Philaret had ability, and we need not quarrel with the way in which he
took the power from the hands of his feeble and incompetent son. That he
was a Wolsey or a Richelieu, as some historians conceive him, is far too
flattering an exaggeration. The Cossacks, the Poles, and the Swedes were
disarmed while he was still absent, and when the Poles renewed the war
in 1632 Philaret’s army was badly beaten, and he could think of
nothing better than to have its generals executed. He had friendly
relations with France and England, because both wanted to enter, through
Russia, into a profitable commerce with Persia; which was refused. The
Turks, of course, barred the Mediterranean route to the east. The Sultan
offered Philaret an alliance against the Poles, but he was at that time
unprepared for a big war. On the whole it was a balance of interests
rather than statesmanship which gave Russia some years of peace.
Internally Philaret did more active service. The question had already
arisen whether Russia should be Europeanised. The colony of foreign
merchants which now grew just outside the walls of Moscow exhibited a
higher culture. The western armies were constantly superior to the
Russian in equipment. The envoys to France, England, and Holland spoke
of refinements which made the luxury of Moscow seem tawdry. On the other
hand were the inevitable croakers who protested that Russian trade,
Russian religion, or even the Russian State, would not survive an
invasion of western ideas. Philaret boldly adopted the progressive view
and summoned foreign teachers to Moscow. Astronomers brought their
marvellous instruments to astonish or scare the populace; mathematicians
and literary men opened schools in the metropolis. Against one western
discovery, tobacco, the Russians remained obdurate; while the man who
was caught surreptitiously taking snuff, as the westerners did, had his
nose cut off.
The religious controversy also contributed to the sharpening of the wits
of the nation. The Jesuits still lingered heroically on the fringe of
the Empire and sought to bring it under the rule of the Papacy. Even a
new pretender was tried--a son of Maryna who had escaped murder, they
said--but the man, a commonplace peasant, was not chosen with their
usual skill, and little harm was done. In the Russian provinces which
were subject to Poland, however, they worked with such effect that the
Church was rent by a great schism. Some of the Russian prelates were for
union with Rome. The struggle had an echo in Russia, and some education
for controversial purposes was inaugurated. We must, however, not
exaggerate the effect on the Russian mind of this controversy. It is
estimated by Russian historians that at that time not one person in a
thousand, at the most, could read, and even in the city-circles in which
the points at issue were debated the clash of ideas must have been of
the crudest conceivable nature.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account