Ivan the Fourth: Leader, Conqueror, Murderer, Psychopath

Extract

[...] He states that “Ivan by modern standards would be a paranoid” and later adds that Ivan had a classic symptom that paranoid individuals have, “whatever threat can be conceived can be believed.”[26] He also speaks of another symptom, saying “Ivan made erroneous judgments about threats posed by others, a basic feature of paranoia.”[27] Ivan also fitted the age range of people afflicted by paranoia, ages thirty-five to fifty, Ivan was 35 at the start of the Oprichnina and 42 when it ended.[28] Hellie's evaluation of Ivan the Terrible is a psychological one, focusing on his individual actions as a function of his paranoia. [...]

[...] In a later scene, Kurbsky is violently punishing Mongol prisoners and Ivan deplores the act.[15] Eisenstein thus shows that Ivan the terrible is seemingly at this point against the use of unnecessary violence, a stance he surely surrenders later in his reign. After the death of his wife, Ivan is shown a list of boyars who abandoned his cause and in an act of self doubt, decides to leave Moscow, with his newly created palace army, abdicating the throne until the people of Moscow beg him to return.[16] This exemplifies the leader's selflessness and at the same time humanity, distraught by the death of this wife he shows apparent weakness in the face of adversity. [...]

[...] the article Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince by Michael Cherniavsky and another article, In Search of Ivan the Terrible by Richard Hellie. Although these articles offer clear and distinct opinions on the cause of Ivan the Terrible, there is an underlying brutality to his actions that is impossible to overlook. Ivan the Terrible committed crimes so atrocious and massive that another person in his position could not have been equally as brutal. One of Cherniavsky's viewpoints is that Ivan the terrible did not truly deserve his epithet. [...]

[...] The final assessment of Ivan the Terrible is by Hellie. Although he attempts to take a neutral opinion on the entire matter, he overwhelmingly appears to side with the camp that believes Ivan was himself mentally unstable. His whole opinion seems to centre on Ivan's “unfounded suspicion of the nobility and oppression of the boyars.”[20] Hellie seems to firmly agree with the point of view that Ivan was paranoid of subversion to his rule, and willing to do anything to attain what was in his mind complete control. [...]

[...] Hellie, Richard, In Search of Ivan the Terrible, University of Chicago, 20- 33. Riasanovsky, Nicholas V., Steinberg, Mark A History of Russia, (New York,1995), 131-142. Mark D Steinberg, Nicholas V Riasanovsky, a History of Russia (New York, 1995) 133. Steinberg, Riasanovsky, History of Russia Steinberg, Riasanovsky, History of Russia Michael Cherniavsky, Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince, Slavic Review (1968) Michael Cherniavsky, Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince, Slavic Review (1968) Michael Cherniavsky, Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince, Slavic Review (1968) Michael Cherniavsky, Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince, Slavic Review (1968) Michael Cherniavsky, Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince, Slavic Review (1968) Michael Cherniavsky, Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince, Slavic Review (1968) Michael Cherniavsky, Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince, Slavic Review (1968) Michael Cherniavsky, Ivan the Terrible as a Renaissance Prince, Slavic Review (1968) Synopsis of Sergei Mikhailovich Eisenstein's Ivan the Terrible Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible Richard Hellie, In Search of Ivan the Terrible, University of Chicago Hellie, In Search of Ivan the [...]