The Solovetsky uprising summarizes its results. Solovetsky uprising

25.09.2019

Read also

How to prepare them at home and how to use ready-made flatbreads?

Zucchini in batter fried in a frying pan with garlic Zucchini fried in a frying pan in batter

Sour cream and mushroom sauce recipe with photo

In the middle of the White Sea on the Solovetsky Islands there is a monastery of the same name. In Rus' it is glorified not only as the greatest among the monasteries that support the old rituals. Thanks to strong weapons and reliable strengthening of the Solovetsky Monastery in the second half of the 17th century became the most important post for the military repelling the attacks of the Swedish invaders. Local residents did not stand aside, constantly supplying his novices with provisions.

The Solovetsky Monastery is also famous for another event. In 1668, his novices refused to accept the new church reforms approved by Patriarch Nikon, and fought back the tsarist authorities, organizing an armed uprising, called Solovetsky in history. Resistance lasted until 1676.

In 1657, the supreme power of the clergy sent out religious books, which were now required to conduct services in a new way. The Solovetsky elders met this order with an unequivocal refusal. Afterwards, all the novices of the monastery opposed the authority of the person appointed by Nikon to the position of abbot and appointed their own. This was Archimandrite Nikanor. Of course, these actions did not go unnoticed in the capital. Adherence to the old rituals was condemned, and in 1667 the authorities sent their regiments to the Solovetsky Monastery to take away its lands and other property.

But the monks did not surrender to the military. For 8 years they confidently held back the siege and were faithful to the old foundations, turning the monastery into a monastery that protected novices from innovations.

Until recently, the Moscow government hoped for a quiet resolution of the conflict and forbade attacking the Solovetsky Monastery. And in winter time the regiments generally abandoned the siege, returning to mainland.

But in the end, the authorities decided to carry out stronger military attacks. This happened after the Moscow government learned about the monastery’s concealment of Razin’s once undead troops. It was decided to attack the walls of the monastery with cannons. Meshcherinov was appointed voivode to lead the suppression of the uprising, who immediately arrived in Solovki to carry out orders. However, the king himself insisted on pardoning the perpetrators of the rebellion if they repented.

It should be noted that those who wished to repent to the king were found, but were immediately captured by other novices and imprisoned within the monastery walls.

More than once or twice, regiments tried to capture the besieged walls. And only after lengthy assaults, numerous losses and a report from a defector who pointed out the hitherto unknown entrance to the fortress, did the regiments finally occupy it. Note that at that time there were very few rebels left on the territory of the monastery, and the prison was already empty.

The leaders of the rebellion, numbering about 3 dozen people, who tried to preserve the old foundations, were immediately executed, and other monks were exiled to prison.

As a result, the Solovetsky Monastery is now the bosom of the New Believers, and its novices are serviceable Nikonians.

Rate the news

Solovetsky uprising of the Decembrists, Solovetsky uprising of Pugachev
1668-1676

Place

Solovetsky Islands

Cause

refusal to accept the “newly corrected liturgical books”

Bottom line

Suppression of the uprising

Opponents Commanders Losses

unknown

Solovetsky uprising or Solovetsky seat- armed resistance of the monks of the Spaso-Preobrazhensky Solovetsky Monastery from 1668 to 1676 to the church reforms of Patriarch Nikon. Due to the monastery’s refusal to accept innovations, the government took strict measures in 1667 and ordered the confiscation of all estates and property of the monastery. A year later, the royal regiments arrived in Solovki and began to besiege the monastery.

1 Background
2 Reasons for the uprising
3 Events
- 3.1 Occupation of the monastery by government troops
4 Solovetsky uprising in Old Believer literature
5 Solovetsky uprising in culture
6 Notes
7 Literature
8 Links

Background

By the beginning of the 17th century, the Solovetsky Monastery had become an important military outpost for the fight against Swedish expansion (Russian-Swedish War (1656-1658)). The monastery was well fortified and armed, and its inhabitants (425 people in 1657) had military skills. Accordingly, the monastery had food supplies in case of an unexpected Swedish blockade. His influence spread widely along the shores of the White Sea (Kem, Sumsky fort). The Pomors actively supplied food to the defenders of the Solovetsky Monastery.

Causes of the uprising

The cause of the uprising was new service books sent from Moscow in 1657. By decision of the council of cathedral elders, these books were sealed in the monastery treasury chamber, and services continued to be conducted using the old books. In 1666-1667, the Solovites (Geronty (Ryazanov)) wrote five petitions to the Tsar in defense of the old liturgical rites. In 1667, the Great Moscow Council took place, which anathematized the Old Believers, that is, the ancient liturgical rites and all those who adhere to them. On July 23, 1667, the authorities appointed reform supporter Joseph as rector of the monastery, who was supposed to carry out reforms in the Solovetsky Monastery. Joseph was brought to the monastery and here, at a general council, the monks refused to accept him as abbot, after which Joseph was expelled from the monastery, and later Archimandrite Nikanor was elected abbot. An open refusal to accept reforms was perceived by the Moscow authorities as an open rebellion.

Events

On May 3, 1668, by royal decree, a rifle army was sent to Solovki to bring the rebellious monastery into obedience. The archers, under the command of solicitor Ignatius Volokhov, landed on Solovetsky Island on June 22, but met a decisive rebuff.

In the first years, the siege of the Solovetsky Monastery was carried out weakly and intermittently, as the government counted on a peaceful resolution of the current situation. In the summer months, government troops (streltsy) landed on the Solovetsky Islands, tried to block them and interrupt the connection between the monastery and the mainland, and for the winter they went ashore to the Sumsky fort, and the Dvina and Kholmogory streltsy dispersed to their homes during this time. In the summer of 1672, I.A. Volokhov was replaced by governor K.A. Ievlev, the army was increased to 725 archers.

This situation remained until 1673.

In September 1673, governor Ivan Meshcherinov arrived on the White Sea with instructions to begin active military operations against the defenders of the Solovetsky Monastery, including shelling the walls of the monastery from cannons. Until this moment, the government was counting on a peaceful resolution of the situation and prohibited shelling of the monastery. The tsar guaranteed forgiveness to every participant in the uprising who voluntarily confessed.

The cold that set in early in October 1674 forced Ivan Meshcherinov to retreat. The siege was lifted again and the troops were sent to the Sumy fort for the winter. period 1674-1675 the Streltsy army was doubled.

Until the end of 1674, the monks remaining in the monastery continued to pray for Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. On January 7, 1675 (December 28, 1674 old style), at a meeting of participants in the uprising, it was decided not to pray for the “Herod” king.

At the end of May 1675, Meshcherinov appeared near the monastery with 185 archers for reconnaissance. In the summer of 1675, hostilities intensified and from June 4 to October 22, the losses of the besiegers alone amounted to 32 people killed and 80 people wounded. Meshcherinov surrounded the monastery with 13 earthen towns (batteries) around the walls, and the archers began to dig under the towers. In August, reinforcements arrived consisting of 800 Dvina and Kholmogory archers. This time Meshcherinov decided not to leave the islands for the winter, but to continue the siege in winter. However, the defenders of the monastery fired back and inflicted heavy losses on the government forces. The tunnels were filled up during a raid by a detachment of defenders of the monastery. On January 2 (December 23, old style), 1676, the desperate Meshcherinov made an unsuccessful attack on the monastery; the assault was repulsed, 36 archers, led by captain Stepan Potapov, were killed.

Occupation of the monastery by government troops

Voivode Meshcherinov suppresses the Solovetsky uprising. Lubok of the 19th century

On January 18th (January 8th of the old style) 1676, one of the defectors - the traitor monk Feoktist - informed Meshcherinov that it was possible to penetrate into the monastery from the moat of the Onufrievskaya Church and introduce the archers through the window located under the drying house near the White Tower and blocked with bricks, an hour before dawn, since it is at this time that the changing of the guard occurs, and only one person remains on the tower and wall. On a dark, snowy night on February 1 (January 22, old style), 50 archers led by Stepan Kelin, directed by Feoktist, approached the blocked window: the bricks were dismantled, the archers entered the drying chamber, reached the monastery gates and opened them. The defenders of the monastery woke up too late: about 30 of them rushed with weapons to the archers, but died in an unequal battle, wounding only four people.

After a short trial on the spot, the rebel leaders Nikanor and Sashko, as well as 26 other active participants in the rebellion, were executed, others were sent to the Kola and Pustozersky prisons.

Solovetsky uprising in Old Believer literature

Conciliar verdict of the Solovetsky monks on the rejection of newly printed books

The Solovetsky uprising received wide coverage in Old Believer literature. Most famous work is the work of Semyon Denisov “The History of the Solovetsky Fathers and Sufferers Like for Piety and Saints” church laws and legends in the present times generously suffered,” created in the 18th century. This work describes numerous brutal murders of participants in the Solovetsky uprising. For example, the author reports:

And having experienced various things, you found in ancient church piety firm and not corrupt, boiling with green rage, preparing various deaths and executions: hang this testament by the neck, and cut through the new and many interstices with a sharp iron, and with a hook threaded on it, afflict each one in his own way. hook. The blessed sufferers with joy howled into the rope of the virgin, with joy prepared their legs for the heavenly mother-in-law, with joy gave the ribs for cutting and commanded the widest speculator to cut.

The story of the fathers and sufferers of Solovetsky, who at the present time generously suffered for piety and holy church laws and traditions

A large number of people were killed (several hundred). Almost all the defenders of the monastery died in a short but hot battle. only 60 people remained alive. 28 of them were executed immediately, including Sashko Vasiliev and Nikanor, the rest - later. Monks were burned with fire, drowned in an ice hole, hung by their ribs on hooks, quartered, and frozen alive in ice. Of the 500 defenders, only 14 remained alive

On January 29 (February 11), the Russian Orthodox Church commemorates the holy martyrs and confessors: Archimandrite Nikanor, Monk Macarius, Centurion Samuel and others like them in the Solovetsky Monastery for the ancient piety of those who suffered. in the Old Believers it is performed at least since late XVIII centuries, manuscripts commemorating the Solovetsky martyrs are dated to this time.

Solovetsky uprising in culture

In the first episode of the multi-part film “Mikhailo Lomonosov,” a Pomor fisherman tells young Lomonosov the story of the uprising.

Notes

1 2 3 Frumenkov G. G. Solovetsky Monastery and defense of the seaside in the 16th-19th centuries. -Arkhangelsk: North-Western Book Publishing House, 1975
Footnote error?: Invalid tag ; no text specified for multi2 footnotes
Archimandrite Nikanor, Samuel the centurion, Macarius the monk and others like them suffered at the Solovetsky monastery
RPSC calendar
Today is the memory of the holy Solovetsky martyrs, who suffered for ancient piety

Literature

Karelia: encyclopedia: in 3 volumes / chapter. ed. A. F. Titov. T. 3: R - Y. - Petrozavodsk: “PetroPress”, 2011. - 384 p.: ill., map. ISBN 978-5-8430-0127-8 (vol. 3) - page 115
Barsukov N. A. Solovetsky uprising. 1668-1676 - Petrozavodsk: 1954.
Borisov A. M. Economy of the Solovetsky Monastery and the struggle of peasants with northern monasteries in the 16th-17th centuries. - Petrozavodsk: 1966. - Ch. 4.
Frumenkov G. G. Prisoners of the Solovetsky Monastery. - Arkhangelsk: 1965.
Frumenkov G. G. Solovetsky Monastery and the defense of Pomerania in the 16th-19th centuries. - Arkhangelsk: North-Western Book Publishing House, 1975.
Chumicheva O.V. Solovetsky uprising of 1667-1676. - M.: OGI, 2009.
History of the first-class stauropegial Solovetsky Monastery. -St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg. acc. total printing business in Russia E. Evdokimov. Troitskaya, No. 18. 1899
Denisov S. The story of the Solovetsky fathers and sufferers. - M., 2002

Solovetsky Uprising Information About

One of the most significant events of the 17th century. became church schism. He seriously influenced the formation of cultural values and worldview of the Russian people. Among the prerequisites and causes of church schism, one can single out both political factors, formed as a result of the turbulent events of the beginning of the century, and church factors, which, however, are of secondary importance.

At the beginning of the century, the first representative of the Romanov dynasty, Mikhail, ascended the throne.

He and, later, his son, Alexei, nicknamed “The Quiet One,” gradually restored the internal economy that had been ruined during the Time of Troubles. Foreign trade was restored, the first manufactories appeared, and state power was strengthened. But, at the same time, serfdom was formalized into law, which could not but cause mass discontent among the people. Initially foreign policy The first Romanovs were cautious. But already in Alexei Mikhailovich’s plans there is a desire to unite Orthodox peoples who lived outside the territories of Eastern Europe and the Balkans.

This confronted the Tsar and the Patriarch, already during the period of annexation of Left Bank Ukraine, with a rather difficult problem of an ideological nature. Most of the Orthodox peoples, having accepted Greek innovations, were baptized with three fingers. According to Moscow tradition, two fingers were used for baptism. You could either impose your own traditions or submit to the canon accepted by the entire Orthodox world. Alexey Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon chose the second option. The centralization of power that was taking place at that time and the idea that arose about the future primacy of Moscow in Orthodox world, “Third Rome,” demanded a unified ideology capable of uniting the people. The reform carried out subsequently split Russian society for a long time. Discrepancies in the sacred books and interpretations of the performance of rituals required changes and restoration of uniformity. The need to correct church books was noted not only by spiritual authorities, but also by secular ones.

The name of Patriarch Nikon and the church schism are closely connected. The Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' was distinguished not only by his intelligence, but also by his tough character, determination, lust for power, and love of luxury. He gave his consent to become the head of the church only after the request of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The beginning of the church schism of the 17th century was laid by the reform prepared by Nikon and carried out in 1652, which included such innovations as triplicate, serving the liturgy on 5 prosphoras, etc. All these changes were subsequently approved at the Council of 1654.

But the transition to new customs was too abrupt. The situation in the church schism in Russia was further aggravated by the brutal persecution of opponents of innovations. Many refused to accept the changes in rituals. They refused to give up the old sacred books according to which the ancestors lived; many families fled to the forests. An opposition movement formed at court. But in 1658 Nikon's position changed dramatically. The royal disgrace turned into a demonstrative departure of the patriarch. However, he overestimated his influence on Alexei. Nikon was completely deprived of power, but retained wealth and honors. At the council of 1666, in which the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch participated, Nikon’s hood was removed. And the former patriarch was sent into exile, to the Ferapontov Monastery on White Lake. However, Nikon, who loved luxury, lived there far from living like a simple monk.

The Church Council, which deposed the willful patriarch and eased the fate of opponents of innovation, fully approved the reforms carried out, declaring them not the whim of Nikon, but the work of the church. Those who did not submit to the innovations were declared heretics.

The final stage of the split was Solovetsky uprising 1667 – 1676, ending in death or exile for those dissatisfied. Heretics were persecuted even after the death of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. After the fall of Nikon, the church retained its influence and strength, but not a single patriarch any longer laid claim to supreme power.

1668-1676 - rebellion of the monks of the Solovetsky Monastery against the Russian reform Orthodox Church. The reason for the uprising was the removal of the rank of patriarch from Nikon. The number of participants in the uprising reached 450-500 people. On June 22, 1668, a rifle detachment under the command of solicitor I. Volkhov arrived on the Solovetsky Islands. The monastery refused to let the archers into the walls of the fortress. Thanks to the support of the surrounding peasants and working people, the monastery was able to withstand more than a seven-year siege without experiencing difficulties in food supply. Many working people, fugitive servicemen and archers made their way to the islands and joined the rebels. In the early 1670s, participants in the uprising under the leadership of S. Razin appeared in the monastery, which significantly intensified the uprising and deepened its social content. The besieged undertook forays, which were led by elected centurions - the fugitive boyar slave I. Voronin, the monastery peasant S. Vasiliev. The fugitive Don Cossacks P. Zaprud and G. Krivonoga supervised the construction of new fortifications. By 1674, up to a thousand archers and a large number of guns The siege was led by the royal governor I. Meshcherinov. The rebels successfully defended themselves, and only the betrayal of the monk Theoktistus, who pointed out the unprotected window of the White Tower to the archers, accelerated the defeat of the uprising, which was brutal in January 1676. Of the 500 participants in the uprising who were in the monastery, only 60 survived after the capture of the fortress. All of them, with the exception of a few people, were later executed.

Solovetsky Monastery and the defense of the White Sea region in the 16th–19th centuries Frumenkov Georgy Georgievich

§ 2. Monastic army in the 17th century. Militarization of the brethren Solovetsky uprising 1668–1676

§ 2. Monastic army in the 17th century. Militarization of the brethren

Solovetsky uprising 1668–1676

Since the time of the Troubles, the number of monastic troops has increased significantly. By the 20s of the 17th century, there were 1,040 people “under arms” in Pomerania. All of them were supported by the monastery and were distributed among three main points: Solovki, Suma, Kem. The abbot was considered the supreme commander, but the “coastal” archers were under the direct command of a governor sent from the capital, who lived in the Sumy fort. Together with the Solovetsky abbot and under his leadership, he was supposed to protect the North. Such “dual power” did not suit the abbot, who wanted to be the sole military commander of the region. His claims were well founded. By this time, the “meek” Chernorisians had become so carried away by military affairs and had mastered it to such an extent that they considered it possible and profitable to remain without military specialists. They no longer needed their help, and did not want to endure embarrassment. The king understood the wishes of his pilgrims and respected their request. According to the proposal of the abbot, who referred to the monastic poverty, in 1637 the Solovetsky-Sumy voivodeship was liquidated. The last governor, Timofey Kropivin, handed over the city and prison keys to the abbot and left for Moscow forever. The defense of Pomerania and the monastery began to be in charge of the Solovetsky abbot with the cellarer and brethren. From that time on, the abbot in the full sense of the word became the northern governor, the head of the defense of the entire Pomeranian region.

The protection of the vast possessions of the monastery required a larger armed force than that which was at the disposal of the abbot. One thousand archers were not enough. Additional detachments of warriors were needed, and this required high costs. The monks found another way out. In order not to spend money on hiring new batches of archers, they themselves began to study the art of war. In 1657, the entire brethren (425 people) were called to arms and certified in a military manner. Each monk received a “rank”: some became centurions, others became foremen, and others became ordinary gunners and archers. In peacetime, the “monk squad” was listed in the reserves. In the event of an enemy attack, the warrior monks had to take places at combat posts, and each of them knew where he would have to stand and what to do: “At the holy gates until Preobrazhenskaya Tower tell the cellarer, Elder Nikita, and with him:

1. Gunner Elder Jonah the Carpenter at a large, toasty copper cannon, and with him 6 people (names follow) to turn the worldly people;

2. Gunner Elder Hilarion, a sailor, at the copper shotgun, and with him, to turn the worldly people - 6 hired men;

3. Pushkar Pakhomiy...", etc.

The militarization of the monastery made the Solovetsky fortress invulnerable to external enemies and, oddly enough, caused a lot of trouble for the government.

The end of the 17th century in the life of the Solovetsky Monastery was marked by the anti-government uprising of 1668–1676. We will not explore the “rebellion in the monastery” in detail, since this is beyond the scope of our topic, especially since such work has already been done. Peculiar, contradictory, complex both in the composition of the participants and in their attitude to the means of struggle, the Solovetsky uprising has always attracted the attention of scientists. Pre-revolutionary historians and Marxist historians approach the study of the uprising in the Solovetsky Monastery from different methodological positions and naturally come to diametrically opposed conclusions.

The bourgeois historiography of the issue, represented mainly by historians of the church and the schism, does not see in the Solovetsky uprising anything other than religious unrest and the “sitting” of the monks, namely the “sitting” and only the monks (emphasized by me - G.F.), for the old faith , in which “all the noble kings and great princes and our fathers died, and the venerable fathers Zosima, and Savvatius, and Herman, and Metropolitan Philip and all the holy fathers pleased God.” Soviet historians consider the Solovetsky uprising, especially at its final stage, as an open class battle and a direct continuation of the peasant war led by S. T. Razin, and see in it the last outbreak of the peasant war of 1667–1671.

The Solovetsky uprising was preceded by 20 years of passive resistance, peaceful opposition of the aristocratic elite of the monastery (cathedral elders) against Nikon and his church reform, into which the ordinary brethren (black elders) were drawn in from the late 50s. In the summer of 1668, an open armed uprising began in the Solovetsky Monastery masses against feudalism, church and government authorities. The period of armed struggle, which lasted as long as 8 years, can be divided into two stages. The first lasted until 1671. This was the time of the armed struggle of the Solovki residents under the slogan “for the old faith”, the time of the final demarcation of supporters and opponents of armed methods of action. At the second stage (1671–1676), participants in the peasant war of S. T. Razin came to lead the movement. Under their influence, the insurgent masses break with religious slogans.

The main driving force behind the Solovetsky uprising at both stages of the armed struggle was not the monks with their conservative ideology, but the peasants and Balti people - temporary residents of the island who did not have a monastic rank. Among the Balti people there was a privileged group, adjoining the brethren and the cathedral elite. These are the servants of the archimandrite and the cathedral elders (servants) and the lower clergy: sextons, sextons, clergy members (servants). The bulk of the Beltsy were laborers and working people who served the internal monastic and patrimonial farms and were exploited by the spiritual feudal lord. Among the workers who worked “for hire” and “by promise”, that is, for free, who vowed to “atone for their sins with godly labor and earn forgiveness,” there were many “walking”, fugitive people: peasants, townspeople, archers, Cossacks, and yaryzheks. They formed the main core of the rebels.

Exiles and disgraced people, of whom there were up to 40 people on the island, turned out to be good “combustible material.”

In addition to the working people, but under their influence and pressure, part of the ordinary brethren joined the uprising. This should not be surprising, since the black elders by their origin were “all peasant children” or came from the suburbs. However, as the uprising deepened, the monks, frightened by the determination of the people, broke with the uprising.

An important reserve of the rebellious monastic masses were the Pomeranian peasantry, workers in the salt fields, mica and other industries, who came under the protection of the walls of the Solovetsky Kremlin.

According to the voivod's letters to the tsar, there were more than 700 people in the besieged monastery, including over 400 strong supporters of the fight against the government using the peasant war method.

The rebels had at their disposal 90 cannons placed on towers and fences, 900 pounds of gunpowder, a large number of handguns and bladed weapons, as well as protective equipment.

Documentary materials indicate that the uprising in the Solovetsky Monastery began as a religious, schismatic movement. At the first stage, both laity and monks came out under the banner of defending the “old faith” against Nikon’s innovations. The struggle of the exploited masses against the government and the patriarchate, like many popular uprisings of the Middle Ages, took on a religious ideological shell, although in fact under the slogan of defending the “old faith”, “ true Orthodoxy", etc., the democratic strata of the population fought against state and monastic feudal-serf oppression. V. I. Lenin drew attention to this feature of the revolutionary actions of the peasantry suppressed by darkness. He wrote that “...the appearance of political protest under a religious guise is a phenomenon characteristic of all peoples, at a certain stage of their development, and not of Russia alone.”

In 1668, for refusing to accept the “newly corrected liturgical books” and for opposing church reform, the tsar ordered the monastery to besieged. An armed struggle between the Solovki residents and government troops began. The beginning of the Solovetsky uprising coincided with the peasant war flaring up in the Volga region and southern Russia under the leadership of S. T. Razin.

The government, not without reason, feared that its actions would stir up all of Pomorie and turn the region into a continuous region popular uprising. Therefore, in the first years the siege of the rebellious monastery was carried out sluggishly and intermittently. In the summer months, the tsarist troops (streltsy) landed on the Solovetsky Islands, tried to block them and interrupt the connection between the monastery and the mainland, and for the winter they went ashore to the Sumsky fort, and the Dvina and Kholmogory streltsy, who were part of the government army, went home for this time .

The transition to open hostilities extremely aggravated social contradictions in the rebel camp and accelerated the disengagement of the fighting forces. It was finally completed under the influence of the Razins, who began to arrive at the monastery in the autumn of 1671, that is, after the defeat of the peasant war. People “from Razin’s regiment” who joined the rebellious mass took the initiative in the defense of the monastery and intensified the Solovetsky uprising. The Razinites and workers become the actual owners of the monastery and force the monks, for whom they themselves previously worked, to “work.”

From the voivod's letters we learn that the enemies of the tsar and the clergy, “outright thieves and factory owners and rebels... traitors to the great sovereign,” the fugitive boyar slave Isachko Voronin and the Kemlyan (from the Kem volost) Samko Vasiliev, came to lead the uprising. The Razin atamans F. Kozhevnikov and I. Sarafanov also belonged to the command staff of the uprising. The second stage of the Solovetsky uprising begins, in which religious issues receded into the background and the idea of fighting “for the old faith” ceased to be the banner of the movement. Having broken with the reactionary theological ideology of the monks and freed itself from the Old Believer demands, the uprising took on a pronounced anti-feudal, anti-government character.

In the “questioning speeches” of people from the monastery, it is reported that the leaders of the uprising and many of its participants “do not go to God’s church, and do not come to confession to the spiritual fathers, and the priests are cursed and called heretics and apostates.” Those who reproached them for the fall were answered: “We can live without priests.” The newly corrected liturgical books were burned, torn, and drowned in the sea. The rebels “gave up” their pilgrimage for the great sovereign and his family and did not want to hear any more about it, and some of the rebels spoke about the king “such words that it’s scary not only to write, but even to think.”

Such actions finally scared the monks away from the uprising. Not to mention the opposition leadership of the monastery, even the rank and file of the brethren breaks with the movement, they themselves resolutely oppose the armed method of struggle and try to distract the people from this, taking the path of treason and organizing conspiracies against the uprising and its leaders. Only a fanatical supporter of the “old faith,” Archimandrite Nikanor, who was exiled to Solovki with a group of like-minded people until the end of the uprising, hoped to use weapons to force the tsar to cancel Nikon’s reform. According to the black priest Pavel, Nikanor constantly walked around the towers, burned incense and sprinkled water on the cannons and called them “mother galanochkas, we have hope in you,” and ordered to shoot at the governor and the military men. Nikanor was a fellow traveler of the people; the disgraced archimandrite and the rebel working people used the same means of struggle to achieve different goals.

The people's leaders decisively dealt with reactionary monks who were engaged in subversive activities; They put some in prison, others were expelled from the monastery. Several parties of opponents of the armed uprising - elders and monks - were expelled from the walls of the fortress.

Since the beginning of the 70s, the Solovetsky uprising, like a peasant war under the leadership of S.T. Razin, becomes an expression of the spontaneous indignation of the oppressed classes, the spontaneous protest of the peasantry against feudal-serf exploitation.

The population of Pomerania expressed sympathy for the rebellious monastery and provided it with constant support with people and food. The black priest Mitrofan, who fled from the monastery in 1675, said in a “questioning speech” that during the siege, many people came to the monastery “with fish and food supplies from the shore.” The royal letters, which threatened severe punishment for those who delivered food to the monastery, had no effect on the Pomors. Boats carrying bread, salt, fish and other foodstuffs continually landed on the islands. Thanks to this help, the rebels not only successfully repelled the attacks of the besiegers, but also made bold forays themselves, which were usually led by I. Voronin and S. Vasilyev, the chosen people's centurions. The construction of the fortifications was led by the fugitive Don Cossacks Pyotr Zapruda and Grigory Krivonoga, experienced in military affairs.

The entire civilian population of Solovki was armed and organized in a military manner: divided into tens and hundreds with the corresponding commanders at their head. The besieged significantly fortified the island. They cut down the forest around the pier so that no ship could approach the shore unnoticed and fall into the firing range of the fortress guns. The low section of the wall between the Nikolsky Gate and the Kvasoparennaya Tower was raised wooden terraces to the height of other sections of the fence, they built a low Kvasopairnaya tower, and on the Drying Chamber they built a wooden platform (roll) for installing guns. The courtyards around the monastery, which allowed the enemy to secretly approach the Kremlin and complicate the defense of the city, were burned. Around the monastery it became “smooth and even.” In places where there was a possible attack, they laid boards with nails and secured them. A guard service was organized. A guard of 30 people was posted on each tower in shifts, and the gate was guarded by a team of 20 people. The approaches to the monastery fence were also significantly strengthened. In front of the Nikolskaya Tower, where most often it was necessary to repel the attacks of the royal archers, they dug trenches and surrounded them with an earthen rampart. Here they installed guns and made loopholes. All this testified to the good military training of the leaders of the uprising and their familiarity with the technology of defensive structures.

After the suppression of the peasant war by S. T. Razin, the government took decisive action against the Solovetsky uprising. In the spring of 1674, the third governor, Ivan Meshcherinov, arrived on Solovetsky Island. During the final period of the struggle, up to 1,000 archers with artillery were concentrated under the walls of the monastery.

In the summer-autumn months of 1674 and 1675. There were stubborn battles near the monastery, in which both sides suffered significant losses. From June 4 to October 22, 1675, the losses of the besiegers alone amounted to 32 people killed and 80 people wounded.

Due to the brutal blockade and continuous fighting, the number of defenders of the monastery also gradually decreased, supplies of military materials and food products were depleted, although the fortress could defend itself for a long time. On the eve of his fall, the monastery had, according to defectors, grain reserves for seven years, according to other sources - for ten years, and cow butter for two years. Only in vegetables and fresh products there was a shortage, which led to an outbreak of scurvy. 33 people died from scurvy and wounds.

The Solovetsky Monastery was not taken by storm. He was betrayed by traitorous monks. The defector monk Feoktist led a detachment of archers into the monastery through a secret passage under the drying rack near the White Tower. Through the tower gates they opened, the main forces of I. Meshcherinov burst into the fortress. The rebels were taken by surprise. A wild massacre began. Almost all the defenders of the monastery died in a short but hot battle. Only 60 people survived. 28 of them were executed immediately, including Samko Vasiliev and Nikanor, the rest - later.

The destruction of the Solovetsky Monastery took place in January 1676. This was the second blow to the popular movement after the defeat of the peasant war by S. T. Razin. Soon after the suppression of the uprising, the government sent trustworthy monks from other monasteries to Solovki, ready to glorify the tsar and the reformed church.

Solovetsky uprising 1668–1676 was the largest anti-serfdom movement of the 17th century after the peasant war of S. T. Razin.

Solovetsky uprising 1668–1676 showed the government the strength of the monastery-fortress and at the same time convinced it of the need to show greater restraint and caution in arming the outlying islands.

From the book Rus' and the Horde. Great Empire of the Middle Ages author

4. The Great Troubles of the 16th–17th centuries as the era of the struggle between the old Russian Horde dynasty and the new pro-Western Romanov dynasty. The end of the Russian Horde in the 17th century. According to our hypothesis, the entire “reign of Ivan the Terrible” - from 1547 to 1584 - is naturally divided into FOUR different

From the book Reconstruction general history[text only] author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

8.3.6. THE END OF THE OPRICHNINA AND THE DEFEAT OF THE ZAKHARINS IN THE 16TH CENTURY. WHY THE ROMANOVS DISTORTED RUSSIAN HISTORY IN THE 17TH CENTURY The famous oprichnina ends with the defeat of Moscow in 1572. At this time, the oprichnina itself is being destroyed. For our analysis of these events, see [nx6a], vol. 1, p. 300–302. As the documents show,

From the book Book 1. New chronology Rus [Russian Chronicles. "Mongol-Tatar" conquest. Battle of Kulikovo. Ivan groznyj. Razin. Pugachev. The defeat of Tobolsk and author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

4. The Great Troubles of the 16th–17th centuries as the era of the struggle between the Russian-Mongolian-Horde old dynasty and the new Western dynasty of the Romanovs. The end of the Russian-Mongolian Horde in the 17th century. Most likely, the entire period of “Grozny” from 1547 to 1584 is naturally divided into FOUR different

From the book New chronology and concept ancient history Rus', England and Rome author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

The Great Troubles of the 16th–17th centuries as the era of the struggle between the Russian-Mongolian-Horde old dynasty and the new Western dynasty of the Romanovs. The end of the Russian-Mongol Horde in the 17th century According to our hypothesis, the entire period of “Grozny” from 1547 to 1584 is naturally divided into

From the book Pugachev and Suvorov. The Mystery of Siberian-American History author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

5. What did the word “Siberia” mean in the 17th century? Substitution of the name “Siberia” after the defeat of Pugachev. Shifting the borders between St. Petersburg Romanov Russia and Tobolsk Moscow Tartary in the 18th century. In our books on chronology, we have repeatedly said that

From the book Rus'. China. England. Dating of the Nativity of Christ and the First Ecumenical Council author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

author Team of authors

ENGLAND IN THE 17TH CENTURY ENGLAND DURING THE RULE OF THE FIRST STEWARTS The founder of the new dynasty, James I Stuart (1603–1625), united England, Scotland and Ireland under his rule, laying the foundation for the triune kingdom - Great Britain. However, differences soon emerged between

From book The World History: in 6 volumes. Volume 3: The World in Early Modern Times author Team of authors

FRANCE IN THE 17TH CENTURY THE EDICT OF NANTES AND THE REVIVAL OF THE COUNTRY In 1598, having concluded the Peace of Vervins with Spain and ending the era of long religious wars with the publication of the Edict of Nantes, the French monarchy of the first king from the Bourbon dynasty, Henry IV (1589–1610), entered a period