The history of the Russian autocracy is inextricably linked with serfdom. It is customary to think that the peasants worked from morning till night, and the landowners did nothing but mock the unfortunate. The lion's share of the truth in this is, but there are many stereotypes about the slave living conditions of the peasants that do not quite correspond to reality.
1. Unlike progressive Europe in Russia, serfdom has always been
It is generally believed that serfdom in Russia existed almost from the moment the state was created, while Europeans built a radically different model of social relations in their countries. In fact, everything was somewhat different: in Europe there was also serfdom. But its heyday fell on the period of the 7th-15th centuries. In Russia, at this time, the overwhelming majority of people were free.
Collection of arrears. A. A. Krasnoselsky, 1869.
The rapid enslavement of the peasants began in the 16th century, when the question of the noble army fighting for the father-tsar and mother-Russia was at the forefront. It was troublesome to maintain an active army in peacetime, so they began to assign the peasants to allotments of land so that they would work for the benefit of the nobles. As you know, the liberation of the peasants from slavery took place in 1861. Thus, it becomes clear that serfdom existed in Russia for a little over 250 years, but not from the moment the state was formed.
2. All peasants were serfs until the reform of 1861Contrary to popular belief, not all peasants were serfs. The "trading peasants" were recognized as a separate official class. They, like the merchants, had their own ranks. But if the merchant of the 3rd guild had to give 220 rubles to the state treasury for the right to trade, then the peasant of the 3rd guild - 4,000 rubles.
Sale of kvass. V. E. Kalistov.
In Siberia and Pomorie, serfdom did not even exist as a concept. Affected by the harsh climate and remoteness from the capital.
3. Russian serfs were considered the poorest in Europe. History textbooks say a lot about the fact that Russian serfs were the poorest in Europe. But if we turn to the testimonies of foreign contemporaries who lived in Russia at that time, it turns out that not everything is as clear-cut as it might seem at first glance.
Serfs.
For example, in the 17th century, Croat Yuri Krizhanich, who spent about 15 years in our country, wrote in his observations that the standard of living in Muscovite Rus is much higher than in Poland, Lithuania, and Sweden. In countries such as Italy, Spain and England, the upper classes were much wealthier than the Russian aristocracy, but the peasants "lived in Russia much more comfortably and better than in the richest countries of Europe."
4. Serfs worked tirelessly all year roundThe claim that the peasants worked without straightening their backs is rather exaggerated. A year before the abolition of serfdom, the number of non-working days among peasants reached 230, that is, they worked only 135 days. Such an abundance of days off was due to the huge number of holidays. The overwhelming majority were Orthodox, so church holidays were strictly observed.
Dances of serfs.
Scientist and publicist A. N. Engelhardt in "Letters from the Village" described his observations on peasant life: "Weddings, nikolschina, zakoski, thrashing, sowing, dumping, freezing, tying up cooperatives, etc." It was then that the saying was in use: "Sleep came to seven villages, laziness came to seven villages."
5. Serfs were powerless and could not complain about the landowner. In the Cathedral Code of 1649, the murder of a serf was considered a grave crime and was punishable under criminal law. For unintentional murder, a landowner was sent to prison, where he awaited an official review of his case. Some were exiled to hard labor.
Bargain. A scene from a serf life. N. Nevrev, 1866.
Promotional video:
In 1767, Catherine II, by her decree, made it impossible to file complaints from serfs to her personally. This was done by "established governments". Many peasants complained about the arbitrariness of their landowners, but in fact, the case came to court very rarely.
