Reddit

culture-novgorod

From [http://mem­ber­s.n­bci.­com/_XM­CM/ni­co­laa/peo­ple.htm­l| Nico­laa’s ar­ti­cle] of the same name, from her [http://mem­ber­s.n­bci.­com/_XM­CM/ni­co­laa/rus­in­tro.htm­l|Nov­gorod Hand­book]

====== Me­dieval Rus­sia — Cul­ture and Peo­ple ====== ===== The Peo­ple of Nov­gorod =====

At the top of the so­cial scale, of course, was the prince, about whom a few brief com­ments should suf­fice. In 1036, we see the role of the prince be­gin­ning to be trans­formed from the mil­i­tary-based mod­el of a chief­tain sur­round­ed by his ret­inue (or druzhi­na) to one whose po­si­tion de­pend­ed as much on in­her­i­tance as on mil­i­tary prow­ess. How­ev­er, those princes who were al­so good mil­i­tary lead­ers usu­al­ly pros­pered at the ex­pense of their not-­so-gift­ed broth­ers and cousin­s. All males of the house of Rurik were con­sid­ered to be princes. This sta­tus did not, how­ev­er, give them claim to lands or rich­es.

These were ei­ther gift­ed to them by the Prince of Kiev (now be­gin­ning to be known as the Grand Prince) or seized by force of arm­s. By 1036, it was be­com­ing cus­tom­ary for the Grand Prince to des­ig­nate his heir by ap­point­ing him Prince of Nov­gorod, which was the sec­ond most im­por­tant city in Rus’.

This was sub­ject to the ap­proval of the cit­i­zens of Nov­gorod— which in lat­er years be­came more and more dif­fi­cult to ob­tain as the pow­er of the bo­yars and rich­er mer­chants of Nov­gorod grew and the pow­er of the bur­geon­ing Rurikid fam­i­ly be­gan to be di­lut­ed. By the thir­teenth cen­tu­ry, the prince held on­ly nom­i­nal pow­er in the city.

==== Bo­yars ==== The bo­yars oc­cu­pied the rank just be­low the princes and were con­sid­ered to be no­bles. The di­vid­ing line be­tween bo­yars and rich mer­chants is quite fuzzy — their dwellings, right­s, and out­ward ap­pear­ances were prob­a­bly sim­i­lar. But bo­yars tend­ed to own large es­tates out­side the towns which were worked by bonds­men, though they kept their own main res­i­dences in towns and were of­ten en­gaged in op­er­a­tions close­ly con­nect­ed with mer­chant ac­tiv­i­ty, such as bank­ing, trade, and usury, us­ing the pro­ceeds from their agri­cul­tur­al op­er­a­tions to fund these ac­tiv­i­ties. Mil­i­tary roles were al­so im­por­tan­t, though per­haps not so much as for the no­ble class­es in West­ern Eu­rope. Bo­yar sons were of­ten con­nect­ed di­rect­ly with a prince­ly ret­inue and would use this ear­ly pa­tron­age to help build their own for­tunes be­fore set­tling in­to a town-based life. As not­ed be­fore, the line be­tween bo­yar and mer­chant was blurred, and many could and did move up or down in the ranks.

The in­ter­ests of bo­yars and mer­chants of­ten co­in­cid­ed, and these two groups

to­geth­er like­ly con­trolled the veche in Nov­gorod.

==== Mer­chants ==== Mer­chants are gen­er­al­ly those en­gaged in trade who are not in­volved in the man­u­fac­ture of the items they are trad­ing. Rus’ mer­chants fell in­to three cat­e­gories: the ku­pet­s, or lo­cal mer­chan­t; the gost, or for­eign mer­chan­t; and the tor­gov­et­s; or pet­ty mer­chan­t. Whether one was a ku­pets or a gost de­pend­ed on­ly on where one was at a giv­en mo­men­t:

If one were in one’s home­town, than one was a ku­pet­s; oth­er­wise, one was

con­sid­ered a gost. Un­der Rus­sian law, mer­chants were treat­ed with a great deal of re­spec­t. In case of calami­ty caus­ing loss of good­s, the mer­chant could de­fer pay­men­t. In the case of re­pay­ment of debt­s, a per­son­’s first du­ty was to re­pay out­-of-­town mer­chants. Mer­chants al­so had a fair bit of lee­way in deal­ing with thieves. Po­lit­i­cal ac­tiv­i­ty al­so be­came the norm for the mer­chant class; along with the bo­yars, they are of­ten men­tioned in records of ne­go­ti­a­tion­s, treaties, re­volt­s, and oth­er such ac­tiv­i­ties.

==== Crafts­men ==== The ma­jor­i­ty of the pop­u­la­tion of Nov­gorod would have been crafts­men, ei­ther free or kholops (bonds­men) in­den­tured to princes or bo­yars. Be­sides be­ing the base of the ur­ban econ­o­my, the crafts­men served as its mili­tia in times of cri­sis. Here fol­lows a list of crafts­men which have been con­clu­sive­ly iden­ti­fied by Tikhomirov as hav­ing ex­ist­ed in Rus’:

White­wash­er­s, Nail-­mak­er­s, Pot­ter­s, For­ti­fi­ca­tion builder­s, Wood­work­er­s, Lock­smith­s, Ar­chi­tect­s, Gold­smith­s, Icono­g­ra­pher­s, Stone­hew­er­s, Stone­ma­son­s, Hood-­mak­er­s, Tan­ner­s, Ship­wright­s, Boil­er­mak­er­s, Smith­s, Sil­ver­smith­s, Cop­per­smith­s, Bow-­mak­er­s, Bridge-builder­s, Tin­smith­s, Weaver­s, Painter­s, Scribes, Car­pen­ter­s, Cat­a­pult-­mak­er­s, Semp­ster­s, Spin­ner­s, Sad­dle­mak­er­s, Sil­ver­ers, Glazier­s, Quiv­er-­mak­er­s, Boot­mak­er­s, Shield­-­mak­er­s, Butch­er­s, Bak­er­s, Brew­ers

Al­so men­tioned in sources are en­ter­tain­ers such as min­strel­s, ac­tors, tum­bler­s, and psaltry-­play­ers and oth­er mu­si­cian­s.

Crafts­men, de­pend­ing on their sta­tus (free or un­free) and the size of their busi­ness could range the wealth scale from bare­ly sub­sis­tence-lev­el all the way up to con­sid­er­ably wealthy. Bonds­men, un­like free mer­chants, main­ly pro­duced items for those they served. Many of them were en­gaged in the pro­duc­tion of lux­u­ry good­s.

==== Guilds ==== Both mer­chants and crafts­men even­tu­al­ly formed trade-spe­cif­ic guild­s. In 1036, these guilds were in their in­fan­cy in Nov­gorod. The mer­chant guild was per­haps fur­thest along at this time. In gen­er­al, a per­son who wished to en­ter a guild had to pay a very high en­try fee, along with a de­posit which was kept in the guild trea­sury. How­ev­er, once in the guild, one’s de­scen­dants au­to­mat­i­cal­ly be­came mem­ber­s, which be­came more im­por­tant as the guilds moved to mo­nop­o­lize their par­tic­u­lar trades. The guilds al­so act­ed as pa­trons in the town­s, fund­ing the con­struc­tion of church­es and monas­ter­ies.

==== Cler­gy ==== The cler­gy of the Rus’ is di­vid­ed in­to two cat­e­gories:

the white, or sec­u­lar, cler­gy; and the black, or reg­u­lar, cler­gy. The for­mer

cat­e­go­ry was by far the larg­er and in­clud­ed not on­ly parish priest­s, but al­so dea­con­s, sex­ton­s, scribes, ser­vants, and their wives and fam­i­lies (re­mem­ber, Or­tho­dox priests were not re­quired to be celi­bate). Var­i­ous “un­for­tu­nates” (wid­ows, beg­gars, the blind) who were at­tached to church­es were al­so con­sid­ered to be “church peo­ple”.

The ma­jor­i­ty of the white cler­gy came from a sim­i­lar eco­nom­ic back­ground as their parish­ioners and were usu­al­ly close­ly as­so­ci­at­ed with them in most mat­ter­s, which made them a tar­get of in­vec­tive from their su­pe­ri­ors and from the black cler­gy, who dep­re­cat­ed their lack of moral­s, drunk­en­ness, in­dul­gence in usury, and lack of learn­ing.

The black cler­gy (monks and nun­s) were al­so close­ly as­so­ci­at­ed with town­s. Aris­to­crats in­ter­est­ed in a re­li­gious vo­ca­tion usu­al­ly chose to en­ter a monastery, and thus many monas­ter­ies be­came rich­ly en­dowed in both land and good­s. Monas­ter­ies al­so be­came cen­tres of learn­ing and pro­duc­tion of icon­s, chron­i­cles, and church good­s. Con­di­tions at the var­i­ous monas­ter­ies var­ied in their harsh­ness. The fa­mous Monastery of the Caves out­side of Kiev shows the ex­treme as­cetic side; those wish­ing an ex­treme dis­ci­pline some­times chained them­selves in­side their un­der­ground cells for lit­er­al­ly years.

Bish­ops could be drawn from ei­ther the black or white cler­gy, but usu­al­ly came from the for­mer. Cathe­dral church­es grad­u­al­ly be­came lo­cal cen­tres of learn­ing, as well as the fo­cus of con­sid­er­able po­lit­i­cal ac­tiv­i­ty.

In Nov­gorod, the ap­point­ment of the arch­bish­op even­tu­al­ly be­came one of

the perquisites of the veche.

==== Wom­en ==== Any­one who has ev­er read ac­counts of the Mus­covite pe­ri­od would have a clear pic­ture of the sta­tus of wom­en in that er­a: Wom­en were com­plete­ly sub­ju­gat­ed, hid­den away in the terem, com­plete­ly iso­lat­ed from out­side life; their hus­bands could legal­ly beat them at any time for any rea­son. Was this true for the Kievan pe­ri­od as well? The an­swer is no; it is not even the com­plete pic­ture for the Mus­covite er­a. The pic­ture of sub­ju­ga­tion pre­sent­ed as the norm for Mus­covy refers in ac­tu­al­i­ty on­ly to the bo­yar class­es; wom­en of low­er class­es, while still sub­ject­ed to the same le­gal con­straints as their wealthy sis­ter­s, were of ne­ces­si­ty more in­volved in pub­lic so­ci­ety.

And a look at the le­gal codes for the Kievan pe­ri­od shows that in ac­tu­al­i­ty, the sta­tus of wom­en was con­sid­er­ably high­er in the eleventh cen­tu­ry than it would be in the six­teenth. Wom­en could own prop­er­ty in their own names, even if they were mar­ried; wom­en al­so re­tained the rights to the things they made, such as wo­ven fab­ric­s. Up­on the death of her hus­band, the wid­ow be­came the head of the fam­i­ly and en­trust­ed with the man­age­ment of the es­tate;

the heirs were ob­li­gat­ed to sup­port her when they came of age. Both sons

and daugh­ters were en­ti­tled to a share in the in­her­i­tance. Sur­viv­ing birch bark doc­u­ments re­veal not on­ly that wom­en could read and write, but al­so took part in le­gal ne­go­ti­a­tion­s, com­mer­cial trans­ac­tion­s, and pa­tron­age.

On this last note, up­per class wom­en were im­por­tant as pa­trons of church­es,

schools (for both boys and girl­s), and as ar­biters of dis­putes among quar­rel­ing men. How­ev­er, as in the rest of Eu­rope, Rus’ so­ci­ety was large­ly pa­tri­ar­chal, and there were the usu­al stereo­types of wom­en as temptress­es (in the mould of Eve), gos­sip­s, or witch­es — in oth­er word­s, men should be wary lest they fall astray.

==== Lit­er­a­cy ==== How lit­er­ate was Rus’ so­ci­ety at this point?

It is dif­fi­cult to say de­ci­sive­ly how many in Nov­gorod of 1036 could read and write, but by a hun­dred years lat­er, we have con­sid­er­able ev­i­dence, in the form of birch-bark let­ter­s, that a sur­pris­ing­ly large seg­ment of the ur­ban pop­u­la­tion was lit­er­ate, and enough ev­i­dence from the eleventh cen­tu­ry sur­vives to demon­strate that writ­ing be­gan to be­come com­mon­place with the in­tro­duc­tion of the Cyril­lic script to Rus’, which oc­curred as the Rus’ be­gan to con­vert to Chris­tian­i­ty. The afore­men­tioned birch-bark let­ters oc­cur in the hun­dred­s, in­clud­ing chil­dren’s al­pha­bet ex­er­cis­es, love let­ter­s, records of busi­ness trans­ac­tion­s, de­tails on law­suit­s, and tax record­s. Al­so ex­tant is graf­fi­ti from the walls of St. Sophi­a’s Cathe­dral and in­scrip­tions on crafts­men­s’ wares. The pop­u­la­tion of Nov­gorod seems to have rec­og­nized the us­es of lit­er­a­cy very ear­ly.

//­Copy­right 1997 Su­san Car­rol­l-Clark. All rights re­served//

The bib­li­og­ra­phy for this ar­ti­cle can be found at http://mem­ber­s.n­bci.­com/_XM­CM/ni­co­laa/bib­lio.html