') In the Chronicle of the rebellions it is said this way: “Prince Mipilo, having consulted with Mnkhail Tatishchev, and from the clerks took Efmshsh Telepnev, and, fearing danger from the Novgorodians, went secretly from Novgorod to Ivana-Gorod not with great people.” 144. The other edition of this chronicle, placed in Nyuon, is also transmitted in this form. years. VIII, 107.
V. S. IKONNIKOV,
izz
The metropolitan turned out to be in disbelief in Novgorod. Isidore; and yet it was so easy to pacify the rebellion (Let. about the rebellion. 145; New Year. 99). There is even reason to believe that one of the reasons for it was Tatishchev himself. Indeed, as soon as Skopin returned to Novgorod, the displeasure against Tatishchev was repeated again. We already know how happily Skopin came out of the affair with Kernozitsky; but such an outcome was difficult to predict. That is why we consider it probable that Tatishchev, seeing the transfer of Pskov, Ivangorod and Oreshok to the side of the Pretender, the success of Kernozitsky on the way to Novgorod (he occupied Torzhok and Tver), the occupation of his estates even before that by the Tushins, the dislike towards him in Novgorod, decided to go over to the side of the Pretender himself. Many people did this then; this happened before Tatishchev’s eyes: in Pskov, in Oreshka (where M. Saltykov was transferred) 2). Skopin’s actions in Moscow have not yet been given “no faith, much for the sake of civil strife and great need” (New Year. 99); Shuisky's rule hung almost by a thread; and yet the transition from one camp to another was so easy. True, Skopin paid his last debt to Tatishchev by burying him in Anto. Nievo Monastery; but the indignation against Tatishchev was so strong that he could not even study his deeds, and, apparently, did not try: he only announced his action *). Amazing,
In the New Chronicle, which is considered the original edition of the two previous editions, it is expressed: “and he (Skopin) ran from Vel. Novygrad secretly to Ivan-grad, taking with him Mikhail Tatishchev, and the clerk Evfim Telepnev and other nobles who were sent with him from Moscow” (Vrem. Moscow. General History. KHIY, 98). It is clear that Skopin took Tatishchev with him, as well as the Moscow nobles, fearing displeasure against them, and at the same time Tatishchev’s advice to leave the city takes on a certain meaning.
') In the New Chronicle it is stated directly that Skopin was informed "that Mykhailo Tat. is asking him not for service, but wants to commit treason and surrender Novgorod." 99. In the Chronicle of the Rebellion we read about this: "that he is going in order to betray Tsar Vasyl and surrender Novgorod." 146.
') The general disappearance of the Novgorod Pyatins at the end of 1608 is evidenced by Verbyshev's reply to Vychegodtsan about the news about Prince. Mvx. Vasilievich (Acts of Expedition II, No. 99*.
*) In New years. “Prince Mikhail Vas., having gathered all the military men,
It was “many Novgorodians” who informed Skopin about the existence of Tatishchev’s plan (Nov. let. 93) and he is in the foreground in deciding the fate of the culprit. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that Skopin, after satisfying the anger of the crowd, did not send a detachment against Bernozitsky, fearing, apparently, treason, and when Kernozitsky approached the Khutynsky monastery and began to devastate the Novgorod district, then “many nobles betrayed and went to the Lithuanian regiments” (ib.), therefore a conspiracy really existed. Novgorod was liberated not on its own, but through the efforts of the “district people.”
But the inventory of Tatishchev’s property shows us the other side of Tatishchev’s story. Skopin ordered the sale of property at public auction without a decree from Moscow, and even Tatishchev’s relatives, who were in Novgorod at that time, received nothing but their belongings (Vremennik, VIII, 3, 11, 12, 15, 30). From this we can conclude that the sale of property was made for the purpose of paying debts and satisfying claims filed against Tatishchev in Novgorod, and on the other hand, it confirms the fact of the betrayal itself, since part of Tatishchev’s property went to satisfy public needs. From this source Skopin treated and gave gifts to the Swedes. Skopin's brother-in-law, Golovin, received the best dress, weapons, harness, and vessel for the congress with the Swedes (11-13, 15-22, 35). Prince Andrei Petrovich Kurakin, who ruled in Novgorod together with Tatishchev, is also listed among the buyers, but he did not pay all the money (15, 27-32). For himself, Skopin took without money several pieces of canvas and cloth for tents, tablecloths, 500 koiei of hay, and sent from the road for silver cups and a Persian saber worth 50 rubles, which he left