Category Archives: History253

This course covers the history of Russia and the lands that were part of its domains and empire from the tenth to nineteenth centuries.

Dead or Alive, You’re Coming with Me

Posted on by

As Peter the Great tries to westernize Russia, he enacts many reforms that follow a similar pattern.  One pattern that I was able to discern from the readings was that each reform had a part in limiting the power of the church or Boyars.  The church is seen to be limited with the role of priests.  To become a priest you must be taught by a bishop and formally trained.  A person cannot just decide to be a priest because he wants to reap the benefits of the position.  Priests are not able to make any commercial gains from baptisms or any sort of service.  They are to must represent a good lifestyle and not set a bad example for those around them (RS, 334-36).   Education begins to become a requirement for admission into the elite class as well and you would not be considered for the position of a noble without being educated.  This forced elites to receive an education outside of traditional religious instruction, perhaps undermining the church (RS, 246-49). Peter seems to be at least trying to enact requirements for positions, instead of letting the less qualified gain these positions.

It seems that Peter’s intent for the Table of Ranks was to undermine the power of the Boyars.  The Table of Ranks introduces how rank is attained and clearly displays which classes have more power compared to the others.  One sentence from the eighth statute is striking as it states, “… We shall proffer no rank to those who have rendered no service to Us and the fatherland….”.  This really drives the point that your rank is decided by how useful you are to the state, not entirely by lineage.  If a noble does not follow this rank and acts higher than their rank, they would be fined.  This could’ve been put in place to deter any Boyars trying to act out of place (RS, 228-29).  The factor of lineage is not completely taken out of determining class, but what you are able to do for the state seems to become a more vital part of the process.  

Kneller, Godfrey. 1698. N.p.

Changing Areas of Focus

Posted on by

Throughout this semester law codes help show the changes occurring throughout Russian history. Written under the rule of Aleksei the Ulozehnie of 1649 differs greatly from previous law codes such as the Sudebnik of 1497. The Ulozehnie is organized into sections like previous law codes; however, the order of the articles reveals important shifts in the structure of the Russian state. Article I of the Ulozehnie protects the dignity and sanctity of the Russian Orthodox Church. The law code prohibits heresy, harming church officials, bringing political complaints to church services, fighting and/or murdering members of the congregation, and other acts that may interfere with a normal service. (((http://community.dur.ac.uk/a.k.harrington/1649code.html.)) Violators of these laws often received capital punishment – showing how closely the state protected the church. In fact, the Ulozehni depicts an overlapping of the church and state, one where the Tsar’s word reflects the will of God. ((Article I, Section 9, http://community.dur.ac.uk/a.k.harrington/1649code.htm.l)) The Sudebnik protected the Russian Orthodox Church but never with the same vigor or priority.

Instead of focusing on the church, the first articles of the Sudebnik outlined court procedures. (((http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/sudebnik.html)) One finds legal procedures located in first in Article X of the Ulozehnie. (((http://community.dur.ac.uk/a.k.harrington/1649code.html.)) Written during a time of internal turmoil and impending foreign invasion, the Ulozehnie addresses treason and the Prince’s safety in Article II. Twenty-two articles prohibit conspiring against the Prince, knowing of a conspiracy but not reporting it, and aiding outside powers against the Prince. (((http://community.dur.ac.uk/a.k.harrington/1649code.html.)) Again, a traitor received capital punishment after a trial confirmed his or her guilt. The number of these codes focusing on the Prince’s safety allude to the turmoil and instability under Aleksei. The Sudebnik outlaws murder and violence but never addresses the security of the Prince or treason. (((http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/sudebnik.html.))

Considering the content of the Ulozehnie’s first two articles, who would you say is the primary audience of these law codes?

 

Exploring The Code of Law of 1649

Posted on by

The excerpts from The Code of Law of 1649 (Ulozhenie) corroborate what we have been exploring in class. Following the Time of Troubles, which lasted from 1598 to 1613, Russia’s government changed the way that it treated its people. Because of the Social period during the Time of Troubles the government understood the power of the people and the need to keep them happy. Along with this understanding came mistrust. The government became rightly afraid of uprising and tighter hold on the people of Russia ensued.

As can be expected some of the most prominent codes regarded the church and the Tsar. Treasonous talk involving the Tsar or the government and insolence towards the church was unacceptable. The government and the church were both gaining power while peasants became even more controlled. Laws became most specific and calculated, as did the corresponding punishments. The laws regarding peasant travel became stricter and even spread to other parts of the class system. This was partially caused by Russian Orthodox Church’s fear of other religions and thus reluctance to let people travel to other countries. More severe punishments including Capital and corporal punishment became routine. “Death without mercy” was one of the most common punishments in the law code. Trials were more specific and people could not be punished for the mistakes of their family as long as they were not aware of the rules being broken. Property was still seen as very important and was something that could be taken away as a form of punishment. The forgery of documents became a serious problem along with the issue of counterfeit money. The falsifying of important possessions is not unusual. With the relatively new prevalence of money and documentation comes the need for laws against forgery. All of the laws in The Code of Law of 1649 came about because at some point they were being broken.

 

How did the people of Russia react to these laws? Were they obeyed? How can we tell if they were used in the society?

Comparing the Sudebnik and the Ulozhenie

Posted on by

The Law Code of 1649 (Ulozhenie) (((https://community.dur.ac.uk/a.k.harrington/1649code.html)) shows us how life has changed for the Muscovites since the Sudebnik of 1497   (( http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/sudebnik.html ))  written under the rule of Ivan III. This document, written during Alexis I’s reign, is significantly longer and more detailed than its predecessors, including topics topic’s that we haven’t seen before such as permits to travel to other countries, tolls, ferries, and bridges, and even illegal taverns. There are many differences, but it is crucial to mention the first and second articles, Blasphemers and Heretics and The Sovereign’s Honor and How to Guard his Health respectively. There is some mention of bishops and patriarchs dealing justice on those who offended them in previous documents, but in Article 1 of the Ulozhenie the state punishes blasphemers and anyone who interrupts a church liturgy with whipping or even death. This illustrates how truly the church and state become one after Mikhail Romanov instated his imprisoned father as the Patriarch of Moscow and how it has continued this way through Alexis’s time.

Article 2 is especially important because it gives many details about traitors who wish to do harm to the Sovereign or even think about harming him. If a man is investigated and is found to have “malicious thought” against the Tsar, he should be executed. This control of thought is very reminiscent of Big Brother and the fact that the sovereign desires total control over his subjects illustrates how there must have been little control over the population at this time. Acts against the Tsar are not even mentioned in the Sudebnik, almost as if no one would dare harm their Grand Prince. This new need for control is certainly valid, given this was written after the oprichnina and the Time of Troubles. People were starting to question this idea of hierarchy and rebellions were becoming more and more common, so this is Alexei’s way to halt rebellion in its tracks. This is especially important for him to do since his family was still new to the throne and some people, especially the boyars, didn’t see him as a valid Tsar.

Questions

1. How has the idea of owning land and property shifted from the Pravda Russkaia and the Sudebnik to the Ulozhenie?

2. The Sudebnik talks a lot about the minute details of fines whereas the Ulozhenie practically doesn’t mention it  at all. What do you think is the reason behind this?

Ulozhenie: Difference Maker or Part of a Trend?

Posted on by

In Chapter Twelve of Reinterpreting Russian History: Readings, 860-1860s, Daniel Kaiser and Gary Marker decide to include the perspective of an author (Richard Hellie) who thought of the Ulozhenie as the defining moment in the history of serfs in Russia. Hellie’s perspective, while interesting, leaves me with additional questions.

The most intriguing part of Hellie’s point-of-view was that his words seem to create a sharp division in Russian history, a division between pre-1649 and post-1649 (since 1649 was the year that the Ulozhenie was written). He did not view the law code as part of a pattern of regressing rights for peasants, but as something which all seemed to happen at once (Kaiser and Marker 181). His view is certainly different from some thoughts on the reduction in peasant rights over time; Kaiser and Marker even said that one school of thought on the disappearance of peasant rights was that it was a long process which began long before 1649 with actions such as the restriction of travel outside of St. George’s Day (Kaiser and Marker 180).

Also interesting was how Kaiser and Marker did not include any documents which introduced the point-of-view that the events over many decades was a bigger factor than any governmental law code. They had a document which addressed how the institution of slavery developed in Muscovy over the course of many decades (namely, during the “Time of Troubles”), but they didn’t do the same with serfdom and how that gradually developed in the decades leading up to the Ulozhenie in 1649.

I am indeed left with multiple questions. Here are the questions I have:

Do you believe that the restrictions on serfdom were a gradual process, or was it something that mostly came out of the Ulozhenie in 1649?

Why would Kaiser and Marker not give more time to the point-of-view that serfdom was an institution which developed over many years, and not mostly from one law code?

On a note unrelated to my response here, how were these masters able to keep control of their peasants when they were so outnumbered by peasants? According to the reading, ninety percent of the Russian population consisted of peasants at one point; this is a percentage so high that it must have been hard to control all of them.

Bibliography

Kaiser, Daniel H. and Gary Marker. Reinterpreting Russian History: Readings, 860-1860s. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

The Systematization of Seventeenth-Century Russia

Posted on by

The excerpts from the Ulozhenie of 1649 indicated the continued centralization and bureaucratization of Russian government. Chapters five and six assert the state’s control over certain aspects of citizens’ daily lives such as currency and the ability to travel outside of Russia. We saw the start of the establishment of bureaucratic processes in the Sudebnik of 1497. The law code included many clauses pertaining to things such as payment of judicial officials, the proper process for slave manumission, and the documentation necessary in order to pursue a criminal case against another person. The Ulozhenie appears to follow the same trend in concerning itself with issues outside of the typical crimes of murder and theft which were almost exclusively featured in the earlier Pravda Russkaia. The centralization of government inevitably breeds a larger bureaucracy as it is necessary to the functioning of a more complex state and it is clearly shown in the excerpts from the Ulozhenie. The roots of the law code lie in the chaotic “time of troubles” which occurred thirty years prior. The Sudebnik of 1497 was a reaction to the disruptive occupancy of the Mongols as it attempted to re-establish Russians control over Russia; the Ulozhenie is similar in that it appears to be an attempt by the government to re-establish order following an extremely turbulent and lawless time.

Ivan’s reign of terror established the slaughter of people based on things as insignificant as being related to a disloyal person. People could be executed if someone in their family betrayed the crown three generations earlier. The Ulozhenie actively tries to combat these kinds of tactics by stating that if one has no knowledge of their family member’s betrayal then they should not be punished as a traitor. The excerpts do not show any signs of outright abuses of power by the state, but the punishments for crimes are severe. Execution is the chosen punishment for something as intangible as “think[ing] maliciously about the sovereign’s health.” The document also shows a partiality towards public displays of punishments in order to instill fear in the rest of the population. This was a central theme in the Sudebnik as well and it is a sign that the government is taking control back by force; something that may be necessary after such a disorganized and non-regulated period in Russian history.

Questions:

What is the significance of giving a specific form of execution for the crime of altering the content of coinage?

Why would the state be so concerned with people traveling out of the country?

Domostroi, Ch. 24-38

Posted on by

Chapters 24-37 of the Domostroi deal with how the people of the household should live their lives. Men of their household must live a christian lifestyle and treat all of their responsibilities with care. If a man is not able to help those in need or commits crimes against the state, he will bring, “… his soul to destruction and his house to disgrace.” ((Carolyn Johnston Pouncy, trans and ed., The Domostroi: Rules for Russian Households in the Time of Ivan the Terrible, (Ithica: Cornell University Press, 1994,) 121.)) Rulers must be fair to their people and not be selfish in all of their decisions they makes. Not being able to manage expenses is considered a great dishonor. The Domostroi reminded people not to keep, “… more slaves than you can afford,” and to free those slaves one did not need. ((Pouncy, Domostroi, 124.)) The relationship between a landowner and his servants appears to be very close, as a landowner is taught to, “… care for them and reward them as though they were your own children.”((Pouncy, Domostroi, 126.))

Wives of the household rulers are to be submissive to their husbands and follow their commands. It’s even mentioned that a wife should consult her husband on any matter of importance.((Pouncy, Domostroi, 132.)) The wife has a tight reign on what is happening in the household and must set an example for the servants to follow. She must be intelligent in the way of knowing how to cook meals for every occasion, keep records of the household, and work tirelessly as ”she should even fall asleep over her embroidery.”((Pouncy, Domostroi, 127.)) The expectation of women continue on and on; drunkenness is impermissible, gossiping is intolerable, idleness is unheard of, and women must act as the example for all other household workers. ((Pouncy, Domostroi, 138.))

While these regulations all explicitly address the individual, they create a larger social contract. The Domostroi creates standards are enforced communally – regulating actions not through a punishment by the state but through a loss of grace and respect of the community. This system only works when a population embraces the same standards. When one strays from the norm they feel the exclusion and chastisement of the whole community. The Domostroi heavily religious messages illustrate the extent to which the church and religion permeated everyone’s lives.
Furthermore, when examining the Domostroi in the context of what Muscovy was experiencing during the rule of Ivan, it takes steps to take even more control into the lives of the people, notably the boyars. Ivan released his own Sudebnik in 1550, and this centralized power in things a law code would normally address, such as theft, property disputes and so on. The Domostroi seeks to control what happens in the home, which fits in with Ivan’s desire to centralize power. The new autocratic ideals Ivan clearly sought to implement within his own government can also be seen in his ambition to control how the boyars and normal people lived their own private lives.

Domostroi ch. 1-11

Posted on by

During the reign of Ivan IV, the Domostroi was written. The book is a guide on the rituals of mundane life of the time period followed by those in the upper strata of society. It details the proper way of living as a Christian, as a good citizen, and as a human being. Throughout the first few chapters, we noticed reoccurring themes.

Being a household manual, it would make sense that the Domostroi would mention God, as the influence of the Russian Orthodox Church was ubiquitous in this time period. These chapters show that religion is not just a part of society but the guiding force in the lives of 16th century Muscovites. The first chapters discuss everything from family relationships to entertaining guests and the importance of religion in all of these acts. The importance of God also appears regularly in the preparation and importance of food in the family home. According to the Domostroi, God can make bad or rotten food taste sweet again. It also explores ideas such as the love each person should have for God, the Tsar, other important figures in society, the less fortunate, and loved ones.  It is very clear in the text that, specifically for God and the Tsar, this love should be accompanied by the acknowledgement that reverence is essential and the fear of these figures is just as important as the love. The prevalence of God in Muscovy is clear through these first few chapters.

The Domostroi mentions food many times throughout the first eleven chapters. Food plays an important role that relates to God. Communion bread must be chewed with the lips and not the teeth: biting sharply and harshly into the flesh of Jesus was wrong. With the bread, a Christian may only drink certain liquids, and must do so carefully, sipping the divine water or consecrated wine. When feasting with neighbors, friends, and family, the highest ranking person in attendance is to start eating first; to eat out of place is disrespectful. When someone dies in a man’s family, food is set out so that the neighbors and friends can feast in celebration in the memory of the person and in God. Food is God’s gift to the people and so the Domostroi demands that Christians “eat, then, and drink in praise of God” (ch.11 p.77) One cannot praise God while eating slovenly, sloppily, or rudely. Food is meant to be shared among all in attendance. The more honor a person has does not entitle him to eat more food than the rest. Sharing and compassion for all of God’s creations — whether elder, equal, or poor — is what the Domostroi promotes.

The Domostroi also placed a lot of emphasis on reverence for all—reverence for God, reverence for superiors, and even reverence for inferiors. Reverence for all of these beings, natural or supernatural, is supposed to be accomplished through both love and fear. By showing reverence through both love and fear, the reader hears quotes from the Bible about love for the Lord (Chapter 4), and at the same time he also hears the quote that one should “fear the tsar and serve him faithfully” (Chapter 7). All of this demonstrates that, while there were different ways of showing reverence to others, one of the central themes of the Domostroi was in showing reverence.

 

Leah, Leah, and Brendan.

Pouncy, Carolyn Johnston. The Domostroi. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1994.

Domostroi 12-23

Posted on by

Chapters 12-23 of the Domostroi emphasize the importance of piety at all levels of society, from national politics to household affairs. Chapters 12 – 17 focus on the role of religion in the home and the importance of religious education for children. The man is the spiritual guide of his family, and he is expected to lead evening vespers and morning prayer for his wife, children, and servants. Men must go to church every day, and women and servants ought to attend services whenever they have relief from their domestic duties (Chapter 12). Children must observe religious rites from an early age: chapter 14 commands children to respect their father-confessors, and that they must invite him into their home, be revealing about their sins, and look to him for examples on how to live a good, useful life. Though children have spiritual guides within the community, parents are ultimately responsible for their children’s religious development and must protect them from sin. If a child sins, the whole family and village are implicated. Chapters 15 and 16 offer gendered guidelines for raising children: if a man has daughters, he must begin to amass her dowry as soon as she is born. If he has sons, he must “break them in early” when they are young and begin to beat them at a young age if they misbehave.

Chapters 18-22 describe relationships within the household, and show how behavior in the household is an extension of one’s devotion to God. Children must respect their parents in order to be blessed God, and a wife’s service to her husband and children are tantamount to her service to her Lord. Men must be devoted to God to be successful in their work. Slaves and servants should always respect their master, and will receive mercy from God if they go to church.

Chapter 23 reflects the belief that the fate of the Russian state depended on the piety of its citizens. All disasters and diseases are “caused by God’s wrath.” If citizens are not devoted to God, the nation will be “captured and slaughtered by pagans” who will burn their churches. An angry God may “cause the Tsar to seize our property in anger,” suggesting that Ivan’s caprice was the result of divine intervention. Citizens could avoid such fates by practicing charity and, “above all, commit[ing] no evil” (page 125).

Domostroi Ch. 39-49

Posted on by

Chapters 39 through 49 of the Domostroi are concerned primarily with supplying one’s household in the most cost-effective way possible. The section opens with the declaration that if a man does not follow the guidelines put forth then he will be “destroyed now and forever,” by God (Ch. 39).The head of a household is then advised, multiple times, to either purchase or have a servant purchase enough supplies to last the entire year. This should be done when peasants have wares at the market place, and one should avoid buying through middlemen as it increases the price (Ch. 40). Having a surplus is never a problem because extra goods can be sold and if they were purchased intelligently, they should not have been an extra cost burden on the household. With a surplus of variable foods a household can also provide excellent hospitality so as to remain in high esteem among his peers.

Along with purchasing in bulk at smart times, the author strongly suggests being as self-sufficient as possible. A household is encouraged to have various animals and for a wife to be able to make dishes from every part of a slaughtered animal (Ch. 42). The author also outlines how to feed these animals: largely with leftover scraps from one’s own kitchen and grazing, meaning that no extra food needs to be purchased for livestock. A household should also take advantage of the many benefits of having a kitchen garden as it can be another source of food for the family and the animals. The author insists that nothing should be wasted, even the greens from root vegetables should be eaten. Finally, the serving dishes used in the household should always be impeccably clean and cooks and servers must remain orderly. This section is focused on the benefits of thrift, being hospitable, and keeping a house in accordance with God’s will.

Questions:

To what proportion of the population do the guidelines in this section pertain?

Why do the writers of the Domostroi place so much emphasis on providing hospitality?

Bibliography

Chap. 39-49, In The Domostroi. Translated by Carolyn Johnston Pouncy, edited by Carolyn

Johnston Pouncy, 145. New York: Cornell University, 1994