Well then who is it? It's Ivan, the guy Stalin imitated in order to get his kicks. My professor really liked this paper - it's an analytical book review of Isabel de Madariaga's Ivan The Terrible: First Tsar of Russia. I wasn't sure how well I did on it but the instructor's high praise bolstered how I felt about it.
---
An utterly brutal and undoubtedly troubled man, Grand Prince – and later Tsar – Ivan IV of Moscow stands as one of the starkest and least human personalities of Russia’s authoritarian history. As investigated in Isabel de Madariaga’s Ivan the Terrible: First Tsar of Russia, the paranoia of the Tsar can be explained as a result of the many negative influences he felt along his life. From the beginning of Ivan’s life until his death, intrigue in the courts lead to death among his family and confidantes, forcing him to utilize similar underhandedness in order to regain his royal power after years of his supporters being crushed publicly. Ivan’s mental state would continue to deteriorate as a result of possible court intrigues: the death of his beloved wife Anastasia soon after his own brush with death quickly led to his wedding with the widely-despised ‘pagan’ princess Maria Temrjukovna, who acted harshly toward Ivan and may have incited him to poison her for political gain, showing the full change in Ivan’s personality over the course of two marriages. Maria would only be the second of Ivan’s eventual eight wives, all of whom would suffer at the hands of Ivan. His cruelty, which bloomed during his youth as he pointlessly ended lives with nary a care, became center stage during his rule as he ravaged any and all potential rivals to his power (as well as the general public) with the use of his Oprichnina, a personal “state” consisting of totally loyal, notably savage subjects; these men would become known for their wanton slaughters of entire populations in locales such as Novgorod and Tver. Later, Ivan IV’s sanity collapsed sharply and, with it, did the stability his harshness had achieved: opponents such as the Crimean Khanate, the Ottoman Empire and Poland-Lithuania encroached upon Ivan’s borders as he acted wildly at home, committing acts such as the accidental murder of his son Ivan, granting the position of heir to his other son Feodor – a future Tsar regarded as aloof, politically uninterested and, in the opinion of de Madariaga, mentally unsound. Fedor’s inability to not only rule but also reproduce would eventually collapse the nigh-ancient dynasty of Rurik, leading to the tumultuous Time of Troubles. It is very evident that through Ivan’s life, most specifically his developmental years and young adulthood, negative influences played a major part in the shaping of his personality: his mental instability, self-importance and cruel authoritarianism can all be seen as results of events in his youth. Despite his political skill, reform-based management preferences and general intelligence, Ivan IV would forever be remembered for his maddening paranoia – which, as seen in Isabel de Madariaga’s seminal Ivan the Terrible, originated early in Ivan’s life as a result of the dangerous environment into which Ivan was born.
The emphasis of this review will be based on de Madariaga’s focus on the youth of Ivan IV, for good reason: the author places a special importance upon the early experiences of the future Tsar of All Russia, citing many examples that would be repeated through Ivan’s life which would come to characterize his personality and, in general, his reign. Court treachery and barbarity toward rivals were heavily experienced by Ivan during his youth – the offenses experienced by Ivan and his brother Iuri at the hands of the Shiusky’s during the Regency Council period bred contempt in young Ivan, giving him reason to repeat the actions of that period upon later rivals. The direct cruelty Ivan experienced also fueled that part of his personality: he exhibited rage toward defenseless creatures and, later in his youth, adult subjects. This cruelty would come to characterize his rule: grisly, widespread executions as a result of paranoia were commonplace. Other examples as provided by de Madariaga and analyzed in this piece will show the necessity of the author’s emphasis upon Ivan IV’s youth.
De Madariaga rings true in her belief that the early youth of Ivan IV is rife with situations that may eventually breed a contemptible, paranoid individual. The very first of these examples would be the Regency Council set up by his father Vasily III and his mother Elena Glinskaya: as easily observable by Ivan, his importance to his parents and their supporters overshadowed the stability and potential acquiescence of the boyars – rivals to Ivan IV’s reign such as the Shiusky family were suppressed with physical harm, and insults toward the honor of rival princes were made on a constant basis (and usually followed by arrests) . This sort of background may have granted Ivan IV an inflated sense of self importance; the later influence of Vasily III’s ally Metropolitan Makarii, too, can be seen as a major influence in this regard. One of Ivan’s only true outlets during this time of his life was the church, where latent delusions of grandeur in young Ivan were influenced heavily by the teachings of Makarii, whose words may have convinced Ivan that he possessed the favor of God. Makarii, the Archbishop of Novgorod, was also responsible for introducing Ivan to the Poems of Repentance, a series of hymns focused on the admittance of mortal sins; de Madariaga’s comments on the appropriateness of the subject matter in pertinence to Ivan’s behavior is a display of the message she is accurately attempting to portray in her branding of Ivan as a disturbed individual . De Madariaga makes note of Makarii’s impact on Ivan’s religious self-importance quite often; it is a valid point, however, in that Ivan used his position to assume the title of Tsar, a notably non-secular role. In doing so, Ivan attempts to place himself into the same role as the Byzantine Emperor or, in the West, Holy Roman Emperor: a monarch whose role was bestowed upon him by the will of God. This action by Ivan is further evidence as provided by de Madariaga of a potential for mental instability in terms of an extreme inflated ego.
De Madariaga mentions that through this holy outlet Ivan may have also fell under the spell of Vlad Tepes Dracul, the infamous Wallachian voivod whose shocking actions against court rivals and his Turkish enemies – done so in the name of protecting his own assets – could have dictated to Ivan the proper way of responding to internal threats . Another example of a negative influence upon Ivan can be seen when, in the midst of the Regency Council period, Ivan’s hale and hearty mother Elena died suddenly – poisoned, by de Madariaga’s estimation, and mourned only by Ivan . The death of Elena and the succession of neglectful political rivals undoubtedly had a major impact on Ivan, now eight years old. De Madariaga’s mentioning of this as an impact upon Ivan’s personality is dreadfully important: it is the first true exposure of Ivan to human cruelty. The result of his mother’s death leads to the virtual abandonment of Ivan and his brother Iuri by the political structure until his adulthood – leading Ivan, naturally, to become a frustrated individual with a skewed sense of self-importance. Madariaga’s claims make it plain to see from where Ivan’s youthful habits, including animal torture, began to originate . Later, Ivan acts out further against defenseless prey when he and his friends act as criminals and chase innocent women with little reason other than malice. He would go on to execute three princes as a result of boredom during army exercise. These examples may strike the reader as similar to Ivan’s later origination and administering of the ‘Oprichnina’ system, which functioned similarly in its brigand-esque activity and intentional harassment of non-guilty subjects. Without this build-up, de Madariaga would be hard pressed to explain the mean behavior exhibited by Ivan later in life.
Ivan is seen accurately through his youth by de Madariaga as a cunning yet overly suspicious individual, even in his youth. As discussed earlier, Ivan was influenced negatively through the intrigue of the Muscovite court; this can be seen through the death of his mother and neglect at the hands of the rival Shiusky party. Despite this, Ivan showed a quick aptitude for adherence to such underhanded behavior: before his marriage to Elena Glinskaya, some of Ivan’s letters as well as other documents support harsh actions against former friends and the families of rivals that strike a tone similar to the traitorous methods put to use by the Regency Council in the suppression of rivals to the Rurikid power structure . De Madariaga’s special mentioning of this event harkens to Ivan’s later years in which he would brutally attack and destroy entire lineages that he considered, despite the reality of their position, rivals to his own power. The Oprichnina were a further example of this: formed originally as a separate ruling body free from the influence of the plotting boyars, the organization was eventually put to use as an oppressive deterrent against any who opposed Ivan’s rule (or who he suspected of doing so, factually or not). Through this and other mentioned examples, de Madariaga makes clear that Ivan’s youth is just a foreshadowing to later events: the future Tsar’s early years would set the stage for a Russia at the whim of a man, quick to act, whose suspicions would rule his realm.
De Madariaga’s ability to articulate her case on the subject of Ivan IV’s development toward the desolate historical figure he now represents is admirable in the least. The lengthy cases she makes pertaining to Ivan’s religious importance are central to his own self-view and assumption of formerly Byzantine religious importance. His cruelty is explained truthfully as being a result of the behavior he was exposed to and the treatment he dealt with at the hands of early opponents; this maturing negative behavior would become a hallmark of his name. His political maneuverings are simply an extension of his harshness: his consistent actions against any perceived threats and his institutionalization of the Oprichnina were executed as a result of the behavior for which he became known. It is not only the treatment he was victim to that is to blame for his identity as a vindictive, paranoid ruler but also how he acted unchecked due to his position – de Madariaga’s discussion of his youth show this, despite how early on in his life the events occurred.
Works Cited
1 de Madariaga, Isabel. Ivan the Terrible: First Tsar of Russia. Yale University Press: New Haven & London, 1981.
---
That's a wrap. Hope you enjoyed the "gripping narrative".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment