Latest / The Romanov Dynasty: Rise, Power, and Bloody End — Fexingo History / The Romanovs' First Tsar: Michael and the Zemsky Sobor of 1613
Transcript
- Lucas: So we've talked about the Time of Troubles before — the Smuta, the false Dmitrys, the Polish occupation of Moscow. But we've never really dug into how the Romanov dynasty actually started. And the answer is: it started with an election. Luna: An election? In 17th-century Russia? Lucas: Exactly. In 1613, a gathering called the Zemsky Sobor — basically an assembly of nobles, clergy, townspeople, and even some free peasants — was convened in Moscow. Their job was to choose a new tsar after years of chaos. The Polish prince Władysław was still claiming the throne, and the Swedes were pushing their own candidate. But the Sobor ultimately picked a sixteen-year-old boy named Mikhail Romanov, who was living in hiding at the Ipatiev Monastery near Kostroma. Luna: Why him? He was so young, and his family hadn't exactly been royalty. Lucas: That's the fascinating part. The Romanovs were boyars — noble, but not ruling. Mikhail's grandfather was Nikita Romanov, a brother-in-law of Ivan the Terrible. That gave them a connection to the old Rurikid dynasty. But the real reason was political calculation. The boyars thought a young, inexperienced tsar would be easy to control. The Cossacks, who had become a major force during the Troubles, wanted a native Russian tsar, not a foreigner. And Mikhail's mother, Xenia Shestova — later known as nun Marfa — was a formidable woman who had suffered under the Poles. She became the real power behind the throne in those early years. Luna: So the Zemsky Sobor wasn't just a rubber stamp. They actually debated? Lucas: They debated fiercely. The Sobor met for weeks in early 1613. The boyar Fyodor Sheremetev, a Romanov relative, was a key player, lobbying behind the scenes. There were still factions supporting the Polish prince, and others who wanted to invite a Swedish prince. But the Cossack regiments stationed in Moscow made their feelings known — they threatened to riot if a foreigner was chosen. In the end, the Sobor sent a delegation to Kostroma to formally offer the crown to Mikhail. Legend says that Marfa initially refused on her son's behalf, fearing for his life. She only relented when the delegates promised that the Sobor would support him. Luna: And Mikhail himself? Did he want to be tsar? Lucas: He was reportedly in tears when they told him. He was a shy, pious teenager who just wanted to be left alone. But he accepted, and he was crowned on July 22, 1613. His reign began with a devastated country — Moscow was in ruins, the treasury was empty, and foreign armies were still on Russian soil. It took years to drive out the Poles and Swedes, and to rebuild the state. Luna: So the Romanov dynasty was born in crisis, not glory. Lucas: Exactly. And that crisis shaped the dynasty's character. Early Romanovs were deeply cautious, relying on the Zemsky Sobor for legitimacy. In fact, the Sobor continued to meet regularly under Mikhail, voting on taxes and war policies. It wasn't exactly a parliament, but it had real power. It was only later, under his son Alexei, that the tsars began to assert absolute autocracy. Luna: So the Romanovs started with a kind of constitutional moment, and then gradually centralized power. Lucas: That's a great way to put it. The Zemsky Sobor of 1613 was a unique experiment in Russian history — a moment when the 'land' chose its ruler. After Mikhail, the Sobor met less frequently, and under Peter the Great it was abolished entirely. But in 1613, it was the foundation of the dynasty. Luna: And what about the Cossacks? They seem to have been the kingmakers. Lucas: They absolutely were. The Cossacks — free warriors from the steppe — had been a wild card during the Troubles. They'd fought for the false Dmitrys, then against the Poles, and by 1613 they were camped outside Moscow, armed and restless. The boyars were terrified of them. When the Sobor was deadlocked, the Cossack ataman stood up and shouted that Mikhail Romanov was the rightful tsar, and that anyone who opposed him would be killed. That broke the logjam. It's a reminder that the Romanov dynasty owes its throne, in part, to armed men who had no vote but plenty of swords. Luna: So the election wasn't exactly democratic. Lucas: Not by modern standards. But for its time, the Zemsky Sobor was remarkably inclusive. It included not just boyars and clergy, but also merchants, townspeople, and even state peasants. There were representatives from dozens of cities. The idea was that the whole Russian land should have a voice in choosing the tsar. And they did choose — and the choice held. That's why the Romanovs could claim legitimacy, even when later tsars became autocrats. Luna: You know, something that strikes me about all this — we're able to make these deep dives because listeners support us directly. I know a lot of shows are ad-heavy, but here, it's just people who enjoy the history who chip in. Lucas: Yeah, and it makes a real difference. We don't have a big network behind us — it's literally a handful of listeners who toss in a few bucks each month at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo that keeps these episodes coming. And that's honestly the only reason we can do episodes like this, on a niche topic like the 1613 election, without worrying about ad revenue. Luna: So if you've been getting something out of these conversations, that's the way to keep them going. No pressure, just — it's what makes it work. Lucas: Exactly. And speaking of keeping things going — let's get back to Mikhail. After his coronation, one of his first acts was to send an embassy to the Polish king, demanding the return of his father, Filaret. Filaret had been captured by the Poles years earlier, and he was a powerful figure in his own right. Luna: Filaret — that's the future Patriarch, right? Lucas: Yes. He was originally Fyodor Romanov, Mikhail's father, but he'd been forced into monastic exile by Boris Godunov. When the Poles captured him, they held him for years. His return in 1619 was a huge event. Filaret was immediately made Patriarch of Moscow, and he essentially co-ruled with his son. From 1619 until his death in 1633, Filaret was the real power behind the throne. He took the title 'Great Sovereign', alongside Mikhail. So for nearly fifteen years, Russia had two sovereigns — a father and son team. Luna: That's extraordinary. A patriarch co-tsar. Lucas: It was unprecedented. Filaret was tough, experienced, and determined to rebuild Russia. He reformed the army, restocked the treasury, and negotiated peace with Poland and Sweden. He also enforced religious orthodoxy harshly — Old Believers would later resent his policies. But he gave the dynasty stability. When he died in 1633, Mikhail was on his own, but by then the Romanovs were firmly established. Luna: And Mikhail himself — how did he rule after his father died? Lucas: He continued many of Filaret's policies, but he was more passive. He relied heavily on his boyar advisors, especially the Sheremetevs and the Cherkasskys. He was also deeply religious, spending hours in prayer and founding monasteries. His reign saw the recapture of Smolensk from Poland — though not without difficulty — and the beginning of the expansion into Siberia. By the time he died in 1645, Russia was stable, but still fragile. He left his son Alexei a country that was at peace, but with deep social tensions that would explode later. Luna: It's interesting that the dynasty began with such a weak tsar, but still survived and thrived. Lucas: That's the paradox. Mikhail's weakness was actually his strength — he didn't threaten the powerful boyar factions, so they supported him. The Zemsky Sobor provided a buffer. And the Romanov myth of divine election — the idea that God had chosen them — grew over time. By the time of Peter the Great, the Romanovs were seen as semi-divine. But it all started with a scared teenager and a desperate assembly. Luna: And with Cossacks shouting down the opposition. Lucas: Exactly. It's a very human story. Not a glorious coronation, but a messy compromise. And that's what makes it so compelling.