Boyars - the highest class in Russia of the 10-17th centuries (along with the great and specific princes). The boyars played a leading role after the Grand Duke in governing the state. The origin of the term is not clear. The emergence of the boyars is attributed to the time of the formation of the Old Russian state of the 9th century. In the 10-11 centuries, princely boyars stood out - princes men (firemen), etc. zemstvo boyars (old men of the city) are the descendants of the tribal nobility. Since the 11th century, due to the granting of land to princely husbands, they merge with the zemstvo boyars into a single boyar estate.
Being vassals of the prince, the boyars were obliged to serve in his army, but they enjoyed the right to leave for another prince, were complete masters in their estates, and themselves had vassals. During the fragmentation of Russia in the 12th-15th centuries, with the weakening of princely power, the economic power of the boyars increased, their political influence and desire for independence increased. In the Galicia-Volyn principality in the 13th century, in the Novgorod land, state affairs were decided on boyar councils. The influence of the boyars in the Chernigov, Polotsk-Minsk, Muromo-Ryazan principalities did not allow the formation of a strong princely power.
In the fight against the boyars-patrimonials, the princes relied on the service boyars and nobles. The strengthening of the grand ducal power from the second half of the 14th century led to the emergence of worthy boyars, who controlled the branches of the palace economy (horsemen, falconers, bowlers) and individual territories that were given to them for feeding (voivods). In the 14th and 15th centuries, as a centralized state took shape, the rights of the boyars were limited (narrowing the scope of immunity, constraint and cancellation of the right to leave for another master by the end of the 15th century), changes occurred in the social composition of the boyars. Since the 15th century, in the Russian state, the boyar has become the highest rank among the "service people in the fatherland." The title of boyar gave the right to participate in meetings of the Boyar Duma, it was the highest duma rank. Traditionally, the boyars occupied the main administrative, judicial and military positions, headed orders.
With the formation of the Russian centralized state at the end of the 15th century, the socio-economic and political privileges of the patrimonial boyars were significantly curtailed; the authorities severely suppressed the speeches of the boyars, who resisted the centralization policy. The oprichnina of Ivan IV dealt a particularly strong blow to the boyar aristocracy. In the 17th century, the composition of the boyars changed a lot, many noble families were cut short, others weakened economically, the service boyars and the nobility acquired great importance. Due to this, the distinctions between boyars and nobles were blurred, which was facilitated by the tendency to merge the estate and patrimonial land ownership, legally formalized in 1714. In everyday meaning in Russia in the 17th century, all landowners were boyars for the population dependent on them; later this word was modified into the concepts of "bar", "master". The abolition of localism in 1682 undermined the influence of the boyars in state affairs. The title of boyar was abolished by Peter I at the beginning of the 18th century.
Boyars in Wallachia and Moldavia (rum. boerii) - a class of feudal lords that developed in the 14th century. The boyars were divided into tribal, who owned bashtins (patrimonies), and local, who owned granted estates (moshii). Over time, the distinction between them began to blur. In independent Romania in the 19th century, the composition of the boyars began to be replenished with people from large merchants and officials. Here the boyars as a class were eliminated as a result of the implementation of the law on agrarian reform on March 22, 1945.
Scratch the Russian boyar - you will find a foreigner! Sheremetevs, Morozovs, Velyaminovs...
Velyaminovs
The family originates from Shimon (Simon), the son of the Varangian prince Afrikan. In 1027 he arrived in the army of Yaroslav the Great and converted to Orthodoxy. Shimon Afrikanovich is famous for participating in the battle with the Polovtsians on Alta and did the most for the construction of the Caves church in honor of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary: the precious belt and legacy of his father is a golden crown.
But the Vilyaminovs were known not only for their courage and generosity: a descendant of the family, Ivan Vilyaminov, fled to the Horde in 1375, but was later captured and executed on the Kuchkov field. Despite the betrayal of Ivan Velyaminov, his family did not lose its significance: the last son of Dmitry Donskoy was baptized by Maria, the widow of Vasily Velyaminov, a Moscow thousand.
The following genera stood out from the Velyaminov family: Aksakov, Vorontsov, Vorontsov-Velyaminov.
Detail: Muscovites are still reminded of the noblest Moscow family, the Vorontsov-Velyaminovs, by the name of the street “Vorontsovo Pole”.
Morozov
The clan of the Morozov boyars is an example of a feudal family from among the old Moscow untitled nobility. The founder of the surname is considered to be a certain Michael, who came from Prussia to serve in Novgorod. He was among the "six brave men" who showed special heroism during the Battle of the Neva in 1240.
The Morozovs faithfully served Moscow under Ivan Kalita and Dmitry Donskoy, occupying prominent positions at the Grand Duke's court. However, their family suffered greatly from the historical storms that overtook Russia in the 16th century. Many representatives of a noble family disappeared without a trace during the bloody oprichnina terror of Ivan the Terrible.
The 17th century was the last page in the centuries-old history of the family. Boris Morozov had no children, and the only heir of his brother, Gleb Morozov, was his son Ivan. By the way, he was born in a marriage with Feodosya Prokofievna Urusova - the heroine of the painting by V.I. Surikov “Boyar Morozova”. Ivan Morozov did not leave male offspring and turned out to be the last representative of a noble boyar family that ceased to exist in the early 80s of the 17th century.
Detail: The heraldry of the Russian dynasties took shape under Peter I, which is probably why the coat of arms of the Morozov boyars was not preserved.
Buturlins
According to the genealogical books, the Buturlin family comes from an “honest man” under the name Radsha, who left the Semigrad land (Hungary) at the end of the 12th century to the Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky.
“My great-grandfather Racha served St. Nevsky as a muscle of battle,” wrote A. Pushkin in the poem “My Genealogy”. Radsha became the ancestor of fifty Russian noble families in Tsarist Moscow, among them are the Pushkins, the Buturlins, and the Myatlevs...
But let us return to the Buturlin family: its representatives faithfully served first the grand dukes, then the sovereigns of Moscow and Russia. Their family gave Russia many prominent, honest, noble people, whose names are still known. Let's name just a few of them:
Ivan Mikhailovich Buturlin served as a roundabout under Boris Godunov, fought in the North Caucasus and Transcaucasia, conquered almost all of Dagestan. He died in battle in 1605 as a result of betrayal and deceit by the Turks and mountain foreigners.
His son Vasily Ivanovich Buturlin was the governor of Novgorod, an active associate of Prince Dmitry Pozharsky in his fight against the Polish invaders.
Ivan Ivanovich Buturlin was awarded the title of St. Andrew's Cavalier, General-in-Chief, Ruler of Little Russia for military and peaceful deeds. In 1721, he actively participated in the signing of the Peace of Nishtad, which put an end to the long war with the Swedes, for which Peter I awarded him the rank of general.
Vasily Vasilyevich Buturlin was a butler under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, who did a lot for the reunification of Ukraine and Russia.
The Sheremetev family traces its origin to Andrey Kobyla. The fifth generation (great-great-grandson) of Andrei Kobyla was Andrei Konstantinovich Bezzubtsev, nicknamed Sheremet, from whom the Sheremetevs descended. According to some versions, the surname is based on the Turkic-Bulgarian “sheremet” (poor fellow) and the Turkic-Persian “shir-muhammad” (pious, brave Muhammad).
Many boyars, governors, governors came out of the Sheremetev family, not only due to personal merit, but also due to kinship with the reigning dynasty.
So, the great-granddaughter of Andrei Sheremet was married to the son of Ivan the Terrible, Tsarevich Ivan, who was killed by his father in a fit of anger. And five grandchildren of A. Sheremet became members of the Boyar Duma. The Sheremetevs took part in the wars with Lithuania and the Crimean Khan, in the Livonian War and the Kazan campaigns. Estates in Moscow, Yaroslavl, Ryazan, Nizhny Novgorod counties complained about their service.
Lopukhins
According to legend, they descend from the Kasozhian (Circassian) prince Rededi, the ruler of Tmutarakan, who was killed in 1022 in single combat with Prince Mstislav Vladimirovich (son of Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavovich, the baptist of Russia). However, this fact did not prevent the son of Prince Rededi, Roman, from marrying the daughter of Prince Mstislav Vladimirovich.
It is authentically known that by the beginning of the XV century. the descendants of the Kasozhsky prince Rededi already bear the surname Lopukhins, serve in various ranks in the Novgorod principality and in the Moscow state and own lands. And from the end of the XV century. they become Moscow nobles and tenants at the Sovereign's Court, retaining the Novgorod and Tver estates and estates.
The outstanding family of the Lopukhins gave the Fatherland 11 governors, 9 governors-general and governors who ruled 15 provinces, 13 generals, 2 admirals, served as ministers and senators, headed the Cabinet of Ministers and the State Council.
The boyar family of the Golovins originates from the Byzantine family of Gavrasov, who ruled Trebizond (Trabzon) and owned the city of Sudak in the Crimea with the surrounding villages of Mangup and Balaklava.
Ivan Khovrin, the great-grandson of one of the representatives of this Greek family, was nicknamed “The Head”, as you might guess, for his bright mind. It was from him that the Golovins, representing the Moscow high aristocracy, went.
From the 15th century, the Golovins were hereditary tsarist treasurers, but under Ivan the Terrible, the family fell into disgrace, becoming the victim of an unsuccessful conspiracy. Later they were returned to the court, but before Peter the Great they did not reach special heights in the service.
Aksakovs
They come from the noble Varangian Shimon (in baptism Simon) Afrikovich or Ofrikovich - the nephew of the Norwegian king Gakon the Blind. Simon Afrikanovich arrived in Kyiv in 1027 with a 3,000-strong retinue and built at his own expense the Church of the Assumption of the Mother of God in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, where he was buried.
The surname of the Oksakovs (in the old days), and now the Aksakovs, came from one of his descendants, Ivan the Lame.
The word “oksak” means lame in Turkic languages.
Members of this family in pre-Petrine times served as governors, solicitors, stolniks and were rewarded for their good service with estates from Moscow sovereigns.
In the 16th century, a model of socio-economic relations developed that lasted until the revolution of 1917, undoubtedly it underwent changes, but the foundations were laid just then. The beginning of the "New Russia" was laid during the reign of Ivan III. And some of the economic foundations laid down then reflect Russia's position on the world market even today.
It is worth noting that for a hundred years from 1500 to 1600, Russia has undergone tremendous changes. So the territory doubled, along with this there was an increase in the population, more than 11 million. From the once scattered regions that did not have a common capital, Russia evolved into the Russian Empire, a huge state with which Europe had to reckon.
The population can be roughly divided into 4 classes. First, it is worth talking about people moving from place to place, interrupted by rare part-time jobs, in a word, leading a nomadic lifestyle. Naturally, it is impossible to determine their number, but the motives for such a life are rather simple, these people fled from paying taxes and other civic obligations.
The second group is the clergy, the number was approximately equal to 150 thousand people, including family members. The clergy were very small relative to the total number, and amounted to only 1%.
Serving people accounted for about 5% of the total mass, and both the noble estates and the people called up for service fall into this category. The called-up people were archers, gunners, border guards, Cossacks, a customs officer, policemen and others.
The remaining 93-94% were peasants or small merchants.
At the same time, only 5% of the population lives in cities, the rest in cities. Although it is worth noting that from 1500 to 1550, the number of cities increased from 96 to 160. In terms of population, the capital Moscow leads with 100 thousand, followed by Novgorod and Pskov, approximately 30-40 thousand each. Despite such a number of farmers, only a few have their own land. The greater part is occupied by the cultivation of the land of the state or the land of noble people. Peasants cultivating state land were conditionally considered tenants and lived much better than people working for the master, since most often there were serfs on the land of the master.
A serf was a peasant who had a debt to the owner of the land, but did not belong to the owner. From the point of view of the state, a serf is a citizen limited in his rights. Subsequently, this will develop into a ban on leaving the owner, but this will be much later. In addition to the serfs in the 15th century, there was a group of people called serfs. A serf is a person sold for debts (either by himself or by his parents), but there are also those who go into serfs voluntarily, having previously agreed on the length of stay in this awkward position. It is worth noting that serfs do not pay tax, which causes the state to have a negative attitude towards this phenomenon. Slavery in any case ends after the death of the owner.
The life of serfs and serfs depended on where the master sent them. If they remained at court, then their life was much easier than those who worked on the ground. It is worth noting that those who remained at the court could manage the economy, and in a good scenario, even receive their piece of land as a gift.
The peasants had to have 15 acres of land to feed themselves and their families. However, by the end of the first half of the century, the population is growing, which leads to the fact that land plots are reduced in size. Due to the reduction in the size of the land allotment, it is becoming increasingly difficult for peasants to feed their families, which leads to hunger. But the peasants, in an attempt to evade taxes, begin to sow less and less land, as the tax is collected from the land, and begin to actively practice animal husbandry, which is not yet taxed, which leads to an increase in grain prices. But on the other hand, there was another way out, to go to the southern lands, where, along with fertile land and tax benefits, neighbors periodically attack. In addition, there is a problem with the forest in those regions, which again leads to the fact that the peasant gets into debt.
The nobles, due to the increase in numbers, also experienced inconvenience by the middle of the 15th century. The more nobles, the smaller the size of the estates. And besides this, it is necessary to endow the schems and new servicemen. This eventually leads to an increase in tax and partial seizure of land from already existing nobles.
As it becomes clear along with greatness, Russia also received a number of problems, which were the prerequisites for a troubled time.
Who are the boyars? This is the upper class that existed in Russia from the 10th to the 17th century. The privileged class also included the great and specific princes.
The emergence of the boyars
In the hierarchical ladder, the boyars occupied a leading role immediately after the Grand Duke, participated along with him in government.
This class stood out in the 9th century, when the formation of the Old Russian state began. Among them, during the 10-11 centuries, princely and zemstvo boyars separately existed. The first were also called princely men, and the second - city elders. It was the latter who were the descendants of the tribal nobility. When in the 11th century princely husbands were endowed with land, they merged with the zemstvo boyars, becoming a single estate.
Princes and boyars in state affairs in the 12th-15th centuries
Since the boyars were vassals of the prince, their duties included serving in his army. But they also had many privileges: they had the right to leave for another prince; and dominance on the territory of their estates; their vassals.
The fragmentation of Russia, which took place in the 12th-15th centuries, led to the weakening of princely power. At the same time, there was an increase in the economic power of the boyar class, an increase in its political influence.
For example, in the territory of the Galicia-Volyn principality and the Novgorod lands in the 13th century, the boyars took over the decision of state affairs, which was carried out at the so-called councils. Due to the strong influence of this class, the Chernigov, Polotsk-Minsk, Muromo-Ryazan principalities did not have powerful princely power.
Rivalry between princes and patrimonial boyars
To weaken the influence of the patrimonial boyars, the princes resorted to the help of service boyars and nobles.
When, starting from the second half, the grand ducal power began to increase again, the so-called worthy boyars appeared. Their powers included managing the branches of the palace economy.
Who are the noble boyars? This is a horseman, falconer, bowler, etc. They also included governors, in whose administration were separate territories that had gone to them for feeding.
Education entailed a restriction of the rights of the boyars, which consisted in narrowing the scope of immunity, constraint and cancellation by the end of the 15th century of the right to leave for another prince. The social status of the class has changed.
Distribution of power in the 15th-17th centuries
Who are the boyars since the 15th century? Now this is the highest rank among service people in the fatherland. The presence of such a title meant that a person could participate in activities; this gave the right to be considered the highest duma rank. Boyars, as a rule, were now in the main administrative, judicial and military positions, were at the head of orders.
The patrimonial boyars, who continued to resist the regime of the newly formed centralized state, were deprived of many socio-economic and political privileges. All protests and speeches were immediately suppressed. The boyar aristocracy suffered greatly from the oprichnina of Ivan IV.
With the accession to the throne of the Romanovs, the distribution of influence among the estates changed dramatically. Now the service boyars and nobles of the 17th century have become economically stronger, while many noble dynasties have been cut short. It was for these reasons that the class differences between the boyars and the nobility gradually began to disappear. And when the local and patrimonial landownership, according to the order of 1714, united, they were tacitly united into the concept of "landlords". Later, this term was modified into the word "bare", or "master".
In 1682 localism was abolished, and now the boyars were less and less involved in state affairs. And at the beginning of the 18th century, Peter I completely abolished the title of boyar.
Life of boyars and nobles
The nobles and boyars of the 17th century in Russia, as mentioned earlier, began to unite into one estate.
If we talk about everyday life, then according to the remaining artifacts of those times, we can conclude that in the noble and boyar estates there were a lot of weapons and silver items, expensive jewelry and interior items. By the 17th century, many estates had become feudal castles that could house 60 to 80 people.
The appearance of the first truly chic estates for those times dates back to the 10th-11th centuries. Gradually, some of them went bankrupt in the process of various reforms. The owners started their estates. But representatives of enterprising families, who managed to preserve their wealth and territories, by the 16-17 centuries surrounded their estates with high walls, turning them into real castles.
Life of boyars and nobles in the 17th century
The gradual penetration of the European model of life into the materially secure classes led to increased concern for the comfort of life. How else to understand who the boyars and nobles are? The upper financially secure classes showed this as soon as they could: a variety of cutlery and napkins, individual dishes and tablecloths began to appear on the tables. Now each member of the family had a separate room. Particularly wealthy dynasties used faience, tin and copper utensils.
Representatives of famous families of that time (Golitsyn, Naryshkin, Odoevsky, Morozov, etc.) decorated their large stone houses according to the latest European fashion: expensive wallpapers, carpets and leather were on the walls; mirrors and paintings; a large number of light sources, in particular chandeliers and decorative candles.
Both masters and servants began to dress in the European manner: light expensive fabrics, free cut, jewelry made of gold and silver embroidery and precious stones. Despite the fact that European dresses were the exception rather than a constant in 17th century Russia, the privileged classes in many ways began to follow the trends of Western fashion.
Hobbies have become another new element in the life of wealthy boyars and nobles. Playing chess, attending concerts and other entertainments have become an integral part of the life of the rich. They traveled in light carriages with springs and servants at the back, wore wigs, and the men began to shave their faces.
The townspeople lived more modestly. Its representatives dressed in a cloth dress, furniture and utensils were not so expensive. But in their lives there was also a desire for comfort. In the rooms one could see paintings, clocks, mirrors. Reception of guests was carried out in special ceremonial halls.
The nobles tried to copy the royal chambers, of course, not with royal gloss, but still. In their mansions there were windows with mica, furniture made of carved wood, carpets on the floors.
Who are the boyars in Wallachia and Moldavia?
On the territory of Wallachia and Moldavia, this feudal class took shape in the 14th century. Within it, a certain classification was observed. The tribal boyars were the owners of the bashtins (estates), and the local boyars were the owners of the granted estates. Over time, the differences between them began to blur. The boyars of independent Romania in the 19th century included people from large merchants and officials. In these territories, the liquidation of the boyars as a class took place only on March 22, 1945, in the process of implementing the law on agrarian reform.
The terms "boyars" and "nobles" in the history textbook
Who are the boyars and nobles? The historical definition provides a clear and concise answer to this question.
Nobles are representatives of a privileged class that arose in a feudal society.
The boyars are representatives of the upper stratum that existed from the 10th to the 17th centuries on the territory of Kievan Rus, the Moscow principality, Bulgaria, the Moldavian principality, Wallachia, and from the 14th century in Romania.
The title of the paragraph needs a little explanation. We have already spoken about the service boyars of the era of Dmitry Donskoy and Vasily I, whose loyalty and service ensured the victory of Vasily the Dark in a deadly battle for power. The question is natural: what is the turning point of epochs? It must be looked for later. What is the nobility and nobility at the end of the XIV - the middle of the XV century. with all the conventionality of these concepts? First of all, it is a set of associations of representatives of noble class groups separated by state borders, headed by sovereign (great, appanage, service) princes. Each association in any reign was first described by the phrase "boyars and free servants", and from the 30s of the 15th century. - “boyars and boyar children”.
A small comment is needed here. It would be a mistake to think that the term "boyar" in the XIV and, say, in the XVI century. had the same meaning. In the XVI century. boyar - a member of the council under the Grand Duke, to whom this rank was "affected" officially. Among all the persons who rightfully took part in the meetings of this council, the boyars occupied the first place, their number (at any given moment) was limited. In the XIV - the middle of the XV century. there are relatively many boyars. Their differences from free servants are not described in detail, but the main thing is clear. Boyarin, firstly, a person of noble origin and significant in the service of his ancestors. Secondly, this is a man of mature age, the owner of estates, who also has an urban settlement in the capital of the principality. He may or may not be a member of the council under the prince, but the nature of his service - military and administrative - corresponds to his origin and status. His relations with the prince are of an individual nature, although they are inscribed in the context of service and family ties of the entire boyars.
The origin of free servants is not so unambiguous; their service to the prince and their status are more often determined as part of a similar group. Living permanently in the city, they apparently did not always possess significant landed property, the nature of their services was of a lower rank.
What united both those and others? A certain unity of rights and duties. In duties - faithful service to the overlord "horse and arms", "where he sends." The concept of military service would also include the obligation to “besiege” in the city in the district of which the boyar or servant had a fiefdom. The rights extended to material remuneration, to participation in the management of a set of hard-working people of a given principality, the possibility of unimpeded departure to another prince without losing estates, to the inclusion of such persons in the institute of social organization - the sovereign's court.
The concept of "sovereign court" had several meanings. But the leading one at that time was the totality of boyars and free servants, connected with the prince-sovereign by vassal-service relations. More narrowly, the court meant those of them who, for various reasons, were constantly or periodically with the prince. Inclusion in the court, apparently, was a pass to the feeding system, with the help of which, in fact, the entire administration of the principality was carried out. In other words, the hierarchically built association of feudal lords (“boyars and free servants”), headed by the prince, was the state apparatus of this reign. As governors, volostels, princely tributaries, scribes, tyuns, righteous people appeared according to their origin, status, merit, and, moreover, boyars and servants were in line. Within the framework of this social structure of the elite strata, state administration, the closest interweaving, the interdependence of power and property, are super-obvious. We have the right to speak about the state-corporate ownership of associations of boyars and free servants, headed by monarchs-princes, on all taxable lands in cities and rural areas, and in a certain sense, on the taxpayers themselves, townspeople and peasants. Of course, the relationship of this form of feudal property (state-corporate) manifested itself in the most distinct form on the black-mowed (black) taxable lands of the city and countryside. But it - this form - also covered private (secular and spiritual) patrimonies with landowning peasants. To the extent that they were involved in serving their duties in the princely villages. To the extent that they were subordinate to the management and court of the feeder, and not their seigneur. To the extent that these possessive peasants paid tribute to the sovereign's treasury, other payments, including access to the Horde.
In general, both seignioral-patrimonial and state-corporate property relations are mutually burdened with similar features. An votchinnik in his possession is a sovereign with public law prerogatives. But the other side of the comparison is more expressive. Here the feeder “runs into” the managed territory. Who accompanies him, who carries out the daily routine of the court and administration - summons the participants in the proceedings to court, takes bail for them, controls the conduct of judicial fights, and enforces court decisions? Kholops-servants (Russian mnnisterials) of their masters are the same persons who govern on behalf of the master in his own estates, participate with him in military campaigns, etc. They collected in-kind provision (feed) for the master and themselves from the subject population. In the XV century. in calm areas and in calm years, the feeder stayed at the residence of the governor or volost only from time to time: military service was more important. In such periods, he was replaced by a tiun, from among the same group of combat servants. In favor of the governor, the population served a number of duties (construction and repair of the yard). If, however, we recall the violence of governors of a completely seigneurial persuasion, then the desired conclusion is nearby: state-corporate property does indeed have many features from the arsenal of seignioral-patrimonial property.
What was reflected in the change of the terms "boyars and free servants" to "boyars and boyars' children"? Not much - there are no fundamental changes yet - but indicative. First and foremost is the fact of the ennoblement of that numerous layer, which was previously designated as "free servants". Undoubtedly, the "children of the boyars" are closer to the boyars in all semantic shades. Of course, this is not primarily about age differences. The very term "children of the boyars" turned out to be so successful that it was fixed for more than two centuries ahead to designate the district nobility. The second circumstance - the new phrase clarified the already noted evolution of the term "boyar": in the last third of the 15th century. this word is more often used in its narrow meaning, which was assigned to it in the 16th century.
In a number of letters of commendation, in chronicles, this inseparable pair of concepts is overgrown with a third term - “princes”, so that the list of noble groups now looks like this: “boyars, princes and boyar children”. Simultaneously and, perhaps, a little earlier in the princely agreements, “serving princes” appear. In both cases, we have traces of the beginning of the fundamental evolution of sovereign princes. Their first step on the stairs leading down is the loss of the status of an appanage prince and the acquisition of the rank of a service prince. Two features expressively draw the difference: a service prince loses his patrimony upon leaving for another sovereign; like a boyar and a son of a boyar, he goes to serve, "where the great prince sends." But the relations of the Grand Duke with the serving prince are individual, the latter enjoys all judicial-administrative and tax rights in his lands, he has vassals, etc. Another step down the same ladder is the emergence of territorial princely corporations as special groups within the sovereign's court. Their main difference is that the monarch builds relations with them not on an individual basis, but on a corporate-group basis. By the end of the XV century. this class group, consisting of a number of territorial corporations, has fully developed.
The last rung on this short ladder is that a nobleman with a princely title is part of one or another stratum of the sovereign's court or some territorial-county corporation.
The evolution of the status of princely families is only a small part of much more massive shifts in the service class. The first of these is rapid demographic growth. The second circumstance is important changes in land provision for servicemen in the homeland by the state. The third point is the nature of other ways of material reward. The fourth point is significant changes in the forms of social organization and social mobilization.
According to indirect data, the demographic growth of the nobility as a whole, starting in the 60-70s of the 15th century, continued until the last third of the 16th century. Its sources were not only natural growth, but replenishment at the expense of serfs, servants, part of the townspeople, emigrants from neighboring countries. The rapid increase in numbers and the deterioration of the genealogical composition of the nobility inevitably led to an increase in tension.
One of the points of tension is the unequal principles in land provision. Conditional land ownership (extremely unstable) is much older than the first estates of the late 15th century. But from conditional possessions, only estates turned at the end of the 15th century. first into a significant, and later into a leading factor in secular land tenure in general. In the 30-40s of the XVI century. not only inequality in local "dachas" grew, but class and family marked inequality in the award of estates. By the middle of the century, these contradictions intensified. The disparity in the severity of the service greatly affected the interests of the service nobles.
Both at the beginning of the 16th century and in the middle of the century, the boyar children were divided into those who "take food" and those who "take the sovereign's monetary salary." The latter belonged to the unborn and least prestigious groups. But there wasn't enough food for everyone. Here was the second break in the interests of the entire mass of boyar children. In addition, there was an inequality in the conditions for obtaining: independently from the feeders, with a clear prospect of abuse, and through the sovereign's treasury from the rest - irregularly, but strictly according to the norms.
In the last third of the XV century. the main contours of the stratification of the nobility were completely outlined. The sovereign's court now included not almost all the vassals of this or that sovereign, but the genealogical and advanced elite. The elite itself was unequal, which is why no later than the 90s of the XV century. the structure of the yard begins to become more complicated. The norms of parochialism arose much earlier than this time, but the scope of their existence was inevitably limited. Now open spaces have opened up for its functioning: it was necessary to coordinate the mutual claims of many surnames and clans from different regions. The structure of the court then provided for various kinds of autonomous institutions.
The systemic changes that had begun in the court were matched by changes in the structure of the service nobility. Taking into account experience and traditions, the principle of a territorial-county corporation was taken as a basis. But the differences between individual corporations were too great, the status of members of even the same corporate group was not the same (in its main bases), the mechanism of social mobilization was not defined. And most importantly, there was no unity in taking into account the severity of service and material support.
Let us now superimpose these contradictions, which are generally understandable and natural in the process of development, on the actual course of events. Of the last 35 years of the reign of Ivan III, no more than 10-12 were peaceful. This is not counting the mandatory advances of noble detachments in the spring-summer period in the fortress to the southern and western borders. The same situation during the reign of Basil III: 18-20 years falls only on major campaigns and large-scale military operations. It is difficult in such conditions to conduct a single and consistent line of transformations in the social, material, organizational structure of the nobility. It did not exist as a developed and implemented project. Changes went naturally, based on tradition, taking into account new realities, by trial and error. At the same time, the accumulation of the latter is almost inevitable. Which gave rise to additional tension between the elite and the bulk of service people, between different district corporations of boyar children. The changes that had begun demanded a logical conclusion.
Were all the named strata and groups aware of themselves as something unified? In very few places. Practice has consolidated the consciousness that only those who carry "military, mortal service" have the right to land holdings with the peasants. There were few exceptions here. And the second. The same Baron Herberstein, drawing the moral and psychological image of the representatives of the nobility, noted: “No matter how poor the boyar, i.e. noble man, he still considers it a shame and dishonor to work with his own hands. The understanding of one's function in society - to protect everyone and co-manage all burdensome people - is firmly rooted in the minds of most boyar children as a prestigious and very significant life orientation.
Were there many? Some foreigners counted by the middle of the XVI century. up to 200 thousand. This is a big exaggeration. Most likely, there were about 120-150 thousand of them (with families), or 2-2.5% of the total population. Quite a bit, based on military needs, but to the extent of economic growth and the economic capabilities of producers.
