boris, Gleb Ivanovich died, and the only owner of this enormous fortune, which was, perhaps, second only to the state of the "eminent people" of the Stroganovs, was the adolescent Ivan Glebovich, but in fact his mother Fedosya Prokopyevna Morozova.
She was surrounded not only by wealth, but also by luxury. Her Moscow house was luxurious. Avvakum recalled that she rode out in a carriage with "musiya and silver", which was carried by "many argamaks, 6 or 12, with rattling chains" and which was accompanied by "100 or 200, and sometimes three hundred" servants. Luxury penetrated into the estates near Moscow, which was then new and unusual. The fact is that, according to the old tradition, the boyar estates had a purely economic purpose. The first to break this tradition was Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, who opened several luxurious estates near Moscow. Izmailovo and Kolomenskoye, "the eighth wonder of the world", stood out among them. His uncle did not lag behind the tsar, who arranged with great pomp his village Pavlovskoye in the Zvenigorod district, which became "a kind of dacha" where the boyar "went for entertainment ... inviting ... sometimes the tsar himself." Gleb Morozov followed their example. In the mansion of his village near Moscow, Zyuzin, the floors were "written chess", the garden occupied two tithes, and peacocks and peacocks were walking in the yard. In this case, the Tsar and the Morozov brothers imitated Europe, and above all the Polish "Potentates". It was in the 17th century, in the Baroque era, that the flourishing of manor life began in Poland. During the campaigns of the mid-50s, the tsar had the opportunity to contemplate the luxurious residences of the magnates. In these campaigns, by the way, Gleb Morozov, who was with the person of the sovereign, also participated.
Considering all this - the antiquity and "honor" of the Morozov family, their family ties with the tsar and tsarina, their position in the Duma and at the court, their wealth and luxury of private life, we better understand Archpriest Avvakum, who saw something completely exceptional in the fact that noblewoman Morozova renounced "earthly glory": "It's no wonder, for 20 years and a single summer they torment me: I am called upon myself, and I will shake off the sinful burden." And behold, a man is poor, unclean and unreasonable, from a man who is unreachable, I have no clothing and gold and silver, a priestly family, an archpriest, full of sorrows and sorrows before the Lord God. But it’s nice to think about your honesty: your family, Boris Ivanovich Morozov was an uncle to this tsar, and a pestun, and a breadwinner, he was sick about him and grieved more than his soul, day and night of peace is not property. ” Habakkuk in this case expressed the popular opinion. The people recognized Morozova as their intercessor precisely because she voluntarily “shook off the ashes” of wealth and luxury, voluntarily caught up with the “commoners”.
We will better understand the behavior of the Moscow nobility. Not having succeeded in trying to reason with the lost sheep, seeing that even appeals to her mother's feelings were in vain, the nobility still resisted the bishops for a long time, who with such zeal carried on the boyaryn’s business. Especially zealous were the ignorant Joachim, then the Chudovsky Archimandrite, and the Metropolitan of Sarsk and Podonsk Pavel - both people are extremely cruel. But even the mild patriarch Pitirim betrayed his temper when he realized how much Morozov hated his "Nikonian faith." "Roaring, like a bear" (according to the author of the Tale), the patriarch ordered to drag the boyary woman, "like a dog, a cap by the neck", so that Morozova on the stairs "considered all degrees to be her head." And Pitirim at that time shouted: "In the morning the sufferer in the pipe!" (ie, on the fire, because then it was customary to burn people "in a log house"). However, again “the bolyar was not pulled,” and the bishops had to give in.
Of course, the nobility defended not so much a person, not Fedosya Morozova as such, as class privileges. The nobles were afraid of a precedent. And only after making sure that it was safe for her in terms of class, that it was "not an example and not a model," she renounced the noblewoman Morozova. They began to look at the lost sheep as at the black sheep - according to the proverb "in the family not without its black sheep, and in the threshing floor not without damage."
Only the brothers Morozova, Fyodor and Alexei Sokovnin, remained faithful to her, just as Princess Evdokia Urusova, her younger sister, who suffered and died with her, was also faithful to her. Tsar Alexei hastened to remove both brothers from Moscow, appointing them as governors to small towns. It was a link that can in no way be called honorable. Apparently, the tsar knew or suspected that the Sokovnins had not only blood, but also a spiritual connection with the sisters, that they all stood for "ancient piety." Apparently, the tsar feared them - and not without reason, as later events showed.
On March 4, 1697, the okolnichy Aleksey Prokopyevich Sokovnin, a "secret schismatic", ended his days on the chopping block. He was beheaded on Red Square - for the fact that, together with the Strelets Colonel Ivan Tsykler, he was at the head of the conspiracy for the life of Peter I. Among the executed conspirators was the steward Fyodor Matveyevich Pushkin, who was married to the daughter of Alexei Sokovnin. The Pushkins, as the weakest in "honor and place" branch of the family of Gavrila Aleksich, began to rise at the end of the 16th century, after the death of more noble relatives in the time of the oprichnina. The 17th century was a period of greatest success for the Pushkins, but it ended in their disaster - unexpected and undeserved, because the execution of one conspirator turned into a virtual disgrace for the entire numerous family. If the Morozovs in the 17th century. died out in the literal sense of the word, then Pushkin's fate was preparing a political death: henceforth and forever they were ejected from the ruling stratum.
But let's return to the confrontation between the boyaryn Morozova and Tsar Alexei. Even after the break with Nikon, the tsar remained loyal to church reform, since it allowed him to keep the church under control. The Tsar was very worried about the resistance of the Old Believers, and therefore he was unhappy with Morozova for a long time. He knew, of course, that at home she was praying in the old way; Apparently, he knew (through his sister-in-law Anna Ilyinichna) that the noblewoman wears a hair shirt, he also knew about her correspondence with Avvakum, imprisoned in Pustozersk, and that her Moscow chambers were a haven and stronghold of the Old Believers. However, the tsar did not take decisive steps for a long time and limited himself to half measures: he took away part of the estates from Morozova, and then returned them, tried to influence her through relatives, etc. her intercession. Indeed, after her death (1669), the tsar spared Morozov for another two and a half years. Apparently, he was content with Morozova's “little hypocrisy”. It is clear from the Tale that she “for the sake of decency ... went to church,” that is, she attended the Nikonian service. Everything changed dramatically after her secret tonsure.
If the noblewoman Fedosya "for the sake of decency" could bend her soul, then the nun Theodora, who had taken monastic vows, did not have a "little hypocrisy." Morozov "began to deviate" from worldly and religious duties associated with the dignity of the "horse" (palace) boyaryn. On January 22, 1671, she did not appear at the wedding of the tsar with Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina, referring to her illness: “My feet are extremely deplorable, and I can neither walk nor stand”. The king did not believe the excuse and took the refusal as a grave insult. From that moment on, Morozova became a personal enemy for him. The bishops played skillfully on this. In the course of a dispute about faith, they put the question directly (in frankness and there was a catch): "In short, we ask you, - according to the service book for which the sovereign tsar receives communion and the noble queen and princes and princesses, did you take communion?" And Morozova had no choice but to answer directly: "I will not receive Communion."
The author of the Tale puts into the mouth of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich significant words concerning his feud with Morozova: "It is hard for her to fraternize with me - the only one who can overcome anything from us." It is unlikely that these words were ever uttered: in fact, the autocrat of all Russia could not admit, even for a moment, that he would be "overcome" by the noblewoman who had become rigid in disobedience. But fiction has in its way no less historical value than an immutably established fact. In this case, fiction is the voice of the people. The people perceived the struggle between the Tsar and Morozova as a spiritual duel (and in the battle of the spirit, rivals are always equal) and, of course, were entirely on the side of the "combatant". There is every reason to believe that the king understood this perfectly. His order to starve Morozova to death in the Bohr pit, in the "unlit darkness", in the "earthly breath" is striking not only with cruelty, but also with cold calculation. It's not even that death is red in the world. The fact is that a public execution gives a person an aura of martyrdom (if, of course, the people are on the side of the executed). The tsar was afraid of this most of all, he was afraid that "there will be the last misfortune and the first bitter." Therefore, he doomed Morozova and her sister to a "quiet", long death. Therefore, their bodies - in matting, without a funeral service - were buried inside the walls of Borovsk prison: they feared that the Old Believers would not dig them up "with great honor, like holy martyrs of might." Morozova was kept in custody while she was alive. She was left in custody after her death, which put an end to her suffering on the night of November 1 to 2, 1675.
In creating a symbol, history is content with a few large strokes. Private life is indifferent to national memory. The life of a mortal man, his earthly passions - all these are trifles, they are carried away by the river of oblivion. There is a reason for such selectivity, because history remembers, first of all, the heroes, but there is also a danger, because the true appearance of a person is involuntarily distorted.
Surikovskaya Morozova breathes with the spirit of fanaticism. But it is wrong to consider her a fanatic. The ancient Russian man, in contrast to the man of the enlightenment culture, lived and thought within the framework of religious consciousness. He was “nourished” by faith as his daily bread. In Ancient Russia there were as many heretics and apostates as you like, but there were no atheists, which means that fanaticism looked different. Boyarynya Morozova is a strong character, but not fanatical, without a shadow of gloom, and it is not for nothing that Avvakum wrote about her as a "cheerful and loving wife" (amiable). She was not at all alien to human passions and weaknesses.
We learn about them first of all from Avvakum, who, as a spiritual father, instructed, scolded, and sometimes scolded Morozova. Of course, Avvakum's cursing does not always have to be taken at face value. It was often a "therapeutic", healing technique. When Morozova was killed in prison for her dead son, Avvakum wrote her an angry letter from Pustozersk, even called her "thin mud", and ended like this: "Don't worry about Ivan, I won't scold." But in some cases, the reproaches of the spiritual father seem to be quite substantiated.
After the death of her old husband, Morozova was left a young, thirty-year-old widow. She "tormented" the body with a hair shirt, but the hair shirt did not always help. "Stupid, insane, ugly," Avvakum wrote to her, "gouge out those eyes with a shuttle like Mastridia." Habakkuk had in mind the example of the Monk Mastridia, whose life the boyaryn knew from the Prologue (under November 24). The heroine of this life gouged out her eyes to get rid of the temptation of love.
Avvakum accused Morozova of being stingy: “But now ... you write: she is scanty, father; There is nothing to share with you. And I will deprive you of laughing at your disagreement ... Alms flow from you, like a small drop from the depths of the sea, and then with a stipulation. " From his point of view, Habakkuk was right. When we read that the noblewoman sent eight rubles to Pustozersk, “Father two rubles to one, but he will share six rubles with the brothers of Christ,” we involuntarily recall the gold and jewelry that she hid from the authorities. In this case, one cannot but agree with Habakkuk. However, it was not just stinginess, but also the thriftiness of a zealous hostess. According to her position, Morozova was a “mother widow,” that is, a widow who ruled over the estates until her son came of age. Therefore, she was worried about "how ... the house is built, how to gain more fame, how ... the villages and villages are slender." The "mother widow" kept the wealth accumulated by his father and uncle for her son. She hoped that her son, no matter how the fate of his mother, would live in "earthly glory" befitting his famous family.
Morozova loved her Ivan very much. Feeling that the tsar's patience was coming to an end, that trouble was on the doorstep, she hurried to marry her son and consulted with the spiritual father about the bride: “Where can I get it - whether from a good breed, or from a lush one. The ones that are in breed better than maidens are worse, and those maidens are better than those that are in breeds worse. " This quote gives a clear idea of Morozova. Her letters are letters from women. We will not find in them discourses on faith, but we will find complaints about those who dare to "abmanate" the boyaryn, we will find requests not to listen to those who sweep her in front of the archpriest: "Whatever you write to you, that's all good." The one who dictated, and sometimes wrote these "letters" with her own hand, is not a gloomy fanatic, but a hostess and mother, busy with her son and household chores.
Therefore, her "little hypocrisy" is understandable, the hesitations that were reflected in the Tale are understandable. Whenever it comes to torture, the author writes that Morozova even from her hind legs "victoriously" denounced "their crafty retreat." Here, the influence of the hagiographic canon is obvious, according to which a sufferer for his faith always endures torture not only courageously, but also “joyfully”. But the end of this episode is much stronger and humanly more reliable, when the noblewoman burst into tears and said to one of the torture supervisors: "Is it Christianity, torture a man's hedgehog?"
And she died not as a heroine of life, but as a person. “Servant of Christ! - the noblewoman, tortured by hunger, called to the archer who was guarding her. - Do you have a father and mother alive or have they passed away? And if they are alive, let us pray for them and for you; If we die, we will remember them. Have mercy, servant of Christ! I’m overwhelmed by the gladness and hunger for food, have mercy on me, give me kolachik ”, and when he refused (“ Neither, madam, I’m afraid ”), she asked him from the pit at least a loaf of bread, at least“ few crackers ”, although would be an apple or a cucumber - and all in vain.
Human weakness does not diminish the achievement. On the contrary, it emphasizes his greatness: in order to accomplish a feat, one must first of all be a man.
The story of the boyaryna Morozova is the main source of information about this wonderful woman. The publication and research of A.I. Mazunin, who thoroughly studied the handwritten tradition, makes it possible to read this text in a new way. But the Tale is valuable not only for its historical material. This is a work of high artistic quality. This monument of ancient Russian literature will undoubtedly be appreciated by the modern reader.
Cit. by book: Konchalovskaya Natalia. An invaluable gift. M., 1965.S. 151.
The tale of the boyaryna Morozova / Prep. texts and research A. I. Mazunin. L., "Science", 1979.
On the genealogy of the Morozovs and other boyar families, see the book: Veselovsky S. B. Studies in the history of the landlord service class. M., 1969.
Life of Alexander Nevsky op. according to the book: Izbornik. Collection of works of literature of Ancient Rus. M., 1970.
Veselovsky S. B. Studies in the history of the landlord service class. P. 103.
In the same place. P. 55.
“In the literal sense of the word, this meant the extradition of the accused into complete servitude. In parochial affairs, “handing over with the head” ... had a symbolic and everyday meaning ... The accused parishioner, with a submissive air, with his head uncovered, went to the courtyard of his new master. The latter, probably in the presence of children, households and the entire household, made the local local more or less harsh suggestion, made him feel fully his power and then mercifully forgave. Depending on the mutual relations of the persons and surnames clashing, the case could have ended either with a similar scene, or with complete reconciliation. The acquitted by the court invited the local man who had been given to him by his “head” to his house, and recent enemies over a glass of wine conscientiously tried to eliminate moments of personal resentment ”( Veselovsky S. B. Studies in the history of the landlord service class. P. 104).
Zabelin I.E. Domestic life of Russian queens in the 16th and 17th centuries. Ed. 3rd. M., 1901, p. 101.
Cm.: Vodarsky Ya.E. The ruling group of secular feudal lords in Russia in the 17th century. - In the book: The nobility and serfdom of Russia in the XVI-XVIII centuries. Sat. in memory of A. A. Novoselsky. M., 1975.S. 93.
In the same place. For comparison, let us point out that, according to the calculations of Ya. E. Vodarsky, at that time the Duma people had an average of households: the boyars had 1567, the okolniks had 526, and the Duma nobles had 357 (ibid. P. 74).
Materials for the history of the split for the first time of its existence, published ... ed. N. Subbotina. T. V, part 2.M., 1879. S. 182-183.
D. I. Petrikeev Large serf economy of the 17th century. L., 1967.S. 46.
Cm.: Tikhonov Yu.A. The estates of the Russian aristocracy near Moscow in the second half of the 17th - early 18th centuries. - In the book: The nobility and serfdom of Russia in the XVI-XVIII centuries. S. 139-140.
Life of Archpriest Avvakum, written by himself, and his other works. M., 1960.S. 216.
In the same place. P. 296.
In the same place. P. 213.
In the same place. P. 208. It is interesting to compare this phrase with one incident from Habakkuk's youth, about which he told in his Life: “When I was still in trouble, a girl came to me to confess, burdened with many sins, a prodigal deed ... I am guilty ... But, the treacherous doctor, he got sick himself, inside with a burning prodigal fire, and I felt bitter at that hour: I lit three lights and stuck to the layer, and laid my right hand on the flame, and held it, until the evil in me extinguished, disdaining ”(ibid. P. 60). Here Habakkuk directly acted "according to the Prologue": in the Prologue on December 27 there is a similar story about a monk and a harlot.
Barskov Ya.L. Monuments of the first years of Russian Old Believers. SPb., 1912.S. 34.
In the same place. P. 37. Of course, eight rubles was a lot of money at that time. But Avvakum and his pustozersk "fellow prisoners" had to spend more than any resident of Moscow. Here's an example: in order to send Morozova's letter, Avvakum had to give the archer a whole fifty dollars.
Barskov Ya.L. Monuments of the first years of Russian Old Believers. P. 34.
In the same place. S. 41-42.
In the same place. S. 38-39.
Material: http://panchenko.pushkinskijdom.ru/Default.aspx?tabid=2330
The attitude towards Feodosia Morozova and her historical role is rather ambiguous. Her renunciation of all the blessings of life, of which the boyaryn had a lot, some call a feat in the name of faith, others - fanatical adherence to religious canons. Life path rebellious noblewoman Morozova captured Vasily Surikov on his most famous canvas, ended in tragic death. Who was she really - a holy martyr or a possessed one?
After Nikon's reform in the 17th century, a split occurred in the church: the Old Believers refused to accept innovations. Following Archpriest Avvakum, they became schismatics and stoically endured torture and went to their deaths, but did not renounce their beliefs. By order of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, the schismatics were sent into exile, thrown into earthen prisons - deep pits, or into cellars with rats. Such a fate awaited the boyaryn Morozov.
Feodosia Prokopyevna Morozova (nee Sokovnina), was the supreme palace boyar. Her father was in kinship with the wife of the tsar Maria Ilyinichna, so Feodosia was one of the courtiers. Her husband Gleb Morozov also came from a noble family, his older brother Boris was very rich. After the death of her husband and his brother, the whole fortune passed to Theodosia. She lived in luxury, at her disposal were several estates and 8 thousand serfs. She rode out in a carriage accompanied by hundreds of servants.
The tsar ordered Theodosia to be arrested, having taken away her estates and lands, and expelled from Moscow if she did not renounce the old faith. Boyarynya Morozova refused and deliberately doomed herself to poverty, hunger and certain death. She died in an earthen prison from complete exhaustion in 1675.
Vasily Surikov portrayed the moment when the boyaryn was driven on the woods along the Moscow streets. The artist was admired by a woman who rebelled against the official church and the royal power, and was so strong that no torture broke her will.
In 1887 the painting "Boyarynya Morozova" was first presented at the 15th exhibition of Itinerant artists, after which P. Tretyakov bought it for his collection. The reaction to the painting was mixed. Surikov was even accused of promoting a split. Only 3 people then openly spoke with a positive assessment of the work: the writers Garshin and Korolenko and the music critic Stasov. V. Korolenko wrote: “There is something great in a person who consciously goes to death for what she considers to be true. Such examples awaken in us faith in human nature, uplifting the soul ”.
Surikov knew the history of Morozova from childhood - he was familiar with the schismatics, the artist's aunt Avdotya Vasilievna leaned towards the old faith. In the first sketches, it was her features that the artist endowed the noblewoman. But the result did not satisfy him: “No matter how I paint her face, the crowd beats. After all, how long have I been looking for him. The whole face was shallow. I got lost in the crowd. " In the end, the Ural Old Believer served as the prototype of the heroine: “I wrote a sketch from her in the kindergarten at two o'clock. And when I inserted it into the picture, it defeated everyone, ”said the artist. This is how everyone now represents the boyarynya Morozov.
Boyarynya Morozova Feodosia Prokopyevna (born on May 21 (31), 1632 - death on November 2 (12), 1675) - the supreme palace boyaryn. She was arrested for adherence to the "old faith", exiled to the Pafnutevo-Borovsky monastery and put in the monastery prison, where she died of hunger.
The image of the noblewoman Morozova in national memory is connected with the painting by V. Surikov, beloved by the people. Even the writer V. Garshin, having seen the artist's canvas 100 years ago at the exhibition, predicted that the descendants would not be able to "imagine Feodosia Prokopyevna otherwise, as she is depicted in the picture." It is difficult for a contemporary to be impartial, but we understand that Garshin, as it turned out, was a good prophet. Many people imagine noblewoman Morozova as a harsh, elderly woman, as in a painting, who fanatically threw up her hand in two fingers. Well, Surikov knew history well and, in the main, did not go against the truth, but the details of fiction were necessary for him for the sake of symbolic generalizations.
Boyarynya Morozova was not old - look at the dates of her life. The noblewoman was arrested 4 years before her death, then she was not even forty, but the people's memory could only capture the martyr for the idea when she was lived, wise and alien to any frivolity.
Why did the glory of the noblewoman Morozova go over the centuries? Why, among thousands of those who suffered for the faith, this particular woman was destined to become a symbol of the struggle of the schismatics against the "Nikonians"?
On the artist's canvas, Feodosia Prokopyevna addresses the Moscow crowd, the commoners - the wanderer with the staff, the old beggar woman, the holy fool, all those who actually represented the social stratum of fighters against new rituals. However, Morozova was not an ordinary disobedient woman. The Miracle Monastery, where she was taken, was located in the Kremlin. It is not known whether the tsar watched from the palace passages, how the people saw off his favorite, how she proclaimed anathema to the "wicked", but there is no doubt that the thought of Morozova haunted him and haunted him.
Painting by V. Surikov "Boyarynya Morozova"
The noblewoman stood too close to the throne, knew the tsar too well, and besides this, the Morozov family was one of the most noble. There were less than ten such high-ranking families in Russia, at least the Romanovs, to whom Alexei Mikhailovich belonged, had no more rights to the throne than any of the Morozovs. One can guess how uncomfortable the tsar felt when giving the order to arrest the boyaryn. However, there were also other circumstances for concern.
The Morozov brothers, Boris and Gleb, were relatives of the Tsar's father, Mikhail, and in his youth they served the elder Romanov as sleeping bags, this was an exceptional position at court. When, in 1645, 17-year-old Alexei was crowned the throne, Boris Morozov became his closest adviser. It was the boyar who chose his wife Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya for the sovereign and played the first role at the wedding - he was with the sovereign "in his father's place." After 10 days, Boris Morozov, a widower and an elderly man, married a second marriage to the tsarina's sister Anna and became the tsar's brother-in-law.
From his exceptional position, he was able to extract everything he could. And if possession of 300 peasant households was considered a good fortune for a master of that era, then Morozov had more than 7000 of them. Unheard of wealth!
The career of Gleb Ivanovich, a very ordinary man, completely depended on the success of his brother. The younger Morozov married an unborn 17-year-old beauty Theodosia Sokovnina, who was very friendly with the queen. Boris Ivanovich died without leaving heirs, and all his enormous fortune went to his younger brother, who also soon died, making his widow and youth Ivan Glebovich the richest people in the Russian state.
1) Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov
2) Boyarynya Morozova visits Archpriest Avvakum
Boyarynya Morozova was surrounded not only by wealth, but by luxury. Contemporaries recalled that she rode out in a gilded carriage, carried by 6-12 best horses, and about 300 servants were running behind. A huge garden was laid out in the Morozov estate of Zyuzino, where peacocks walked. Considering all this - Morozova's successful marriage, luxurious life, personal friendship with the royal family - one can understand Protopope Avvakum, who saw something absolutely exceptional in Theodosia Prokopyevna's renounced "earthly glory." The noblewoman actually became an ardent opponent of church reforms. The temperament of a public figure raged in her, and she was able to fully realize herself, defending the old faith.
The house of a wealthy and influential noblewoman turned into a headquarters for opponents of innovations, critics of making corrections to church books, he came here, lived for a long time, receiving shelter and protection, the leader of the schismatics. For days, Morozova received wanderers, holy fools, priests expelled from monasteries, creating a kind of opposition party to the royal court. The noblewoman herself and her own sister, Princess Evdokia Urusova, were blindly devoted to Avvakum and listened to the fiery preacher in everything.
But it would be wrong to think that the boyarynya Morozova was a fanatic and a “blue stocking”. Even Habakkuk noticed that she had a cheerful and friendly character. When her old husband passed away, she was only 30 years old. The widow "tormented" the body with a hair shirt, but the hair shirt did not always help to pacify the flesh. Avvakum in letters advised his pupil to gouge out her eyes in order to get rid of the temptation of love.
The archpriest also denounced the boyaryn in stinginess in relation to their common cause, but, most likely, it was not just stinginess, but the zeal of the hostess. Morozova selflessly loved her only son Ivan and wanted to give him all the Morozov riches safe and sound. The letters of the noblewoman to the disgraced archpriest, in addition to discussions about faith, are filled with purely female complaints about their people, discussions about a suitable bride for a son. In a word, Feodosia Prokopyevna, possessing an enviable strength of character, had completely human weaknesses, which, of course, makes her asceticism even more significant.
The noblewoman, being a close friend of the sovereign's wife, had a strong influence on her. Maria Ilyinichna, of course, did not oppose her husband's reforms of the church, but with her soul she still sympathized with the rituals of her parents and listened to the whispers of Feodosia Prokopyevna. Alexei Mikhailovich hardly liked this, but the tsar, who loved his wife, did not allow attacks on the boyar, although the latter became more and more intolerant of innovations and openly supported the tsar's enemies.
1669 - the queen dies. For another two years, Alexei Mikhailovich was afraid to touch the rebellious boyar. As you can see, sadness for the untimely departed spouse affected, but most of all the sovereign was wary of the indignation of the old boyar families, which could see in the encroachment on Theodosia Prokopyevna a precedent of reprisals against high-ranking families. In the meantime, Morozoav took monastic vows and began to be called the nun Theodora, which, of course, strengthened her fanaticism and "standing up for the faith." And when in 1671 the tsar, who was finally comforted, played a wedding with Natalya Kirillovna Naryshkina, noblewoman Morozova did not want to appear at the palace, citing her illness, which Alexei Mikhailovich considered an insult and neglect.
Torture of the boyaryn Morozova - drawing by V. Perov
It was then that the sovereign recalled all the past grievances to the boyaryna Morozova; affected, apparently, and the fact that the king, like a mere mortal, disliked the girlfriend of his beloved wife and, like any man, was jealous of her. The autocrat unleashed all his despotic power on the rebellious noblewoman.
On the night of November 14, 1671, Morozova was escorted in chains to the Chudov Monastery, where they began to persuade her to take communion according to a new rite, but the elder Theodora answered firmly: "I will not take communion!" After torture, he and her sister were sent away from Moscow to the Pechersky Monastery. There, the content of the prisoners was relatively tolerable. At least the noblewoman could keep in touch with her friends. Servants could visit her, bring food and clothes.
Protopope Avvakum still passed on the instructions to his spiritual daughter. And she just needed warm, compassionate support - her only beloved son died at the boyar's wife. The grief was increased by the fact that she could not say goodbye to him, and what it was like for her, nun Theodora, to find out that her son was receiving communion and buried according to new "wicked" rites.
The new patriarch Pitirim of Novgorod, who sympathized with the supporters of Avvakum, turned to the autocrat with a request to release Morozova and her sister. In addition to considerations of humanity, there was also a share of political intent in this proposal: the imprisonment of a noblewoman, firm in her faith, her sister and their friend Maria Danilova made a strong impression on the Russian people, and their release would rather attract a new rite than intimidation. But the sovereign, not cruel by nature, this time turned out to be adamant. Again, the version suggests itself that he was burned by some kind of personal resentment against Morozov, and perhaps he felt awkward in front of Feodosia Prokopyevna because of his marriage to the young beauty Naryshkina and wanted to forget about the past. However, why guess? ..
Having considered the circumstances of the execution of the hated noblewoman, Aleksey Mikhailovich decided that the prisoners should not be burnt at the stake, because "death is red in peace", but ordered to starve the Old Believers by starving them into the cold pit of the Borovsky Monastery. All the property of the noblewoman Morozova was confiscated, her brothers were first exiled, and then they were also executed.
The drama of Morozova's last days defies description. Poor women, driven to despair by hunger, asked the jailers for at least a piece of bread, but were refused. Princess Urusova was the first to die on 11 September, followed by Theodosia Prokopyevna, who died of exhaustion on 1 November. Before her death, she found the strength to ask the jailer to wash her shirt in the river so that, according to Russian custom, she would die in a clean shirt. Maria Danilova suffered the longest, another whole month.
The once great family of the Morozovs ceased to exist.
When the writer Garshin 100 years ago saw the great canvas of Surikov for the first time, he said that now people would not be able to "imagine Feodosia Prokopyevna otherwise, as she is depicted in the picture." And so it happened. Today we imagine the boyarynya Morozova as an emaciated old woman with fanatically burning eyes.
What was she like? To understand this, let us remember how other characters in this canvas look at Morozov. Some sympathize, they see her as a martyr for her faith, others laugh at the crazy fanatic. This is how this extraordinary woman remained in history: either saint or insane.
Feodosia Prokopievna, the future noblewoman Morozova, was born in 1632, in the family of the okolnichego Sokovnin, a relative of the first wife of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. Due to this relationship, Theodosia was well acquainted and friendly with Tsarina Maria Ilyinichna. When Theodosia was 17 years old, she was married to the boyar Gleb Ivanovich Morozov. Gleb Ivanovich was the younger brother of the all-powerful Boris Ivanovich Morozov, the tsarist educator, whom Alexei Mikhailovich revered as his own father. The husband was 30 years older than Feodosia.
Immediately after the wedding, Theodosia Prokopyevna Morozova received the title of Tsaritsa "visiting boyaryn", that is, a person who has the right to come to the Tsarina for dinner and on holidays in a related manner. It was a considerable honor, which was given only to the wives of the most noble and close to the sovereign. A role here was played not only by the relationship of the young Morozova with Marya Ilinichna, but also by the nobility and wealth of her husband. Gleb Morozov owned 2,110 peasant households. In his estate near Moscow, Zyuzino, a magnificent garden was laid out in which peacocks walked. When Theodosia left the yard, 12 horses were carrying her gilded carriage, and up to 300 servants hurried after. According to legend, the couple got along well, despite the big age difference. They had a son, Ivan, who was destined to inherit the enormous fortune of his father and childless uncle - the tsarist educator Boris Morozov. Feodosia Prokopyevna lived in luxury and honor, which were comparable to those of the tsars.
In 1662, 30 years old, Feodosia Prokopyevna was widowed. A young, beautiful woman could marry again, her huge fortune made her a very enviable bride. The morals of that time did not forbid a widow to marry a second time. However, Feodosia Prokopyevna took a different path, also very common for pre-Petrine Russia. She chose the fate of an honest widow - a woman who devoted herself entirely to caring for a child and works of piety. The widows did not always go to the monastery, but they made life in their house according to the monastery model, filling it with nuns, wanderers, holy fools, with services and prayer vigils in the home church. Apparently, at this time she became close to the leader of the Russian Old Believers, Archpriest Avvakum. When the church reforms began, which led to the Schism, Theodosia, with all her soul retaining devotion to the old rite, outwardly at first was hypocritical. She attended the services of the "Nikonian", was baptized with three fingers, however, she kept the old rite in her house. When Avvakum returned from Siberian exile, he settled with his spiritual daughter. His influence became the reason that the house of Morozova turned into a real center of opposition to church reform. All dissatisfied with Nikon's innovations flocked here.
In his numerous letters, Archpriest Avvakum recalled how they spent the faith in the rich house of the Morozovs: he read spiritual books, and the boyaryn listened and spun threads or sewed shirts for the poor. Under rich clothes, she wore a hair shirt, and at home she even dressed in old, patched dresses. However, it was not easy for a woman who was only 30 years old at that time to keep an honest widowhood. Protopope Avvakum even advised his spiritual daughter to gouge his eyes out so that they would not tempt her with carnal pleasures. In general, from the letters of Avvakum, a portrait of the widow Morozova is formed, which is not at all similar to the image that we see in the famous painting. Avvakum wrote about a zealous mistress who cares about leaving her father's estates in perfect order to her son, about a "cheerful and amiable wife," at least sometimes a bit stingy.
Alexei Mikhailovich, who sent the rebellious Archpriest Avvakum to distant Pustozersk, for the time being turned a blind eye to the activities of the noblewoman Morozova. In many respects, probably, thanks to the intercession of the tsarina and the fact that in public Morozova continues to be “hypocritical”. However, in 1669 Maria Ilyinichna died. A year later, Theodosia Prokopyevna takes a secret monastic tonsure with the name of Theodore. Everything changes dramatically. What was forgivable to the widow of Theodosia Moroza, the "visiting boyaryna" of the tsarina, was unacceptable and impossible for the nun Theodora. Morozova stops pretending, stops appearing at court and intensifies her protest activities. The last straw was Morozova's refusal to appear at the sovereign's wedding when he was married to Natalia Naryshkina. On the night of November 16, 1671, the nun Theodora was taken into custody. Together with her, her sister, Princess Evdokia Urusova, was arrested. Thus began the path of the cross of the noblewoman Morozova and her faithful companion and sister Evdokia Urusova. They were tortured on a rack "with shaking", interrogated for many hours, they were insulted and intimidated. Sometimes imprisonment, thanks to the efforts of noble relatives, became relatively mild, sometimes it became tougher, but the sisters were adamant. They refused to take the sacrament of the Nikonian and were baptized with two fingers. The end of the sisters' lives was terrible. In June 1675 they were placed in a deep earthen prison and forbidden by the guards on pain of death to give them water and food. First, Princess Urusova died. Nun Theodora held out until November. She was dying not as an obsessed fanatic, but as a weak woman. Tradition has preserved her touching conversation with the archer guarding her.
- Servant of Christ! - she cried - Do you have a father and mother alive or have they died? And if they are alive, let us pray for them and for you; If we die, we will remember them. Have mercy, servant of Christ! Exhausted from the gladness and hunger for yasti, have mercy on me, give me kolachik.
- No, madam, I'm afraid! - answered the archer.
Then the unfortunate woman asked for a loaf of bread or crackers, or at least a cucumber or an apple. In vain. The frightened guard did not dare to throw even a crust of bread into the pit. But he agreed to go to the river and wash the captive's shirt so as not to appear before the Lord in dirty clothes.
The ancient Orthodox Church honors the saints nun Theodora (boyarynya Morozova) and her sister Princess Evdokia in the town of Borovsk, who suffered for the Orthodoxy.
