Did the Slavs have slavery? Slavery and tributary among the Eastern Slavs (VI-X centuries). There was no slavery
There have always been slaves in Rus'. Until 1863, people were traded openly.
From the Tale of Bygone Years. Descriptions of contracts and actions of the 10th century AD in Rus':
And about this: if the Russians find a Greek ship washed up somewhere on the shore, let them not cause damage to it. If anyone takes anything from him, or turns anyone from him into slavery...===
- According to the agreement with the Greeks, Greeks from a broken ship cannot be taken as Russian slaves.
If anyone from our country violates this, be it a prince or anyone else, baptized or unbaptized, may he not receive help from God, may he be a slave in this life ===
- It was possible to turn into a slave in Rus' for breaking an oath.
Olga ordered her soldiers to grab them. And how she took the city and burned it, took the city elders captive, and killed other people, and gave others into slavery to her husbands ===
- Saint Olga gave prisoners into slavery to the Russians.
Per year 6477 (969). Svyatoslav said to his mother and his boyars: “I don’t like to sit in Kyiv, I want to live in Pereyaslavets on the Danube, for there is the middle of my land, all the good things flow there: from the Greek land - pavoloks, gold, wine, various fruits, from the Czech Republic and from Hungary silver and horses, from Rus' furs, wax, honey, and slaves.”
- as we see, Svyatoslav received most of the slaves not from the Czech Republic, Hungary or other countries (Greece, Byzantium, etc.) but from Rus'.
Slaves in the time of Svyatoslav were among the four main goods and wealth of Rus'.
Let's look at the Russian Truth - a set of Russian laws developed in 1068-1072 by the three sons of Yaroslav the Wise - Izyaslav, Svyatoslav and Vsevolod).
There are the following provisions:
24. If a slave-nurse or breadwinner is killed, then 12 hryvnia.===
27. And if he takes away someone else’s slave or slave, then he pays 12 hryvnia for the offense. ===
A Word about Igor's Campaign
The Tale of Igor's Campaign (presumably written at the end of the 12th century or in 1185) also talks about the trade in slaves in Rus' and their prices.This is what it sounds like in Likhachev’s translation:
"Grand Duke Vsevolod!
Are you thinking of flying from afar?
guard your father's golden throne?
You can splash the Volga with oars,
and scoop up the Don with helmets!
If you were here
then she would be a slave by foot,
and the slave is cut."
Here is how Zabolotsky translated this piece:
"If you brought the army to help,
So as not to let the enemy out of your hands,
We'd sell girls by the foot,
And the slaves were slaughtered in circles."
Dvina charter charter of 1397
The Dvina charter is a source of law granted Dvina land Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily I Dmitrievich in 1397 after its annexation to Moscow.It also talks about slavery:
"11. And whoever the master sins, hits his holoth or robe, and death occurs, the governors do not judge him, nor bear any guilt."
The term "slave" was applied only to those slaves who were kept in chains. Female slaves were not kept in chains and were called concubines. For the sake of distinction, the remaining slaves were often called serfs, servants or servants. The term "slave" left the language along with the chain content.
Slaves in Russia began to be called serfs, servants or courtyard people.
At the same time, the right of a slave owner to own, use and dispose of a slave without restrictions remained in Russia until the 19th century. People in Russia were torn from their families and sold along with furniture, cows and greyhounds until the mid-19th century.
In the 16th century, Ivan the Terrible abolished St. George's Day - the right of a slave to try to change the owner once a year.
In the 18th century, Peter 1 assumed the right to select slaves from slave owners for state needs (recruitment) and abolished the right of slaves to become free after the death of the slave owner. At the same time, a tax on slaves is introduced from slave owners.
May 28, 1801 Alexander 1 issues a Decree “On the non-acceptance of advertisements for the sale of people without land for printing in registers.” In it "His Imperial Majesty I have deigned to command from the highest level that announcements about the sale of people without land should not be accepted from anyone for publication in news reports.”
Slavery in Rus' is not abolished, but it is beginning to be disguised.
In 1861, a manifesto was published, which, from 1963, abolished the right of landowners to own, use and dispose of slaves if they were ready to leave the landowner without land.
If the peasant wants to buy back the land that he used before the manifesto, then he will have to take out a loan from the state and begin making payments to the landowner. Until the end of the ransom, he will be called “temporarily obligated” and his relations with the slave owner will continue on the same terms.
"6. Before the expiration of this period, peasants and courtyard people
remain in the same obedience to the landowners and unquestioningly fulfill their previous duties."
In 1907 redemption payments were cancelled. But, although the former slaves no longer paid ransom payments, Bonded peasants continued to exist in some regions of Russia until February 1917.
In certain regions of Russia (Caucasus, Asian regions), slavery and the corresponding method of farming have been preserved to this day.
Original taken from maximus101 in On the slave trade in Rus'
I was once asked about the scale of the slave trade in Rus'. I will give excerpts from the famous text - “The Journey of the Antiochian Patriarch Macarius to Russia in the middle of the 17th century,” written by Pavel of Aleppo. The Syrian Patriarch Macarius came to Russia twice - in 1656 and in 1666.
Paul of Aleppo writes mainly about slaves captured as a result of raids and wars, but there was also a significant internal market. I posted earlier about the trafficking of women in Veliky Novgorod in the 15th century.
About how the Muscovites drove the Tatars into slavery
>>>>the Muscovites take prisoners from them: standing on top of the fortresses, they observe, since the Tatars’ path passes close to them, and as soon as they notice the riders, some of them dismount, rush on their horses and, ahead of the Tatars, are ambushed in side of the road. When the Tatars approach them, they immediately seize their caravan, whether they be men, women, girls or boys, take them to their own country and sell them in the market of humiliation for ten, fifteen or twenty piastres. Therefore, every rich woman has fifty, sixty (slaves) and every important person has seventy, eighty (slaves).
They do not leave them like that, but immediately convert them to Christianity, whether they want it or not; they are even baptized by force. If they later see that they behave well and are zealous in the faith, they are married to each other and their children are given the best names. We noticed in them a piety with humility that we had not seen among the best Christians: they learned the secrets of faith and rituals and became such that it was impossible to be better.
About the price of Tatar slaves in Muscovy
>>>>Tatars are often captured by Muscovite troops guarding the border near them; attacking their country suddenly, they devastate, burn and capture the inhabitants. In the country of Moscow they are sold at the lowest price: they can be bought not for twenty or thirty gold pieces, but for no more than ten, for the price for them has been established since ancient times. Having purchased them for an insignificant price, they immediately baptize them and convert them to Christianity.
About how the Don Cossacks sold Turks and Tatars into slavery in Muscovy
>>>>As for the Don Cossacks who go to the Black Sea, numbering 40,000, they are also under the rule of the Tsar. The Tatars tremble before them, for the Cossacks always accidentally attack their country, take them captive and bring them to the country of the Muscovites, where they sell them. Since the Tatars are a punishment for the Christians living around them, God sent these (Cossacks) to them in retribution (may God increase their power over them!).
We saw them captives from the eastern lands: from Trebizond (Turkish Trabzon), Sinop and their districts, from Yeniköy, from the Tatars; all of them are captured by the Cossacks...called in Turkish tonun-Cossacks, i.e. Don Cossacks: they sail around the Black Sea, capture many men, women, boys and girls, bring them here and sell them at the cheapest price. They are immediately baptized. We met a lot of them in the houses of the rich and even commoners. When we spoke to them in Turkish, they did not answer us at all, out of fear of their masters, who, having heard that they speak their own language, think that their former faith is still in their chests. For this reason, they do not speak their own language at all.
About the deportation of population from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Muscovy
>>>>Starting from this Volkhov, we began to meet carts with prisoners who were being transported by Muscovites from the country of the Poles; There were only women and children here, the men were killed with a sword. Our hearts broke for them. May God not allow us to see such things!
About the beating of Jews, Armenians and Poles by Muscovites
>>>>>The king went on a campaign, and the Lord in the end gave him victory: he conquered great city Smolensk defeated the most important of its enemies, Radzivil, and its military leaders conquered about 49 cities and fortresses by force of the sword and, by voluntary surrender, beat, God knows how many, Jews, Armenians and Poles. It is said that their babies were put in barrels and thrown without mercy into the great river Dnieper, for the Muscovites hate heretics and pagans to the extreme.
About how the Muscovites stole women and children from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth into slavery
>>>>>They beat all the men mercilessly, and took women and children captive, devastated the country and exterminated the population. The country of the Poles, which had previously been like a pomegranate and was cited as a model, was turned into ruins and desert, where no villages or people were found for 15 days of travel in length and width. More than a hundred thousand were taken captive, so that, as we were told, seven or eight boys and girls were sold for one dinar (ruble) or less, and we ourselves saw many of them. As for the cities that surrendered voluntarily, those of the inhabitants who were baptized were left, ensuring their safety, and those who did not wish (to be baptized) were expelled. As for the cities taken by the sword, having exterminated their population, the Muscovites themselves settled in them and fortified them.
About Tatar slaves in Muscovy
>>>>these were the wives of the most important dignitaries, in luxurious dresses with expensive sable fur, in dark pink cloth (outer) clothes, studded with precious pearls, in beautiful caps, embroidered with gold and pearls, trimmed with very long black fur. With them were many Tatar maids, which was visible from their faces and small eyes; they are captives and are in a humiliating position. We have seen thousands of them in this country, because their price is insignificant and they are sold cheaply, just like Tatar men: every nobleman has forty, fifty of them.
You would see, reader, that their hair is black and hangs freely, like Muscovites, but their eyes are small and narrowed. Their names are Christian, for they are purely Orthodox: their piety and their knowledge of your faith are truly great. Their names are the names of the most important (saints): Theodosius, Eustathius, Basil, Abramius, Theodore, Gregory - names of men of this kind. The names of the girls and slave women are: Thekla, Theodora, Justina, Euphemia, Juliana, Varvara, Marana (Marina?), Kira, Eupraxia. These and similar names, which are the most distinguished of (Christian) names, are used to call the Tatars, who were previously unclean and shameless, but after receiving baptism they turned into the chosen people of God.
The most ancient Russian concept to designate a slave, as we have seen, - servants in the plural - servants. The term appears in Old Church Slavonic texts and is also used in tenth-century Russo-Byzantine treaties.
Another ancient term is rob(otherwise - slave; in the feminine gender - robe, later – slave), suggestive in connection with the verb robotati. In this sense, a slave is a “worker” and vice versa,
In the middle of the eleventh century a new term appeared - serf, which can be compared with Polish clap(in Polish spelling chlop), “peasant”, “serf”. The Proto-Slavic form was holp; in the transcription used by most Slavic philologists, - cholpa.In Russian the term serf denoted a male slave. The slave was constantly called slave
Slavery in Kievan Rus There were two types: temporary and permanent. The latter was known as "total slavery" (servility is white). The main source of temporary slavery was captivity in war. Initially, not only soldiers of the enemy army, but even civilians captured during hostilities were enslaved. As time passed, more mercy was shown to civilians and finally, by the time of the treaty between Russia and Poland, signed in 1229, the need to spare civilians was recognized.
By the end of the war, prisoners were freed for a ransom, if one was offered. The Russian-Byzantine treaties established a ransom ceiling in order to prevent abuses. If it was not possible to collect a ransom, the prisoner remained at the disposal of the person who captured him. According to the “Law of Judgment by People,” in such cases, the work of the captive was considered as payment of a ransom, and after paying it in full, the captive had to be released.
The rule had to be observed accordingly in relation to citizens of states with which the Russians concluded special treaties, such as with Byzantium. In other cases it could be ignored. In any case, it is important that Russian Truth does not mention captivity in war as a source of complete slavery.
According to paragraph 110 of the expanded version, “total slavery is of three types.” A person becomes a slave: 1) if he is sold into slavery of his own free will; 2) if he marries a woman without first concluding a special agreement with her owner; 3) if he is hired to serve the owner as a butler or house manager without a special agreement, that he must remain free. As for self-sale into slavery, two conditions had to be met in order for the transaction to become legal: 1) a minimum price (not less than half a hryvnia) and 2) payment to the city secretary (one nogata). These formalities were prescribed by law in order to prevent a person from being enslaved against his will. This part of Russian Pravda does not say anything about female slaves, but it can be assumed that a woman can sell herself into slavery, like a man. On the other hand, a woman was not given the privilege of maintaining her freedom by agreement with her master if she married a male slave. Although this is not mentioned in the Russian Pravda, we know from later legislation, as well as from various other sources, that such a marriage automatically made the woman a slave. This was supposed to be ancient custom, and therefore he was not considered worthy of mention in Russian Pravda.
In addition to the main sources of the slave population mentioned, the sale agreement can be characterized as a derivative source. It is obvious that the same formalities as in the case of self-sale had to be observed in the case of the sale of a slave. This set a minimum price for full slaves. There was no minimum price for prisoners of war. After the victory of the Novgorodians over the Suzdalians in 1169, the captured Suzdalians were sold for two nogat each. In the “Tale of Igor’s Campaign” it is said that if Grand Duke Vsevolod took part in the campaign against the Polovtsians, the latter would have been defeated and then the female captives would have been sold for one nogat, and the men for one rezana.
No upper price was set for slaves, but public opinion—at least among the clergy—was against speculation in the slave trade. It was considered sinful to buy a slave at one price and then sell him for more; this was called "outcasting."
A slave had no civil rights. If he was killed, then compensation had to be paid by the killer to his master, and not to the relatives of the slave. In the laws of this period there is no regulation regarding the murder of a slave by his owner. Obviously, the master was responsible if he killed a temporary slave.
If the slave was “full,” then the owner was subjected to church repentance, but this was obviously the only sanction in such a situation. A slave could not bring charges in court and was not accepted as a full-fledged witness in a lawsuit. By law, he was not supposed to own any property, with the exception of his clothes and other personal belongings, known as peculium in Roman law (Old Russian version - staritsa); a slave could not accept any obligations or sign any contract. In fact, many slaves of Kievan Rus had property and assumed obligations, but in each case this was done on behalf of their owner. If in such a case the slave defaulted, his owner would pay the loss unless the person with whom the slave was dealing was aware that the other party was a slave. If he knew about the fact, he acted at his own risk.
Slaves were used by their owners as various types of domestic servants and as field laborers. It happened that they were men and women skilled in the craft, or even teachers. They were judged on their abilities and services provided. So, according to Russian Pravda, the amount of compensation to the prince for the murder of his slaves varied from five to twelve hryvnia, depending on what type of slave the victim was.
As for the end of the slave state, leaving aside the death of the slave, temporary slavery could end after a sufficient amount of work was completed. The end of complete slavery could come in two ways: either the slave ransomed himself (which, of course, few could afford), or the owner could release his slave or slaves by volitional decision. He was constantly encouraged to do this by the Church, and many wealthy people followed this advice, freeing slaves posthumously in a special section of their wills.
There was also, of course, an illegal way for a slave to free himself - escape. Many slaves, it turns out, used this path to freedom, since the Russian Pravda contains several paragraphs talking about fugitive slaves. Any person who gave shelter to such a slave or assisted him in any way was to be fined.
There is a topic about which, it would seem, the teachings of alternative historians and glorifiers of the great past of the Rus are broken, like a breakwater. This topic is so shameful and obvious that few people undertake to discuss it, much less challenge it.
But you can’t keep such a skeleton in the closet, you have to, you have to figure it out, try to understand. Where would we be without this?
“Here they are, the free tribes of the ancient Slavs. Here is their daring prince and his retinue. Here are the freedom-loving Russian people throwing off the Tatar yoke (and if they are not freedom-loving, then why are they throwing it off, one wonders?). And then - bam: 90% of the population are slaves , which are traded like cattle. How, at what point could this happen? Why did people not rebel, as they did against the Tatars? before, driving away the careless prince and his retinue? Even the pride of the Russian Land, the Holy and Blessed Prince Alexander Nevsky, was driven away by the Novgorodians when he was too much of a brute. And here... What happened to these people in two hundred years, by the middle of the 16th century? lost all that freedom and dignity, which he was rightfully proud of and which even foreigners celebrated?” ( Alfred Koch "How our ancestors became slaves")
Das, the formulation of the question is very common. Let's finally figure it out!
The picture of the development of serfdom in Rus' from ancient times to the mid-17th century in textbooks is presented as follows: princely and boyar land ownership, in combination with a strengthening bureaucratic apparatus, attacked personal and communal land property.
Previously, free farmers, communal peasants, or even private land owners—“fellows” of ancient Russian legal acts—gradually became tenants of plots belonging to the clan aristocracy or the serving nobility.
This is clear and understandable to everyone from school. I’ll start with the question of where and when the first Russian Tsar came from and why he is a Tsar and not a Prince.
I apologize for such a primitive educational program, but it is necessary to point it out because, it turns out, there is confusion here too.
But, there is another opinion that the first of the great princes who ruled in the now united Rus', his grandfather Ivan began to call himself tsar III Vasilievich.
Why is this so? It's simple - Ivan's wife is the niece of the last Emperor of Constantinople, Sophia Paleologus (actually Zoya).
Ivan III, having married, became king by right. Tsar with capital letters C. (Caesar/ Caesar or Caesar is a mandatory part of the title of Roman emperors during the Roman state). And Moscow became the third Rome after Constantinople (Constantinople).
Interesting addition from the site otvetina.narod.ru:
“But it’s one thing to call yourself a king, and another to actually be one. Until the middle of the 15th century, Ancient Rus' In addition to the Byzantine emperors, they were also called kings Khans of the Golden Horde. The grand dukes were subordinate to the Tatar khans for several centuries and were forced to pay them tribute, so the grand duke could become king only after he ceased to be a tributary of the khan. But in this regard, the situation has changed. Tatar yoke was overthrown, and the Grand Duke finally stopped attempts to demand tribute from the Russian princes."
When we put everything back on its feet, we will see that already under Ivan the Third it was possible to snatch a large piece from Great Tartary, the former part of it called “Muscovy” becomes independent with its center in the city of Moscow, where Ivan proclaims himself the new tsar.
It was then that, apparently, the age of slavish lawlessness began its mournful course, which later grew into serfdom. History is gradually being rewritten, Tartary is gradually turning into a fairy tale about the Tartar-Mangol yoke, betrayal and war for a just cause, the sovereign is well done and all in white.
I want, my friends, I want to believe in the version that serfdom is a myth. That under this shameful affair lies only a system of relationships between the inhabitants of the fortresses. When everyone, as if in reserve, is in military service and, if something happens, takes his place in the fortress, exercising and receiving protection in it from the enemy. The collection of tributes, the tax on the fortress, implements this very serfdom. There is such a version, how beautiful and slender she is. And perhaps something similar happened somewhere. Somewhere, but not here. Ours was not a play on words and substitution of concepts, but real trash.
The history textbooks that some of my visitors strongly advise me to take and finally read and not disgrace, present the unification of the “scattered” principalities in the single state. In fact, I see that the result of this “good” soon became that terrible serfdom.
The peasants lived in village communities, in which a special peasant world was formed. Some of these communities found themselves under the rule of landowners, who imposed taxes on every household and peasant farm. The most freedom-loving people went to the “inconvenient areas”, where free villages were formed. As they strengthen " the mighty of the world In addition, they were again subject to taxes. Some of the peasants, for whom “freedom” was not an empty word, again went to uninhabited places.
In 1646, Tsar Mikhail Romanov introduced serfdom in Muscovite Rus'.
Mikhail Romanov. Handsome. Beard, still Tartar clothes and headdress.
The first Russian Tsar from the Romanov family, Mikhail Romanov, was the son of the boyar Fyodor Nikitich Romanov and the noblewoman Ksenia Ivanovna Romanova.
Romanov needed a way to simplify and increase the collection of taxes. For this purpose, the peasants were “assigned” to the owners of the land. People who were on military service, the king began to allocate “estates”, lands with peasants living on them.This is how the “landowners” appeared. They had to feed themselves from the peasants and were obliged to ensure the collection of taxes into the royal treasury.
The peasants who lived on the lands of churches and monasteries were assigned to the clergy.
Some of the peasants living on the estates of the royal court were assigned to the clerks of the court.
The collection of taxes “to the treasury” has become more efficient. But on the other hand, such a law deprived many Russian peasants of the age-old value of “free will.”
What is free will
At first glance, “free will” is a meaningless expression, like “butter.”
However, it has a very ancient, and extremely important for the study of this chapter, meaning.
In ancient Rus', concluding a “row” (agreement) with each other, the princes wrote: “And free will for the boyars and boyars’ children, and servants, and peasants.”
When this proverb took shape, every peasant was free to plow wild land, create fertile plots, grow bread and other products. With their labor, the peasants turned empty, worthless land into valuable land.
At first, the princes demanded taxes for the protection of such land, and the peasants agreed to pay.
Then the princes and boyars forcibly turned such land into their possessions, and the peasants were forced to hire out or move away from such possessions. The Russian plain is vast, so there was plenty of room to escape.
When hired to work for a landowner, a peasant paid him with his labor or the harvest in half (half the harvest). He settled with the landowner according to honor and conscience and is free. That is, “free will” meant freedom to live on the owner’s land as long as he lives, and to go wherever he pleases.
Even in the Middle Ages, a peasant, if he wished, could leave the landowner’s territory by fulfilling his obligations under the lease and loan.
Yes, and about the role of the Church in the enslavement of the peasants.If without any special emotions, then Russian Orthodox Church not only did she not condemn serfdom spiritually, but also received great material benefits. Almost immediately, a huge mass of peasants were assigned to monasteries and churches.
An audit of 1678 shows: a quarter of all serfs belonged to the clergy.
There was a particularly large share in the Moscow region. In 1719 - 1.1 million out of 1.6 million of all serf peasants were clergy.
Of course, before 1646, the official date of the introduction of serfdom, the peasants were not having a sweet time, but fundamental changes in the situation of peasants are coming EXACTLY
with the accession of the Romanov dynasty. For example, by this time the time it took to find runaway peasants had increased up to 15 years old. And in the Council Code published in 1649, two fundamentally new circumstances appeared:
Firstly, it was announced unlimited period of search for fugitive peasants. The gentleman now had the right to return the fugitive himself or even his descendants with all the goods acquired while on the run, if he could prove that it was from his estate that the peasant fled.
Secondly, even a debt-free peasant lost the right to change place of residence— he became “strong”,
that is attached forever to the estate where I found him 1620s census. In the event of his departure, the Code ordered the forcible return of the previously free person back along with his entire household and family. He fell hard, in short, but did not become a resident of the fortress.
In fact, the Code of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich carried out a social revolution, depriving the majority of the country's population of the right to free movement and disposal of themselves, their labor and property.
During the reign of Peter the Great, the trade in serfs acquired the most cynical and outspoken character. People are starting sell wholesale and individually, in the market squares, dividing families, separating children from their parents, and wives from their husbands.
And let us note that we are not talking about some brought slaves or captives, but about our own relatives! Yes, just family?
Emperor Peter himself distributed into private ownership more than two hundred thousand male souls(state statistics took into account only men) and, therefore, in reality, about half a million people
of both sexes. These distributions were usually gifts Peter to his associates.
From the end of the 17th and especially from the beginning of the 18th century, serfdom in Russia acquired a fundamentally different character than that which it had at its inception. It began as a form of state “tax” for peasants, a kind of public service, but in its development it came to the point that serfs, deprived of all civil and human rights, ended up in slavery from their landowners.
The apogee of serfdom was the reign of Catherine the Great.
These 30-odd years ( 1762-1796
gg.) became the time of greatest enslavement of the peasants. The landowner could exile the peasants to Siberia for some offenses, sell them as conscripts, the peasants were forbidden to complain about the landowner to the emperor, although they could go to court. During the reign Catherine gave away gifts to about 800 thousand peasants,
which became a record.
And just by chance, Vicki mentions that on Most of the territory of Russia was subject to serfdom there wasn't : in all Siberian, Asian and Far Eastern provinces and regions, in Cossack regions, in the North Caucasus, in the Caucasus itself, in Transcaucasia, in Finland and Alaska.
Replies to mail.ru:
- Serfdom was absent in Siberia for one reason - the settlement of this region began during the Stolypin reform.
-With a population density of 1 person per 2 km2, this is not easy.
Well, finally, as a conclusion, let me suggest you follow this old link, otherwise everything turned out quite sad.
Here is another thought that has been tormenting me for a long time:
Russian women's surnames are declined when answering the question “whose”. That is, the wife of such and such a husband. Petrova, Smirnova, etc.
Men's surnames often end in "in". They hesitate when answering the question “whose”. Are there not traces of a slave past?
I myself have a surname ending in “in” and I don’t like talking about it, but in the search for the truth, turning a blind eye to unsightly facts is stupid - you won’t get far.
And you, reader, whose will you be?
Slavery among the Slavs
Among the dependent population of ancient Rus' in the 9th - 12th centuries, slaves occupied a very significant place. Their labor even prevailed in the ancient Russian estate. In modern historical science, the idea of the patriarchal nature of slavery in Rus' is especially popular. But there are other opinions in the literature. P.N. Tretyakov, regarding slavery among the Slavs and Antes, wrote: “Slaves were bought and sold. A member of a neighboring tribe could become a slave. During wars, slaves, especially women and children, were an indispensable and very important part of military booty. It is hardly possible to consider all this as primitive patriarchal slavery, which was common among all primitive peoples. But this was not, of course, a developed slavery, which took shape as an integral system of production relations.”
Russkaya Pravda also pointed out other sources of the appearance of slaves in Rus', in addition to the capture of prisoners. Such sources were: self-sale into slavery, marriage with a slave, entry into service (tiuns, keymasters), “without a row” (that is, without any reservations), bankruptcy. A runaway purchaser or a person who committed a serious crime could also become a slave. Researcher E.I. Kolycheva writes the following about slavery in ancient Rus': “... servility in Rus' as a legal institution was not something exceptional, unique. It is characterized by the same important features as slavery in other countries, including ancient slavery.” In Rus' there were several forms of slavery: serfdom and servants (In the 6th - 9th centuries, servants were captive slaves. In the 9th - 10th centuries, they became the object of purchase and sale. From the 11th century, the term "servant" referred to part of the dependent population employed in the feudal economy. In the middle of the 11th century it was replaced by the term “slaves”. 19th centuries the word “servants” meant the landowner’s courtyard people).
Czech Republic
The Czechs traded in slaves of prisoners of war already under Brzechislav I; At the same time, unpaid debtors were also given into slavery for committing well-known crimes and for violating the marriage union. In the 12th century, Jews traded slaves in Prague; this was prohibited by King Wenceslas I. There are known cases of slaves being freed in the Czech Republic either by the mercy of the owner (1108, 1132) or by ransom (1167). .
Poland
In Poland, the existence of slavery back in the middle of the 13th century is evidenced by one monument of Polish customary law, written in German; it does not talk about slaves, but talks about female slaves (German Dirne), who were bought, given as a dowry, in a word, were in civil circulation on a par with movable things. The Pomeranian Slavs also had slaves, mainly from prisoners of war.
Serbia
In various Serbian monuments there is a lot of news about slaves (“servants, sirak, servants, worker, rob”); “Youths” can also be equated to them in position. In § 21 of Dusan the Law (“and whoever sells a Christian to another faith, let his hand be cut off and his tongue cut out”) one can see an indication of the existence of slavery among the Serbs in the 14th century. .
Slavs of the Adriatic
Among the Adriatic Slavs, probably already in - centuries. there was a slave trade. From the statutes of the coastal islands and cities of Dalmatia one can conclude that slavery existed here. The main reason for slavery was the war with external enemies and the internal struggle between owners, tribes and communities. Since the inhabitants of Dalmatia did not have enough land to accustom slaves to agriculture, the slave trade appeared, which did not stop despite the prohibitions. Slaves could be sold, mortgaged, given to pay debts, given as dowries to daughters, or set free. Slavery extended to descendants through birth. The treatment of slaves was not gentle, but still the slave was not quite a thing and the master did not have power over the life and death of the slave. The master could find runaway slaves through the bailiffs. No one had the right to buy anything or take a mortgage from slaves. For harm caused to someone by a slave, the latter's master was responsible. In the Dalmatian statutes we also find traces of slavery for debts. Dubrovnik residents also had slaves, as can be seen from the charters. Among other trade items, they did not disdain slaves, which Bosnia supplied in abundance.
Rus' (Middle Ages)
Although the slave trade and slavery were not a significant social phenomenon in the lives of the vast majority of Russian Slavs (for the purposes of war there was no capture of slaves and concubines, there were no slave markets, etc.), with the advent of the state, slavery in Rus' began to take place (slaves were for committing especially serious crimes, see the types of punishments of “Russian Truth”). Thus, the beginning of slavery was laid by the need to carry out the most severe measure of punishment without resorting to murder; the most dangerous criminals initially became slaves. Slavery in Rus' is known from many medieval sources, in particular, from the laws of the “Russian Truth” of the Kyiv prince Yaroslav the Wise. In addition, some peoples (in particular, the Varangians), apparently mistaken for the Slavs, had the kidnapping and sale of slaves as their main source of income and therefore some sources included references, sometimes mistakenly understood as references to the Slavs as living off the slave trade. In particular, this is how the Arab traveler of the first half of the 10th century Ibn Fadlan describes the slave trade of the Varangians in the Volga city of Bulgar.
| As for ar-Rusiya, it is located on an island surrounded by a lake. The island on which they (Russians) live, a three-day journey, is covered with forests and swamps, unhealthy and so damp that as soon as a person steps foot on the ground, the latter shakes due to the abundance of moisture in it. They have a king called the Khakan of the Rus. They attack the Slavs, approach them on ships, disembark, take them prisoner, take them to Khazaran and Bulkar and sell them there. They have no arable land, but feed only on what they bring from the land of the Slavs." |
(The text clearly shows the contrast between the “Rus”-Varangians described by the author and the Slavs).
The position of slaves in Rus' was similar to the position of serfs. The only difference was that a serf could change hands on St. George's Day. The slave was deprived of such an opportunity.
Subsequently, slaves merged with serfs, courtyard people and other categories of serfs. In Russia, the abolition of slavery occurred in 1861: Alexander II issued a decree prohibiting serfdom (for comparison: the official abolition of slavery in Mauritania occurred in 1981, the institution of the Sultan’s harem in Istanbul with female slaves ceased to exist only in 1909, after the renunciation of throne of Abdul Hamid II, natural “classical” slavery still takes place de facto in Mauritania, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan, India, Nepal, Myanmar, Angola).
Russia (modern time)
Notes
Links
- Igor Froyanov. Slavery and tribute among the Eastern Slavs
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
See what “Slavery among the Slavs” is in other dictionaries:
Contents: Sources of slavery. Slavery among modern savages and barbarians. Slavery among the Aryans and in India. Slavery in China. Slavery in Egypt. Slavery in Assyro-Babylonia. Slavery among the Jews. Slavery in Media and Persia. Slavery in Greece. Slavery in Rome... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron
This term has other meanings, see Slavery (meanings). The request for "Slave" is redirected here; see also other meanings. Slavery is historically a system of society where a person (slave) is the property of another... ... Wikipedia
To improve this article, would you like to: Wikify the article. On the outskirts of the Roman Empire lived the so-called barbarian tribes. The Romans called all non-Greeks and non-Romans barbarians. The most numerous tribes were the Slavs, Celts and... ... Wikipedia
The first historically emerged and most brutal form of exploitation, in which the slave, along with the instruments of production, was the property of his master, the slave owner. In the most distinct forms of R., the slave had no rights and was considered a thing to... ... Soviet historical encyclopedia
Historically, the first and most brutal form of exploitation, in which the slave, along with the instruments of production, was the property of his master, the slave owner. At the stage of the most distinct forms of labor, the slave had no rights; deprived... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia
One of the oldest legal institutions, which represents the right of ownership (of a private individual, community, state) to a person as a thing. The usual attributes of R. were the slave trade and non-economic forced labor. Often dominance... ... Encyclopedia of Lawyer
Social system of the ancient southern Slavs- Slavic tribes, social systems and whose life is described in the works of writers who lived in the eastern part of the Roman Empire, inhabited a vast territory from the Laba (Elbe) to the Seversky Donets, Oka and Upper Volga and from the Baltic Sea to ... ...
- (East Slavic tribal unions, tribes Eastern Slavs) form of social organization of East Slavic society during the period of decomposition of the primitive communal system and the formation of statehood. Tribal unions were not only tribal, but... ... Wikipedia
The crisis of the slave system and the emergence of feudal relations in the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium). Settlement of Slavs and other peoples on its territory- Formation of the Eastern Roman Empire From the end of the 3rd century. As a result of the crisis of the slave-owning mode of production, the economic and political isolation of the eastern regions of the Roman Empire from the western ones became more pronounced. Due to... ... World history. Encyclopedia
The question of the existence of slave owners in Ancient Rus' does not seem as simple as it might seem at first glance, because there is plenty of evidence of slavery in literary sources. But why then do the most respected historians sincerely believe that the Russians did not have slaves or slavery?
Was there slavery?
The existence of slaves, and therefore slave owners, in the work “Al-Alaq an-nafisa” is directly stated by the Persian scientist Ahmet Ibn-Dasta, who lived in the 10th century, who describes the settlement of the Rus on a large swampy island.
He tells that the leader of the Rus is the Kagan, and they live by robberies and the capture of slaves, who are then taken to the slave markets in the cities of Khazaran and Bulkar and sold there for money.
The Persian notes that the Russians have many cities, “they treat slaves well and take care of them,” although the historian immediately clarifies that if the priests order a human sacrifice to be made to the gods, they will not be contradicted, they take slaves and hang them on poles, “until they won’t suffocate.”
“Russkaya Pravda” writes in great detail about the attitude towards slaves - a set of laws that have been in force in Rus' since 1016: a person who killed a slave had to pay his owner 5 hryvnia, and for a slave (“robe”) - 6 hryvnia, for a princely a slave killed without guilt - they already paid 12 hryvnia to the prince. The slave himself could be released from the offense at the will of the owner - then his owner had to give a “vira” - a monetary fine - for the slave’s offense.
It was also said here about various actions when a slave escapes, about the master’s responsibility for various misdeeds of a slave. The responsibility of the people who fed the runaway slave or showed him the way was also indicated here: they also had to pay the slave owner a vira of 5 or 6 hryvnia.
According to the “Russian Truth”, not only captives, but also debtors and criminals became slaves in Rus'; men or women who expressed a desire to marry a slave; and in extreme poverty one could sell oneself into slavery.
The Soviet historian Pyotr Nikolaevich Tretyakov in his works expressed the opinion that in Ancient Rus' there were both slaves and slave owners, but pointed out that among the Slavs a slave often became a member of another tribe, or a prisoner captured in war; Women and children, who were an important part of the spoils, were especially valued. At the same time, the historian clarified that slavery in Ancient Rus' was not patriarchal in nature and was part of socio-economic life.
Historian Evgenia Ivanovna Kolycheva believes that slavery in Rus' was not unusual, and it was characterized by the same features as slavery in the ancient world.
Soviet historian Boris Aleksandrovich Romanov, in his work “People and Morals of Ancient Rus',” expressed the opinion that slavery in Rus' generally played a huge role and had a “corrupting” effect on the morality of the population. According to the scientist, a “free husband” in Rus' could not be imagined without a slave, and those who did not have them sought to acquire them at any cost.
Romanov believed that already in the 11th century there was a “democratization” of slave owners, that is, any free resident of Rus' could be one, and in the 12th century almost everyone owned slaves.
In these conclusions, the historian relied on the ideas of Soviet science and believed that from the 10th to the 13th centuries Rus' experienced complex process the formation of classes in a feudal society, which is unthinkable without slavery.
There was no slavery
But not all historians shared the opinion that slavery existed in full among the ancient Slavs, especially for historians of the 19th century.
For example, Professor Sergei Mikhailovich Solovyov believed that slavery in its ancient form did not exist at all among the ancient Slavs, since there was no economic need for it - the Slavs were not accustomed to luxury.
The historian pointed out that the peoples of Ancient Rus' were not overly warlike, that is, they had few prisoners, and the Slavs were engaged in farming and farming themselves, without transferring these responsibilities to women and slaves. Solovyov also pointed out that the large number of slaves made it extremely difficult for the Slavic tribes to move in the event of an enemy attack.
His opinion was shared by another Russian historian, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Rozhkov, who referred to Byzantine authors in his research. He also expressed the opinion that slavery was not developed among the Slavs, there were few slaves, their situation was not difficult: they treated slaves well and often set them free
The Russian historian of the 19th century, Matvey Kuzmich Lyubavsky, believed that slavery in Rus' spread only with the arrival of Varangian squads in it and with the formation of large princely courts, which included “boyars, firemen, gridi, youths, children’s, princely slaves.” And if before that enemies captured in battles were sold to other lands, then with the advent major cities they began to remain in the possessions of the princes.
If we turn to the authors cited by scientists, we learn that, for example, the Byzantine commander Mauritius the Strategist wrote about the Slavs as freedom-loving people who would prefer death to slavery, and captives “are not kept in slavery all their lives, but are limited to a certain period , after which the captive has the right to ransom.”
Baghdad traveler Muhammad Ibn Haukal, talking about the people of Kyivians (residents of the city of Kuyaba), mentions slaves only in passing: “they... export... black sables, black foxes and tin and a certain number of slaves.”
The absence of the spread of slavery among the ancient Slavs is also evidenced by the fact that in Rus' there were no specialized slave markets, such as existed, for example, in Bulgaria, in the Crimea or in the East.
So the truth may lie somewhere in the middle. Undoubtedly, there were slave owners in Ancient Rus', but this phenomenon was not widespread as in ancient Greece, the Roman Empire or the East: a few slave owners took care of the slaves, they were allowed to be redeemed and the time spent in slavery was limited.
The spread of slavery and the increase in the number of “free husbands” owning slaves occurred after the 12th century in connection with the spread of new economic relations, the emergence of large cities and large landowners.
Loading...