Libmonster ID: RS-625
Author(s) of the publication: A. A. Gorsky

The important role of the druzhina institute in the development of feudal relations in Russia is noted by almost all researchers. In the works of B. D. Grekov, S. V. Yushkov, V. V. Mavrodin, B. A. Romanov, B. A. Rybakov, the position and social function of the druzhina in the early feudal society of Kievan Rus are considered in detail, and a complex of issues concerning the internal structure of the Old Russian druzhina of the X-XIII centuries is highlighted. But a special study of the place and role of the squad in the formation of class society in Russia has not yet been undertaken. This article attempts to trace the evolution of the squad in connection with the process of class formation.

A squad is usually called a permanent organization of professional soldiers headed by a military leader (king, prince), which existed among a number of peoples during the transition from the primitive communal system to feudalism. This is often also the name given to military detachments that are assembled only for the duration of military operations (in pre-capitalist societies at various stages of their development). The difference lies in the fact that for the period of formation of early medieval states, the druzhina was characterized as a constantly functioning institution, and its members represented a special social stratum, a special type of nobility, different from the tribal one. This is the military-service (or military-squad) nobility, which in the process of class formation turns into the main part of the ruling class of feudal society, thereby determining the military-service character of the secular part of this class, characteristic of all medieval class societies in Europe. Further, the term "druzhina "is used in the first sense - as a synonym for the concept of"military-druzhinnaya nobility".

The origin of the druzhina was determined by a certain level of development of society: the appearance of a surplus product sufficient for the maintenance of vigilantes as a result of the growth of productive forces, the decomposition of tribal communities, without which such groups of people could not arise who did not participate in material production and stood outside the communal structure.

Researchers dealing with the history of the Slavs and Ancient Russia do not have a single opinion about the time of the appearance of the squad among the eastern Slavs (or their ancestors, if we refer the appearance of squads to the time before the formation of the eastern, western and southern branches of the Slavs) I. I. Lyapushkin believed that we can talk about the squads in relation to the time century 1 . According to V. A. Bulkin, I. V. Dubov and G. S. Lebedev, the initial stage of the formation of the Old Russian squad covers the IX - first half of the XX century.-

1 Lyapushkin I. I. Slavs of Eastern Europe on the eve of the formation of the Old Russian state (VIII-first half of the IX century). In: Materials and research on the archeology of the USSR, N 152. L. 1968, pp. 156-163.

page 17

well X century 2 . This conclusion is shared by V. V. Sedov, but at the same time he writes that even in the VI-VIII centuries "a small number of vigilantes were constantly under the tribal prince" 3 . According to G. V. Abramovich, the druzhina emerged as an independent armed force from the community in the VIII-first half of the IX century 4. I. Ya. Froyanov admits the existence of druzhina communities among the Slavs in the VI-VII centuries, but does not consider it proven that even then the druzhina turned into a permanent institution 5. M. B. Sverdlov, referring to the story Procopius of Caesarea on Hilbudia, states that the Slavs already had permanent squads during this period. 6 B. A. Rybakov has no doubts about the existence of Slavic squads in the VI-VII centuries .7
For judging the ways in which the institution of the druzhina was formed, the famous story of Tacitus about the druzhina among the Germans in the first century AD is of interest .8 In this story, the initial stage of the existence of a layer of military-retinue nobility is recorded, since as early as in the middle of the first century BC, Caesar noted among the Germans only temporary military associations gathered for the period of combat operations, 9 whereas in the time of Tacitus, the Germans 'retinue" has already acquired a more permanent character, forming a stable core, which is organized already in peacetime, and around which, in the event of war, the rest of the volunteers are grouped. " 10
Tacitus ' account [11] allows us to draw the following conclusions about the Germanic druzhin organization in the first century A.D. The druzhinniks (comites) are a permanent social group that exists even in peacetime. Singling out a layer of professional warriors does not eliminate the fact that the entire nation is armed. The vigilantes are mainly supported by the chief (princeps), and they are not engaged in agriculture much. Their relationship with the leader is one of personal loyalty. Within the squads, a certain hierarchy is outlined ("in the squad itself, at the discretion of the person to whom it reports, differences in position are established"). The vigilantes seem to live separately from their fellow tribesmen in the presence of their leader, and thus are not members of the communities: this is indicated by the indication that the leaders are always, not excluding peacetime, surrounded by "a large crowd of selected young men", and by the mention of feasts at which food replaces the vigilantes ' salary, which implies a joint meal of the leader and the squad. The separation of vigilantes from the community structure is also indicated by the fact that representatives of this stratum could join the squads of others

2 Bulkin V. A., Dubov I. V., Lebedev G. S. Archaeological monuments of Ancient Russia of the IX-XI centuries. l. 1978, e. 140-143.

3 Sedov V. V. Vostochnye slavyane v VI-XIII vv. m. 1982. pp. 255-256, 246-247.

4 Abramovich G. V. On the issue of criteria of early feudalism in Russia and the stadiality of its transition to developed feudalism. - History of the USSR, 1981, N 2, p. 68-69.

5 Froyanov I. Ya.Kievskaya Rus '[Kievan Rus']. Ocherki sotsial'no - politicheskoi istorii [Essays on socio-political history], L. 1980, pp. 186-188.

6 Sverdlov M. B. Social order of the Slavs in the VI-beginning of the VII century. - Soviet Slavic Studies, 1977, N 3, p. 54, 57-58.

7 Rybakov B. A. Kievan Rus 'i russkiye knyazhestva XII - XIII vv [Kievan Rus' and Russian Principalities of the XII-XIII centuries]. 47 - 48, 50 - 55, 93, 99.

8 This story is not the earliest mention in history of the existence of the barbarian druzhin layer. Before Tacitus, Julius Caesar reported that the leader of the Celtic tribe of the Sotiates Adiatunna had a detachment of 600 so-called soldurii ("devotees"), connected with their leader by personal loyalty (Notes of Julius Caesar and his successors on the Gallic War, the Civil War, the Alexandrian War, the African War. M " 1962, p. 49). The story of Tacitus is more detailed. His involvement is useful in view of the lack of a similar detailed description of the early Slavic squads.

9 Notes of Julius Caesar and his successors, p. 96.

10 Marx K. and Engels F. Soch. Vol. 21, p. 94.

11 Tacitus. Germania, cap. XIII-XV (Tacitus Cornelias. Т. II, fasc. 2. Lipsiae. 1940, pp. 13 - 14).

page 18

tribes. Sources of formation of the squad are young men from "noble" families and people who stand out for their military prowess. All of them existed at the expense of war booty, tribesmen's offerings and gifts from other tribes (apparently, as a payoff from the war).

Let's turn to the information from sources on the history of the Slavs. In the Miracles of St. Demetrius of Thessalonica, a seventh-century Byzantine monument describing the Slavs 'attacks on Thessalonica (Solun), it is said that at the end of the sixth or very beginning of the seventh century, 12 the city was approached by a detachment of the enemy numbering, according to an approximate calculation of the besieged, up to 5 thousand people, which consisted of "selected" and "experienced in military affairs" people who were "the chosen color of the Slavic tribes" 13 . Such a characteristic of the enemy can be explained by the fact that this detachment was different in its weapons from the main mass of Slavic troops, whose attacks on Solun are further discussed in the source, So, obviously, researchers are right who believe that in this case we are talking about a squad, a detachment of privileged professional warriors .14 In the "Miracles of St. Demetrius of Thessalonica" there is another passage indicating the existence of a druzhin layer among the Slavs. The second Book of Miracles, in connection with the penultimate attack of the Slavs on Solun (the second half of the seventh century), 15 mentions among the attackers "strong and outstanding warriors", the victory over which ensured the overall success of the Byzantines .16 The fact that in this case we mean warriors who stood out among their tribesmen with their weapons is indicated by the term "Hoplites", which meant heavily armed warriors.

It is very likely that the actions of the squads are mentioned in the story of Procopius of Caesarea about the Slavic invasion around 550. "The army of the Slavs," he wrote, " having gathered no more than three thousand men, crossed the Istrian River... and then, without much difficulty, it crossed the Gevre River and split into two parts... Although these units were separated, the Romans were defeated", despite the fact that "the barbarians were much weaker in numbers than the Romans". Then one of the enemy detachments "without much difficulty" defeated the regular cavalry of the Romans under the command of Asbad, which "had long been stationed in the Thracian fortress of Tzurule and consisted of numerous excellent horsemen." After that, Procopius continues, the barbarians plundered in Thrace and Illyricum, "and many fortresses were besieged by both groups of Slavs." The following tells about the capture of the seaside town of Toper 17 by the same Slavic detachments .

In the story of Procopius, two things attract attention. First, his characterization of the Slavic army sharply diverges from all other news of Byzantine authors, who invariably emphasize the importance of the Slavic army.-

12 For the date of this attack, see: Burmov A. Slavyanskite attacks from the Solun peninsula in "Chududata na sv. Demetre" and tyakhnata khronologiya. In: University. Sophia. One-year student at the Faculty of Philosophy and History. Book II. History. 1952, p. 179-180, 185-186; Barishi B. F. Chuda Dimitrija Solunskog kao istoriski izvori. Beograd. 1953, pp. 53-55.

13 Acta sanctorum, editio novissima. October, t. IV. P. - Roma. 1866, p. 139.

14 Lovmyansky G. Social transformations in Europe in the VI-XII centuries. Doklad na XIII MKIN. M. 1970, p. 8. Vasilevsky T. Organizaciya gorodovoy druzhiny i ee rol ' v formirovanii slavyanskikh gosudarstv [Organization of the city guard and its role in the formation of Slavic states]. In: The Formation of Early Feudal Slavic States. Kyiv. 1972, p. 106.

15 According to A. Burmov-658, according to F. Barishich-about 680 (see: Burmov A. Uk. soch., pp. 202-205; Byzantium izvori za istoriju naroda Jgoslavije. Vol. 1. Beograd. 1955, p. 208). Burmov and Barisich agree that the first book of Miracles (which deals with the first two attacks of the Slavs) was written in the second decade, and the second-in the second half of the seventh century. (Burmov A. Uk. soch., p. 175-178, 212-213; Byzantiki izvori, vol. 1, p. 173-174, 185-186).

16 Acta sanctorum, editio novissima. October, t. IV, p. 175.

17 Procopius of Caesarea Voina s Gotami [War with the Goths], Moscow, 1950, pp. 364-366.

page 19

nodding huge numerical superiority of the enemy 18 . In this case, the small number of Slavic detachments contrasts with the brilliant results of their actions. The defeat by the Slavs of the numerically superior selected Byzantine troops suggests that the first also acted with selected, well-armed forces. Secondly, Procopius ' reference to the fact that the Slavs pursued the cavalry of Asbad ("and during this shameful flight they killed many people") suggests that the Slavic detachments were also mounted: foot soldiers can put the cavalry to flight, but they do not pursue it. in the state. Since the fact that ordinary Slavic warriors of the sixth century fought on foot is beyond doubt, only units consisting of privileged soldiers could be mounted. All this suggests that Procopius described the actions of the druzhin detachments 19 .

The data on the number of Slavic detachments contained in the above news suggest that for campaigns against Byzantium, squads of several (probably many) tribes were united, and it is possible that along with the vigilantes, some number of soldiers who were not included in this layer also took part in them. Information from Procopius of Caesarea and the first book of the Miracles of St. Demetrius of Thessalonica about the actions of Slavic squads cannot be attributed to the Slavs of the Balkan Peninsula, since at that time mass Slavic settlement of this region had not yet begun and invasions were being made from the left bank of the Danube.

As for archaeological sites, a series of rich hoards is known for the period of the VI - VII centuries, found on the territory of a reliably Slavic culture of the Penkov type (Middle Dnieper, Transnistria, Lower Danube) and coinciding with its monuments in their inventory. The view that these treasures are associated with vigilantes seems to be quite reasonable 20 .

Thus, the earliest information from sources about Slavic squads dates back to the VI-VII centuries and suggests the existence of squads in the southern regions of Slavic settlement - the forest-steppe zone of Eastern Europe and the Danube left bank. There is no data on more northern territories. It is also unclear whether the Slavs had squads earlier than the sixth century. What is certain is that before the appearance of permanent squads, they could have had temporary military associations assembled for the period of combat operations, similar to those recorded by Caesar among the Germans in the first century BC. e. The Slavic squads of the VI-VII centuries, apparently, are at about the same stage of development as the squads the Germans of Tacitus.

The dating of the appearance of the institute of druzhina among the Slavs no later than the VI-VII centuries is also supported by the facts of the socio-economic development of the Slavs of that era. The third quarter of the 1st millennium AD was the time of the Slavs ' transition to a neighboring community . The destruction of tribal ties created social conditions for identifying groups of people outside the community structure, such as vigilantes.

18 Mishulin A.V. Ancient Slavs in excerpts of Greek-Roman and Byzantine writers in the seventh century AD-Vestnik drevnoi istorii, 1941, N 1 (14), p. 235, 236, 241 - 243, 247, 260, 262, 263, 266, 267, 269, 270, 272.

19 The story of Procopius of Caesarea about Hilbudius, to which M. B. Sverdlov refers (Sverdlov M. B. Uk. soch., pp. 54, 58), does not give grounds to believe that it contains a hint of the squad: it only follows that Ant Hilbudius, being a prisoner of the Slavs, participated in military operations, serving his master-a noble Slav (Procopius of Caesarea. Uk. soch., p-295). From this we cannot conclude that this noble Slav had a retinue; rather, Hilbudius, as a non-free servant, accompanied him during the wars as a bodyguard.

20 Rybakov B. A. Uk. soch., pp. 70-72; Sedov V. V. Uk. soch., pp. 19-26.

21 Sedov V. V. Uk. soch., pp. 243-244.

page 20

The remains of Slavic druzhin settlements of the VI-VII centuries have not yet been found on the territory of our country. For a somewhat later time, the Khotomel settlement on the right bank of the Goryn River, a right tributary of the Pripyat, is known. In the cultural layer of the upper horizon of the ancient settlement (which was destroyed by fire), weapons were found - arrowheads, spears, iron knives, iron plates of carapace, iron horse bits. It is noteworthy that many agricultural tools were found in the village excavated nearby and modern to it, but there are almost no finds of weapons, while no agricultural tools were found in the settlement. Weapons from the Khotomel settlement date back to the 8th-9th centuries 22 . A number of researchers consider it a druzhin settlement 23 . This conclusion is supported by the findings of items of equipment of a mounted warrior and the remains of a shell (ordinary Slavic soldiers, according to Byzantine sources, did not have shells) 24 .

The isolation of the settlements of druzhin detachments is also indicated by druzhin burial grounds of the IX-X centuries. These are primarily the complexes of the Gnezdsvaand Novoselok mounds (near Smolensk) and Chernihiv druzhinny mounds25 . B. A. Rybakov suggested that the remoteness of the mounds of the Chernihiv necropolis at a distance of up to 18 km from Chernihiv indicates the appearance of land possessions around the city among the druzhinniki 26 . However, the Chernihiv druzhin mounds are not scattered singly or in small groups, which would be natural if the druzhinniks lived in their own villages, but form groups that include a fairly large number of burials. Probably, such mound groups are a sign of the existence of special settlements of druzhin detachments. The large number of such mound groups27 and their proximity to Chernihiv are probably explained by the fact that the squad of the Chernihiv prince in the X century. it was already so numerous and had such a developed hierarchy that individual detachments were settled in the vicinity of the city, and in the city itself only that part of the squad that was constantly with the prince was concentrated. Large mounds, which stand out in their groups (such as the "Gulbishche" mound), apparently belonged to representatives of the druzhin elite, who headed the dispersed detachments of the Chernihiv druzhina. Only two mounds from the Chernihiv necropolis are located separately, near the city walls-the Black Grave mound and the so-called "Princess Cherna mound". But these mounds, as proved by B. A. Rybakov, are princely 28 .

The existence of special druzhin settlements after the tenth century is not traced. With the emergence and development of cities as centers of political power the place of settlement of the druzhin nobility becomes their territory-

22 Kukharenko Yu. V. Medieval monuments of Polesie. In: Archeology of the USSR. Set of archaeological sources. Issue No. E 1-57. Moscow, 1961, pp. 8-10, 22-27, Table 8.

23 Rybakov B. A. Uk. soch. p. 248-249; Shirinsky S. S. Objective laws and subjective factor in the formation of the Old Russian state. In: Leninist Ideas in the study of the history of primitive society, slavery and feudalism, Moscow, 1970, p. 196.

24 Procopius of Caesarea. Uk. soch., p. 296.

25 Bulkin V. A., Dubov I. V., Lebedev G. S. Uk. soch., pp. 48-51; Shirinsky S. S. Kurgany IX-first half of the X century. u pos. Novoselki. In: Ancient Slavs and their Neighbors. Materials and Research on the Archeology of the USSR, No. 176, Moscow, 1970, pp. 114-116.

26 Rybakov B. A. Antiquities of Chernihiv, - Ibid., N 11. Moscow, 1949, pp. 51-52.

27 In the immediate vicinity of Chernihiv, five groups of druzhin mounds are known, not counting the groups near the villages of Gushchina and Shestovitsy, which are somewhat more remote from the city (ibid., pp. 15-17, map on page 11).

28 Ibid., p. 11. 16, 24 - 40, 52.

page 21

toria 29 . Judging by archaeological data, in the X century on the territory of the emerging cities there were courtyards-estates of individual representatives of the top of the squad-boyars 30 . Obviously, in such estates, the labor of servants was exploited. But the main source of income for the military - druzhin nobility in the tenth century was the corporate form of feudal exploitation - tribute. The fact that the main consumer of tribute at that time was the military-service nobility is beyond doubt. Chronicles, speaking about the collection of tribute on the territory of the Ancient Russian state in the X-beginning of the XI century., six times call its recipients. In four cases, these are territorial units, without specifying the social stratum in favor of which tribute was collected - the cities of Kiev (twice) and Vyshgorod, Rus (in the sense of Kievan land) 31 . But twice it is explicitly stated that the recipients and consumers of tribute were princely vigilantes: this is the story of the Drevlyansky tribute (945) 32 and the report on the division of tribute collected by the Novgorod princes-viceroys (1014) 33 The story of Konstantin Porphyrogenitus about the polyudye of the Kiev princes also points to the druzhin layer as a recipient of tribute 34 .

The tribute received by the druzhin corporation headed by the prince was derived from two types of collecting surplus product in favor of the squad (in the embryonic form recorded by Tacitus among the Germans): voluntary initially tribesmen's offerings and tributes-contributions from other tribes. Since offerings and tributes-contributions-become regular, indefinite, normalized and linked to the main means of production - land (i.e., with the appearance of taxation units), we can talk about the emergence of tax exploitation of direct producers. The formation of the tax system in Russia took place in the IX-X centuries 35 . After the appearance of the tribute tax, the military-druzhin nobility turns into a corporate land owner and at the same time into an apparatus of state power .36 The original method of collecting tribute-tax was polyudye - a circular detour by the prince and his retinue of subject lands 37 .

The earliest information about the emergence of individual land owners (fiefdoms) from among the military - druzhin nobility is associated with the emergence of the princely domain 38."Pravda Yaroslavichey", which reflected the social system of Russia in the first half of the XI century, contains legislative norms concerning the princely domenic economy. Among the population of the fiefdom, representatives of the druzhin elite who performed duties in the princely fiefdom are also mentioned.-

29 Bulkin V. A., Dubov I. V., Lebedev G. S. Uk. soch., pp. 142-143.

30 Sverdlov M. B. Genezis i struktura feudalnogo obshchestva v Drevnoi Rus ' [Genesis and structure of feudal society in Ancient Russia].

31 The Tale of Bygone Years (PVL). Part I. M.-L. 1950, pp. 43, 59, 88-89.

32 "In this same summer, Igorev's retinue rekosha:" The young Svenelzhi disguised themselves as weapons and ports, but we are nazi. Go, Princess, with us in tribute, and you will also get us " (ibid., p. 39).

33 " To Yaroslav I exist in Novegorod, and as a lesson I give to Kiev two thousand hryvnias from year to year, and we will distribute a thousand in Novegorod. And Tako dayahu vsi posadyitsi novgorodstii" (ibid., pp. 88-89).

34 Monuments to the history of the Kievan State of the IX-XII centuries. Moscow, 1936, p. 63.

35 Rapov O. M. On the issue of land rent in Ancient Russia in the pre-Mongol period. - Bulletin of Moscow University, history series. 1968, No. 1; Sverdlov M. B. From the history of the taxation system in Ancient Russia. In: Eastern Europe in Antiquity and the Middle Ages, Moscow, 1978.

36 For more information, see: Gorsky A. A. On the question of the prerequisites and essence of the genesis of feudalism in Russia. - Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta, seriya istoriya, 1982, N 4, pp. 78-79.

37 Polyudye of the Kievan princes of the first half of the tenth century was studied in detail by B. A. Rybakov (Rybakov B. A. Smerdy. - History of the USSR, 1979, N 2).

38 Its folding in the tenth century is considered in: Sverdlov M. B. Genesis and structure of feudal society, pp. 65-74.

page 22

main functions - ognishchanin, podezdnoy, tiun. Their lives were protected by a double vira - 80 hryvnias.

The appearance of patrimonial property among the vigilantes on the basis of a combination of archaeological data and written sources should be attributed to the XI century. Since the end of this century, archaeologically traced rural settlements, which are the estates of patrimonial estates (ancient settlements - castles) 39. Druzhinnye mounds in the XI-XII centuries. dispersed almost throughout the Old Russian territory. New groups of druzhin burials do not appear, and the mounds of druzhinni are now located in village cemeteries - a sign of the settlement of members of the druzhin (including the "younger" one). in their fiefdoms 40 . Given that the ruling class increasingly adopted the Christian rite of burial, it can be assumed that such a dispersal of druzhin mounds does not fully reflect the genesis of private land ownership by druzhinniks.

Written sources give very scant information about this process, but still allow us to identify several possible ways for the appearance of patrimonial property among the vigilantes. One of these ways is the transfer of princes to representatives of the druzhin elite of the right to collect tribute from certain areas. Isolated reports of such a phenomenon date back to the tenth century .41 Much more often, such a transfer of territories for "feeding" is recorded in sources in relation to representatives of the princely family .42 It should be emphasized that with such a transfer, the corporate nature of ownership was preserved, since the income received was distributed among the vigilantes of the regional manager-the" breadwinner " 43 . However, such a steward, of course, had the opportunity to start a patrimonial farm in the subject territory. According to sources, it is impossible to trace whether the boyars had fiefdoms in this way .44 Another possible way for the emergence of patrimonial land ownership is a princely grant from state lands (i.e., lands that were in the corporate ownership of the military-druzhin nobility) directly to the property of the druzhinnik. Apparently, such a grant is mentioned in the story "The Life of Theodosius of the Caves" about the hegumen's childhood years (the second quarter of the XI century): Theodosius ' parents, by order of the prince, moved from Vasilev (near Kiev) to Kursk, where they had a "village" in their possession .45 The third possible way is a grant from the princely domenic land. There are five direct reports of such grants to ecclesiastical corporations in the twelfth century .46 Obviously, the domenial lands could also complain to representatives of the secular part of the ruling class - the vigilantes. In tse-

39 Sedov V. V. Rural settlements of the central districts of Smolenskaya zemlya. In the book. Materials and research on the Archeology of the USSR, No. 92, Moscow, 1960; Tretyakov P. N. Medieval castles of Smolensk region. In: Historical and Archaeological Collection, Moscow, 1962; Nikolskaya T. N. Zemlya vyatichey, Moscow, 1981, p. 7!?-96.

40 Aletkovsky M. H. Kurgany russkikh druzhinnikov XI-XII vv. - Sovetskaya arkheologiya, 1960, N 1.

41 Novgorodskaya pervaya letopis srshego i mladshego izvodov (NPL) [Novgorodskaya pervaya letopis srshego i mladshego izvodov (NPL)]. Moscow, l. 1950, pp. 109, 110. ,

42 For Xb. this is the transfer of land by Svyatoslav and Vladimir to the management of their sons (PVL, Part I, pp. 49-50, 83).

43 NPL, p. 110; PVL. Ch. I, p. 39, 89.

44 It is precisely this way of forming the patrimonial land ownership of princes (from administration with the right to collect tribute in their favor - to the establishment of a domenic economy) that seems proven. It is most fully considered on the materials of the Novgorod land (Yanin V., L. Novgorod feudal patrimony, Moscow 1981, pp. 241-249) and Smolenskaya (Alekseev L. V. Domain of Rostislav Smolensky. In: Srednevekovaya Rus', Moscow, 1976).

45 Paterik of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, St. Petersburg, 1911, pp. 15-20.

46 Charters of Veliky Novgorod and Pskov. M.-L. 1949, p. 139-141; Old Russian princely charters of the XI-XV centuries. M. 1976, p. 141-145; PSRL. T. II. M. 1962, stb. 492-493; T. I. M. 1962, stb. 348.

page 23

scrap period of the XI-XII centuries - the time of the formation and spread of patrimonial land ownership of vigilantes.

The considered material allows us to distinguish three stages in the development of the druzhin organization in connection with the genesis of feudalism: VI-VIII, IX-X and XI-XII centuries. VI-X centuries are characterized by the isolation of settlements of vigilantes who live on the support of their leader. The first stage belongs to the pre-class society, its last stage. At this time, the number of vigilantes, the number of vigilantes and their influence in society are growing. At the second stage, during the formation and expansion of the Kiev early feudal state, the military-druzhin nobility turns into a corporate owner of land, realizing their property by collecting tribute-taxes from the personally free agricultural population. The tenth century was the time of the heyday of a peculiar early feudal druzhin culture, which was different from the culture of the ordinary population and absorbed a number of non - Slavic elements (partly due to the presence of other ethnic components in the squads - Scandinavian, Finno-Ugric) 47 . At the third stage, some of the vigilantes become individual landowners and settle in their patrimonial possessions. At the same time, according to sources, some of the vigilantes continue to live under the roof of the prince, on his maintenance, and the boyars own courtyards on the territory of the cities of 48 .

The significant role of the military-druzhin nobility in the formation of class society in Russia is indisputable. The question of the correlation between the role of druzhin and tribal nobility is less clear. This topic has recently been considered by G. V. Abramovich and M. B. Sverdlov. According to G. V. Abramovich, the squad of the Eastern Slavs of the VIII-IX centuries was a force that was "at the disposal and subordination" of the tribal nobility - "deliberate" and "best" husbands, the nobility, who did not completely break ties with the community. This nobility, according to the author, represented the line in the formation of the early feudal state, which "developed by local leaps and bounds in the process of decomposition of the patriarchal system." It is contrasted with the line characteristic of the Kievan princes with their reliance on "military force" 49 . However, the idea that the squads could be not only the princes, but also the representatives of the tribal nobility, does not find confirmation in the sources. For the IX-XI centuries. there are three testimonies in which the leader of the squad is not called a prince: under 945 - "otroci Svenelzhi"; under 1071-youths collecting tribute in the Rostov land led by Jan Vyshatnch; under 1095- "Ratibor squad" 50 . However, all these persons are not representatives of the tribal nobility, but of the military-service elite, and each of them was (at the time on which the above news falls) actually the first person under his prince: Sveneld - under Igor, Yan - under Svyatoslav Yaroslavich, 51 Ratibor - under Vladimir Monomakh. The picture drawn by G. V. Abramovich also contradicts the fact that the squads did not exist in separate communities.-

47 Rybakov B. A. On two cultures of Russian feudalism. In: Lenin's Ideas in the study of the history of primitive society, slavery and feudalism; Bulkin V. A., Dubov I. V., Lebedev G. S. Uk. soch., pp. 141-142; Sedov V. V. Vostochnye slavyane v VI-XIII vv., pp. 248-256.

48 Sverdlov M. B. Genezis i struktura feudalnogo obshchestva [Genesis and structure of feudal society]. 112 - 113, 202 - 207, 214 - 215.

49 Abramovich G. V. Uk. soch., pp. 69-71.

50 PVL. Ch. I, p. 39, 117, 148. In the Ipatiev Chronicle (PSRL. Vol. II. stb. 417): "the squad of Ratiborov's children".

51 Events related to the suppression of the uprising by Yan Vyshatich in Rostov land relate to the time of the Kievan reign of Svyatoslav (see: Kuchkin V. A. Rostov-Suzdal land in the X-first third of the XIII century (centers and borders). - Istoriya SSSR, 1969, N 2, p. 67-70; Rapov O. M. O datirovke narodnykh vosstaniy na Rus ' XI veka v PVL. - Ibid., 1979, N 2, p. 142-145).

page 24

and in the tribes and tribal unions, and they could be headed by people who stood outside and above the communities, i.e., the princes of the tribes and tribal unions.

The contrast between the "Kievan" and "local" ways of feudalization is also unconvincing. It is based on an analysis of the description of the Drevlyansk land in connection with the uprising of 945. The author proceeds from the text of the Resurrection Chronicle, where in the phrase read in most chronicles:

"Our princes Dobri are the essence, who plowed the essence of the Tree land", instead of "plowed" it is "divided". According to G. V. Abramovich, this passage allows us to state that the Drevlyansky nobility, " deliberate men "(the author identifies the" good princes "of Drevlyans with" deliberate men " who were sent by the Drevlyans to the embassy to Olga), divided the Drevlyansky land "into spheres of influence and management", standing in relation to the population "in the center". the position of peculiar seigneurs " 52 .

The idea of the identity of" good princes " and "ostentatious husbands" does not agree, however, with the sources: in them, princes are never confused with"ostentatious husbands". In addition, following the interpretation of G. V. Abramovich, we would have to admit that the Drevlyans sent 50 princes to the embassy to Olga .53 As for the variant" divided "in the Resurrection Chronicle instead of "rasp", G. V. Abramovich prefers the variant "divided" on the grounds that it, in his opinion, "more accurately reflects them ("deliberate husbands", they are also "good princes". - A. G. ) relations with the population " 54 .

However, it is necessary to take into account the late origin of the variant given by the Resurrection Chronicle. The latter (created in the XVI century) is based on the Moscow Grand Ducal Code of 1479, which is similar to the text of the Sofia I Chronicle. The main source of the codex of 1479 was the first edition of the same Sofia Chronicle (or its protograph) 55 . A comparison of the story of Olga's three vengeances on the Drevlyans in the Resurrection Chronicle with a similar text in various lists of the Sofia I Chronicle and in the 1497 codex shows that the Resurrection Chronicle accurately conveys the text of the list of Kings of the Sofia I Chronicle, in which the word "shared" is mentioned in the place of interest .56 The Tsarsky list is one of the lists of the second edition of the Sofia I Chronicle, based on its first edition with additions to the Moscow code, which, according to Shakhmatov, is close to the code of 1479. The lists of the second edition, which are in common with the list of the Tsar's protograph 57 , give the same reading (with the exception of one of them, Vorontsov, where the "razdisha" is written) 58 . The first edition of the Sofia I Chronicle, represented by the Obolensky and Karamzinsky lists 59, gives the reading "butchered", and in the code of 1479 it is "rozdelali" 60 . It is obvious that the reading of the protograph of the Tsar's list of the second edition of the Sofia I Chronicle and the reading of the Resurrection Chronicle represent a corrupted reading of the protograph of the first edition of the Sofia I Chronicle, which was reflected in a slightly modified form in the codex of 1479.

The meaning of the word "butchered" almost coincides with the meaning of the word "rasasli" read in most chronicles, which means

52 Abramovich G. V. Uk soch., pp. 66-68, 70.

53 PSRL. Vol. VII. SPb. 1856, pp. 283-284.

54 Abramovich G. V. Uk. soch., p. 67.

55 Shakhmatov A. A. Obozrenie russkikh letopisnykh svodov XIV-XVI vv. L. 1938, p. 256-284, 370: PVL. Ch. II. Moscow-l. 1950, p. 164-170, 173-176; Lurie Ya. S. Obshcherusskie letopisi XIV-XVI vv. l. 1976, ch. II, III.

56 PSRL. Vol. VII, pp. 283-284; vol. V. l. 1925, pp. 31-33; vol. XXV. Moscow-l. 1949, pp. 351-352.

57 Shakhmatov A. A. Uk. soch., p. 216 - 221; 258 - 260, 263, 283; PVL. Ch. II, p. 167-168.

58 PSRL. Vol. V, p. 32.

58 Shakhmatov A. A. Uk. soch., pp. 208-215; PVL. Ch. II. p. 167.

60 PSRL. Vol. V, p. 32, vol. XXV. p. 351.

page 25

"arranged", "put things in order" 61 . This meaning of the word fully corresponds to the meaning of the entire chronicle phrase, in which the Drevlyansky princes, who justly ruled their land, are contrasted with the bloodthirsty Igor, who ruined it with exorbitant levies: "I will kill your husband, byasha bo your husband is like a wolf admiring and robbing, and our princes Dobri are, who plowed (option: cut up) the essence of the Tree land"62 . Thus, there is no division of the Drevlyansky land into spheres of influence and administration between "ostentatious men", and there is no reason to see landowners in the tribal nobility on the basis of the chronicle article of 945.

M. B. Sverdlov writes about the merger in the early feudal period of military service and" local tribal "" non-service " nobility. In his opinion, the "local" nobility was called "boyars", a term that also denoted the top of the serving nobility and was thus broad in meaning in the X - XI centuries, and generally referred to the most noble people. The author considers it possible to apply the epithet "landowning" to the "local nobility" 63 . However, the factual material given by M. B. Sverdlov only allows us to assume that nobles in the tenth century had courtyards on the territory of Kiev and Novgorod .64 But, first of all, these courtyards could belong to representatives of the upper ranks of the service nobility. Secondly, the genetic connection between such urban courtyards and later feudal fiefdoms remains unclear (it is not shown in the work of M. B. Sverdlov). In rural areas, the courtyards-estates of the nobility of the X century have not yet been found. Their existence can be traced, as mentioned above, only from the end of the XI century, i.e., at a time when the patrimonial land ownership of vigilantes was already widespread.

M. B. Sverdlov's interpretation of the term "boyar" needs more definiteness. There are no examples in the sources that this term clearly refers to the tribal nobility of the X-XI centuries, so it is unclear how one can conclude that when the term "boyar" is mentioned, it refers to "non-service", "local tribal" nobility. At the same time, more than once in the annals it is indisputably about the boyars as the druzhin elite.

Under 971 (Svyatoslav's treaty with Byzantium): "As I swear to the king of Grech, and with me bolyars and all Russia, so let us keep the rights of sveschanya" 65 . From the stories about the procedure for concluding contracts in 907 and 945, it is clear that the oath ("company") is a very specific action: the Russian prince and his "people" swear 66 . Swearing together with Svyatoslav could only be his retinues and "howl", therefore, here the boyars mean the senior squad, and by "all Russia" not the entire population of Kievan Rus, but the army of Svyatoslav, only the "Rus" that was with the prince under Dorostol at the time of the conclusion of the treaty 67 .

Under 996 (the story of Vladimir's benefactions): "Lo, pack up your creative people: for the whole week, set up a feast in the courtyard in gridnitsa to create and come with bolyar, and gridem, and sts, and desyatskim, and a deliberate husband, with and without the prince." Further reading (the episode with the silver liars) all feasters are named

61 From "pasti" in the sense of "manage" (see Sreznevsky I. I. Materials for the dictionary of the Old Russian language, vol. II. SPb. 1895, stb. 885; vol. III. SPb. 1903, stb. 78).

62 PVL. Ch. I, p. 40. In the NPL of the younger platoon, the word "bred" is close in meaning (NPL, p. 111).

63 Sverdlov M. B. Genesis and structure of feudal society, pp. 41-44, 46.

64 Ibid., pp. 65-67. The author refers to the works of a number of archaeologists.

65 PVL. Ch. I, p. 52.

66 Ibid., pp. 25, 38-39.

67 The word "Rus" in the early Middle Ages meant not only the entire Old Russian nation, but also limited groups of people who belonged to it (ibid., p. 19, 24, 25, 28, 33, 36 - 39, 50, 104).

page 26

"druzhina" 68 . Consequently, here too the boyars are the senior, privileged part of the squad.

Under 1015: "Svyatopolk also came to Vyshegorod at night, otay called Putshu and Vyshegorodsky bolyartsy and reche im..." 69. M. B. Sverdlov believes that in this news we are talking about "local nobility" 70 . However, his work convincingly shows that Vyshgorod was founded as a princely domenic city and remained so in the first half of the XI century .71 Naturally, the highest stratum in it should have been represented by the princely vigilantes, part of the Kievan squad, settled in the domenic possession of the grand Duke. In relation to the members of the senior squad of the capital Kiev, they are called diminutively - "bolyarce".

Under 1093: "Volodimerus also traveled the river with a small retinue - many bo fell from his regiment, and his bolyars tupadosha" 72 . The fact that here under the boyars are meant senior vigilantes is obvious. In another eight cases, the involvement of boyars in a druzhin organization is clearly indicated: "his (Prince. - A. G.) boyars " 73 . From the rest of the chronicle news about the events of the X-XI centuries, it is impossible to determine which social group is meant - it is only clear that we are talking about the top of the nobility of the Old Russian state. 74 A similar picture is given by the use of the term "boyar" in relation to the events of the XI century in the Paterik of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery 75 .

M. B. Sverdlov sees a sign of the broad meaning of this term in the fact that Russkaya Pravda does not specify a reward for the murder of boyar 76. However, an analysis of Russkaya Pravda's articles on penalties for murder shows that they identify members of the ruling class by their positions. In Kratkaya Pravda, these are representatives of the princely administration-ognishchanin, podezdnoy, tiun, " the old groom at the herd?!"whose lives are protected by the 80-hryvnia vira (Articles 19-23). In "Prostrannaya Pravda", such a vira is paid for the murder of "prince of the husband" (Articles 1, 3)," tiuna of the prince "(Article 1)," tiuna of the ognishchny "(Article 12)," tiuna of the equerry " (Article 12). Here we are talking about two categories of the service elite: the domenic princely administration (tiuns) and senior vigilantes who stood outside it and were obliged to the prince only by military, state service (princely men). Junior vigilantes (gridi and youths) are mentioned separately, and a 40-hryvnia fine is imposed for their murder (Articles 1, 11).

M. B. Sverdlov points out that Russian chroniclers called the high nobility of Byzantium and Poland boyars, and considers this an argument in favor of the broad meaning of the term .78 However, it is natural that the chroniclers called the upper social stratum of other states by the same name as the upper stratum of the Old Russian state. At the same time, if the upper stratum in Russia was represented by the druzhin elite, then the foreign nobility (regardless of whether it had a similar military service character) should have been accompanied by a term denoting this druzhin elite.

68 PVL. Ch. I, p. 85-86.

69 Ibid., p. 90.

70 Sverdlov M. B. Genesis and structure of feudal society, p. 42.

71 Ibid., p. 68.

72 PVL. Ch. I, p. 144.

73 Ibid., p. 26, 35, 48, 74, 75, 85, 121.

74 Ibid., p. 52, 58, 74, 75, 81, 89, 97, 136, 142, 172.

75 In two cases, the military function of the boyars is visible, in two-their service to the prince; other uses of the term are neutral (Paterik of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, p. 23 - 25, 38, 39, 49, 50, 55 - 56, 106).

76 Sverdlov M. B. Genezis i struktura feodalnogo obshchestva [Genesis and structure of feudal society].

78 Ibid., p. 42.

page 27

Thus, the sources do not give grounds for a broader understanding of the term "boyar" in the period of early feudalism. 79 If representatives of the tribal nobility could be included in the boyars, then, apparently, only with the entry into the princely service, i.e. with the transition to the ranks of the serving military-druzhinny nobility. Of course, with the development of feudal relations, the boyars acquired a certain independence from the prince. This was most evident in Novgorod, where already at the beginning of the XI century the retinue of the prince-viceroy and the Novgorod boyars, which had their own military-corporate organization, were separated from each other .80 In the second half of the 11th century, there was a "big squad" in Kiev, whose members move from prince to prince when the princes change at the Kiev table (while the "junior" squad moves along with the prince when he moves from one table to another) .81 Thus, the boyars, while retaining their official function, begin to gravitate primarily to cities, and not to specific princes. In this regard, the chronicles appear (since the XII century) the definition of boyars by city (boyars of Novgorod, Galician, Chernihiv, Polotsk) 82 .

In the process of the genesis of feudalism, there is no sharp line between the military-druzhin and tribal nobility. The leaders of the squads, the princes, came from among the tribal nobility. One of the sources of the formation of the military-druzhin nobility, probably the main one, was young men from families of tribal nobility (Tacitus points out this). The period from the emergence of the druzhina institute to the formation of early feudal society was a period of increasing role of the military-serving nobility in comparison with the tribal one. The tribal nobility, obviously, was increasingly absorbed by the military-druzhinnaya. In some cases, when the early feudal state forcibly subordinated tribal unions, it could be destroyed (for example, Drevlyanskaya Zemlya). In Russia of the XI century, no traces of the existence of tribal, non-service nobility can be traced, with the exception, perhaps, of marginal territories with an ethnically mixed population, where the feudalization process has not yet been completed (the "old children" and "best wives" of the uprisings of 1024 and 1071 in the Rostov-Suzdal land) 83 . Sources do not give grounds to assert that even before its transition to military service, the tribal nobility was a landowner.

In general, the institute of druzhina played a leading class-forming role. With the emergence of feudal relations in Russia, the military-druzhinny nobility turned into IX-X centuries. as a corporate land owner. Druzhina at this time is a corporate organization of the ruling class of early feudal society. In the X-XI centuries, domenic land ownership was formed by the leaders of druzhin corporations-princes. In the XI-XII centuries, a significant part of the vigilantes turned into owners of fiefdoms. This happens through princely grants from lands that are in corporate (state) and princely domenic ownership, as a result of which the system of feudal land ownership takes on the character of hierarchy.

79 It is not clear why it is the" local tribal"," non-service", as M. B. Sverdlov believes, and not the service nobility that indicates the right of the boyars to send ships to Byzantium, the ownership of their servants, and a significant amount of collection from the boyars for hiring the Varangian squad during the struggle against Svyatopolk (ibid., p. 42 - 43).

80 PVL. Ch. I, p. 95-97.

81 Ibid., p. 143.

82 NPL, p. 25, 84, 205, 313; PSRL. Vol. II, stb. 723-724, 789.

83 PVL. Ch. I, p. 99, 117; M. B. Sverdlov writes about the existence of a "non-service part of the ruling class" in relation to the period of the XI-first third of the XIII century for Russia as a whole (Sverdlov M. B. Genesis and structure of feudal society, p. 200-202, 219, 222), but there are no specific examples results.

page 28


© library.rs

Permanent link to this publication:

https://library.rs/m/articles/view/DRUZHINA-AND-THE-GENESIS-OF-FEUDALISM-IN-RUSSIA

Similar publications: LSerbia LWorld Y G


Publisher:

Andrija PutnikContacts and other materials (articles, photo, files etc)

Author's official page at Libmonster: https://library.rs/Putnik

Find other author's materials at: Libmonster (all the World)GoogleYandex

Permanent link for scientific papers (for citations):

A. A. Gorsky, DRUZHINA AND THE GENESIS OF FEUDALISM IN RUSSIA // Belgrade: Library of Serbia (LIBRARY.RS). Updated: 01.02.2025. URL: https://library.rs/m/articles/view/DRUZHINA-AND-THE-GENESIS-OF-FEUDALISM-IN-RUSSIA (date of access: 19.02.2025).

Found source (search robot):


Publication author(s) - A. A. Gorsky:

A. A. Gorsky → other publications, search: Libmonster SerbiaLibmonster WorldGoogleYandex

Comments:



Reviews of professional authors
Order by: 
Per page: 
 
  • There are no comments yet
Related topics
Publisher
Andrija Putnik
Белград, Serbia
87 views rating
01.02.2025 (18 days ago)
0 subscribers
Rating
0 votes
Related Articles
Заснув в сафьянах книг Мы пробудились поздно Нам нами не зажгут сиреневые звёзды В лесах росу не раскачает лень полуденных дерев Дрозды уснут в полях всех перепев... И шепот деревень загасит пламя дня Наступит ночь, как видно без меня Осталось мало Нас, сотрудников Земли Уходим, уводя Надежды корабли...
Catalog: Филология 
«Вздор!.. Гений не совершает ошибок. Его блуждания намеренны, они врата – открытия» (Джойс Д. Улисс. стр. 202). Писано в брутальные времена...
Jean Eiffel and Innovations Derivatives
Catalog: Экономика 
The Question of Changing the Global Matrix in Russia and in the World
Catalog: Экономика 
"A WORD ABOUT IGOR'S REGIMENT" IN THE "EXPERIENCE OF NARRATION ABOUT RUSSIA" BY I. P. ELAGIN
18 days ago · From Andrija Putnik
Many of you and your associates are operating in the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions y.e. This is about your transactions... Direct or Indirect or Potential. Not so long ago, many of you became players in "Cybereconomics". In a fundamentally new transformation of the digital world, about which many of us are still little known.. Purchase and exchange of fiat money, work on the transformation of fiat money into cryptocurrency. Buying a car, apartments, loans from financial institutions... Et cetera. There are lucky people who work in their own business or act as investors.
Catalog: Экономика 
LITTLE-KNOWN HERO OF BORODIN
Catalog: История 
21 days ago · From Andrija Putnik
THE IDEA OF SLAVIC UNITY IN THE SOCIAL THOUGHT OF PRE-REFORM RUSSIA
21 days ago · From Andrija Putnik
A. M. STANISLAVSKAYA. POLITICHESKAYA DEYATEL'NOST ' F. F. USHAKOV V GREKE [POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF F. F. USHAKOV IN GREECE]. 1798-1800
21 days ago · From Andrija Putnik
DEVELOPMENT OF ETHNIC IDENTITY OF SLAVIC PEOPLES IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES
21 days ago · From Andrija Putnik

New publications:

Popular with readers:

News from other countries:

LIBRARY.RS - Serbian Digital Library

Create your author's collection of articles, books, author's works, biographies, photographic documents, files. Save forever your author's legacy in digital form. Click here to register as an author.
Library Partners

DRUZHINA AND THE GENESIS OF FEUDALISM IN RUSSIA
 

Editorial Contacts
Chat for Authors: RS LIVE: We are in social networks:

About · News · For Advertisers

Serbian Digital Library ® All rights reserved.
2014-2025, LIBRARY.RS is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map)
Keeping the heritage of Serbia


LIBMONSTER NETWORK ONE WORLD - ONE LIBRARY

US-Great Britain Sweden Serbia
Russia Belarus Ukraine Kazakhstan Moldova Tajikistan Estonia Russia-2 Belarus-2

Create and store your author's collection at Libmonster: articles, books, studies. Libmonster will spread your heritage all over the world (through a network of affiliates, partner libraries, search engines, social networks). You will be able to share a link to your profile with colleagues, students, readers and other interested parties, in order to acquaint them with your copyright heritage. Once you register, you have more than 100 tools at your disposal to build your own author collection. It's free: it was, it is, and it always will be.

Download app for Android