Ivan’s first executions apparently arose out of his disappointment over the course of theLivonian War and the suspected treason of several Russian boyars. The defection of one of Ivan’s outstanding field commanders, PrinceAndrey Kurbsky, to Poland in 1564 greatly startled thetsar, who announced later that year his intention ofabdicating in view of the boyars’ betrayal. The Muscovites, however, led by the clergy, implored him to continue to rule, and in 1565 he acceded to their request on condition that he should be allowed to deal with the traitors as he wished and that he should form anoprichnina—i.e., anaggregate of territory that would be administered separately from the rest of the state and put under his immediate control ascrown land. A bodyguard of 1,000–6,000 men, known as theoprichniki, was raised; and specified towns and districts all overRussia were included in theoprichnina, their revenues being assigned to the maintenance of the tsar’s new court and household, which consisted of a number of carefully selected boyars and service gentry. Ivan lived exclusively in this entourage and withdrew from the day-to-day management of Russia’s administrative apparatus (now called thezemschina, or “the land”), which he left in the hands of leading boyars andbureaucrats. Ivan cut himself off from almost all communication with them, while theoprichniki trampled withimpunity on everyone beyond Ivan’s immediate circle.

Since nearly all the documents relating to this epoch were destroyed in one ofMoscow’s periodic fires, historians tend to give differing explanations for Ivan’s actions during this part of his reign. The majority tend to the view that the struggle was between the tsar and the old hereditarynobility, which, jealous of surrendering its power and privileges, had resisted his internal reforms and military projects. Theoprichnina thus may have been Ivan’s attempt to create a highly centralized state and destroy the economic strength and political power of the princes and the high nobility. The increasingly resentful boyars had indeed opposed Ivan and plotted against him on occasion, but the reign of terror that Ivan initiated by theoprichnina proved far more dangerous to thestability of thecountry than the danger that it was designed to suppress. In 1570, for example, Ivan personally led hisoprichniki troops againstNovgorod, destroying that city and executing several thousand of its inhabitants. Many boyars and other members of the gentry perished during this period, some being publicly executed with calculated and symbolic cruelty. Ivan later sent to various monasteries memorials (sinodiki) of more than 3,000 of his victims, most of whom were executed in the course of theoprichnina.

Theoprichnina lasted only seven years, from 1565 to 1572, when it was abolished as a result of the failure of theoprichnina regiments to defend Moscow from attack by the Crimean Tatars. Theoprichnina army was reintegrated with that of thezemschina, and some of the estates confiscated by Ivan’s followers were returned to their owners. The entire episode of theoprichnina leaves a bloody imprint on Ivan’s reign, causing some doubts about his mental stability and leaving historians with the impression of a morbidly suspicious andvindictive ruler.

Later years

Withdrawal and flight are themes that run through the later years of Ivan’s reign. He expressed an interest in establishing diplomatic and trade relations with England, even suggesting his readiness to marry an English noblewoman. In 1575 he seems to haveabdicated for about a year in favour of a Tatarprince, Simeon Bekbulatovich. During the 1570s he married five wives in succession in only nine years. Finally, in a fit of rage, he murdered his only viable heir, Ivan, in 1581. This murder set the clock ticking for the political crisis, known as theTime of Troubles, that began with the extinction of the Rurikdynasty upon the infirm Fyodor’s death in 1598.

Legacy

Ivan’s achievements were many. Inforeign policy all his actions were directed toward forcing Russia into Europe—a line thatPeter I the Great was to continue. Internally, Ivan’s reign of terror eventually resulted in the weakening of all levels of thearistocracy, including the service gentry he had sponsored. The prolonged and unsuccessful Livonian War overextended the state’s resources and helped bring Russia to the verge of economic collapse. These factors, together with Tatar incursions, resulted in the depopulation of a number of Russian provinces by the time of Ivan’s death in 1584. Nevertheless, he left his realm far more centralized both administratively and culturally than it had been previously.

Ivan also encouraged Russia’s cultural development, especially through printing. He himself wrote well, and, though his surviving writings are mainly of a political nature, his command of words and his bitingsarcasm are very evident. Ivan was a devout adherent of theOrthodox church. His arguments on religious questions are striking in their power andconviction, but he placed the most emphasis on defending the divine right of the ruler to unlimited power under God—a view with which most other monarchs of the time would have been in agreement.