Trade route Muscovy England. Political interests of Muscovy in England

WHITE LILY OF STALINGRAD. Fighter pilot. Call sign - "White Lily" Many in Russia know the names of the pilots who defended the skies of our Motherland during the harsh years of the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945 and the feats they accomplished. Books have been written and films have been made about some of them. Names such as Alexander Pokryshkin, Grigory Rechkalov, Ivan Kozhedub, Alexey Maresyev have been known to us since childhood. We also know about women pilots who took part in the war. We mostly know those who served in the Po-2 light night bomber regiments, about which much has been written and the film “Night Witches in the Sky” was filmed. These women made a huge contribution to the defeat of the German invaders and the approach of Victory. But not everyone knows that among these fragile girls and women there were fighter pilots. Three fighter regiments, staffed by one female staff, fought on the fronts, and also in some fighter divisions separate female units were formed. About one of these legendary women, a fighter pilot, a Hero Soviet Union Guard junior lieutenant Lydia Vladimirovna Litvyak this article. Road to Heaven Lydia Litvyak was born in Moscow on August 18, 1921. These were difficult years for the young country - the Civil War had just ended, the country was in devastation. Lydia's father was a railway worker and worked at the depot. In the difficult year of 1937, following a false denunciation, he was arrested and shot as an “enemy of the people.” Since this could cause great harm, the young girl carefully hid this fact. Lidia Vladimirovna “fell ill” with the sky early, at the age of 14, along with adults, she signed up for a flying club - in those years the cry was thrown out in the USSR: “Youth - to OSOAVIAKHIM!”, and already at the age of 15 she made her first independent flight. Then she completes a geology course and goes on an expedition to the Far North. The next step on the path to the sky was the Kherson Aviation School of Pilot Instructors, after graduating from which Litvyak became one of the best instructors at the flying club in the city of Kalinin. By the beginning of the war, she managed to train 45 cadets. To the front With the start of the war, in June 1941, the country needed qualified pilots and Lydia signed up as a volunteer. At the beginning, the command did not intend to use women as fighters; they were assigned secondary roles. But gradually, due to the loss of a large number of career pilots, views changed dramatically. In the fall of 1941, the State Defense Committee headed by I.V. Stalin decided to form three women's air regiments. These units were formed under the leadership of the legendary pilot, Hero of the Soviet Union Maria Raskova. Lydia, having learned at the beginning of 1942 about the formation of a fighter aviation regiment, attributed 100 missing hours to her flight time and was immediately enrolled in the 586th IAP. And already in June of this year she made her first combat flight in the skies over Saratov on a Yak-1 aircraft. In August of the same year, having one group victory (Ju-88) to her credit, she achieved transfer to the 286th Fighter Air Division. But already in early September, several of the best pilots of the division, including Lydia Litvyak, were transferred to the “male” 437th IAP Stalingrad Front, for further service on La-5 fighters. Already on September 13, during her second flight as part of this regiment, the girl shot down two German aircraft - a Me Bf 109-F2 fighter and a Ju 88-A1 bomber. Two weeks later, another victory - another Ju 88-A1. And another one paired with pilot R. Belyaeva - Me Bf-109 F2. Soon Litvyak was transferred to a separate women's unit at the division headquarters, and from there to the 9th Guards Odessa IAP - a regiment of aces that fought on the Yak-1. The birth of an ace. On February 23, 1943, Lydia Vladimirovna received her first military award- Order of the Red Star. By this time, there were 8 stars on board her Yak - 8 air victories. At the same time, the hood of her fighter was decorated with a bright white lily, the insignia of a pilot who was allowed to “free hunt.” Lydia’s call sign also changed, now she was known as “White Lily-44” (44 is the tail number of her plane). In mid-March, the air situation at the front became more complicated - battles began to gain air supremacy in the skies of Kuban. By documentary evidence up to 80 occurred daily over the Kuban air battles, With big losses on both sides. In such battles, pilots became aces. On March 22, Lydia took part in the interception of a Ju 88-A1 group in the Rostov-on-Don area. In this difficult and long battle, she shoots down another plane, but the “six” Me Bf 109-G6 came from the clouds to the aid of her bombers. It was a new modification of this aircraft, with a more powerful engine and cannon armament. Fight at high speeds and incredible turns with inhuman overloads lasted more than 15 minutes. The pilot was wounded, the plane was seriously damaged, but she still managed to reach the airfield and land the crippled fighter. It was after this battle that Lydia Litvak was recognized as an ace. After treatment in the hospital, the girl returns to her native regiment. And already on May 5, not yet strong enough, she takes part in a combat mission - accompanies our bombers. During this flight, he repels several attacks by German fighters and shoots down one of them. Two days later, another victory - another Me Bf 109-F2. At the end of May, Litvyak carries out a unique attack and destroys the enemy spotter balloon in the air, which they could not destroy for a long time. Lydia approached him from enemy territory from the direction of the sun. The attack lasted only 39 seconds. For this victory of the guard, junior lieutenant Lydia Vladimirovna Litvyak was awarded the Order of the Red Banner of Battle. All newspapers wrote about her exploits in the sky and her name became known throughout the country. Brief happiness and the bitterness of loss Life does not end at the front and Lydia met her love there. It was a pilot of the same regiment, its leader Alexey Salomatin. The young people fell in love with each other and in April 1943, during a break between battles, they married. But war is war. She made adjustments to this young family as well. On May 21, 1943, a young girl experienced the pain of near loss. In a difficult unequal battle, covering her comrade, her husband, Hero of the Soviet Union Guard Captain Alexei Frolovich Salomatin, died. The bitterness of irreparable loss overwhelmed Lydia. On July 19 of the same year, a new personal tragedy died - her best friend Ekaterina Budanova, who was considered the most productive of the female aces, died, she had 11 victories (Lydia at that time had 10 plus 3 in the group). The girl vowed to take revenge on the enemy for her family and friends without sparing her life. Lydia herself was on the verge of death more than once - she was shot down twice over territory occupied by the enemy. But both times she returned safely to the unit. The first time she spent 3 days getting out of enemy territory - she walked at night so as not to be captured, and the second time she was saved by a friend, the pilot made a risky landing next to the pilot’s downed car and took her out in the cockpit of his plane. Last flight On August 1, 1943, Lydia Vladimirovna Litvyak made her last combat flight. The Yak-1 flight was covered by Il-2 attack aircraft going to attack enemy positions. For Lydia, this was already the fourth flight of the day. In previous missions, she had already shot down one enemy aircraft. In the area where the attack aircraft were operating, our flight met with a large group of German fighters, the number of which was 3 times greater than our Yaks. Despite this, our fighters entered into an unequal battle. According to eyewitnesses, four Me Bf 109-G6 immediately rushed towards the plane with a white lily on board - Lydia’s plane was well known to German pilots. A deadly carousel began to spin - 1 against 4. The air was deafening, the roar of engines working at the limit, and bursts of cannon fire. From this chaos a fighter fell out, engulfed in flames - Litvyak shot down the second enemy plane of the day and the twelfth in a row. But the battle was unequal. Several cannon bursts from three German fighters “pierced” Lydia Vladimirovna’s Yak. The plane of the legendary pilot and brave girl, engulfed in flames, fell into the forest near the village of Dmitrievka. In two weeks she would have turned only 22 years old. The regiment command urgently organized a search for her. But neither the plane nor the pilot could be found. It was because of this that Lydia Litvyak was never awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union, which was awarded for 10 aerial victories. And her name “fell out” of history for decades. Hero's Star Even though the search for Lydia back in 1943 did not lead to her finding, the girl's relatives and fellow soldiers stubbornly continued them. And finally, in 1979, they achieved the long-awaited success. It was found and documented that the remains of guard junior lieutenant Lydia Vladimirovna Litvyak, born in 1921, were buried in a mass grave in the village of Dmitrievka, Shakhtarsky district, on Donetsk soil. In 1988, in her personal file, the entry “missing in action” was changed to another “died while performing a combat mission.” After this, veterans of the 9th Guards IAP, in which she served and fought, wrote a letter to the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR with a petition to award her the title of Hero of the Soviet Union. The request of fellow soldiers did not go unanswered. By decree of the President of the USSR dated May 5, 1990, Lydia Vladimirovna Litvyak was awarded the long-awaited and fully deserved title of Hero of the Soviet Union (posthumously). And on October 25, 1993, by Presidential Decree Russian Federation, as recognition of her military merits during the Great Patriotic War, Lydia Vladimirovna Litvyak was awarded the title of Hero of Russia (posthumously). Epilogue Lydia Litvyak became a real legend during the war. Shot down the most planes among female pilots. She was wounded three times, made an emergency landing on enemy territory twice, but was able to return to her regiment. During her short combat career, she made 186 combat missions and conducted 69 air battles. He has 12 confirmed victories to his name. And I would like to express my deepest bow to her relatives, fellow soldiers, and friends who did not give up and continued the search for the legendary pilot, as well as to all those who helped them in this and returned her undeservedly forgotten name to us. Thank you from the entire post-war generation. The combat path of Lydia Litvyak 1940 - Becomes an instructor pilot at OSOAVIAKHIM October 1941 - Undergoes combat training in Engels January 1942 - Enlisted in the women's 586th IAP September 1942 - Sent to the 437th IAP February 1943 - First award - Order of the Red Star May 1943 - Order of the Red Banner August 1943 Died in battle having won her 12th victory May 1990 awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union (posthumously) October 1993 awarded the title of Hero of Russia (posthumously)

English king

Why did Russia need ports on the Baltic in the 16th century? Before that, for centuries, Novgorodians had access to the sea, but they did not try to build fortresses or cities right on the shore. Ivan-Gorod was built opposite Narva only in 1492, and even then exclusively as a fortress. Control of the coast had only military significance. After all, having captured the mouth of the Neva, the Swedes or Germans could close the exit to the Baltic for Novgorod ships, thereby putting Novgorod commodity flows under their control. The Swedes seriously tried to do this twice. It is significant that both times the events took place on the territory of the future St. Petersburg. In 1240 they landed at the mouth of the Neva, but were attacked by the Novgorodians and forced to retreat. In honor of this battle, the leader of the Novgorodians, Prince Alexander, received the nickname Nevsky. However, 60 years later, Swedish Marshal Torkel Knutsson made a second attempt, entering the mouth of the Neva with a fleet of more than a hundred ships. This time, the attempts of the Novgorodians to throw the enemy into the sea were unsuccessful, and the Swedes founded the Landskrona fortress, as Karamzin notes, “seven versts from present-day St. Petersburg.” After the Swedish fleet left, the Novgorodians attacked the city and in 1301 razed it to the ground.

However, over time, the positions of the Novgorodians objectively became weaker. In the 8th-11th centuries, river and sea vessels differed little. Already in the 12th century, Italians and Germans were building sea vessels that were significantly superior in carrying capacity to the boats of the Russians and Scandinavians. And with the beginning of the great geographical discoveries a new one begins to develop merchant fleet. The tonnage and size of ships is steadily increasing. Novgorod river fleet finally becomes uncompetitive.

The British “discover” Muscovy

IN early XVI century, the economy of the Muscovite kingdom is developing in much the same way as in other European countries. In 1534, Elena Glinskaya, the mother of the future Tsar Ivan the Terrible, carried out a monetary reform that replaced the coins of various appanage principalities with a single system. Conditions arise for the formation of an all-Russian domestic market. Production and trade are growing. The paradox is that economic growth is also accompanied by increasing backwardness of Russia from the West. This apparent contradiction is caused by the fact that, being involved in the general process of development and socio-economic transformation, Russia finds itself on its periphery.

Economic growth occurs against the backdrop of expanding state borders. If Western European countries begin to create colonies in America and on the coast of Africa, then Russia is moving east. The first stage of this movement was the conquest of the Kazan Khanate. As M. Pokrovsky notes, the trigger for this expansion was, as in Western Europe, a combination of the interests of the land-poor nobility and merchant capital. The nobility grew quantitatively, became more and more numerous and (like the Spanish hidalgos) no longer lacked either peasants or land, while capital grew qualitatively and was able to finance noble expeditions in its own interests. A similar situation in Western Europe was observed already in the era Crusades, and by the end of the 15th century a similar situation had developed in both the east and west of the continent.

This is superimposed on the crisis of the traditional feudal economy caused by the development of the market. The estates are losing their isolation. “The transformation of bread into a commodity,” notes Pokrovsky, “made the land that gave the bread a commodity.” The old relationships of ownership and mutual responsibility are being called into question. However, the boyar estate is not sold or divided; it remains a family inheritance.

Most quickly market relations are adopted in Russia by monasteries. On the contrary, large boyar estates turned out to be a brake on development. However, it was impossible to divide them or sell them on the market due to the remaining political power of the boyars. This also makes the Russian situation in many ways similar to the Spanish one (unlike England, where after the Wars of the Roses the old aristocracy was largely exterminated and its political influence undermined). Since the expropriation of the boyars was politically difficult and risky, external expansion seemed a reasonable solution: it was possible to obtain land and supply grain to the market without sacrificing the interests of the boyars. However, the war in the Kazan Khanate was not as easy as it seemed at first. After the capture of Kazan, the resistance of local residents in the form of guerrilla warfare continued for about 6 years. The victory was achieved only through the massive resettlement of Russian colonists from the interior regions of the country to the Volga region. Peasants died in the thousands, but they changed the demographic situation in favor of the conquerors. The nobility, on the contrary, was the loser. During the 6 years of war, it was never able to seize new estates, and the peasants western regions became even smaller. The merchants won more. Merchant capital gained access to river routes leading to Persia, but this only whetted its appetites.

Now Russia is trying to get rid of trade intermediaries - German merchants who control trade in the eastern Baltic through Riga, Revel, Narva. Meanwhile, Russia is not the only country that is hampered by German trade mediation. A new trading power, England, is beginning to rise in Western Europe. She has not yet become the mistress of the seas, and main problem for the development of British merchant capitalism is the Spanish-Portuguese monopoly in the Atlantic. But German domination in the Baltic also restrains the development of English trade. We need new markets and new sources of raw materials. Russia can provide both for English merchant capital.

In 1553, three ships set sail towards Norway, officially with the goal of finding a northern sea route to China, Japan and India. The idea was initially unrealistic. The Northern Sea Route bypassing Siberia and Chukotka could not be properly constructed even in Soviet times with the help of icebreakers. However, in the 16th century, the idea of ​​​​opening a northern route to China did not seem crazy either in England or in Russia itself. Thirty years after the failure of the English expedition, the merchant house of the Stroganovs made a second such attempt. The Dutch sailors they hired in 1584 tried to do what the British could not, and, naturally, also failed.

Meanwhile, the English expedition initially pursued a much wider range of goals. Its organizers were looking for new markets, because “our merchants are discovering that the goods and products of England are not in great demand among the countries and peoples around us.” The ships that set sail carried with them a message from King Edward VI, addressed to no less than “all kings, princes, rulers, judges and governors of the earth.” This was not only a confirmation of the powers of the travelers, who were both merchants and official representatives of their country. "The letter described the benefits free trade in terms that free trade economists would appreciate schools XIX century,” writes the English historian T.S. Willan (T.S.Willan).

Two ships were lost because the crews were not prepared for sailing in the extreme north. The leader of the expedition, Hugh Willoughby, also died along with them. But the third ship - Edward Bonaventure under the command of captain Richard Chancellor - entered the mouth of the Northern Dvina. In February 1554, Chancellor was received in Moscow by Ivan the Terrible as the English ambassador. The Tsar granted the British trade privileges in Russia, including the right to duty-free trade throughout the country.

After this, Chancellor and his companions returned safely to their homeland. A year later, The Moscow Company or The Russian Company was created in London. The significance of this company is already indicated by the fact that it was the first such company whose charter was approved by parliament. IN in a certain sense The Moscow Company turned out to be not only the prototype of trade and political organizations created to work in the West Indies and East Indies, but also the predecessor of transnational corporations of the twentieth century.

The company's commercial activities were closely connected with diplomatic ones. English embassies at the royal court protected the interests of merchants, and the company's representative office conducted the affairs of the English crown. While in Muscovy, the British wasted no time. Unlike the notes of other travelers, the texts prepared by Chancellor and his friend John Hasse most closely resemble instructions for commercial use Russia. He describes in detail the economic geography of the kingdom of Ivan the Terrible: where and what is produced, what can be bought, what and where can be sold. Soon after this, the English Courtyard appeared in Moscow - first one building, and then a whole complex of structures - residential, commercial, industrial, the remains of which still exist in Moscow. Stone house on Varvarka was granted to the British as a gift from the Tsar “as a sign of his special favor.” As Russian sources noted, this was not enough for the company: “and the Aglin Germans built the wooden mansions themselves.” Soon “English houses” appeared in Kholmogory, Yaroslavl, Borisov and other cities. The company had offices in Novgorod, Pskov, Yaroslavl, Kazan, Astrakhan, Kostroma, and Ivangorod. In Yaroslavl, the British set up large warehouses for goods, which were then sent to Asia. Protestant churches also appeared in Muscovy. In general, in relation to the Western Reformation, Moscow rulers did not take the position of outside observers. “The Russian government,” notes the famous researcher I. Lyubmenko, “while being extremely hostile towards Catholics, often showed great tolerance towards Protestants.”

Northern route

The new trade route was important not only for the British, but also for Muscovy. Arrives in England in 1556 Russian embassy led by boyar Osip Nepeya. Chancellor died delivering him to London, but he completed his mission. Nepeya went down in the history of diplomacy because he “achieved in London the same benefits that the British received in Moscow.” However, Russian merchants could not use them. They did not have a fleet capable of making long sea voyages. Since 1557, regular trade along the northern route began. Initially, these journeys were accompanied by numerous casualties. 6-7 ships left England for navigation and sometimes no more than half made it back safely. The navigation season was short - the sea froze for 5-6 months. However, as English sailors gained experience sailing in northern latitudes, these voyages became less risky. Nevertheless, the company periodically complained of losses - Tatar raids, pirates, northern storms, all of which damaged trade. The raid of the Crimean Khan Devlet-Girey on Moscow caused the company a loss of a huge sum of 10 thousand rubles at that time (which, however, also testifies to the company’s huge turnover). About 40 Englishmen out of 60 who were in Moscow at that moment died in the fire. The Tatar pogrom apparently made a strong impression on the company's management, and therefore, already under Tsar Feodor, the British donated 350 pounds for the construction of a new stone wall around Moscow.

The company's shareholders were repeatedly urged to make additional investments - 50 pounds per share in 1570, 200 pounds in 1572. But they were not going to wind down the business. And the reason for this is not only in the high profits that were able to be obtained from time to time from trade with Muscovy, but also in the importance of these supplies for the general military-political situation England. They brought from Russia not just northern goods, but strategic raw materials.

As Willan notes, the Anglo-Russian trade of the 16th century “was in many ways reminiscent of the exchange that developed between England and its colonies.” Wood, wax, leather, meat, lard, sometimes grain, flax, hemp (hemp), vorovan (train-oil), resin, ropes, and ship masts were supplied from Russia to England. The king himself was bargaining. According to the British, he was “one of the most important suppliers of wax and sable furs.” Wax was an extremely profitable commodity - candles were made from it, and huge quantities were required to illuminate Gothic cathedrals. This made it possible for the king to assert that wax was not a simple product, but a sacred, “reserved” one. And kings should trade it. Such a monopoly was a real punishment for other Russian merchants, and it was not cheap for the British, but for Tsar Ivan it turned out to be extremely profitable. As for goods brought from England, the tsar demanded the right of first sale, but paid inaccurately. In this, however, the king also did not differ from his contemporaries. Elizabeth of England also did not like to pay debts.

During the oprichnina, the English company tried to get the tsar to return the money owed to it by the boyars executed by the tsar. The tsar listened to the claims, but did not give the money, recommending his English partners to lend less frequently to the Muscovites. However, sometimes bad debts returned. During the Bowes embassy, ​​Ivan the Terrible suddenly ordered the payment of 3,000 marks, which had already been written off by the company.

"Moscow company"

The British brought paper, sugar, salt, fabrics, dishes, copper, lead tiles for roofing, and luxury goods to Moscow. London cloth in Russian markets was called “lundysh”. “Exotic” goods that came to Russia from America and Asia through the Moscow Company were also of considerable importance. In the lists of supplied goods we also find almonds, raisins, horse harnesses, medicines, musical instruments, halberds, jewelry, dishes and even... lions. They also carried bells and precious metals, which were prohibited for export from England, but by special order of the crown an exception was made for Russia. And yet, what was especially important for Moscow was that lead, gunpowder, saltpeter, sulfur and, apparently, weapons and ammunition arrived on English ships.

Of course, the Moscow Company was not a monopolist in trade with the West. German, Dutch, Italian, Danish, even Spanish and Italian entrepreneurs flocked to Muscovy. However, it was the British who managed to bring trade cooperation to the level of state policy in the 16th century.

In 1557, the British established rope production in Kholmogory. Vologda became another production center of the company. By 1560, local workers had already mastered the technology, and most English craftsmen returned to their homeland. During their stay in Kholmogory, English craftsmen were paid 9 pounds per year (of which 2 pounds per year were deposited into their account in England). This was quite decent money for that time, but the influx of precious metals from America caused rampant inflation, which went down in history as the “price revolution.” As it turns out, this happened not only in Western Europe. 25 years after the first English workshops appeared in Muscovy, a certain John Finch, citing high costs, already demanded an increase in wages to 42 rubles per year - in English money this was 28 pounds. As T.S. rightly notes. Willan, this indicates “that the “price revolution” reached Russia during this time.”

In 1558, a representative of the Moscow Company, Anthony Jenkinson, received permission from the king for an expedition to Persia and Bukhara along the Volga route. Although a significant part of the purchased goods was lost on the way back, what was brought was enough to justify the company's activities for a long time in a commercial sense. At the same time, the English merchant carried out a diplomatic mission for Ivan the Terrible in Persia. The Moscow Tsar sought an alliance with the Persians against the Turks.

At the dawn of capitalism, politics was openly intertwined with trade. Azerbaijani researcher L.I. Yunusova notes that Jenkinson's commercial success was largely determined by the fact that he was “not just an English merchant, but an envoy of the Russian Tsar.”

Jenkinson's mission marked the beginning of a long period of competition and cooperation between English and Russian capital in the Caspian Sea. On the one hand, Moscow, and later St. Petersburg, needed foreign partners. Trade with Persia was largely transit. The British helped establish trade routes; Persian silk and other goods were exported further to Europe on English and later Dutch ships. But on the other hand, the partners waged a fierce struggle among themselves. Both of them sought to retain the maximum share of the profits from Persian trade.

Jenkinson achieved trade privileges in Persia similar to those in Moscow. English expeditions to Persia followed one after another - in 1564, 1565, 1568, 1569 and 1579. This caused concern in Moscow, where they did not want to cede such a profitable trade route to foreigners. In the future royal court takes measures to ensure that Volga trade remains under his control, and limits the activities of the British in this direction. Trade expeditions to the south could only be undertaken with royal permission and with joint forces. Despite all the problems, the Persian trade was a real “golden mine” for the company, but early XVII century, another, safer and simpler route to Persia through the Indian Ocean is being established. East India Company begins to export Persian goods to the West in significant quantities, thereby reducing the commercial attractiveness of the Volga route. Later, another transit route appeared - through Turkey. Nevertheless, trade with Persia across the Caspian continued, leading to the prosperity of Astrakhan.

Partners or competitors?

Subsequently, the activities of the Moscow Company became a topic of heated discussion among Russian historians. The 19th century historian N. Kostomarov drew attention to the fact that English merchants, organized around the Moscow Company, were closely connected with their government and acted in concert, often even to the detriment of their compatriots who did not have political support in London. Kostomarov is convinced that the British had “extensive types of political dominance in Russia.” It is easy to guess that this thesis was very popular among Soviet historians, especially in the early years of the Cold War. Row Soviet authors argued that the British found a backward country in Russia and “strove in every possible way to consolidate this backwardness,” “prevented the Russians from mastering and studying advanced technology,” and went “through pressure and blackmail.” On the contrary, historians of the “Western” persuasion saw in the English merchants representatives of an advanced civilization who brought knowledge to the backward Russian people. Only in the early 1960s did Ya.S. Lurie tried to demythologize the history of Anglo-Russian relations in the 16th century.

The activities of the British in Russia were accompanied by numerous mutual claims between Russian and English partners. Complaints by Russian merchants about foreign competition are repeated regularly, starting from the second half XVI and ending with the era of the first Romanovs. In the 1646 petition submitted to the tsarist government against the “Aglitsky Germans”, the claims made are approximately the same as in documents more early period. The Russians accused the British of manipulating prices, the British, in turn, complained about the unreliability of Russian merchants, frequent delays, and fraud. Often, the complaints of the British (and foreigners in general) who were in Muscovy in the 16th and 17th centuries look quite comical. Thus, foreigners complained that they were being “fed,” clearly trying to harm their health with excessive food. In Muscovy of those times, it was indecent to get up from the table on your own, and if the next day the guests did not complain of feeling unwell due to excessive food and drink, then the feast was considered unsuccessful. Communicating with their Russian partners, the British noticed that they did not keep their words, “and if they start swearing and swearing, they probably want to deceive.” The ability of the Russians to combine ingenuity and enterprise with carelessness and dishonesty could not help but amaze the Protestants, however, as Kostomarov notes, the mutual claims of Russian and Western merchants never prevented them from “deceiving the government together.”

To be fair, it should be noted that the situation always looks more dramatic in hindsight. The fact is that cases where the parties separated amicably leave fewer traces in the documents. It is when mutual claims arise that people begin to write complaints and contact various authorities, thereby providing material for future historians. Paradoxically, it is huge amount all sorts of complaints testifies to the scope and intensity of trade relations between the British and Russians.

In reality, of course, the main problems were not cultural contradictions. Having settled in Muscovy, the British began to trade in the domestic market, successfully competing with local merchants. They organized their own network of suppliers and a wholesale purchasing system, providing loans to manufacturers. This order, Kostomarov notes, “was beneficial for small traders and for the people in general, but ruinous for Russian wholesale traders.” The law of merchant capitalism is that whoever has the most capital controls the market. Having an advantage in financial resources, the British occupied more strong positions than their Russian competitors.

The behavior of English merchants in Muscovy caused discontent not only among their competitors among the Russian merchants, but also among many in England itself. In London there was a belief that Russian soil had a corrupting effect on company employees. Once in Muscovy, they quickly became rich, built luxurious mansions that London shareholders could not afford, adopted local customs, and kept servants, dogs and bears. They began, like the Moscow boyars, to overeat to the point of stomach cramps. In London it was believed that Russia was corrupting the British with the temptation of excessive freedom, and those who lived in Moscow did not want to return to Puritan abstinence. Ambassador Bowes openly complained to Grozny about his poverty (my pitiful estate at home). When company employees were recalled, they did everything to stay. Some switched to Russian service for this and even converted to Orthodoxy.

Trade with the British was so important for Ivan the Terrible that he ordered boyar Boris Godunov, at that moment a rising star in the Kremlin administration, to deal with their affairs. The British called Godunov in their own way “protector”. The English astrologer, known in Moscow as Elisha Bomeliy, enjoyed particular influence at the tsar’s court. In addition to predicting the future, he also performed more practical tasks ruler: prepared poisons for him, collected information about boyars suspected of treason. “The fame of Bomelius,” writes S.F. Platonov, “was so widespread, and the fame of his power was so noisy that even the obscure provincial chronicle of that time told about him in an epic-fairy-tale tone.” According to the chronicler, the “fierce sorcerer” Bomelius was to blame for all the troubles that the reign of Ivan the Terrible brought upon the country. The English astrologer instilled in the king “ferocity” towards his own subjects and turned him in favor of the “Germans”.

The question, however, is not what the behavior of the British was, but what was expected of them Russian government. Karamzin is confident that by establishing ties with England, the government of Ivan the Terrible took the opportunity to “borrow from foreigners what was most necessary for its civil education.” Historians note that Ivan the Terrible patronized foreigners to such an extent that this was “much offensive to his subjects, whom he willingly humiliated before foreigners.” However, the Russian Tsar's interest in foreigners was quite practical. Ivan the Terrible tried to find a military and commercial ally in Elizabeth of England.

Strategic alliance

The fact that both the English and Russian governments gave preference to organized merchants from the Moscow Company over individual traders, both Russian and British, indicates that both sides tried to solve their problems on state level. The mutual interest of Elizabeth of England and Ivan the Terrible is completely natural. If the Swedes and Germans needed to maintain trade dominance in the eastern part of the Baltic, then the British, on the contrary, needed to gain access to Russian resources without the mediation of the Riga and Revel merchants. In the same way, Muscovy tried to find direct access to European markets. However, the trade problems of England and Muscovy could not be resolved peacefully.

To understand why government intervention from both London and Moscow was so intense, it is enough to look at the list of goods supplied to each other by both sides. The fact is that it was not only and not so much about commerce, but about military-technical cooperation.

Individual shipments of weapons can also be supplied by individual traders, but systematic military supplies were already coordinated at the state level in the 16th century. The effectiveness of such cooperation is ensured by the fact that the sale of weapons is combined with the supply of military materials and technology transfer, the arrival of specialists, etc. Supplies from Russia were a decisive factor in the development of the English navy. Russian-English cooperation was part of the Anglo-Spanish confrontation. The Spanish king Philip II was preparing to invade England, and Elizabeth of England urgently created a fleet.

“To cut off England and the Netherlands from Eastern European raw materials meant destroying these states,” wrote historian Ya.S. Lurie. - This is precisely the goal that Philip II achieved in Poland, Sweden and Russia. In Poland, his diplomats had only some success. In Russia they were a complete failure." Supplies of strategic raw materials from Russia to England played a huge role in the outcome of the military-political struggle that engulfed Western Europe in the second half of the 16th century. The confrontation between England and Spain over dominance of the Atlantic Ocean became inevitable. From now on, the creation of naval power was a matter of life and death for Elizabethan England. “The English fleet built during these years and which defeated the Spanish Invincible Armada in 1588 was equipped primarily with Russian materials,” notes Swedish historian Arthur Attman.

The Moscow Company was the official supplier of the Royal Navy. “Russia was not a monopoly supplier of ropes and tackle, which were also imported from the Baltic countries, but Russian supplies were especially important for Elizabeth’s fleet, and ropes and tackle were of the same importance to the then fleet as oil was to the modern one,” writes Willan. English sailors admitted that the gear supplied from Russia was “the best of those brought into the country.” In addition, the ropes and tackle coming from Muscovy were cheaper than those supplied from other places. Therefore, Willan concludes, northern trade “was more important for England than for Russia.”

In turn, Ivan the Terrible asked England for the supply of military materials, weapons, engineers knowledgeable in artillery, and architects familiar with the construction of fortifications. As soon as the Livonian War began in 1557, rumors spread across Europe about English weapons ending up in the hands of the Muscovites. Poland and Sweden protested. In Cologne and Hamburg, large shipments of weapons purchased by the British were blocked, since the Germans feared that the equipment was actually intended for the troops of Ivan the Terrible. Elizabeth of England, of course, denied everything. Not only did she assure other monarchs that there was no military cooperation with Muscovy, she also belittled the scale of trade in every possible way, claiming that we were talking about several merchant ships that almost accidentally sailed into the mouth of the Northern Dvina. The merchants, naturally, were peaceful people who thought exclusively about commercial gain.

One episode testifies to how “peaceful people” the employees of the “Moscow Company” were. In 1570, at the height of the Livonian War, Swedish corsairs attacked English traders transporting “Russian” cargo. As a result of the ensuing battle, the flagship (!) of the Swedes was boarded and captured by “peaceful merchants”. The victorious report was immediately sent by company representatives to Moscow and brought to the attention of the Russian authorities.

However, British diplomats throughout Europe denied “rumors” of military cooperation, and a special embassy was sent to the continent for this purpose. Meanwhile, from nowhere, Ivan the Terrible’s troops acquired weapons and military technologies that were suspiciously reminiscent of English ones.

In 1558, company employee Thomas Alcocke, captured by the Poles, admitted that military supplies had taken place, but justified himself by saying that “they only imported old, worthless weapons.” The engineer Locke would hardly have agreed with this, boasting in his letters that with his help Moscow had learned to make the most advanced weapons available in Europe. Meanwhile, not only English doctors and pharmacists, but also architects and specialists “to erect stone buildings” arrive in Russia. Considering that Ivan directly wrote to London several times about the fact that he needed help during fortification work, it becomes clear what kind of “stone buildings” we are talking about.

The surviving documents also leave no doubt as to what was in the holds of the Moscow Company ships. They carried saltpeter, lead, sulfur, and artillery gunpowder. Although, of course, not all deliveries had a strategic purpose. The British, not being winemakers themselves, also brought wine to Muscovy. Moscow consumers were not demanding. Therefore, they imported “various spoiled wines, sweet wines, wines with a large admixture of cider.” Perhaps they carried a lot of other things, because not all deliveries were documented. “Although the British repeatedly assured other states that they did not supply Russia with weapons,” writes I. Lyubimenko in the history of Anglo-Russian trade, “but, on the other hand, they more than once pointed out to the Tsar himself what an important service they provided him with the import military supplies." Since ammunition, as a rule, was exchanged for wax, which was in great demand in Europe, Tsar Ivan’s desire to keep the supply of wax under personal control is apparently explained not only by the desire to profit from the “secret commodity.”

The cooperation between England and Muscovy was strategic as well as commercial. Trade of the 16th and 17th centuries is inseparable from war. Having opened the route from Northern Europe to the mouth of the Northern Dvina, the British quickly made it attractive to other Western countries. However, the Russian Pomors themselves did not have the technology or resources to build a serious fleet. Moreover, it was basically impossible to create a serious fleet in the north, even if the British helped in its construction. This required not only a lot of wood and know-how. In the end, specialists can be discharged from abroad, as Peter I later did. But a strong fleet can only be based in large port cities. The Northern Dvina was too remote from the rest of Russia and had too few resources and people to compete with Riga. And it was not profitable to develop trade there - the sea freezes in winter. The main flow of Russian goods went through German-owned Revel and Swedish Vyborg. The Moscow Company was in intense competition with them. In order to gain access to new trade routes, Russia needed trading positions in the Baltic, and therefore the German merchants, who were at first opponents and then leading partners for the Novgorodians, again turned into opponents - now for Muscovy. Russia needed its own large port in the Baltic. And with the beginning of the Livonian War, she received it.

Livonian War

Immanuel Wallerstein, in a study on the origins of the modern world economic system, argues that during the Livonian War, Ivan the Terrible tried to “achieve the autonomy of the Russian state in relation to the European world economy” and in this sense, the tsar’s policy that led to the war was not only not a defeat, but on the contrary it was a "giant success". As a result of the policy of Ivan the Terrible, “Russia was not drawn into the European world economy,” which allowed our country to maintain a developed national bourgeoisie and subsequently become not a periphery, but a semi-periphery of world capitalism. It is curious that Wallerstein's reasoning coincides with the official propaganda myth that dominated Stalin times. Meanwhile, the Livonian War was not only a disaster in military terms, but was also caused precisely by the desire of the tsarist government to achieve inclusion in the emerging world system at any cost.

In the 16th century, Russia’s integration into the world system was, at first glance, quite successful. As the Swedish historian Arthur Attman notes, Russia constantly had a trade surplus in relation to Western countries. “As for the Russian market, from the Middle Ages and at least until mid-17th century century, each of these countries was forced to spend precious metals to cover their trade deficits.” The situation for Russia as a whole was better than for Poland - despite the fact that both countries often traded the same goods (but Poland, unlike Russia, could not act as a supplier of furs on the world market).

And yet, Russian trade in the 16th century is a paradoxical phenomenon. On the one hand, there is a positive balance, a constant influx of hard currency. In other words, Russia benefited from world trade, ensuring capital accumulation. On the other hand, the structure of trade is clearly peripheral. The similarities with the American colonies noted by Willan are far from accidental. Russia exports raw materials and imports technology. It competes in the world market with other countries and territories that form the periphery of the emerging world system. This combination of strength and vulnerability predetermined the inevitable aggressiveness foreign policy Muscovy, as well as its subsequent failures.

When Wallerstein, comparing Russia with Poland, concludes that Ivan the Terrible fought to avoid the fate of Poland, which became an appendage of the European world system, he is deeply mistaken. The Russian Tsar sought just the opposite, unsuccessfully trying to occupy the same place in the emerging world system that Poland occupied in the 16th and 17th centuries. Contemporaries were well aware that Russia and Poland were competitors on the world market. In the 17th century, Dutch trade representatives in Moscow discussed these issues directly with the Tsar, insisting on expanding Russian grain exports.

Contrary to Wallerstein’s opinion, the ruling circles of Russia did not strive to resist the expansion of the West, but, on the contrary, to join the world system - as its periphery, but on their own terms. In turn, Poland and Sweden in this war defended the places that they had already occupied in the world economy by mid-16th century century.

At first, the Livonian War was successful for the Russian troops. Starting hostilities, Ivan the Terrible used a completely ridiculous and deliberately far-fetched pretext, remembering the failure of the Dorpat bishop to pay tribute, which was never mentioned for 50 years. Ideologically, the order was undermined by the reformation, its troops were small in number. Unlike the conflicts of the 17th century, the armament of Russian troops was not yet much inferior to that of the West. The presence of British military specialists also had an effect. Artillery and metalworking were at a completely modern level for those years, which predetermined the rapid success royal troops at the first stage of the war. Livonian Order suffered a crushing defeat. In May 1558, Russian troops took Narva, a key port and fortress that opened the road to the Baltic.

In turn, for England, the capture of Narva opened up direct access to Russian raw materials. However, this was by no means good news for the shareholders of the Moscow Company, because the northern route it had mastered with such difficulty was losing its attractiveness. After the Russians took Narva, English ships arrived there. In general, the Narva port was not very convenient, and the conditions for doing business here were incomparably worse than in Revel. However, Narva attracted Western traders. As American researcher Walther Kirchner notes, “as in the case of the northern route, traders here were attracted to Russia by the potential opportunities of this market, and not by the real state of affairs.” In 1566, 42 ships had already visited Narva and trade was growing rapidly. Compared to this, the 6-7 ships that sailed along the northern route seem like an insignificant trading operation. The monopoly of the Moscow Company does not extend to Narva; everyone who wants to sail here can sail here. In turn, the company protests and complains that traders who have no experience working in Muscovy are bringing all sorts of rubbish there and are undermining the reputation of English goods. If in the case of the Northern Sea Route, official London was completely on the side of the Moscow Company, protecting its monopoly in every possible way, then in the conflict around the “Narva voyage” the company has to give in. Here trade is already reaching such proportions that military-strategic considerations cannot help but be pushed aside by commercial ones. It is significant that Elizabeth, who previously supported the Moscow Company in everything, is in no hurry to take action against Narva traders this time. The company was not only a trading enterprise, but also a political instrument of England in Russia, however, with the capture of Narva, one of the key political goals was achieved. Of course, this does not at all indicate a change in policy, especially since the compromise reached between the company and its competitors maintains the company's dominant position. Now all English merchants can benefit from the fruits of her efforts. The issue of Narva trade is discussed in parliament, the monopoly is ultimately confirmed, but in such a form that for the company in a commercial sense it turns out to be a Pyrrhic victory.

Narva swimming

Before the Livno War, Narva was not so much a trading port as a fortress, blocking the Russians’ access to the Baltic. But after 1559, Narva trade developed rapidly: in addition to the British, merchants from Holland and other countries appeared here. Large-scale construction begins in the city, business life is in full swing. In 1566, 98 ships departing from Narva passed Riga, and only 35 ships left Riga itself to the west. In 1567, no less than seventy English ships alone were sent here. With the transition of Narva to Russian rule, the port of Revel fell into decay (even after the end of the war, Narva continued to undermine its position). Other German ports on the Baltic - Riga and Konigsberg - suffered less, because Polish exports went through them. At first, the Swedes tried to compensate for losses by introducing duty-free trade in Vyborg for Russian merchants. At the same time, Swedish pirates terrorized merchants heading to Narva. However, even this could not provide Vyborg with a dominant position.

The trade goals of the Livonian War were achieved. However, when starting the war, Ivan the Terrible relied not only on the merchants, but also on the land-poor nobility. “The bourgeoisie was satisfied,” writes Pokrovsky, “for them, continuing the war no longer made sense. When the order's embassy came to Moscow to sue for peace, it found support precisely from the Moscow merchant class. But the success made a completely different impression on the “military”. The campaign of 1558 yielded huge booty - the war in a rich, cultural country was not at all like the fight against foreigners in distant Kazan or the pursuit of the elusive Crimeans across the steppes. The landowners were already dreaming of a lasting conquest of all of Livonia and the distribution of rich manors of German knights to the estates. This distribution has actually already begun. But the transition to Russian rule of the entire southeastern coast of the Baltic raised the entire Eastern Europe“Neither the Swedes nor the Poles could allow this.”

The capture of Revel and Riga would give Russia a chance to enter European trade without intermediaries. Poland could not allow Riga to fall under the rule of Russia, which was its main competitor in the world market. The era of trade wars was beginning, for which Muscovy was not ready, first of all, diplomatically and politically. Having defeated the Livonian knights, Ivan the Terrible was faced with the combined forces of Sweden and Poland, which, although they were in conflict with each other, could not allow the strengthening of Moscow. Polish trading capital was in the same situation as Russian, and therefore Russian domination in the Baltic would have meant disaster for it. In 1561, the Swedes occupied Revel, and the Poles annexed most of Livonia. Ivan the Terrible tried to avoid war with the Swedes, but it was too late. Negotiations with the Swedish king Eric XIV broke down due to a palace coup, after which Johann III became the head of Sweden, who categorically rejected any concessions to the Muscovites.

As Pokrovsky notes, at the first stage of the war, the victories of the Russian troops “were ensured only by a colossal numerical superiority: where the order could field hundreds of soldiers, there were tens of thousands of Muscovites.” With the entry of Sweden and Poland into the war, the balance of power changes. Already the Polish army was difficult to cope with. When superbly armed, organized and trained Swedish troops (perhaps the best in Europe at that time) appeared on the battlefield, the state of affairs became simply catastrophic. Prince Kurbsky, the best of the governors of Grozny, lost to four thousand Poles near Nevel, having 15,000 troops, and in 1564 near Orsha the Russian army was completely defeated. Senior commanders died, the enemy got guns and convoys. And most importantly, the fighting spirit of the Moscow army was broken. There was a split in the coalition that supported the reforms of Grozny.

Oprichnina

The more difficult the king’s field of maneuver became. “In an environment of foreign policy failures,” writes Soviet historian R.G. Skrynnikov, the tsar’s associates strongly advised to establish a dictatorship in the country and crush the opposition with the help of terror and violence. But in the Russian state, not a single major political decision could be made without approval in the Boyar Duma. Meanwhile, the position of the Duma and church leadership was known and did not promise success for the enterprise.”

Trying to put pressure on the Duma, the tsar left Moscow and announced his abdication of the throne. In front of the whole country, the tsar presented himself to the people as offended and “expelled” by the boyars from his own capital. The Duma was forced to reject the Tsar's abdication and itself turned to him with assurances and fidelity.

Having undermined the political position of the Duma, the tsar announced that in order to “protect” his life he was forced to divide his entire land into “zemshchina” and “oprichnina”. If the “zemshchina” remained under the control of the Boyar Duma, then the oprichnina was subordinated to the personal power of Ivan the Terrible. Here everything was organized as in an appanage principality; affairs were in charge of the tsar’s appointees, who did not have a noble background. “High-born” nobles who had no connections with the boyar aristocracy were selected here. Foreigners were willingly taken into oprichnina service. The oprichnina army equipped in this way became the tsar’s reliable weapon in the fight against internal opposition.

Moscow witnessed bloody executions. Real and imaginary opponents of the tsar, accused of conspiracy, ascended to the scaffold. At the direction of Ivan the Terrible, the chronicles were corrected in accordance with the changed political situation, and stories about boyar conspiracies recorded under the dictation of the tsar's people replaced non-existent investigative materials.

However, the oprichnina was not just a terrorist organization in the service of the tsar. Oprichnina meant the beginning of a large land redistribution. In the territory of the oprichnina, the confiscation of boyar estates began, which provided for the tsar's nominees. Until now, while waging wars in Kazan and the Baltic, the tsar tried to satisfy the needs of the land-poor nobility and the trading bourgeoisie, without affecting the interests of the old nobility. As Pokrovsky notes, after the defeats in Livonia, it was impossible to continue such a course: “foreign policy no longer promised either land or money.”

According to Pokrovsky, the oprichnina remained the only way out for the government, which was confused in its own politics. The Tsar twice tried to satisfy the land hunger of the minor nobility. The first time was during the Kazan campaign, the second time during the Livonian War. But in neither case was the goal achieved. The only way out was the expropriation of the feudal aristocracy. In the territory of the oprichnina, not only unbridled terror began against the old boyar families and their supporters, but also land redistribution. In place of feudal estates, much smaller landowner farms arose. The boyar estate was large enough to live its own closed life. It supplied only the surplus of its production to the market. The new estates, on the contrary, were not self-sufficient; from the very beginning they produced a significant part of their products for exchange on the market.

The redistribution of property that took place in the oprichnina is strikingly similar to what happened in England several decades earlier during the Reformation carried out by Henry VIII. The English aristocracy was largely exterminated already during the War of the Scarlet and White Roses, and therefore huge monastic possessions were destroyed. The “new nobility”, which settled on the occupied land, laid the foundations of rural capitalism. The more the estates focused on the market, the stronger the connection between the “new nobility” and the urban bourgeoisie became: in civil war XVII century they acted on the same side.

The land redistribution carried out by Ivan the Terrible also received the full support of commercial capital. It is significant that all the main trading cities and routes fell into the oprichnina: “of all the roads connecting Moscow with the borders, only the roads to the south, to Tula and Ryazan, were left without attention by the oprichnina,” writes the famous historian S.F. Platonov, “ We think because their customs and other income was not great, and their entire length was in troubled places in southern Ukraine.” This approach cannot be explained by concerns about defense - from a military point of view, it was the unsafe southern roads that should have attracted attention in the first place. But the oprichnina was not so much a military organization as a socio-political one. “It’s not for nothing that the British, who dealt with northern regions, asked that they too be taken into account by the oprichnina; “- notes Platonov, “it was not without reason that the Stroganovs also flocked there: commercial and industrial capital, of course, needed the support of the administration that was in charge of the region and, apparently, was not afraid of the horrors with which we associate the idea of ​​the oprichnina.” Mikhail Pokrovsky, quoting this statement, sarcastically adds: “One would also be afraid of what was created with the participation of this very capital.”

As Pokrovsky notes, the oprichnina represented the expropriation of the boyars by the petty nobility, focused on commodity production, primarily on the grain trade. Oprichnina, Pokrovsky believes, “went along the line of natural economic development" In this sense, the oprichnina in Russia under Grozny is a step in the same direction as the creation of the “new nobility” in England by Henry VIII. Not only the goals are similar, but also the methods: Henry VIII did not hesitate to deal with his opponents, supporters of the Catholic Church were subjected to brutal repression, the monks were forcibly expelled from the monasteries. But despite all the similarities with the measures of Henry VIII, the measures of Ivan the Terrible had one more than significant difference: politically they failed. It was impossible to carry out reforms within the country while simultaneously waging a war doomed to failure. The Moscow state was transformed by Ivan the Terrible, literally raised on its hind legs. But in the face of military failures, it was impossible to consolidate what had been achieved.

Meanwhile, the Livonian War was hopelessly lost. Attacks against the Swedes in Reval were launched twice - in 1570 and 1577, both times ending in heavy defeats. In 1571, the Crimean Tatars reached Moscow, subjecting the city to terrible destruction. Contemporaries wrote about 800 thousand dead and 150 thousand taken into slavery. Even if these data are exaggerated, we are talking about a real catastrophe in a country whose population did not exceed 10 million.

The oprichnina terror takes on a “senseless and merciless” character against the backdrop of military failures and a chronic lack of funds. Expropriations turn into ordinary robbery, not only in favor of the treasury, but also in favor of the guardsmen themselves. Discontent is growing in the country, to which the authorities are responding by intensifying terror. The tsar's destruction of Veliky Novgorod in January 1570 became the pinnacle of madness. First, the tsar and the guardsmen massacred almost the entire local elite, including women and children. The clergy did not escape reprisals either. Then a real pogrom began in the city. According to famous historian R.G. Skrynnikova, the guardsmen “made a formal attack on the city. They plundered the Novgorod market and divided the most valuable of the loot among themselves. They dumped simple goods such as lard, wax, flax into large heaps and burned them. During the days of the pogrom, large reserves of goods intended for trade with the West were destroyed. Not only the auctions, but also the houses of the townspeople were robbed. The guardsmen broke gates, exposed doors, and broke windows. Townspeople who tried to resist the violence were killed on the spot. The royal servants persecuted the poor with particular cruelty. As a result of the famine, many beggars gathered in Novgorod. In severe frosts, the king ordered them all to be driven out of the city gates. Most of these people died from cold and hunger.”

Despite the terror, and to a large extent because of it, the government's position remained unstable. In 1567, Ivan the Terrible stipulated in his letters that he would receive political asylum in England in case he was defeated by his enemies in his homeland. And more weapons. And architects for the construction of fortresses. And even better - the English fleet for the war with Poland and Sweden. Elizabeth promises refuge. Weapons, apparently, continue to arrive, although clearly not in the quantities that Ivan expected. But the queen refuses to openly enter into the Livonian War. Naturally, the cunning and cautious Elizabeth could not agree to this. And this is not only a matter of fear of a war on two fronts - a conflict with Spain is brewing and a war in the Baltic is an unaffordable luxury for England. In addition, the fleet that will “rule the seas” has not yet been built (it is for its creation that ropes and masts from Narva are needed). But Elizabeth has another reason for caution. No matter how important its interests in Russia are, the British are also actively trading in Poland and do not intend to sacrifice it. London is quite happy with the current state of affairs.

However, having refused to send a military fleet to Moscow, Elizabeth did not completely ignore the requests of her partner. In 1572, at least 16 English sailors were in the royal service in Narva. They are trying to create a Russian navy in the Baltic 130 years before Peter the Great, train people, help build ships.

The embassy of Thomas Randolph in 1568 confronts the king with a fact: we will trade, but we will not conclude an open military alliance. Ivan the Terrible repeatedly expressed his displeasure, but, in turn, was forced to accept the conditions of the British, realizing that he simply had no other choice. The privileges of the “Moscow Company” were confirmed in 1569 to the maximum extent. A new rope factory is being built in Vologda, the British begin searching for and mining metal in Russia, and then set up their own production.

The privilege of 1569 was, according to Lyubimenko, “undoubtedly the culminating point in the history of the successes achieved by the company with the Russian supreme power.” Soon after this, difficulties began. In 1571, against the backdrop of a worsening military situation in Livonia, Ivan the Terrible again tried to get direct intervention from the British. The Tsar repeatedly complained that Elizabeth was interested in “not royal” affairs, but “merchant” affairs - trade, finance. It must be said that these complaints were clearly demagogic - the tsar himself also did not disdain trade. But such complaints should, speaking modern language, were to shift the focus of the discussion from trade to military-political issues. Having failed to achieve what he wanted, the Moscow Tsar tried to influence the trade interests of the British. Privileges were revoked and British goods were seized. It is significant that this crisis in Anglo-Russian relations coincides with the crisis of Ivan’s regime. But the king was in a disadvantageous position. In 1572, trade was resumed on English terms.

Disaster in Livonia and Dutch successes

In 1581 Narva was lost. Together with her, the Swedes occupied the old Novgorod fortress of Ivangorod. The Livonian War finally took on a catastrophic character for Muscovy. A year later, the privileges of the British in Russia were once again confirmed, but to a limited extent. Ivan the Terrible is again trying to use trade as a reason for open union, this time dynastic. He asks for your hand English princess from the House of Tudor.

In general, this idea originated back in 1568, but only now became the subject of diplomatic negotiations. The Russian ambassador Fyodor Pisemsky was introduced to Lady Mary Hastings, who, apparently, did not make much of an impression on him. The British delayed, and in 1584 Ivan the Terrible died.

The result of the reign of Ivan the Terrible was a lost war in Livonia and internal disorder in the state. The struggle for the Baltic coast turned into a complete defeat for Russia, when it was necessary not only to abandon the captured ports in the Baltic, but also to cede its own territories. Polish troops under the leadership of Stefan Batory they found themselves at the walls of Smolensk and almost took the city. The Moscow state was devastated by the war and weakened. Swedish hegemony was established in the Baltic for more than a hundred years. The Swedes captured not only shopping centers Baltic, but later also the sparsely populated strip of land between Narva and Lake Ladoga. This territory in itself had no value, but its possession finally guaranteed control over the Novgorod trade routes.

After the catastrophic defeat in the Livonian War, Russia risked finding itself not so much on the periphery of the emerging world system as outside of it. And this is precisely where the tragedy manifested itself historical fate Russian state. The only real alternative to peripheral development was isolation and stagnation.

On the contrary, England achieved its goals, although not in full. It did not receive free access to the Russian market, but it provided systematic supplies of raw materials and materials for the emerging fleet during the most difficult period of the conflict with Spain. In 1588, the Spanish Invincible Armada was destroyed, Britain took the first decisive step towards becoming "Mistress of the Seas". And yet, the defeat of Muscovy in the Livonian War was at the same time a major defeat for England in the struggle for direct access to Russian resources. Already at the end of the 16th century, Anglo-Dutch trade rivalry intensified. Recent allies in the fight against Spain, the English and Dutch bourgeoisie enter into a battle for dominance in the markets. Throughout the 17th century, this confrontation leads to constant conflict, ending in war three times. This struggle is also being waged on Russian territory, and the Dutch, following in the footsteps of the British, are increasingly pushing them back.

The first Dutch ship entered the mouth of the Northern Dvina in 1578. This was not yet a serious threat to the British. In addition to them, Swedes, French, Germans and even Spaniards also conducted trade in the north, but no one could seriously undermine the position of London merchants. However, soon Dutch merchants, fleeing the pursuit of Danish pirates, accidentally discovered a new harbor, more convenient than the one used by the British. This harbor, located near the Michael-Arkhangelsk monastery, became the beginning of the city of Arkhangelsk. The Dutch asked to move trade here. The British resisted, but there was nothing to be done, and in 1583-84 it was built here main port Russian north.

Arkhangelsk harbor was the most convenient of all that existed in the Russian north. However, it was shallow, like most Dutch harbors. She was ideally suited for lighter Dutch ships. The displacement of the English ships was significantly larger, and therefore for the Moscow Company the transfer of trade to Arkhangelsk meant additional difficulties.

After the opening of the Arkhangelsk port, the rivalry between the British and the Dutch intensifies. Holland, having defended its freedom in the fight against the Spanish crown, turns into a leading maritime power. If at the beginning of the struggle for independence the Dutch bourgeoisie needed the support of the English monarchy against a common enemy, now the two most advanced countries in Europe find themselves first as competitors and then as enemies. Russia is becoming one of the arenas for their rivalry. The Dutch exported furs, caviar, hemp, flax, resin, lard, soap, and ship masts from Muscovy. English and Dutch embassies to Moscow follow one after another. The British are unsuccessfully trying to prevent their rivals from entering the country. During the Anglo-Dutch wars, both sides tried to persuade the king to prohibit the supply of masts - a strategic raw material - to their opponents. The Moscow government preferred neutrality, banning the removal of masts to both warring states for the duration of hostilities.

Trade competition and diplomatic intrigue are accompanied by an ideological struggle. Contemporaries wrote that the Dutch “tried to humiliate and ridicule the British, drew caricatures of them, and wrote lampoons.” British representatives in Moscow complained that “the Dutch deliberately put a false English mark (a tailless lion with three overturned crowns) on their worst cloth in order to discredit British goods, and also spread all sorts of tall tales about England.” But most in an efficient way to win over the sympathy of the Moscow elite were ordinary bribes.

Throughout the 17th century, the position of the Moscow Company weakened, and Dutch merchants strengthened their presence in the Russian market. “Their goods,” wrote a Soviet researcher, “were of higher quality. The British themselves admitted this. Further, they were richer and had more possibilities for bribery, although they resorted to it only in extreme cases. But their gifts and offerings to the king were more magnificent and luxurious than the English ones. Finally, they were able to create a reputation for themselves from the very beginning as disinterested and honest traders.” To this, historians often add that the Dutch acted more in the spirit of free enterprise, while the British were organized around the monopoly “Moscow Company” into a trade and political structure closely linked to the state. Thus, the defeat of the British in the 17th century was caused by the same thing that ensured their impressive success in the middle of the 16th century. The Moscow Company, being closely connected with the royal court in London, was an ideal partner for Ivan the Terrible during the preparation for the Livonian War and at the height of hostilities. During these times, as Lyubimenko writes admiringly, the English ambassador “dared to enter the Tsar without taking off his hat.” But after the defeat in the war, all this no longer mattered to the Moscow government. While Ivan the Terrible was alive, the old relationship remained, but with his death everything inevitably had to change.

The end of the "English king"

On the eve of his death, Tsar Ivan managed to arrange a meeting with Queen Elizabeth's ambassador. The Englishman who arrived at the Kremlin realized that the audience would not take place. “Your English king has died,” clerk Andrei Shchelkanov threw at him.

Shchelkanov’s hostility towards the British was far from personal. Or, at least, not only personal. Shchelkanov sympathized with the Habsburgs, and subsequently, in defiance of the British, patronized the Dutch merchants. He belonged to the party at court that relied not on a trade and political alliance with distant England, but on joint actions with the German Emperor against Turkey.

Russia, even having lost the war in the Baltic, was not at all in diplomatic isolation. But the choice in favor of the English Tudors or the Austrian and Spanish Habsburgs in the Europe of that time was not just a choice of foreign policy. This was an (unconscious, of course) choice in favor of the forces of bourgeois reform or feudal reaction. Fortunately for the British, neither Austria, nor especially Spain, could offer Moscow anything truly beneficial. And the Dutch and Danes, despite their rivalry with the British, did not at all want to strengthen the position of the Habsburgs. “Despite the fact that the social system of feudal-absolutist Spain was undoubtedly closer to Grozny and Godunov than the social system of the Netherlands and even England,” writes Ya.S. Lurie, “despite the fact that the participation of English “trading men” in public administration seemed to the Russian Tsar to be the greatest nonsense, Russia’s international political position was objectively less favorable for the Habsburgs than for their opponents.”

Losing their political influence, the British were doomed to lose their commercial influence. Under Tsar Fedor and Boris Godunov, they finally lost the opportunity to engage in retail trade; they were deprived of the right to travel through Russia to Persia. Political relations between Moscow and London under Godunov no longer had the previous allied character. From now on, Moscow saw in England only one of the possible trading partners- along with the Dutch and Danes. The alliance with Denmark was especially important, since it was here that Moscow hoped to find an ally against Sweden. And for money-loving Moscow officials, the generous Dutch were much more attractive than the British.

This article is part of the book "Peripheral Empire. Russia and the World System." - M.: Ultra; Culture, 2004

N.M. Karamzin. Quote op., book. 1, p. 531. It is curious that the Novgorodians themselves did not try to build a fortress at the mouth of the Neva, nor to populate Landskrona with their people. This place clearly had no value for them. XVI XVI century. Tbilisi, 1956; A.I. Ivanov. On the question of initial stage Anglo-Dutch trade rivalry in Russia. Scientific notes of Komi State pedagogical institute. Syktyvkar, 1968, v. 34. The change in position of I. Lyubimenko is also very interesting in this regard. If in her pre-revolutionary works she assessed in the most positive way the activities of the British in Russia in the 16th and 17th centuries, then in the works of Stalin’s time she assessed the same actions as attempts at a colonialist takeover of the country (see The English bourgeois revolution of the 17th century. Edited by E.A. Kosminsky and Ya.A.Levitsky M., Publishing house of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1954, vol. 2).

Scientific notes of the Komi State Pedagogical Institute. Syktyvkar, 1968, t. 34, p. 83; N.T. Nakshidze. Quote cit., p. 153-154.

See A.Attman for details. Op. cit., p. 25. Attman notes that until the beginning of the Livonian War, it was through Revel that most of Novgorod’s exports passed, and essentially it was as a transit port for Novgorod that this city took shape and flourished. (see p. 35).

Wallerstein believes that the policies of Ivan the Terrible helped the Russian bourgeoisie and the monarchy to escape “at least for the moment, the fate of their Polish counterparts” (I. Wallerstein. The Modern World-System I, p. 319). The paradox is that Russia and Poland laid claim to same thing place in the world system and in this sense, the failure of the king’s attempts to conquer Livonia can be retroactively considered as “luck.” But in reality, Moscow’s military defeats did not isolate it from the world system at all, but simply forced it to integrate to a lesser extent. favorable conditions. As for Poland, the struggle between it and Russia for a place in the world system continued until Poland disappeared from the map of Europe.

HELL. Kuzmichev, I.N. Shapkin. Domestic entrepreneurship. Essays on history. M., “Progress Academy”, 1995, p. 25.

Scientific notes of the Komi State Pedagogical Institute. Syktyvkar, 1968, t. 34, p. 103.

Wax was an extremely profitable commodity - candles were made from it, and huge quantities were required to illuminate Gothic cathedrals. This made it possible for the king to assert that wax was not a simple product, but a sacred, “reserved” one. And kings should trade it. Such a monopoly was a real punishment for other Russian merchants, and it was not cheap for the British, but for Tsar Ivan it turned out to be extremely profitable. As for goods brought from England, the tsar demanded the right of first sale, but paid inaccurately. In this, however, the king also did not differ from his contemporaries. Elizabeth of England also did not like to pay debts.

During the oprichnina, the English company tried to get the tsar to return the money owed to it by the boyars executed by the tsar. The tsar listened to the claims, but did not give the money, recommending his English partners to lend less frequently to the Muscovites. However, sometimes bad debts were returned. During Bose's embassy, ​​Ivan the Terrible suddenly ordered the payment of 3,000 marks, which had already been written off by the company.

In the 16th century, people rediscovered the world. The harsh Middle Ages are ending, the era of great geographical discoveries forces Europeans to change their idea of ​​the Earth.

Three ships sailed from the shores of Albion in May 1553. The small expedition was led by Hugh Willoughby and Richard Chancellor. The two ships ran aground off the Lapland coast and Willoughby's crew most likely perished in early 1554. Dozens of corpses were later found by Pomors. Death overtook the sailors instantly during their everyday activities. Even the captain himself, according to Karamzin, sat with the magazine in his hands and did not think about anything.

The ship "Eduard Bonaventure"

Richard Chancellor

Russia in the 16th century had already gained a foothold in the consciousness of the enlightened minds of Europe, but such distant Western guests had not yet looked into Muscovy itself from the land of ice and frost. The local authorities did not have any ready-made orders regarding the appearance of foreigners. Chancellor was informed that the state was ruled by Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich, and only he had the right to decide such important issues. The Englishman replied that “... they are looking for his friendship and want to enter into trade relations with the Muscovites, from which both Kingdoms can receive great benefits.”

Plan of Moscow, 1618

Viktor Vasnetsov, "Tsar Ivan the Terrible"

London, 16th century

Every day the inhabitants of the building received quite royal contents- a quarter of an ox, two geese, twelve chickens, four rams, one hare, beer, wine, fifty eggs, 62 loaves. The company's agent staff consisted of 20-30 people. Ivan the Terrible was extremely favorable towards the discoverers of Muscovy and many times confirmed the benefits granted to the British. Shareholders were given the opportunity to build rope factories, spinning factories, guest houses, warehouses, and achieved duty-free trade rights. True, in this case, the goods were first delivered to the royal court - the sovereign chose what he liked, and the rest of the products went to the market.

V.A. Ryabov "Panorama of Zaryadye" late XVII c", view of the Old English Court

Participants in the Moscow Company even minted Russian coins from imported silver, tried to develop ore deposits in the Vologda region, and could rob ships in the White Sea that violated trade agreements. Russian customs officers did not open the bales of the company's imported goods.

The British sought to establish a trade monopoly; their competitors did not like such attempts - Dutch merchants sent Ivan the Terrible a letter in which they stated that the British sailors were just ordinary pirates.

The activities of the Moscow company were relatively beneficial to both parties - the British exported cheap raw materials from Russia, and the royal court received a new channel for purchasing luxury goods, equipment, and complex handicraft products. Every year 5-10 ships entered the mouth of the Dvina. In 1557, foreigners brought 9 barrels of tin and hundreds of bales of cloth and cloth to Rus'. A little later, the list of goods mentions sugar, prunes, raisins, pepper, and dishes. Russians did not remain aloof from cultural trends - clavichords came to the country from England. Paradoxically, sometimes gunpowder, expensive weapons, and saltpeter were brought to Russia. The countries of the Hanseatic League were dissatisfied, because the bloody Livonian War was fought for possession of the shores of the Baltic. The forest, hemp, blubber, leather, honey, hemp, and wax went back. The export structure was very similar to the Novgorod export of the 14th-15th centuries, only Russian furs were not particularly popular in Britain.

Map of Russia, Muscovy, Tartary by Anthony Jenkinson (1562)

At the turn of the 16th-17th centuries, Russian-British trade relations endured several more ups and downs, and Russia finally closed itself off from England only in the 1640s. In Britain, the legitimate monarch Charles I was executed, and the enraged Alexei Mikhailovich ordered to significantly limit the field of activity of the Moscow company.

Pavel Gnilorybov,
Moscow historian, coordinator of the Mospeshkom project

Today we will take a walk through the very places associated with the very beginning of Russian-British relations. England (still England) is the first country to open an embassy in Muscovy (then still Muscovy) back under Ivan the Terrible. While the Spaniards were in full swing bringing goods from the colonies in the New World, Vasco da Gama found a southern route to India, English merchants had a hard time and had to look for new trade routes. Since the concept of geography was very conditional at that time, in England it was assumed that since there was a southern route to India, bypassing Africa, then there should also be a northern route to India, bypassing Eurasia. An expedition was equipped, which, of course, underestimated the size of the continent and future Russia in particular, it circled Scandinavia and, battered, was forced to land in the Arkhangelsk region. Ivan the Terrible, who was then at war with both the Livonians and the Tatars, was also looking for new trade routes and allies. This is how the first embassy appeared in Muscovy on Varvarka.

1553 Captain Chancellor's ship Edward Bonaventure rounds the North Cape (now Norway, the most northern point Europe)

Ivan the Terrible receives Richard Chancellor. English engraving.

By the way, the British Embassy is the first embassy in Russia (then Muscovy) in general, so the first three digits of the British Embassy are still 001 on the red diplomatic plates (Even Germany is 002, and the USA is 004)

Three years after the opening of the embassy in Moscow, in 1556, a Russian embassy consisting of 4 ships led by Ambassador Osip Nepeya was sent from Moscow. After a 4-month voyage, the ships almost reached the British Isles, but a storm destroyed three ships, and the most big ship with Ambassador Nepeya, he lost his course and, as a result, ran into rocks in the Edinburgh area, after which the unlucky Scots robbed the Russian ambassador and, as the chronicler wrote, “from there he was released to the land of England.”

The Muscovy Embassy was located in the area of ​​what is now Fenchurch Street, in commemoration of which there is still Moskovitskaya Street behind the Tower:

General view of the Muscovite street:

The street is literally 30-50 meters away.

Well, we will move to Greenwich - the shipping center of London, where the clipper Cutty Sark still stands.

There are also cannons still standing on the embankment.

Now the river here is almost empty, but during the colonial period there was no crowd, ships loaded with colonial goods came and went here and there

Here in the Deptford area there is a monument to Peter I

The monument was erected in honor of the 400th anniversary of the Great Embassy. In the docks that were once located here in 1698, Peter I studied marine science for almost four months

The monument was made with Russian money by sculptor Mikhail Shemyakin (he is also the author of the monument to Peter in the Peter and Paul Fortress in St. Petersburg and the monument to vices on Bolotnaya Square in Moscow)

Sovereign Peter Alekseevich

On the throne, as expected, is a monogram and coat of arms

The inscription on the monument in Russian:

PETER 1 THE GREAT
RUSSIAN TSAR PETER THE GREAT
CAME TO ENGLAND
IN JANUARY 1698
LIVED ALMOST 4 MONTHS
IN THE HOUSE OF SIR JOHN EVELYN
SAYRES COURT IN DETFORD
THE MONUMENT IS ERECTED
AT THE FORMER ROYAL DOCTS
WHERE PETER 1 STUDYED SCIENCE
ENGLISH SHIPBUILDING
MONUMENT - GIFT OF THE RUSSIAN
PEOPLE IN MEMORY OF THE 300TH ANNIVERSARY
VISIT OF THE RUSSIAN TSAR
IN SEARCH OF KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE

Next to Peter stands a dwarf with a navigation device and a boat

General view of the area and the monument:

Nearby, again to commemorate Peter's visit, in the not very wealthy area of ​​​​Lewisham there is Tsarskaya Street

Tsarskaya Street looks almost Russian - low-rise apartment buildings, garbage and occasional parking on the sidewalks

Here, in the Sayes Court area, of which the park of the same name remains a reminder, and numerous Peter the Great’s embassy stayed

Tsar Peter and his retinue occupied a house in this area that belonged to a famous statesman At that time, John Evelyn, however, Evelyn himself did not live in a luxurious house with a garden, but rented it out to the no less famous Admiral Benbow, who was asked to give up the house during Peter’s visit, because it was the only decent house near the shipyards and docks.
Benbow was not an ideal tenant, but Peter and his retinue managed to surprise even the seasoned admiral. Here are just small excerpts from the inventory made after the departure of the Russian delegation:

Bedroom, cleaned blue finishing , And blue bed, upholstered inside is light yellow silk, all stained and torn...
Japanese bed rail is broken...
The Indian silk quilt, flannelette blanket and bed linen are stained and dirty...
The dressing table, upholstered in silk, is broken and torn...
The walnut wall table and locker are broken...
A copper poker, a pair of tongs, an iron grate, a spatula are partly broken, partly lost...
The fawn bed is broken into pieces, the red trim, trimmed with striped Persian silk, is badly torn and damaged...
In the large room, two large fireplace hooks with copper handles are broken...
In the next room, the calico bed with curtains is stained and torn to shreds...
14 Dutch wicker chairs, all broken and damaged...
12 chairs with backs upholstered in draget, badly damaged...
An ordinary stamet blanket is torn and burned in several places...
The black panel table and lockers are broken and worn out...
12 armchairs, upholstered in blue fabric, badly damaged...
6 white, thin, damask window curtains are torn and damaged...
The heating pad is broken inside and burned...
7 sloping chairs are broken and lost...
A large Turkish carpet is damaged...
8 feather beds, 8 pillows, 12 pairs of flannelette blankets are very soiled and damaged...
3 pairs of triple, thin, Dutch sheets are lost...
The table is broken and damaged...
20 beautiful paintings are very dirty, and the frames are all broken...
Some beautiful drawings and other drawings depicting the best views are lost...
3 cars are broken and lost...
The house belonging to a certain Rossel, a poor man, where the guards assigned to the house occupied by the king lived, was almost completely destroyed, so it must be paid in full...

The total damage to the mansion and garden was estimated at 162 pounds and 7 shillings, loss on property amounted to £158 2s 6d. On July 21, 1698, the State Treasury of England ordered the payment of money to all persons who suffered damage from Peter the Great's stay in Deptford

If you take a walk just north of the Lewisham area, you will find something even more interesting:

There was once a special dock here where ships with goods from the south of Russia were unloaded

Odesskaya and Odesskaya Verf streets

Odessa is rather an exception here, because... in this area, ships arriving via the northern sea route were mainly unloaded

The entire area, built on the site of the docks, is imbued with a maritime theme.

Partially preserved harbors and docks

Now there is cozy and inexpensive housing on stilts

And nearby is the Onega Gate street - again, goods brought by the northern sea route

General view of the street

And a completely unpreserved Russian document:

General view of Russia Dock road