After the death of Ivan the Terrible, there were only two representatives of the main branch of the Rurikovichs - Fyodor, who was in poor health, and the infant Dmitry, who was also born in a marriage that, according to church canons, was considered illegal.
Ivan IV married the mother of Tsarevich Dmitry, Maria Feodorovna Nagoy, four years before his death. Dmitry was born in 1582, and at the time of his father's death he was only one and a half years old. The young prince was raised by his mother, numerous relatives and an extensive court staff.
Dmitry could be considered illegitimate and excluded from the list of contenders for the throne. However, out of fear that Dmitry could become the center around which all those dissatisfied with the rule of Fyodor Ioannovich would gather, he and his mother were sent to Uglich. Formally, Dmitry received this city as an inheritance, but in reality he could only manage the income received from it and actually ended up in exile. Real power in the city was in the hands of Moscow “service people”, and, first of all, clerk Mikhail Bityagovsky.
According to the official version, on May 15, 1591, the prince and the courtyard children played “poke” with a “pile” - a penknife or a sharpened tetrahedral nail. While playing, he had an epileptic attack, accidentally hit himself in the throat with a “pile” and died in the arms of his nurse. However, the Tsarevich’s mother and her brother Mikhail Nagoy began to spread rumors that Dmitry was killed by “service men” on direct orders from Moscow. An uprising immediately broke out in Uglich. “Servant people” Osip Volokhov, Nikita Kachalov and Danila Bityagovsky, accused of murder, were torn to pieces by the crowd.
Four days later, an investigative commission was sent from Moscow, consisting of Metropolitan Gelasius of Sarsk and Podonsk, boyar Prince Vasily Shuisky, okolnichy Andrei Kleshnin and clerk Elizariy Vyluzgin.
From the investigation file, the following picture emerges of what happened in Uglich in the May days of 1591. Tsarevich Dmitry suffered from epilepsy for a long time. On May 12, shortly before the tragic event, the seizure recurred. On May 14, Dmitry felt better and his mother took him to church with her, and when she returned, she told him to take a walk in the yard. On Saturday, May 15, the queen again went with her son to mass, and then let him go for a walk in the courtyard of the palace. With the prince were mother Vasilisa Volokhova, nurse Arina Tuchkova, bed-maid Marya Kolobova and four of Dmitry’s peers, the sons of the nurse and bed-nurse Petrusha Kolobov, Ivan Krasensky and Grisha Kozlovsky. The children played poke. During the game, the prince suffered another seizure of epilepsy.
Many Uglich residents testified about the tragedy that followed. Judging by the interrogation records, the entire investigation was conducted publicly.
After questioning witnesses, the commission came to an unequivocal conclusion - death was caused by an accident. But rumors about Dmitry’s violent death did not subside. The direct heir of Ivan the Terrible, albeit illegitimate, was a competitor to the usurper Boris Godunov. Indeed, after the death of Fyodor Ioannovich, he de jure took power into his own hands. The Time of Troubles began in Rus', during which the name of Tsarevich Dmitry became a cover for many impostors.
In 1606, Vasily Shuisky, who was investigating the murder of Tsarevich Dmitry, took the throne after the murder of the first impostor, False Dmitry I. He changed his mind regarding the Uglitsky tragedy, directly stating that Dmitry was killed on the orders of Boris Godunov. This version remained official during the Romanov dynasty. A coffin with the body of the prince was removed from the crypt in Uglich. His relics were discovered incorrupt and placed in a special reliquary in the Archangel Cathedral near the grave of Ivan the Terrible. Numerous miraculous healings of the sick immediately began to occur at the shrine, and in the same year Dmitry was canonized. The veneration of Dmitry as a saint continues to this day.
A prominent specialist in genealogy and the history of writing, Sergei Sheremetev, a professor at St. Petersburg University, Konstantin Bestuzhev-Ryumin, and a prominent historian, Ivan Belyaev, believed in Dmitry’s salvation (or at least accepted this possibility). A book specifically devoted to the substantiation of this version was published by the famous journalist Alexei Suvorin.
The authors, who believed that in 1605-1606 the real Dmitry sat on the Russian throne, drew attention to the fact that the young tsar behaved with amazing confidence for an adventurer-impostor. He seemed to believe in his royal origins.
Supporters of False Dmitry's imposture emphasize that, according to the investigative case, Tsarevich Dmitry suffered from epilepsy. For a long period of time (from his appearance in Poland in 1601 to his death in 1606), False Dmitry did not experience any symptoms of this disease. Epilepsy cannot be cured even by modern medicine. However, even without any treatment, patients with epilepsy may experience temporary improvements, sometimes lasting for years and not accompanied by seizures. Thus, the absence of epileptic seizures does not contradict the possibility of the identity of False Dmitry and Dmitry.
Supporters of the version that it was not the prince who was killed in Uglich, but a stranger, pay attention to the ease with which the prince’s mother, nun Martha, recognized her son in False Dmitry. By the way, even before the impostor arrived in Moscow, summoned by Godunov, she was rumored to have stated that faithful people told her about the salvation of her son. It is also known that False Dmitry, announcing his royal origin to Prince Adam Vishnevetsky, presented as evidence a precious cross studded with diamonds. By the same cross, the mother allegedly recognized him as her son.
Those letters from the impostor in which he announced his salvation to the Russian people have also reached us. These explanations were preserved in the clearest form in the diary of the impostor’s wife, Marina Mnishek. “There was a doctor with the prince,” writes Marina, “an Italian by birth. Having become aware of the evil intent, he... found a boy similar to Dmitry, and ordered him to be constantly with the prince, even to sleep in the same bed. When the boy fell asleep, the careful doctor transferred Dmitry to another bed. As a result, another boy was killed, not Dmitry, but the doctor took Dmitry out of Uglich and fled with him to the Arctic Ocean.” However, Russian sources do not know about any foreign doctor who lived in Uglich.
Important considerations in favor of the imposture of False Dmitry are given by the German landsknecht Konrad Bussow. Not far from Uglich, Bussov and the German merchant Bernd Hoper got into a conversation with the former guard of the Uglich palace. The watchman said about False Dmitry: “He was a reasonable sovereign, but he was not the son of Ivan the Terrible, for he was really killed 17 years ago and has long since decayed. I saw him lying dead in the playground."
All these circumstances completely destroy the legend of the identity of False Dmitry and Tsarevich Dmitry. Two versions remain: he stabbed himself and was killed at the instigation of Boris Godunov. Both versions now have supporters in historical science.
The material was prepared based on open sources
The palace where Dmitry lived with his mother Maria Naga
After the death of his father, he remained the only representative of the Moscow line of the Rurikovich house, except for his elder brother, Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich. However, he was born from no less than his father's sixth marriage, while the Orthodox Church considers only three consecutive marriages legitimate, and therefore could be considered illegitimate and excluded from the number of contenders for the throne. Sent by the regency council together with his mother to Uglich, where he was considered the ruling prince and had his own court (the last Russian appanage prince), officially receiving him as an appanage, but apparently, the real reason for this was the fear of the authorities that Dmitry, willingly or unwillingly, could become a center around which all those dissatisfied with the rule of Tsar Fedor will rally.
This version is confirmed by the fact that neither the prince himself nor his relatives received any real rights to the “destiny” other than receiving a portion of the district’s income. Real power was concentrated in the hands of “service people” sent from Moscow under the leadership of clerk Mikhail Bityagovsky.
Death
On May 15, 1591, the prince played “poke”, and he was accompanied by little timid residents Petrusha Kolobov and Vazhen Tuchkov are the sons of the bed-maid and wet-nurse who were attached to the queen’s person, as well as Ivan Krasensky and Grisha Kozlovsky. The Tsarevich was looked after by his mother Vasilisa Volokhova, nurse Arina Tuchkova and bed-maid Marya Kolobova.
Murder and mourning of Dmitry. Fragment of an icon
The rules of the game, which have not changed to this day, are that a line is drawn on the ground through which a knife or sharpened nail is thrown, trying to get it stuck into the ground as far as possible. The one who makes the farthest throw wins. If you believe the testimony of eyewitnesses to the events given during the investigation, the prince had a “pile” in his hands - a sharpened tetrahedral nail or a pocket knife. The same was confirmed by the queen’s brother Andrei Nagoy, who, however, relayed the events from hearsay. There is a slightly different version, recorded from the words of a certain Romka Ivanov “and his comrades” (who also spoke, in all likelihood, from hearsay): Tsarevich amused himself with a piledriver in the ring.
Regarding what happened next, eyewitnesses are mostly unanimous - Dmitry began to have an attack of epilepsy - in the language of that time - “black sickness”, and during convulsions he accidentally hit himself with a “pile” in the throat.
According to nurse Arina Tuchkova
The same version, with some variations, was repeated by other eyewitnesses of the events, as well as by one of the queen’s brothers, Grigory Fedorovich Nagoy.
However, the queen and her other brother, Mikhail, stubbornly adhered to the version that Dmitry was stabbed to death by Osip Volokhov (the son of the prince’s mother), Nikita Kachalov and Danila Bityagovsky (the son of clerk Mikhail, sent to oversee the disgraced royal family) - that is, on the direct orders of Moscow .
The excited crowd, who raised the alarm, tore the alleged murderers to pieces. Subsequently, by order of Vasily Shuisky, the bell, which served as an alarm, had its tongue cut off (as a person), and he, along with the Uglich rebels, became the first exiles to Siberia, which had just been annexed to the Russian state. Only at the end of the 19th century was the disgraced bell returned to Uglich. Currently it hangs in the Church of Tsarevich Demetrius “On the Blood”. The body of the prince was taken to the church for the funeral service, and Andrei Alexandrovich Nagoy was “relentlessly” next to him. On May 19, four days after the death of the prince, an investigative commission arrived from Moscow consisting of Metropolitan Gelasius, the head of the Local Prikaz, Duma clerk Elizariy Vyluzgin, okolnichy Andrei Petrovich Lup-Kleshnin and the future Tsar Vasily Shuisky. The commission's conclusions at that time were clear - the prince died from an accident.
It is generally believed that he was disadvantageous to the ruler of the state, Boris Godunov, who seized absolute power in 1587, as a contender for the throne; however, many historians argue that Boris considered him illegitimate for the reason stated above and did not consider him as a serious threat.
Life after life: Time of Troubles
With the death of Dmitry, the Moscow line of the Rurik dynasty was doomed to extinction; although Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich subsequently had a daughter, she died in infancy, and he had no sons. On January 7 of the year, with the death of Fedor, the dynasty came to an end, and Boris became his successor. From this date the Time of Troubles is usually counted, in which the name of Tsarevich Dmitry became the slogan of a variety of parties, a symbol of the “right”, “legitimate” tsar; this name was adopted by several impostors, one of whom reigned in Moscow.
In 1603, False Dmitry I appeared in Poland, posing as the miraculously saved Dmitry; Boris’s government, which had previously hushed up the very fact that Tsarevich Dmitry lived in the world and remembered him as a “prince,” was forced, for propaganda purposes, to hold funeral services for him, remembering him as a prince. In June 1605, False Dmitry ascended the throne and for a year officially reigned as “Tsar Dmitry Ivanovich”; Dowager Queen Maria Nagaya recognized him as her son, but as soon as he was killed on May 18, 1606, she abandoned him and declared that her son undoubtedly died in Uglich.
False Dmitry I, portrait of the early 17th century.
After this, the same Vasily Shuisky, who fifteen years ago investigated the death of Dmitry and then recognized False Dmitry I as the true son of Ivan the Terrible, became king. Now he claimed the third version: the prince died, but not because of an accident, but was killed on the orders of Boris Godunov. As a sign of confirmation of the death of the prince, a special commission was sent to Uglich under the leadership of Filaret. Dmitry's grave was opened, and an "extraordinary incense" spread throughout the cathedral. The relics of the prince were found incorrupt (in the tomb lay the fresh corpse of a child with a handful of nuts clutched in his hand). There were rumors that Filaret bought the son of Roman from the archer, who was then killed, and his body was placed in the tomb instead of Dmitry's body. The solemn procession with the relics moved towards Moscow; On November 3, near the village of Taininskoye, she was met by Tsar Vasily with his retinue, as well as by Dmitry’s mother, nun Martha. The coffin was open, but Martha, looking at the body, could not utter a word. Then Tsar Vasily approached the coffin, identified the prince and ordered the coffin to be closed. Martha came to her senses only in the Archangel Cathedral, where she announced that her son was in the coffin. The body was placed in a shrine near the grave of Ivan the Terrible. Immediately, miracles began to happen at Dmitry’s tomb - healings of the sick, crowds of people began to besiege the Archangel Cathedral. By order of the tsar, a letter was drawn up describing the miracles of Dmitry of Uglich and sent to the cities. However, after a patient who was near death, brought to the cathedral, touched the coffin and died, access to the relics was stopped. In the same 1606, Dmitry was canonized.
Icon with scenes of the prince's murder and burial
This action did not achieve its goal, since in the same 1606 False Dmitry II (Tushinsky thief) appeared, and in 1608 False Dmitry III (Pskov thief, Sidorka) appeared in Pskov. The name of "Tsarevich Dmitry" (whom he did not identify with any of the real impostors) was used by his "voivode" Ivan Isaevich Bolotnikov. According to some reports, in 2011, the Cossack leader Ivan Zarutsky, who was the guardian of the widow of the first two False Dmitrys, Marina Mnishek, and her young son, Ivan, known as “Vorenok,” impersonated Dmitry. With the execution of this unfortunate child (), the shadow of Tsarevich Dmitry and his “descendants” ceased to hover over the Russian throne, although later the Polish nobleman Faustin Luba passed himself off (in Poland) as the son of Marina Mniszech.
In 1812, after the capture of Moscow by French troops and their allies, Dmitry's grave was again opened and plundered, and the relics were thrown out. After the expulsion of the invaders, the relics were again found and installed in the same place in the new shrine.
Disputes about the circumstances of the death of the prince
Uglich Kremlin, Church of St. Dmitry on Spilled Blood 1692
With the end of the Time of Troubles, the government of Mikhail Fedorovich returned to the official version of the government of Vasily Shuisky: Dmitry died in the year at the hands of Godunov’s mercenaries. It was also recognized as official by the church. This version was described in “History of the Russian State” by N. M. Karamzin). In 1829, historian M.P. Pogodin risked speaking out in defense of Boris's innocence. The original criminal case of the Shuisky commission, discovered in the archives, became the decisive argument in the dispute. He assured many historians and biographers of Boris (S. F. Platonov, R. G. Skrynnikov) that the cause of the death of Ivan the Terrible’s son was an accident. Some criminologists argue that the testimony recorded by the Shuisky commission gives the impression of being taken from dictation, and an epileptic child cannot injure himself with a knife during a seizure, because at this time his palms are wide open. The version according to which Tsarevich Dmitry remained alive and disappeared (in this regard, it was assumed, for example, that False Dmitry I was not an impostor, but the real son of Ivan the Terrible), discussed back in the 19th - early 20th centuries, still has supporters.
Reverence
The veneration of the faithful Tsarevich Demetrius as a saint is preserved; Since the 18th century, his image has been placed on the coat of arms of Uglich, and on the flag of the city.
In 1997, the Russian Orthodox Church, together with the Russian Children's Fund, on the initiative of the chairman of the fund, writer Albert Likhanov, established the Order of the Holy Blessed Tsarevich Demetrius. According to the order, it is awarded to persons who have made a significant contribution to the care and protection of suffering children: the disabled, orphans and street children. The order is a cross with rays made of pure silver with gilding, in the middle of which in a medallion there is an image of Tsarevich Demetrius with the inscription “For works of mercy.” Every year in Uglich on May 28, the Orthodox holiday Day of Tsarevich Dimitri is held.
Notes
Literature
- Shirokorad A. B. Path to the throne. - M.: Astrel, AST 2004. - 445 p.: ill. ISBN 5-17-024340-5
- See also “Boris Godunov” by A. S. Pushkin, Tsarevich Dmitry: murder, accident, rescue
- 415 years ago in Uglich, Tsarevich Dmitry died under mysterious circumstances.
Wikimedia Foundation.
2010.
See what “Tsarevich Dmitry” is in other dictionaries:
The request "Tsarevich Dmitry" is redirected here. See also other meanings. The request "Dmitry Uglitsky" is redirected here. See also Dmitry Ivanovich Zhilka Tsarevich Dimitry Ioannovich. Copy from the 17th century “Titular Book” of Tsarevich Dmitry. Picture... ... Wikipedia
Three Moscow princes bore the name Dmitry. All of them died or died in childhood: Dmitry Ivanovich (eldest son of Ivan IV) (1552 1553) eldest son of Ivan the Terrible. Dmitry Uglitsky (1582 1591) youngest son of Ivan the Terrible, canonized... ... Wikipedia
On May 15, 1591, in Uglich, during a game of poke, Tsarevich Dmitry, the son of his last wife Maria Nagoya, died under unclear circumstances. This event caused a rebellion, in particular, Nagikh’s political opponents and the mayor of Uglich were killed. The government formed a Commission of Inquiry to clarify the circumstances of the death. The investigation ruled that the cause of the prince's death was accidental suicide, but rumor attributed the blame for this death to Boris Godunov.
Over the past centuries, the idea of Godunov’s unequivocal guilt in the death of the prince has become entrenched in the public consciousness. This belief was given particular popularity by the play by A.S. Pushkin "Boris Godunov". In the work, Boris Godunov is shown as a wise and firm ruler, but throughout the entire narrative he is tormented by remorse for the death of his child:
...Reproach hits my ears like a hammer,
And everything feels nauseous and my head is spinning,
And the boys have bloody eyes...
After the death of Ivan the Terrible, the throne was taken by his son Fyodor Ioanovich. It is believed that he was distinguished by poor health and feeble mind. The real power was in the hands of his brother-in-law, Boris Godunov.
The youngest son of Ivan IV - Dmitry - together with his mother and relatives was sent to the appanage city of Uglich. The prince was brought up surrounded by the queen's relatives - the Nagikhs.
Many historians, starting with N.M. Karamzin, openly accuse Boris Godunov of this crime. Historical sources, stories and legends, illustrate the details of his murder, but none of the authors of the works were an eyewitness to the Uglich events. It would seem that many facts speak against Boris. After all, it was he who ultimately gained power in 1598.
Some historians, including R.G. Skrynnikov interpreted these events radically differently. Dmitry was the son of Ivan IV from his eighth marriage, who did not receive the blessing of the church.
By the time of the Tsarevich’s death (1591), the possibility of Tsar Fedor having a legal heir had not disappeared, because the latter died only a long time after the events described in 1598. Could he really calculate the course of events for the next seven years in advance?
There is an opinion that Boris Godunov specifically sent devoted people to Uglich, whose task was not to find out the truth, but to suppress the rumor about the violent death of the prince. However, as noted by R.G. Skrynnikov, attention should be paid to the fact that the investigation was headed by Godunov’s political opponent - the cunning and resourceful Prince Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky. Researchers were confused by Shuisky’s behavior, because subsequently he changed his testimony several times. According to the findings of the Investigative Commission, Boris was not involved in the death of the prince. However, later V.I. Shuisky changed his point twice depending on the political situation. And in the end, having become king, he recognized and made official the version of Dmitry’s murder. Should we trust such testimony?
It is interesting to note that immediately after the death of the prince, by order of Queen Maria Nagaya, a bloody lynching took place, during which a version arose about the planned murder of the prince. The Nagi prepared false evidence to confuse investigators, but the deception was exposed. If the prince was really killed, why did this have to be done?
From the point of view of some researchers, the Investigative Commission was tasked with investigating two issues: the case of the death of the prince, and the case of Nagikh’s treason.
As noted above, the Investigative Case recorded a version of the accidental, unexpected death of the prince. This version was based on two statements. The first was that the prince suffered from a terrible disease - epilepsy, or, as it was called in Rus', “epileptic”, “black illness”. The second fact is that it was at the moment of playing knife with the prince that he had an epileptic attack. All eyewitnesses recorded the child's seizure.
Some researchers believe that the testimony of the Uglich residents about the accidental death of the prince was obtained under pressure and threats. R.G. Skrynnikov notes that the commission did not persecute its witnesses.
The investigative case carefully and in detail examined the fact of Dmitry’s death and no direct evidence indicating Boris Godunov’s involvement in it was identified. Another thing is that with the onset of the Time of Troubles, the “name of Dmitry” was adopted by the adventurer who captured the Moscow court. And the “myth of the miraculously saved Dmitry Ioannovich” itself began to be used by different classes to satisfy their interests.
Of course, it is impossible to unequivocally state the involvement or non-involvement of Boris Godunov in the death of the prince. This issue is still debatable, but no direct evidence incriminating Boris Godunov has been found at the moment.
Sources and literature
Pushkin A.S. Boris Godunov M., 1978.
It has never happened in the Moscow state that a royal relative, even an eminent boyar, achieved such high honor and such power as Godunov: he was the real ruler of the state; Fyodor Ivanovich was a tsar in name only.
Whether foreign ambassadors came to Moscow, whether some important matter was being decided, whether it was necessary to beat the brow for the great royal favor - they turned not to the tsar, but to Boris. When he rode out, the people fell on their faces before him. The petitioners, when Boris promised them to report to the Tsar about their requests, happened to tell him:
- You yourself, our merciful sovereign, Boris Fedorovich, just say your word - and it will be!
This daring flattery not only went in vain, but even pleased the ambitious Boris. Is it any wonder that he, standing at an unprecedented height, became dizzy and became very fond of power?.. His wife, the daughter of the villain Malyuta, was no less ambitious than him.
Godunov was praised by both his own and others. Everyone was amazed at his tireless activity: he conducted continuous negotiations with foreign governments, looked for allies, improved military affairs, built fortresses, founded new cities, populated deserts, improved justice and punishment. Some praised him for the speedy resolution of the court case; others - for the acquittal of a poor man in a lawsuit with a rich man, a commoner with a famous boyar; still others praised him for building city walls and living courtyards without burdening the inhabitants... The most favorable rumors about him were spread everywhere. Both Russian ambassadors and foreign ones who visited Moscow called him the leading man in Russia and said that such wise rule had never happened in it. Even crowned heads sought Godunov's friendship.
Greater glory and power cannot be achieved by a ruler from mere mortals; but the thought that all this greatness was extremely fragile, that with the death of the sick and childless king it would collapse, must have depressed Godunov. Tsarevich Dmitry grew up in Uglich. Die today Fedor, and tomorrow farewell not only the power of Godunov, but also freedom, and perhaps life itself... Naked, the royal relatives and his worst enemies will not fail to crush the temporary worker they hate...
Nagikh was feared no less than Godunov and all his supporters; and the boyars, who did not love him, but voted in the Duma for the removal of Dmitry with his mother and relatives to Uglich, had to fear the future, they understood that they would all be in trouble when power fell into the hands of the Nagikhs.
The young prince lived with his mother in Uglich, in a small gloomy palace. He was already about nine years old. His mother and uncles were looking forward to his coming of age; There were rumors that they even called in fortune tellers to find out how long Fyodor would live. They also said that the prince, like his father, was prone to cruelty and loved to watch domestic animals being killed; They said that, while playing once with his peers, he molded several human likenesses out of snow, named them after the main royal boyars and began to beat off their heads and hands with a stick, saying that this is how he would chop down boyars when he grew up.
Of course, all these stories could have been invented by idle people, most likely by Godunov’s well-wishers and the enemies of the Nagikhs.
To Uglich, to supervise zemstvo affairs, and most of all to monitor Nagimi, Godunov sent people completely devoted to him: clerk Mikhail Bityagovsky with his son Danil and nephew Kachalov.
On May 15, 1591, at noon, a stunning event occurred in Uglich. The alarm sounded in the cathedral church. People came running from all sides, thinking there was a fire. In the palace courtyard they saw the body of the prince with his throat cut; Over the murdered man, the mother screamed in despair and shouted that the killers were sent by Boris, calling the Bityagovskys - father and son, Kachalov and Volokhov. The enraged people killed them all at the direction of the Nagikhs, and also killed several more people suspected of agreeing with the villains.
According to the chronicles, the crime was committed as follows.
The queen generally kept a watchful eye on her son, did not let him go from her, especially began to protect him from the Bityagovskys and their comrades who were suspicious to her, but on May 15, for some reason, she hesitated in the mansion, and Volokhova’s mother, a participant in the conspiracy, took the prince for a walk in the yard, The nurse followed her. On the porch the killers were already waiting for their victim. The mother's son, Osip Volokhov, approached the prince.
- Is this your new necklace, sir? - he asked, taking his hand.
- No, it’s old! - the child answered and raised his head to give him a better look at the necklace.
A knife flashed in the killer’s hands, but the blow was wrong, only the neck was wounded, but the larynx remained intact. The villain started to run. The prince fell. The nurse covered him with herself and began to scream. Danila Bityagovsky and Kachalov stunned her with several blows, pulled the child away from her and cut him to death. Then the mother ran out and started screaming in a frenzy. There was no one in the yard, but the cathedral sexton saw all this from the bell tower and rang the bell. The people came running, as said, and carried out their bloody reprisals. All those killed and torn to pieces by the people were 12 people.
Dmitry's body was placed in a coffin and taken to the cathedral church. A messenger was immediately sent to the king with terrible news. The messenger was first brought to Godunov, who ordered to take a letter from him, wrote another, which said that Dmitry himself had stabbed himself to death in a fit of epilepsy.
Fyodor Ivanovich cried for a long time and inconsolably for his brother. The investigation into this case was launched. Prince Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky, Okolnichy Kleshnin and Krutitsy Metropolitan Gelasy were to investigate on the spot in Uglich everything as it happened and report to the tsar. The last two were supporters of Godunov, and Shuisky was his enemy. Obviously, Godunov was counting on the fact that the cautious Shuisky did not dare to accuse him of anything, and yet all the unkind rulers had their mouths closed by Shuisky’s appointment: no one could say that the investigation was carried out only by Godunov’s friends.
The investigation was conducted in an extremely dishonest manner; it was aimed, it seemed, at concealing the crime: a careful examination of the body was not made; no testimony was taken from the people who killed Bityagovsky and his accomplices; The queen was not asked either. Most importance was attached to the testimony of several dubious individuals who claimed that the prince stabbed himself to death in a fit of epilepsy.
The investigative case was given for discussion by the patriarch and the clergy. The Patriarch recognized the investigation as correct, and it was decided that Tsarevich Dmitry’s death was caused by God’s court, and Mikhailo Nagoy ordered the sovereign’s officials: the Bityagovskys, Kachalov and others to be beaten in vain...
Godunov exiled all the Nagi to distant cities as a prisoner; Queen Mary was forcibly tonsured under the name of Martha and imprisoned in a monastery. The people of Uglich fell into disgrace. Those accused of murdering Bityagovsky and his comrades were sentenced to death. Some had their tongues cut out for “inappropriate speech”; many people were exiled to Siberia; they populated the newly founded city of Pelym. A popular legend has developed that Godunov from Uglich even exiled to Siberia the bell that was rung at the hour of the prince’s death. This bell is still shown in Tobolsk.
The naked suffered, but popular rumor pronounced its verdict on Godunov. The conviction that he had ruined the prince grew stronger among the people - and the very people who were not embittered against Ivan the Terrible for his cruel and countless executions could never, despite all the good deeds and mercies, forgive the ambitious man for the death of the last branch of the royal house, the martyrdom of an innocent child.
Whether Godunov is guilty of the murder of Dmitry, as popular rumor said, or not is a dark matter. There were rumors that the murderers, tormented by the people, confessed before their deaths that they had been sent by Godunov; but it is unlikely that, with his intelligence and caution, he could decide on such a gross and dangerous crime. It would be more correct to assume that Godunov’s well-wishers, realizing the trouble that threatened both him and them with Dmitry’s accession, themselves came up with the crime.
With the death of the prince, Godunov's position was strengthened. It was unlikely that even then he dreamed of the royal throne: what was important for him was that he got rid of the Naked, which was terrible for him. Now, with the death of the childless king, he could hope that power would pass to the queen, and with her he would remain as an all-powerful ruler.
Soon after the death of the prince, a strong fire broke out in Moscow, incinerating a significant part of the city. Godunov immediately began distributing benefits to fire victims and rebuilt entire streets at his own expense. Unprecedented generosity, however, did not attract people to him; There were even unkind rumors that Godunov secretly ordered his people to set fire to Moscow in order to divert the attention of Muscovites from the murder of the prince and show himself as a people's benefactor.
In 1592, Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich had a daughter, Theodosius. Great was the joy of the king and queen; Godunov was happy, or at least showed an appearance of joy. In the name of the tsar, he freed prisoners, gave out generous alms, but the people did not believe his sincerity, and when, a few months later, the child died, absurd rumors began to circulate among the people that Godunov had tormented the little princess.
He obviously became a victim of merciless human rumors.
The death of Tsarevich Dmitry, the youngest son of Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible, is still the subject of controversy among historians. Dmitry was born on October 19, 1582. His mother was the last, sixth wife of the Tsar, Maria Nagaya. Grozny had two adult sons from his first marriage to Anastasia Zakharyina - Ivan and Fedor, but Ivan, the heir to the throne, was killed by his father in a fit of anger.
Fedor was a sickly and weak man. Having become king, he actually ceded power to the regency council, which was dominated by the brother of his wife Irina, boyar Boris Godunov. And little Dmitry was given the city of Uglich as his inheritance. But in reality the boy was simply expelled from Moscow so that he would not become the center around which the dissatisfied would rally. True, Dmitry could not be considered the legal heir. Maria Nagaya was the sixth wife of the Tsar, and the Orthodox Church recognizes only three marriages as legal. But there could still be danger from him. And therefore, the widow and her son were in Uglich rather in honorable exile. The city was ruled by servicemen sent from Moscow, led by clerk Mikhail Bityagovsky.
The boy grew up, and gradually it became clear that he was unwell. The child had epilepsy, which was then called epilepsy. Dmitry loved to play pile (poke). This game consists of drawing a line on the ground through which a knife or sharpened tetrahedral nail is thrown. The one who throws further wins. Or the pile is thrown into the outlined ring, trying to hit the target. If anything, giving a sick child a knife or nail seems irresponsible. However, for a noble boy, especially a prince, not to carry a weapon was simply impossible in those days.
And then one day, May 15, 1591, the prince was playing poke in the yard with other children - the sons of his bed-wife and nurse. Nearby were mother Vasilisa Volokhova, nurse Arina Tuchkova and bed-maid Marya Kolobova.
The Queen Mother was in the house at that time. Suddenly, screams were heard from the street, Maria Nagaya ran out onto the porch and saw with horror that her son was lying in the arms of the nurse, bloodied and dead. She screamed that clerk Bityagovsky was guilty, that Godunov had sent the killers. Unrest began in the city. The cathedral bell struck. The crowd tore to pieces several people, including Mikhail Bityagovsky, his son Danila, Nikita Kachalov and Osip Volokhov, Vasilisa’s son.
The prince's body was taken to the church for the funeral service, where the queen's brother Andrei Alexandrovich Nagoy was constantly with him. And on May 19, an investigative commission arrived from Moscow consisting of Metropolitan Gelasius, the head of the Local Prikaz, Duma clerk Elizariy Vyluzgin, okolnichy Andrei Petrovich Lup-Kleshnin and boyar Vasily Shuisky. Although Shuisky was from the Rurik family and hated the upstart Boris Godunov, who had seized all power in the country and was about to sit on the throne, he carried out the investigation extremely carefully. First, he checked the testimony of the queen and her brothers Mikhail and Andrei, who accused the Bityagovskys and Volokhov. Witnesses, however, testified that the Bityagovskys were having dinner at home when the alarm bell sounded in the city. Moreover, it turned out that Mikhail Nagoy, the night before Shuisky’s arrival, ordered bloody knives to be placed on the corpses of the Bityagovskys, thrown into a ditch near the city wall.
The boys, Dmitry's playmates, said that "... the prince poked a knife with them in the backyard, and an illness came upon him - an epileptic illness - and attacked the knife." This was confirmed by adult witnesses - connectors Larionov, Ivanov and Gnidin. Vasilisa Volokhova said this: “...threw him to the ground, and then the prince stabbed himself in the throat with a knife.” Other eyewitnesses claimed that the prince ran into a knife, “fighting” or “flying” to the ground. So, the commission came to the conclusion that the prince died from an accident. But how plausible is all this? Some historians believe that the evidence was forged or torn out under threat. Many people doubt whether it is possible to kill yourself with a knife or a sharp nail during an epileptic seizure? This cannot be ruled out - on the neck, directly under the skin, there are the carotid artery and jugular vein. If one of these vessels is damaged, death is inevitable. A puncture of the jugular vein entails almost instant death; with bleeding from the carotid artery, the agony can be prolonged. In any case, such a version is not excluded. But many criminologists argue that an epileptic child cannot injure himself with a knife during a seizure, because at this time his palms are wide open. And the version that Dmitry was killed remains very widespread. But why did Boris need this? Clear your path to power? But Tsar Fedor, although sickly, was young, and there remained hope that Tsarina Irina would give birth to a son. (Moreover, soon the tsar had a daughter, Theodosia, who, however, died in infancy.) But if a son had been born, would Boris really have had to kill him too? This would raise even greater suspicions. True, it can be assumed that Godunov himself did not organize the murder, but other people did it on their own initiative and in their own interests. Nevertheless, the death of Dmitry really brought Boris to the throne after the death of thirty-nine-year-old Fyodor in 1598. And the incomprehensible circumstances of the death of the little prince subsequently caused the appearance of impostors.
In 1606, as a result of a coup, Vasily Shuisky became king. This man, who once came to the conclusion that it was an accident and then recognized False Dmitry I as the legitimate son of Ivan the Terrible, now began to claim that the prince was killed on the orders of Boris Godunov. To confirm the death of the boy in 1591, he ordered the body of the prince to be brought from Uglich. This time the commission was headed by Metropolitan Filaret of Rostov - boyar Fyodor Nikitich Romanov, father of the future Tsar Mikhail Romanov.
Under the supervision of Filaret, the grave was opened and they saw there the incorrupt, fresh corpse of a child with a handful of nuts clutched in his fist. The coffin was brought to Moscow and shown to the people. Queen Maria Nagaya, tonsured a nun under the name of Martha, looked at the child, but did not say a word. Tsar Vasily confidently identified the prince and ordered the coffin to be closed. But Martha only came to her senses in the Archangel Cathedral and confirmed that this was her son. In the same 1606, Dmitry was canonized as a saint. However, there is still no exact answer to the questions of what happened in Uglich, whether the prince was killed and who Filaret brought to Moscow.
