Pre-revolutionary life. Life and customs of Tsarist Russia. Palace life of Russian tsars and the life of the Russian people. Section I. Customs, life and moral state of Rus' from ancient times to the end of the 17th century

A Russian dwelling is not a separate house, but a fenced yard in which several buildings, both residential and commercial, were built. Izba was the general name for a residential building. The word "izba" comes from the ancient "istba", "heater". Initially, this was the name given to the main heated living part of the house with a stove.

As a rule, the dwellings of rich and poor peasants in villages practically differed in the quality and number of buildings, the quality of decoration, but they consisted of the same elements. The presence of such outbuildings as a barn, barn, shed, bathhouse, cellar, stable, exit, moss barn, etc. depended on the level of development of the economy. All buildings were literally chopped with an ax from the beginning to the end of construction, although longitudinal and transverse saws were known and used. The concept of “peasant yard” included not only buildings, but also the plot of land on which they were located, including a vegetable garden, orchard, threshing floor, etc.

The main building material was wood. The number of forests with excellent “business” forests far exceeded what is now preserved in the vicinity of Saitovka. Pine and spruce were considered the best types of wood for buildings, but pine was always given preference. Oak was valued for its strength, but it was heavy and difficult to work with. It was used only in the lower crowns of log houses, for the construction of cellars, or in structures where special strength was needed (mills, wells, salt barns). Other tree species, especially deciduous (birch, alder, aspen), were used in construction, usually of outbuildings

For each need, trees were selected according to special characteristics. So, for the walls of the log house they tried to select special “warm” trees, covered with moss, straight, but not necessarily straight-layered. At the same time, not just straight, but straight-layered trees were necessarily chosen for roofing. More often, log houses were assembled in the yard or close to the yard. We carefully chose the location for our future home.

For the construction of even the largest log-type buildings, usually no special foundation was built along the perimeter of the walls, but supports were laid in the corners of the huts - large boulders or so-called “chairs” made of oak stumps. In rare cases, if the length of the walls was much greater than usual, supports were placed in the middle of such walls. The very nature of the log structure of the buildings allowed us to limit ourselves to support on four main points, since the log house was a seamless structure.

The vast majority of buildings were based on a “cage”, a “crown” - a bunch of four logs, the ends of which were chopped into a connection. The methods of such cutting could vary in technique.

The main structural types of log-built peasant residential buildings were “cross”, “five-walled”, and a house with a log. For insulation, moss mixed with tow was laid between the crowns of the logs.

but the purpose of the connection was always the same - to fasten the logs together into a square with strong knots without any additional joining elements (staples, nails, wooden pins or knitting needles, etc.). Each log had a strictly defined place in the structure. Having cut down the first crown, a second was cut on it, a third on the second, etc., until the frame reached a predetermined height.

The roofs of the huts were mainly covered with thatch, which, especially in lean years, often served as feed for livestock. Sometimes wealthier peasants erected roofs made of planks or shingles. The tes were made by hand. To do this, two workers used tall sawhorses and a long rip saw.

Everywhere, like all Russians, the peasants of Saitovka, according to a widespread custom, when laying the foundation of a house, placed money under the lower crown in all corners, with the red corner receiving a larger coin. And where the stove was placed, they did not put anything, since this corner, according to popular belief, was intended for the brownie.

In the upper part of the log house across the hut there was a matka - a tetrahedral wooden beam that served as a support for the ceilings. The matka was cut into the upper crowns of the log house and was often used to hang objects from the ceiling. So, a ring was nailed to it, through which the ochep (flexible pole) of the cradle (shaky pole) passed. In the middle, to illuminate the hut, a lantern with a candle was hung, and later - a kerosene lamp with a lampshade.

In the rituals associated with the completion of the construction of a house, there was a mandatory treat, which was called “matika”. In addition, the laying of the womb itself, after which a fairly large amount of construction work still remained, was considered as a special stage in the construction of the house and was furnished with its own rituals.

In the wedding ceremony, for a successful matchmaking, the matchmakers never entered the house for the queen without a special invitation from the owners of the house. In the popular language, the expression “to sit under the womb” meant “to be a matchmaker.” The womb was associated with the idea of ​​the father's house, good luck, and happiness. So, when leaving home, you had to hold on to your uterus.

For insulation along the entire perimeter, the lower crowns of the hut were covered with earth, forming a pile in front of which a bench was installed. In the summer, old people whiled away the evening time on the rubble and on the bench. Fallen leaves and dry soil were usually placed on top of the ceiling. The space between the ceiling and the roof - the attic - in Saitovka was also called the stavka. It was usually used to store things that had outlived their useful life, utensils, dishes, furniture, brooms, tufts of grass, etc. Children made their own simple hiding places on it.

A porch and a canopy were always attached to a residential hut - a small room that protected the hut from the cold. The role of the canopy was varied. This included a protective vestibule in front of the entrance, additional living space in the summer, and a utility room where part of the food supplies were kept.

The soul of the whole house was the stove. It should be noted that the so-called “Russian”, or more correctly oven, is a purely local invention and quite ancient. It traces its history back to Trypillian dwellings. But during the second millennium AD, very significant changes occurred in the design of the oven itself, which made it possible to use fuel much more fully.

Building a good stove is not an easy task. First, a small wooden frame (opechek) was installed directly on the ground, which served as the foundation of the furnace. Small logs split in half were laid on it and the bottom of the oven was laid on them - under, level, without tilting, otherwise the baked bread would turn out lopsided. A furnace vault was built above the hearth from stone and clay. The side of the oven had several shallow holes, called stoves, in which mittens, mittens, socks, etc. were dried. In the old days, huts (smoking houses) were heated in a black way - the stove did not have a chimney. The smoke escaped through a small fiberglass window. Although the walls and ceiling became sooty, we had to put up with it: a stove without a chimney was cheaper to build and required less firewood. Subsequently, in accordance with the rules of rural improvement, mandatory for state peasants, chimneys began to be installed above the huts.

First of all, the “big woman” stood up - the owner’s wife, if she was not yet old, or one of the daughters-in-law. She flooded the stove, opened the door and smoker wide. The smoke and cold lifted everyone. The little kids were sat on a pole to warm themselves. Acrid smoke filled the entire hut, crawled upward, and hung under the ceiling taller than a man. An ancient Russian proverb, known since the 13th century, says: “Having not endured smoky sorrows, we have not seen warmth.” The smoked logs of the houses were less susceptible to rotting, so the smoking huts were more durable.

The stove occupied almost a quarter of the home's area. It was heated for several hours, but once warmed up, it kept warm and warmed the room for 24 hours. The stove served not only for heating and cooking, but also as a bed. Bread and pies were baked in the oven, porridge and cabbage soup were cooked, meat and vegetables were stewed. In addition, mushrooms, berries, grain, and malt were also dried in it. They often took steam in the oven that replaced the bathhouse.

In all cases of life, the stove came to the aid of the peasant. And the stove had to be heated not only in winter, but throughout the year. Even in summer, it was necessary to heat the oven well at least once a week in order to bake a sufficient supply of bread. Using the ability of the oven to accumulate heat, peasants cooked food once a day, in the morning, left the food inside the oven until lunch - and the food remained hot. Only during late summer dinners did food have to be heated. This feature of the oven had a decisive influence on Russian cooking, in which the processes of simmering, boiling, and stewing predominate, and not only peasant cooking, since the lifestyle of many small nobles was not very different from peasant life.

The oven served as a lair for the whole family. Old people slept on the stove, the warmest place in the hut, and climbed up there using steps - a device in the form of 2-3 steps. One of the obligatory elements of the interior was the floor - a wooden flooring from the side wall of the stove to the opposite side of the hut. They slept on the floorboards, climbed out of the stove, and dried flax, hemp, and splinters. Bedding and unnecessary clothes were thrown there for the day. The floors were made high, at the same level as the height of the stove. The free edge of the floors was often protected by low railings-balusters so that nothing would fall from the floors. Polati were a favorite place for children: both as a place to sleep and as the most convenient observation point during peasant holidays and weddings.

The location of the stove determined the layout of the entire living room. Usually the stove was placed in the corner to the right or left of the front door. The corner opposite the mouth of the stove was the housewife's workplace. Everything here was adapted for cooking. At the stove there was a poker, a grip, a broom, and a wooden shovel. Nearby there is a mortar with a pestle, hand millstones and a tub for leavening dough. They used a poker to remove the ash from the stove. The cook grabbed pot-bellied clay or cast iron pots (cast iron) with her grip and sent them into the heat. She pounded the grain in a mortar, clearing it of husks, and with the help of a mill she ground it into flour. A broom and a shovel were necessary for baking bread: a peasant woman used a broom to sweep under the stove, and with a shovel she planted the future loaf on it.

There was always a cleaning bowl hanging next to the stove, i.e. towel and washbasin. Underneath there was a wooden basin for dirty water. In the stove corner there was also a ship's bench (vessel) or counter with shelves inside, used as a kitchen table. On the walls there were observers - cabinets, shelves for simple tableware: pots, ladles, cups, bowls, spoons. The owner of the house himself made them from wood. In the kitchen one could often see pottery in “clothes” made of birch bark - thrifty owners did not throw away cracked pots, pots, bowls, but braided them with strips of birch bark for strength. Above there was a stove beam (pole), on which kitchen utensils were placed and various household supplies were placed. The eldest woman in the house was the sovereign mistress of the stove corner.

The stove corner was considered a dirty place, in contrast to the rest of the clean space of the hut. Therefore, the peasants always sought to separate it from the rest of the room with a curtain made of variegated chintz or colored homespun, a tall cabinet or a wooden partition. Thus closed, the corner of the stove formed a small room called a “closet”. The stove corner was considered an exclusively female space in the hut. During the holiday, when many guests gathered in the house, a second table was placed near the stove for women, where they feasted separately from the men sitting at the table in the red corner. Men, even their own families, could not enter the women’s quarters unless absolutely necessary. The appearance of a stranger there was considered completely unacceptable.

During the matchmaking, the future bride had to be in the stove corner all the time, being able to hear the entire conversation. She emerged from the corner of the stove, smartly dressed, during the bride's ceremony - the ceremony of introducing the groom and his parents to the bride. There, the bride awaited the groom on the day of his departure down the aisle. In ancient wedding songs, the stove corner was interpreted as a place associated with the father's house, family, and happiness. The bride's exit from the stove corner to the red corner was perceived as leaving home, saying goodbye to it.

At the same time, the corner of the stove, from which there is access to the underground, was perceived on a mythological level as a place where a meeting of people with representatives of the “other” world could take place. According to legend, a fiery serpent-devil can fly through a chimney to a widow yearning for her dead husband. It was generally accepted that on especially special days for the family: during the baptism of children, birthdays, weddings, deceased parents - “ancestors” - come to the stove to take part in an important event in the lives of their descendants.

The place of honor in the hut - the red corner - was located diagonally from the stove between the side and front walls. It, like the stove, is an important landmark of the interior space of the hut and is well lit, since both of its constituent walls had windows. The main decoration of the red corner was a shrine with icons, in front of which a lamp was burning, suspended from the ceiling, which is why it was also called “saint”.

They tried to keep the red corner clean and elegantly decorated. It was decorated with embroidered towels, popular prints, and postcards. With the advent of wallpaper, the red corner was often pasted over or separated from the rest of the hut space. The most beautiful household utensils were placed on the shelves near the red corner, and the most valuable papers and objects were stored.

All significant events of family life were noted in the red corner. Here, as the main piece of furniture, there was a table on massive legs on which runners were installed. The runners made it easy to move the table around the hut. It was placed near the stove when baking bread, and moved while washing the floor and walls.

It was followed by both everyday meals and festive feasts. Every day at lunchtime the whole peasant family gathered at the table. The table was of such a size that there was enough space for everyone. In the wedding ceremony, the matchmaking of the bride, her ransom from her girlfriends and brother took place in the red corner; from the red corner of her father's house they took her to the church for the wedding, brought her to the groom's house and took her to the red corner too. During the harvest, the first and last compressed sheaf was solemnly carried from the field and placed in the red corner.

"The first compressed sheaf was called the birthday boy. Autumn threshing began with it, straw was used to feed sick cattle, the grains of the first sheaf were considered healing for people and birds. The first sheaf was usually reaped by the eldest woman in the family. It was decorated with flowers, carried into the house with songs and placed in the red corner under the icons." The preservation of the first and last ears of the harvest, endowed, according to popular beliefs, with magical powers promised well-being for the family, home, and entire household.

Everyone who entered the hut first took off his hat, crossed himself and bowed to the images in the red corner, saying: “Peace to this house.” Peasant etiquette ordered a guest who entered the hut to remain in half of the hut at the door, without going beyond the womb. Unauthorized, uninvited entry into the “red half” where the table was placed was considered extremely indecent and could be perceived as an insult. A person who came to the hut could only go there at the special invitation of the owners. The most dear guests were seated in the red corner, and during the wedding - the young ones. On ordinary days, the head of the family sat at the dining table here.

The last remaining corner of the hut, to the left or right of the door, was the workplace of the owner of the house. There was a bench here where he slept. A tool was stored in a drawer underneath. In his free time, the peasant in his corner was engaged in various crafts and minor repairs: weaving bast shoes, baskets and ropes, cutting spoons, hollowing out cups, etc.

Although most peasant huts consisted of only one room, not divided by partitions, an unspoken tradition prescribed certain rules of accommodation for members of the peasant hut. If the stove corner was the female half, then in one of the corners of the house there was a special place for the older married couple to sleep. This place was considered honorable.

Shop

Most of the “furniture” formed part of the structure of the hut and was immovable. Along all the walls not occupied by the stove, there were wide benches, hewn from the largest trees. They were intended not so much for sitting as for sleeping. The benches were firmly attached to the wall. Other important furniture were benches and stools, which could be freely moved from place to place when guests arrived. Above the benches, along all the walls, there were shelves - “shelves”, on which household items, small tools, etc. were stored. Special wooden pegs for clothes were also driven into the wall.

An integral attribute of almost every Saitovka hut was a pole - a beam embedded in the opposite walls of the hut under the ceiling, which in the middle, opposite the wall, was supported by two plows. The second pole rested with one end against the first pole, and with the other against the pier. In winter, this structure served as a support for the mill for weaving matting and other auxiliary operations associated with this craft.

spinning wheel

Housewives were especially proud of their turned, carved and painted spinning wheels, which were usually placed in a prominent place: they served not only as a tool of labor, but also as a decoration for the home. Usually, peasant girls with elegant spinning wheels went to “gatherings” - cheerful rural gatherings. The “white” hut was decorated with homemade weaving items. The bedcloth and bed were covered with colored curtains made of linen fiber. The windows had curtains made of homespun muslin, and the window sills were decorated with geraniums, dear to the peasant’s heart. The hut was cleaned especially carefully for the holidays: women washed with sand and scraped white with large knives - “mowers” ​​- the ceiling, walls, benches, shelves, floors.

Peasants kept their clothes in chests. The greater the wealth in the family, the more chests there are in the hut. They were made of wood and lined with iron strips for strength. Often chests had ingenious mortise locks. If a girl grew up in a peasant family, then from an early age her dowry was collected in a separate chest.

A poor Russian man lived in this space. Often in the winter cold, domestic animals were kept in the hut: calves, lambs, kids, piglets, and sometimes poultry.

The decoration of the hut reflected the artistic taste and skill of the Russian peasant. The silhouette of the hut was crowned with a carved

ridge (ridge) and porch roof; the pediment was decorated with carved piers and towels, the planes of the walls were decorated with window frames, often reflecting the influence of city architecture (Baroque, classicism, etc.). The ceiling, door, walls, stove, and less often the outer pediment were painted.

Non-residential peasant buildings made up the household yard. Often they were gathered together and placed under the same roof as the hut. They built a farm yard in two tiers: in the lower one there were barns for cattle and a stable, and in the upper one there was a huge hay barn filled with fragrant hay. A significant part of the farm yard was occupied by a shed for storing working equipment - plows, harrows, as well as carts and sleighs. The more prosperous the peasant, the larger his household yard was.

Separate from the house, they usually built a bathhouse, a well, and a barn. It is unlikely that the baths of that time were very different from those that can still be found now - a small log house,

sometimes without a dressing room. In one corner there is a stove-stove, next to it there are shelves or shelves on which they steamed. In another corner is a water barrel, which was heated by throwing hot stones into it. Later, cast iron boilers began to be installed in stoves to heat water. To soften the water, wood ash was added to the barrel, thus preparing lye. The entire decoration of the bathhouse was illuminated by a small window, the light from which was drowned in the blackness of the smoky walls and ceilings, since in order to save wood, the bathhouses were heated “black” and the smoke came out through the slightly open door. On top, such a structure often had an almost flat pitched roof, covered with straw, birch bark and turf.

The barn, and often the cellar underneath it, was placed in plain sight opposite the windows and away from the dwelling, so that in the event of a hut fire, a year's supply of grain could be preserved. A lock was hung on the barn door - perhaps the only one in the entire household. In the barn, in huge boxes (bottom boxes), the main wealth of the farmer was stored: rye, wheat, oats, barley. It’s not for nothing that they used to say in the villages: “What’s in the barn is what’s in the pocket.”

QR code page

Do you prefer to read on your phone or tablet? Then scan this QR code directly from your computer monitor and read the article. To do this, any “QR code scanner” application must be installed on your mobile device.

The composition, structure and economic functions of the Belarusian family changed depending on specific historical conditions and the development of industrial relations. Back in the middle of the 19th century. Among the peasantry of Belarus, a patriarchal large family was common, when parents lived with their married or married children and their offspring. Under capitalism, by the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. The small family, usually consisting of parents and their unmarried children, became predominant. A small family was also a family in which the elderly parents had one married son (usually the youngest) with a daughter-in-law or, less commonly, a married daughter with a son-in-law and their children. In those places where capitalist relations penetrated less intensively, for example in Mogilev and the southern part of Minsk province, a large, undivided family remained among the peasants. According to the Russian population census of 1897, the average family composition in the Belarusian provinces ranged from six to nine people.

The peasant family was the main economic unit in Belarusian agriculture. In the economic activities of a peasant family, there was a traditional gender and age division of labor. All household work was usually divided into men's and women's. Plowing, sowing, harrowing, mowing, threshing, collecting firewood, caring for horses, transporting them to the field and some other work were considered men's work. Cooking, caring for children, spinning, weaving, sewing, washing clothes, milking cows, caring for livestock and poultry, harvesting, raking hay, weeding, pulling flax, harvesting potatoes behind the plow, caring for a vegetable garden and a number of other jobs - women's work .

With the development of capitalism and the destruction of the patriarchal foundations of the family, the lines between “male” and “female” jobs became blurred. If there was a shortage of male labor, women and girls performed men's work, even such as plowing and mowing. If necessary, especially when men went to work, women did everything. But some women's jobs were never performed by a man, who considered them humiliating. For example, a man never sat down at a spinning wheel or at a weaving mill, did not cook unless absolutely necessary, and did not milk cows.

The manager of the main economic work was the father, and in his absence, the eldest son. A woman became the head of the family only after the death of her husband, if there was no adult son in the family. All women's work was managed by the owner's wife; he himself usually did not interfere in specifically women's work.

The head of the family enjoyed great authority. However, the most important economic matters (the start of certain agricultural work, the acquisition or sale of property, livestock, etc.) were decided with the participation of adult family members, especially men, although the main role in the final decision belonged to the head of the family.

This limitation of the power of the head of the Belarusian peasant family is explained by the fact that land, tools, livestock, crops and harvests, outbuildings, furniture and household utensils were the common property of the family. If the family had adult and especially married sons, the head of the family could not independently dispose of these values. Personal property consisted of clothing, shoes, jewelry and some other small items and tools. The wife's personal property was considered her dowry.

Under the conditions of the landowner-bourgeois system, peasant women endured double oppression - social and family. The tsarist government not only did not fight against the customs that oppressed women, but strengthened them with its legislation. Girls and women spent their youth in hard, exhausting work. Loaded with housework and worries, living in poverty, they did not have the opportunity to study, remaining dark and downtrodden throughout their lives.

Nevertheless, the wife-housewife in the Belarusian peasant family was not powerless. In the household, in raising children, in income from the garden and in household expenses, she was a full manager. M.V. Dovnar-Zapolsky, who observed the life and everyday life of the peasants of the Minsk province, noted that cruel treatment of his wife was a rare phenomenon, even moreover, exceptional. Another was the position of the daughter-in-law (i son), who was an oppressed creature in the house of her husband's parents. The situation of peasant children, who from the age of five participated in the hard work of a peasant family, was also bleak.

In the family life of the pre-revolutionary peasantry of Belarus, primacy was a fairly common phenomenon, caused by socio-economic reasons. The younger sons in the family, for whom it was impossible to allocate a part of the allotment, were forced to “paisch u prymy,” which meant settling in the wife’s house. The bitter fate of the Priymak was truthfully expressed by the old “Primytstya” songs, proverbs and sayings - “Prymachcha share of the Sabachcha.”

When concluding a marriage, considerations of an economic nature and the need to supplement the family with a worker came to the fore. Therefore, when choosing a bride, her hard work, the economic status of her parents’ family and her dowry were especially valued. This moment is widely reflected in Belarusian folklore. The proverb taught: “Don’t choose your wife at the market, but choose your wife at the market” 2.

The bride could be a girl who had reached the age of sixteen, and the groom could be a young man who had turned eighteen. Usually girls got married at sixteen to twenty years old. A girl over twenty years old was considered to have already “stayed too long”, and she was in danger of remaining “with the dzeuks”. Before the introduction of universal conscription (1874), “lads” got married at eighteen to twenty years old, but after the introduction of this law, they usually started a family after finishing their military service, at twenty-four to twenty-five years old.

According to existing customs, weddings were celebrated at a certain time of the year - late autumn, i.e. after the end of field work, and during the winter season, as well as on “semukha” (semik). The marriage in a Belarusian village was preceded by a long acquaintance between a girl and a guy. Young people got to know each other and spent time together at numerous “irpbiin-chahs,” “vyachorkas,” or “supradkas.” Neighboring villages also organized joint parties for young people. More often this happened during fairs (trgima-show) or temple festivals (khvestau). Parents, as a rule, monitored the acquaintances, and if the choice of a son or daughter coincided with their interests, they sent matchmakers to the bride’s house. However, there were cases when neither the groom nor the bride saw each other before the wedding day. This happened when parents were guided only by economic calculations.

The marriage was sealed with a wedding ceremony. The actual wedding (vyasel) was preceded by matchmaking. Traditionally, the matchmaker was the groom's godfather or his other relative, or any married man, but more often a broken and talkative person, a gavarun, was chosen for this role. Matchmakers (usually together), sometimes together with the groom, came to the bride’s house and began a “diplomatic” conversation. They started him up from afar and allegorically. After the matchmaking, in some places, marriages, zapotas, and zaruchyny took place, during which the parents of the bride and groom agreed on the timing of the wedding, dowry, etc.

The church wedding, although it was obligatory, did not play a major role in the wedding ceremony and could take place several days or even several weeks before the wedding. Wedding rituals, basically uniform throughout the entire territory of Belarus, had a number of local features. Conventionally, there are two main variants of the wedding ritual - the loaf ritual, widespread in most of Belarus, and the pillar ritual in the northeast. In the first case, the center of the wedding ritual was the rituals associated with baking and dividing the loaf, and in the second, one of the most important ceremonies of the “vyaselya” was the blessing of the newlyweds. It was performed at a stove pillar, to which magical properties were attributed in ancient times. All other rites and customs of the wedding ritual were basically the same in both versions. This is a bachelorette party (bridal shower), the departure of the groom and his groomsmen for the bride, the wedding table in the bride’s house and in the groom’s house, the seating of the bride, the unbraiding of her braids, the wedding of the newlyweds, etc. All rituals were accompanied by the singing of numerous wedding songs.

The village-wide character of the Belarusian wedding should be emphasized. It was not only a family holiday, but also a great celebration for the entire village. The Belarusian traditional “vyaselle”, rich in songs, music, ancient rituals, and genuine fun, was a vibrant spectacle. E. R. Romanov, recalling that the great A. S. Pushkin considered every Russian folk tale to be a poem, wrote about the Belarusian wedding: “Whoever was present at the folk wedding, in all its complex archaic details, can with the same right say that every folk wedding is a kind of opera” 1.

The birth of a child was a big family celebration for Belarusians. The main role during childbirth belonged to the village grandmother, who acted as a midwife. There were no maternity hospitals in rural areas before the revolution, and not every volost had a midwife. Economic conditions forced a woman to work until her last day, so she often gave birth in the field or at work. With her healer’s techniques, the grandmother not only did not alleviate the situation of the woman in labor, but often complicated it.

The birth of a child was accompanied by rituals, the original meaning of which was to protect the newborn from evil forces and provide him with a happy life. In the first days, the woman in labor was visited by relatives and neighbors, who brought her gifts, mainly delicacies, and helped her around the house. Soon the relatives, godfather, godfather and grandmother, invited by the parents, gathered for christenings (khresbty, kststy). The main ritual dish at christenings was babta porridge. The grandmother cooked it at home from millet, buckwheat or barley groats. At the christening table, the godfather took the pot, broke it so that the porridge remained untouched, and at the same time uttered words that with sufficient clarity revealed the ancient meaning of the ritual eating of “woman’s porridge”: “God grant for children, sheep, cows, pigs, horses, the offspring of all livestock, health and wealth for godfather, godfather and godson.” After this, porridge was placed on the shards of the pot and distributed to the guests. In response, the guests put small money on the table. The moment of distributing “baba’s porridge”, full of jokes and jokes, was the most fun at the christening. During the celebration, “holy” songs were sung, which were a feature of Belarusian family ritual folklore. These songs glorified the grandmother, godfathers, the newborn and his parents.

Native rites, as well as many wedding rites, took place at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. lost their original meaning and turned into ordinary entertainment on the occasion of a family celebration.

Rituals accompanied funerals and wakes in a peasant family. After washing and dressing, the deceased was placed in a dimavta, or corpse (coffin), which was placed on a table or bench, with the head facing the “kut”. According to custom, elderly people prepared a shirt and other clothes “for death” in advance and gave instructions on how to dress them and what to put with them in the coffin. Dead girls were decorated with a wreath of flowers, like brides. They were usually buried on the second or, less often, on the third day after death, after numerous lamentations and farewells. The funeral participants, at the invitation of the deceased’s closest relatives, gathered on the same day at his home for the funeral at a specially prepared table. After six days after death, shasts were carried out, and after forty days (<сарачыны) и через год (гадавши) вновь устраивались поминки по умершему. Кроме этого, ежегодно справляли дни всеобщего поминания радзщеляу и всех умерших родственников - так называемые дзяды. Таких дней в году было четыре. Главным поминальным днем считалась радутца, отмечавшаяся во вторник после пасхальной недели. Таким образом, в семейной обрядности белорусов дореволюционного времени в некоторой степени сохранялись дохристианские верования и обряды.

In addition to family holidays and rituals (weddings, homelands, funerals), all the most important holidays of the annual circle were celebrated - Kalyada (Christmas), Vyaltzen (Easter), Syomukha (Semik), etc.

The remnants of early religious views in the family life of the pre-revolutionary Belarusian peasant included belief in the power of conspiracy and various witchcraft remedies. This was facilitated by the socio-economic conditions in which the Belarusian peasantry lived before the revolution, and the almost complete absence of organized medical care in the countryside. It is not surprising that healers and whisperers sought to monopolize “medical care.” In Belarusian folklore there are many conspiracies and spells (zamou, sheptau) for various diseases. Along with this, rational traditional medicine was widely used (treatment with infusions and decoctions of herbs and roots, etc.).

In the family life of the Belarusian peasantry, until the revolution, some features of the patriarchal life of the feudal era were preserved. With the development of capitalism in the village, the property relations of family members changed. The departure of individual family members to work in the city gave rise to their desire for independence. Patriarchal foundations gradually collapsed under the influence of new capitalist relations. Elements of the city’s culture penetrated more intensively into the village, many relics disappeared or lost their original meaning.

The Belarusian working family, which formed mainly in the era of capitalism, was less affected by private property aspirations than the peasant family. Karl Marx noted that large-scale capitalist industry in the working environment “creates the economic basis for the highest form of family and relations between the sexes” 1 . We must not forget about the specific conditions in which the working family was placed. This is primarily unemployment and material insecurity. “...Machines,” K. Marx pointed out, “distribute the cost of a man’s labor power among all members of his family” 2 . Under the system of capitalist exploitation, even all working family members, including women and teenagers, received just enough to somehow make ends meet.

By the end of the 19th century, among Belarusian workers, as well as among the peasantry, there was a small family. The youngest married son or the youngest daughter with her husband-priymak often stayed with their parents. Most family groups consisted of three to six people. Intrafamily relations in the working environment differed from those in the peasantry. This, in particular, was reflected in the fact that the position of family members was more equal. The head of the pre-revolutionary Belarusian working-class family, as a rule, was a man: father, eldest son. A woman most often stood at the head of the family team only where there were no adult males. When the eldest son grew up, he became the head of the family and, in fact, was the main breadwinner, breadwinner. The family treasury was under his direct control. When deciding the most important issues, the head of a working family consulted with all adult members of the family team. Common law required him to take care of all his household, sober behavior, humanity, etc.

If the position of a woman in a working environment in a family was relatively more bearable than in a peasant family, then in economic terms it remained very difficult. A female worker was obliged to take care of the household and children in the complete absence of nurseries, kindergartens, etc. She actually had no political rights.

The administration of factories and factories did not care at all about protecting maternity rights. Workers' wives did not have the opportunity to give birth in a hospital or invite a midwife to their home. Births were usually attended by midwives. Due to the lack of maternity leave, workers sometimes gave birth right at the machine. The family legislation of Tsarist Russia recognized only church marriage. Spouses who lived “without a crown” were persecuted, and their children were considered “illegitimate” and were deprived of many civil rights. Among pre-revolutionary Belarusian workers, there were isolated cases when a family was created without a church ceremony. This reflected some manifestation of atheism.

The dowry also did not have such a decisive importance as among the peasants. His absence rarely served as an obstacle to marriage. Among the workers, there was, for example, a well-known Belarusian proverb: “You don’t live by watches (dowry), but by small chalaveks.”

Matchmaking among Belarusian workers remained more traditional. Workers' daughters often worked in production, to a lesser extent than peasant girls, they were economically dependent on their father and therefore were more independent in choosing a groom. The wedding rituals of Belarusian workers were not uniform. In families of hereditary workers, fewer features of a traditional peasant wedding were observed. Sometimes it was celebrated in the form of a friendly feast. More elements of the traditional Belarusian “vyasel” could be found among the workers who retained connections with the village. Here, a wedding usually would not be complete without a matchmaker, gifting of gifts to the newlyweds, and other traditional rituals of the wedding cycle. Weddings were common. The wedding feast was often held on Sundays or other holidays (including religious ones) and non-working days. The most advanced workers occasionally timed their weddings to coincide with revolutionary holidays, especially May 1st.

The rituals associated with birth and funerals were in many ways similar to those of the peasants. In hereditary proletarian families they were often buried without a priest. This manifested the revolutionary traditions and atheism of the advanced, most revolutionary part of the workers. “It was often necessary,” recalls one old Belarusian worker, “to see off fighters for the cause of the people on their last journey. They were buried in a working manner, without a priest, with the singing of “You have fallen as a victim,” with a mourning meeting at the coffin” 1 .

In addition to peasant customs and rituals, the formation of the family rituals of the Belarusian worker was noticeably influenced by the traditions of Russian and Ukrainian workers. The proletarians were united by joint work in production, the common class struggle against the exploiters and autocracy. Therefore, relationships in working-class families were built on the basis of mutual assistance, friendship and camaraderie.

During the years of Soviet power, the family life of the Belarusian peasantry and workers radically changed, the cultural level of the family increased, and many family customs and rituals changed.

In peasant families in Rus', children were taught very early on responsibility and systematic work: this was both the main issue of education and the key to survival. Moreover, the views of our ancestors on this process would hardly please modern teenagers.

The most important thing is that the approach to their heirs among the people was not just strict, but very strict. Firstly, no one then considered children equal to their parents. And it was in the first years of a child’s life that adults saw the key to what kind of person he would become.

Secondly, the authority of mother and father in peasant families was indisputable. Usually the parents were unanimous in their views on the upbringing and responsibilities of the child, and even if they did not agree with each other on something, they never demonstrated it publicly, so the child had no chance of “pulling” one of the parents to his side.

Thirdly, it was not customary to “tweak” with either girls or boys and spoil them in vain. Usually, assignments between household members were distributed by the head of the family in an orderly tone, and no one contradicted him in response. At the same time, the child was always praised and encouraged for successfully completing a task, emphasizing in every possible way that he had benefited the whole family.

Child labor is the involvement of children in work on a regular basis. Currently, in most countries it is considered a form of exploitation and, according to UN Convention N32 “On the Rights of the Child” and acts of the International Labor Organization, is considered illegal. Our great-grandfathers could not even dream of such a thing. Maybe that’s why they entered adulthood perfectly prepared and adapted?

“A father teaches his son bad things”

The age criteria for children were very clear, and, accordingly, their work responsibilities were also clearly divided. Age was measured in seven years: the first seven years were childhood or “infancy.” The babies were called “child”, “baby”, “kuvyaka” (crying) and other affectionate nicknames.

In the second seven years, adolescence began: the child became a “youth” or “youth”, boys were given ports (pants), girls were given a long girl’s shirt.

The third seven-year period is adolescence. As a rule, adolescents mastered all the necessary skills for independent living by the end of adolescence. The boy became his father's right hand, a substitute during his absences and illnesses, and the girl became a full-fledged assistant to her mother.

Perhaps the requirements for boys were stricter than for girls, because it was the sons who were supposed to grow up to be future “breadwinners”, “carers” and protectors. In a word, real husbands and fathers.

In the first seven years of his life, the boy learned many of the basics of peasant labor: he was taught to care for cattle, ride a horse, help in the field, as well as the basics of craftsmanship. For example, the ability to make toys from various materials, weave baskets and boxes, and, of course, bast shoes, which had to be strong, warm, and waterproof, was considered an absolutely necessary skill.

Many 6- and 7-year-old boys confidently helped their fathers in making furniture, harness and other household items. The proverb “Teach a child while it lies across the bench” was not an empty phrase in peasant families.

In the second seven years of life, the boy was finally assigned stable and varied economic responsibilities, and they acquired a clear gender division. For example, not a single boy was obliged to care for his younger brothers and sisters or to garden, but he had to learn to plow and thresh - girls were not involved in such physically difficult work.

Often, already at the age of 7-9, peasant boys began to earn extra money “with people”: their parents gave them to be shepherds for a reasonable fee. By this age, it was believed that the child had already finally “entered the mind”, and therefore it was necessary to teach him everything that the father could and knew.

Working on the ground. In Russian villages, farming was a confirmation of full male status. Therefore, teenage boys had to work in the fields. They fertilized the soil (spread manure across the field and made sure that its lumps did not impede the work of the plow), harrowed (loosened the top layer of soil with harrows or hoes), led a horse harnessed to the harrow by the bridle, or rode on it “when the father is driving the furrow.” .

If the earth was lumpy, the father would sit his son on the harrow to make it heavier, while he led the horse by the bridle. Teenagers took an active part in harvesting. From the age of 11-13, the boy was already involved in independent plowing. At first, he was allocated a small plot of arable land on which he could practice, and by the age of 14, the teenager could confidently plow the land himself, that is, he became a full-fledged worker.

Caring for livestock. Another important component of peasant life, which women were not trusted (they could only milk cows or goats and drive them out to pasture). The youths had to feed, remove manure, and clean the animals under the strict guidance of their elders.

The main breadwinner in a peasant family was always a horse, which worked in the field all day with its owner. They grazed the horses at night, and this was also the responsibility of the boys. That is why, from a very early age, they were taught to harness horses and ride them, drive them while sitting or standing in a cart, and drive them to watering places - in full accordance with the saying “Things teach, torment, and feed.”

Trade activities. They were especially common in the Russian North and Siberia, where they served as a reliable source of income. Looking at his father and older brothers, the boy first adopted the skills of fishing and hunting in the form of a game, and then improved this art.

By the age of 8-9, a boy usually knew how to set snares for small game and birds, shoot a bow, fish for fish or hit it with a spear. Picking mushrooms, berries and nuts was often added to this list, which was also a good material help. By the age of 9-12, a teenager could join an adult fishing artel and by 14, after completing a probationary period, become a full member. Then he began to contribute a significant share to the family budget and moved into the category of adult “breadwinners” and eligible bachelors.

This is how “good fellows” grew up in peasant families - father’s assistants, of whom parents were rightfully proud. In addition to labor education, the boys were also instilled with clear moral principles: they were taught to honor their elders, be merciful to the poor and wretched, hospitality, respect for the fruits of their own and others’ labor, and the foundations of faith.

There were two more important rules that any boy knew by heart: first, a man must be able to protect his woman and his family, not only physically, but also from the material and psychological sides. According to the second rule, a man had to be able to restrain his emotions and always control himself.

... Suppose that a family lives in Moscow, consisting of a husband, wife and only two children (and there are usually two within 3 years after marriage). The husband, an official or middle-class clerk, receives 50 rubles a month. This salary is good, because not very long ago the Minister of Finance recommended hiring predominantly people with higher education to serve in this department, and the initial salary is something like 30 rubles a month. Until recently, candidates for judicial positions served for a long time without pay, and only recently they were assigned something like 50 rubles a month. Hospital doctors also receive the same amount. Therefore, it will not be an understatement if for people without higher education a salary of 50 rubles is good.

Now let’s calculate the monthly budget of this family, making calculations for items not even of the first necessity, but of the utmost necessity.

An apartment of 1 1/2 rooms with a kitchen costs less than 20 rubles. per month it is impossible to find, and even then somewhere closer either to heaven, or to hell, if in the center of the city, or near the “devil in the middle of nowhere.”
For firewood and coal for samovars and ironing, put 5 rubles each. per month would not be an exaggeration.

It is impossible to spend on lighting, on average, less than one pound of kerosene per month. Let's take the worst grade at 1 rub. 20 kopecks

Tea and sugar a month, with the most extreme frugality, will cost no less than 3 rubles. (counting the smallest portion).

For lunch, dinner and breakfast, for soup (or cabbage soup) and roast, take 3 pounds of beef per day, moreover, the lowest grade, the so-called human, 12 kopecks. pound, a total of 36 kopecks per day, and 10 rubles per month. 80 kop. Brown bread (white bread is nothing to think about) 3 pounds a day, seasonings (potatoes, onions, roots, salt, etc.; cucumbers, perhaps, also nothing to think about) 15 kopecks; for a total of 4 rubles. 50 kopecks per month.

One of the children requires milk porridge; counting only 10 kopecks. per day, that's 3 rubles per month.

Water carrier 1 ruble per month.

Petty expenses: postage stamps, paper and envelopes, ink, feathers, pencils, wax for cleaning boots, needles and threads for sewing and darning, broken dishes and lamp glasses, matches, etc. - we’ll put 2 rubles on everything. per month.

Now the servants. After all, the husband is at work in the morning, the wife can’t run to the store and leave the children alone or carry firewood and water, clean boots, etc. But... let me sum up the previous expenses:

Apartment ………………. 20 rub. 00 kop.

Heating and coal………. 5 rub. 00 kop.

Lighting……………… 1 rub. 20 kopecks

Tea and sugar………………… 3 rub. 00 kop.

Beef ………………. 10 rub. 80 kop.

Bread and seasoning…………. 4 rub. 50 kopecks

Milk porridge …………… 3 rub. 00 kop.

For water ………………… 1 rub. 00 kop.

Little things…………………. 2 rub. 00 kop.

Total 50 rub. 50 kopecks

Girls in kubilyaks. Don smart suit. 1875-1876

Oh God! Already exceeded budget! What to do?

We rent a small room for 15 rubles from a tenant. This gives a reduction of 5 rubles for the apartment, 5 rubles for heating, 1 ruble for water; We will take 2 pounds of beef - saving 3 rubles. 60 kopecks, total savings 14 rubles. 60 kopecks But when preparing food at home, you will get 1 ruble more kerosene. 20 kopecks The total reduction is 13 rubles. 40 kopecks The landlady's cook should be given at least 1 ruble. - total 12 rubles. 40 kopecks The monthly budget is 50 rubles. 50 kopecks — 12 rub. 40 kopecks = 38 rub. 10 kopecks With an income of 50 rubles, 11 rubles will remain for all other expenses. 90 kopecks per month, and the family lives in a kennel room with a tenant.

But let's move on to other necessary expenses.

Washing clothes is necessary. You need soap, and if the hostess allows access to the kitchen, she will charge you for water and coals. No matter how you look, it’s cheaper than 2 rubles. washing will not cost a month, so in total there will be only 9 rubles left for other expenses. 90 kopecks Of course, the wife already washes and irons the clothes herself, and starches her husband’s shirts, and the husband cleans his own boots and dress.

But the husband must always be decently dressed, and the wife and children also cannot walk around in the costume of Adam and Eve. The wife sews everything herself for herself and for the children, and the husband already needs to buy ready-made linen. Let's make an estimate for this expense item.

Return of the Cossacks from the fair to the Tsimlyanskaya village. 1875-1876

A. Estimate for husband

The cheapest, but decent for service, a vice-uniform pair or a simple one costs 25 rubles, not cheaper. At least one other pair is needed, at home, for 15 rubles. Assuming that they are replaced only once every three years (???), we obtain an annual repair expense of (25 + 15): 3 = 40: 3 = = 13 1/3 rubles. It would not be an exaggeration to assume the same expense for the repair of outerwear, hats, caps; in total we will get about 27 rubles for the upper and lower dresses. per year of consumption.

We won’t mention gloves, but handkerchiefs, cufflinks and ties will hardly cost less than a ruble a year, a total of 27 + 1 = 28 rubles.

Boots, assuming that the husband will not even dream of a horse-drawn horse (not to mention cab drivers), you need two pairs per year for 6 rubles. 50 kopecks (cheap varieties) and galoshes, also two pairs for 2 rubles. 25 kopecks, and in total (6 1/2 +2 1/4) x 2 = 17 rubles. 50 kopecks

Let's assume that the wife sews underwear for the whole family herself. Still, we need: calico, buttons, thread, and sewing machine repair. Let’s put 3 rubles a year on everything, really, not much.

As a result, for maintaining my husband’s clothes in a somewhat tolerable condition, we get:

Top and bottom dress….. 27 RUR. 00 kop.

Cufflinks, ties, etc….. 1 rub. 00 kop.

Shoes …………………. 17 rub. 50 kopecks

Underwear ……………. 3 rub. 00 kop.

Total 48 rub. 50 kopecks

Don Cossack rifleman, seventy-five years old. 1875-1876

B. Estimate for wife, children, etc.

We saw above that for everything except the most urgently needed items, 9 rubles are left from the budget. 90 kopecks per month, i.e. 9 rubles. 90 kopecks x 12 = 118 rub. 80 kop. in year. But for my husband, 48 rubles are absolutely necessary. 50 kopecks — for the family, therefore, only 70 rubles remain. 30 kopecks

If the wife dresses like a cook, she still needs at least three cotton dresses a year for 5 rubles; Let's put underwear, like my husband, at 3 rubles, shoes and galoshes, like my husband, at 17 rubles. 50 kopecks, for repairs and repayment of the outer dress 15 rubles; for pins, hairpins, scarves, etc. 2 rubles each - total 15+3+17 rub. 50 kopecks + 15 rub. + 2 rub. = 52 rub. 50 kopecks There are 70 rubles left. 30 kopecks — 52 rub. 50 kopecks = 17 rub. 80 kopecks, this is for children and small needs, such as repairing lamps and burners, brushes, combs, soap for washing, etc. It is easy and without calculation to say that the amount is hardly enough.

It is assumed that the husband does not smoke tobacco and does not drink a glass of vodka or a bottle of beer a year, that there is never a single guest, that the wife runs to the shops herself, leaving the children without supervision, that she washes clothes, sews and repairs her own, her husband's and children's underwear and, if her husband has fallen asleep, cleans his boots and dress, all this happens in a kennel for 15 rubles. per month.

Well, what if births, christenings, illness happen? What if there are not two children, but four? What to bury if one of them dies? etc.

There is only one answer; complete poverty, even if the husband showed up for work in a very elegant vice uniform (after all, it is now a general requirement that employees, even men, be dressed quite decently). Poverty and hunger together are hopeless, hopeless, increasing every year, taking away the strength of the family worker... Family life, contrary to the proverb “heaven with a sweetheart in a hut,” turns into a real hell, from which the only salvation for the husband is vodka, and the family Let him eat only potatoes for months...

Cossacks before leaving for service. 1875-1876

Here's another interesting piece:

This explains the apparently strange fact that many highly educated people marry almost illiterate people. I knew one highly learned professor who married his cook. Everyone, of course, knows many cases when teachers of gymnasiums, for example, marry dressmakers, milliners, etc., while young ladies who speak two or three foreign languages ​​either sit in girls, or stand behind the counter of a store with 9 o'clock morning until 8 o'clock. evenings for a salary of 25 rubles. per month, or are engaged in other professions (telegraph operators, teachers, etc.), which make it possible to eat cheap sausage and bread, vegetate and... dream of suitors.

Mothers and young brides should think about this. I assure you that if, by chance, the groom appears and finds the young lady ironing her linen and all stained with soot, he will like it much more than if he found her dressed up, powdered, and perfumed. If you add modesty and unpretentiousness to simplicity, it will be a magnet for grooms.

Of course, such increasing cases of educated people marrying dressmakers and seamstresses is an undesirable phenomenon; Of course, it would be nice to talk with my wife sometimes about something more sublime than housekeeping. But what to do: we live not in heaven, but on earth.

This is how today's grooms think.

Father and son before hunting. Vyatka province, Glazov district. 1907

However, is it really necessary to go against the education of women? That would be more than unfortunate. Education for a woman is an excellent dowry, and we will prove it here with numbers.

Let's assume that the mother knows languages, music and science in the gymnasium curriculum. It is obvious that she herself can (but will she!) teach her children, and this is very expensive; We will calculate according to the Moscow tax.

A teacher or music teacher costs no less than 15 rubles per month. — per year 180 rubles.

It’s impossible to find a decent tutor for less than 20 rubles a month—240 a year.

To teach languages, you need to hire a governess, also with a salary of at least 20 rubles, and her maintenance (including a separate room) will cost 25 rubles. - total 45 rubles per month, and 540 rubles per year. Counting everything together, we get 180+240+540 rubles. = 960 rubles. Obviously, the wife, putting her labor and knowledge into the family, contributes capital of about 25,000 rubles.

It is impossible for a woman to earn this amount on the side: lessons for everything are extremely limited, and it is obviously impossible to become a governess - in a word, women’s work has the most rational use in their own family; This is the best solution to the women's issue, I dare to assure you of that. There is no calculation in rushing to the side, because in the above calculation it is not yet indicated how much the farm will lose from the lack of supervision of the mistress, and this can be appreciated and very expensive.

Educated, but at the same time modest, unpretentious wives, capable of mending stockings and ironing clothes for the same children after a music and French lesson, are almost an extraordinary rarity. But the secret is that this should not be rare. Let the tongues be replaced by the piano, and then by the needle and iron. Such a young lady will always find a groom, and time, although perhaps not much, for her ideal dreams, so that at least for a while she can float up the swamp of life that drags us down...

Salaries in pre-revolutionary Russia:

Servant received per month: from 3 to 5 rubles for women and from 5 to 10 rubles for men.
Next, according to the increasing wages in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, there are workers in provincial factories, village factories, unskilled workers, and loaders. Their salary ranged from 8 to 15 rubles per month. Moreover, it was not uncommon for one tenth of the salary to be given out in cards, which could only be used to purchase goods in the factory store at inflated prices with products that were far from being the freshest. Mostly workers at metallurgical plants in Moscow and St. Petersburg earned more. The salary of these workers at the beginning of the 20th century in Tsarist Russia ranged from 25 to 35 rubles. And representatives of the so-called labor aristocracy, i.e. professional turners, mechanics, foremen, and foremen received from 50 to 80 rubles per month.

Employees
The smallest salaries at the beginning of the 20th century were for junior ranks of civil servants in the amount of 20 rubles per month. The same amount was received by ordinary postal employees, zemstvo elementary school teachers, pharmacists' assistants, orderlies, librarians, etc. Doctors received much more, for example, in zemstvo hospitals they had a salary of 80 rubles, paramedics 35 rubles, and the head of the hospital received 125 rubles a month. In small rural hospitals, where there was only one paramedic on staff, he received a salary of 55 rubles. High school teachers in women's and men's gymnasiums received from 80 to 100 rubles per month. The heads of postal, railway, and steamship stations in large cities had monthly salaries from 150 to 300 rubles. Deputies of the State Duma received a salary of 350 rubles, governors had salaries of about one thousand rubles, and ministers and senior officials, members of the State Council - 1,500 rubles per month.

Military personnel
After promotion in 1909, the salary in the army was like this.
The second lieutenant had a salary of 70 rubles a month, plus 30 kopecks a day for guard duties and an additional 7 rubles for renting housing, for a total of 80 rubles.
The lieutenant received a salary of 80 rubles, plus the same apartment and guard pay another 10 rubles, for a total of 90 rubles.
A staff captain received a salary from 93 to 123 rubles, a captain from 135 to 145 rubles, and a lieutenant colonel from 185 to 200 rubles per month.
A colonel in the Tsarist Army received a salary of 320 rubles per month from the Sovereign, a general in the position of division commander had a salary of 500 rubles, and a general in the position of corps commander had a salary of 725 rubles per month.

Op.: Science and Life, 1890, No. 1. Without a signature. Republished: Science and Life, 2000, No. 12. The preface to the republication states that the author is apparently the editor M.N. Glubokovsky, whose signature was all the unsigned materials of the magazine. Page numbering is based on the 2001 republication, with the page number preceding the text on it.

Prices for 1913
A loaf of black stale bread weighing 400 grams - 3 kopecks,
A loaf of fresh rye bread weighing 400 grams - 4 kopecks,
A loaf of white butter bread weighing 300 grams - 7 kopecks,
Fresh harvest potatoes 1 kilogram - 15 kopecks,
Old harvest potatoes 1 kilogram - 5 kopecks,
Rye flour 1 kilogram - 6 kopecks,
Oat flour 1 kilogram - 10 kopecks,
Premium wheat flour 1 kilogram - 24 kopecks,
Plain pasta 1 kilogram - 20 kopecks,
Second grade granulated sugar 1 kilogram - 25 kopecks,
Selected lump refined sugar 1 kilogram - 60 kopecks,
Tula gingerbread with jam 1 kilogram - 80 kopecks,
Chocolate candies 1 kilogram - 3 rubles,
Coffee beans 1 kilogram - 2 rubles,
Leaf tea 1 kilogram - 3 rubles,
Table salt 1 kilogram - 3 kopecks,
Fresh milk 1 liter - 14 kopecks,
Heavy cream 1 liter - 60 kopecks,
Sour cream 1 liter - 80 kopecks,
Cottage cheese 1 kilogram - 25 kopecks,
Cheese BB "Russian BB" 1 kilogram - 70 kopecks,
Butter 1 kilogram - 1 ruble 20 kopecks,
Sunflower oil 1 liter - 40 kopecks,
Steamed chicken 1 kilogram - 80 kopecks,
A dozen choice eggs - 25 kopecks,
Veal meat, steamed tenderloin 1 kilogram - 70 kopecks,
Beef shoulder blade 1 kilogram - 45 kopecks,
Pork neck meat 1 kilogram - 30 kopecks,
Fresh river perch fish 1 kilogram - 28 kopecks,
Fresh river pike perch fish 1 kilogram - 50 kopecks,
Frozen pink salmon fish 1 kilogram - 60 kopecks,
Frozen fish salmon 1 kilogram - 80 kopecks,
Frozen fish sturgeon 1 kilogram - 90 kopecks,
Black granular caviar 1 kilogram - 3 rubles 20 kopecks,
Pressed black caviar 2 grades 1 kilogram - 1 ruble 20 kopecks,
Red salted caviar 1 kilogram - 2 rubles 50 kopecks,
Vegetables fresh cabbage 1 kilogram - 10 kopecks,
Vegetables, pickled cabbage 1 kilogram - 20 kopecks,
Vegetables onions 1 kilogram - 5 kopecks,
Vegetables carrots 1 kilogram - 8 kopecks,
Selected tomatoes, vegetables 1 kilogram - 45 kopecks.

A little about the cost of things at the beginning of the 20th century in Tsarist Russia:
Let's start with the cost of uniforms and military uniforms, which Russian officers were forced to purchase with their own money, and taking into account the low officer salary (which will be given at the end of the article), it clearly cost them a lot.
Officer's dress boots - 20 rubles,
Dress officer's uniform - 70 rubles,
Chief officer's cap - 3 rubles,
Uhlan hat - 20 rubles,
Hussar staff cap - 12 rubles,
Gilded headquarters officers' epaulettes - 13 rubles,
Spurs - 14 rubles,
Dragoon and Cossack sabers - 15 rubles,
Officer's backpack - 4 rubles.
Clothing for civilians was much cheaper:
Weekend shirt - 3 rubles,
Business suit for clerks - 8 rubles,
Long coat - 15 rubles,
Cow boots - 5 rubles,
Summer boots - 2 rubles,
Garmon - 7 rubles 50 kopecks,
Gramophone - 40 rubles,
Grand piano of a famous brand - 200 rubles,
Car without additional equipment - 2,000 rubles
In the army, officer salaries at the beginning of the 20th century in the Russian Empire, after an increase in 1909, were as follows. The second lieutenant had a salary of 70 rubles a month, plus 30 kopecks a day for guard duty and an additional 7 rubles for renting housing, for a total of 80 rubles. The lieutenant received a salary of 80 rubles, plus the same apartment and guard duty another 10 rubles, for a total of 90 rubles . A staff captain received a salary from 93 to 123 rubles, a captain from 135 to 145 rubles, and a lieutenant colonel from 185 to 200 rubles per month. A colonel in the Tsarist Army received a salary of 320 rubles per month from the Sovereign, a general in the position of division commander had a salary of 500 rubles, and a general in the position of corps commander had a salary of 725 rubles per month.

In the provinces of the Russian Empire, the percentage of officials whose salaries did not correspond to the subsistence level was 64.7%, in the capital - 87.8%. . B.N. Chicherin notes that “insignificant salaries serve as a sure way to spread extortion, and once it has taken root, it also covers the higher levels, where it no longer satisfies material needs, but the needs of luxury. The worst thing is when in the highest spheres huge salaries are received, while in the lower spheres employees are begging.”

© Valery Georgievich Anishkin, 2016

© Lyudmila Valerievna Shmaneva, 2016

ISBN 978-5-4483-5395-6

Created in the intellectual publishing system Ridero

This book presents the palace life of the Russian tsars, the customs and life of the royal courts and the Russian people from ancient times to the beginning of the 20th century, including the reign of the last Russian tsar.

The book also contains information about the army, trade, government, religious relations, etc., and the material in the book is arranged in such a way that it is easy to find the information that interests the reader.

The book contains extensive thematic material and is intended for a wide range of readers.

Preface

In Russia there has always been a high interest in its history, in its national traditions, customs, and way of life. But lately the topic of morality has attracted no less interest. We are losing our moral principles towards our family and towards each other. And the decline of morality leads to the degeneration of society.

Now more than ever, it is important for us to know what we were like in order to understand what we are and why we became like that. This will allow us to correctly evaluate ourselves, not repeat the mistakes of our ancestors and not feel like outcasts, integrating into the community of civilized states.

If customs are a generally accepted order or traditional rules of social behavior, and everyday life is a general way of life, i.e. our everyday life, then morality is the rules of human behavior, spiritual and mental qualities necessary for a person in society.

Morality cannot be separated from folk life and customs, but it also depends on many other factors. These include economic relations, laws, courts and forms of government. Morality is also closely related to philosophy, politics, ideology and religion, which plays a special role in the formation of moral standards.

All this is reflected in the book and presented in the form of the most interesting historical facts.

Much attention in the book is paid to such terrible events for Russia as the Tatar-Mongol yoke, the Time of Troubles and the Polish-Swedish intervention, the war with Napoleon, etc. These shocks involuntarily convince us that we are martyrs, but history has repeatedly proven that what can we do? harder, the stronger we become. In the most difficult times for Russia, when it was on the brink of destruction, the people rose up and saved it. For this, Russia needed only a firm hand and hope.

Madame de Stael, who visited Moscow in 1812 just before Napoleon’s invasion, was struck by the unprecedented spiritual uplift of the Russian people, their patriotism and sacrifice in the name of Russia.

Russia is also known for its unique identity. The Russian historian and archaeologist I.E. Zabelin very precisely defined this phenomenon: “Our ancient society ... took shape through direct birth, without the participation of any alien elements alien to it.

The Varangian invasion and exile blossomed in our everyday life like a drop in the sea, leaving almost no trace. The unique power of our way of life is so great that the reform itself, and one might say the revolution of Peter, turned out to be completely powerless in many respects.” I. E. Zabelin has a good definition of another truly Russian phenomenon - self-will. “The idea of ​​independence, moral independence,” writes the historian, “was inseparable from the idea of ​​autocracy, and even closer, with the idea of ​​self-will and self-will. That is why we, people of a different time and other concepts about the laws of morality, do not have the right to judge too harshly this immeasurable and boundless self-will and autocracy, which so widely dominated in our pre-Petrine and Petrine society, and we have especially little right to condemn individual people for this. and even more so historical figures, who always serve only as more or less strong exponents of the ideas and provisions of the life of their society... Willfulness and autocracy in that era were the moral freedom of man; the entire world-people was firmly and deeply convinced of this; it was the general, basic way of life.”

If we talk about historical figures, they undoubtedly had a great influence on the state and development of society. And if we are talking about the life and moral state of the royal courts and Russia as a whole, then we cannot ignore the personality of the autocrat, as well as the personalities of heroes, such as Minin, Pozharsky, or anti-heroes, such as False Dmitry, Biron, Pugachev.

We know little about the life of Russia before the 10th century, but already in the 11th century the chronicler Nestor appears, about whom the German historian Schlözer said that he “... is the first, oldest, only, at least the main source for the entire Slavic, Lettish (Latvian) and Lithuanian) and Scandinavian life...", from which we received some information about the life, customs and moral behavior of our ancient ancestors. Since then, Russia has aroused constant interest in the West and at different times such classics of world literature as Shakespeare, Rabelais, Cervantes, Cyrano de Bergerac, Thomas More and many others wrote about it. etc. Politicians, diplomats, military men, merchants, doctors, writers from almost all European countries visited Russia and left written information about it. Foreigners were amazed by the harsh climate of Russia, its natural resources, the abundance of bread, honey, livestock, fish, the uniqueness of the culture and religious tolerance, which the West could not boast of. “There is no such wealth in Europe,” noted the German diplomat Herberstein.

Memoirs of eyewitnesses who wrote about Russia were popular in the West, they were read by both kings and ordinary people. But not all authors were objective in relation to Russia. Often this was hindered by ignorance of the language, customs and morals of the Russian people, and sometimes simply by bias or differences in political and religious views. Thus, the German scientist and traveler Olearius wrote about the morals, life, and rituals of the Russians of the 17th century and at the same time criticized them for intemperance, rudeness, drunkenness and immoral behavior, forgetting that the inhabitants of Western Europe suffered from the same vices, and the author himself was forced to flee from native Leipzig from the violence of drunken soldiers engaged in robberies. But, criticizing the Russians, Olearius still speaks with delight about the simplicity of the morals and customs of the Muscovites of that time. The same can be said about the French writer de Custine, whose book in the 30s of the 19th century became a pamphlet with an anti-Russian direction. The writer condemned the vices of Russian society, although the same society existed in France, if we look at the literary prototypes of Stendhal, Balzac, George Sand and others.

Many Europeans condemned de Custine’s attitude towards Russia, and Herzen said that “... Russia should be explored a little deeper than the pavement along which the elegant carriage of the Marquis de Custine rolled.”

Evaluation of people's actions from the point of view of moral principles and norms is expressed in the categories of good and evil, honor and dishonor, justice and injustice, and if we measure modern Russians with these categories, then we must keep in mind that genetically we have changed little, and therefore in events past, one can find parallels to the crisis state of modern society.

In conclusion, it remains to be said that in Russia, customs, life and moral principles are commensurate with the characteristics of both the geographical location and historical development, and they are no worse than the customs and morals of any other European powers with their poor and wretched traditions. And it is not always wise to look back to the West, and even less wise to cross out everything that is dear to a Russian person and blindly transfer Western culture into the Russian environment.

Section I. Customs, life and moral state of Rus' from ancient times to the end of the 17th century

Chapter 1

PAGAN Rus' BEFORE THE CALLING OF THE VARYAGS

The influence of natural conditions on the appearance and life of the Slavs. - Rule by the Slavs. – The warrior spirit of the Slavs. – Trade. - The cruelty of the Slavs. - Kindness and hospitality. – Chastity of the Russian Slavs.. – Marriages and polygamy. - Life of the Slavs. - Idolatry. – Pagan holidays and legends. – Temples and sacrifices.

The influence of natural conditions on the appearance and life of the Slavs

Ancient Greek historian Herodotus 1
Herodotus (c.485 - 425 BC) - “father of history”, a Greek from Halicarnassus, traveled a lot, wrote the history of the Greco-Persian wars (up to 479) in 9 books. Describing the history of the Greeks and Persians, G. gives a description of the peoples with whom they came into contact.

After visiting the lands north of the Black Sea, he wrote that the tribes that live in this country lead the way of life that their nature dictates to them. S. M. Solovyov, agreeing with the ancient historian, argues that this remark remains true after several centuries and that “the course of events is constantly subject to natural conditions.”

From the Greeks and Romans we know that the entire land from the Baltic shores to the Dnieper in the middle of the 5th century was covered with impenetrable forests and swamps, the soil was a desert, flocks of wild predatory animals scoured the vast space, and the deep snow was terrifying.

Slavic tribes occupied vast spaces and settled along the banks of large rivers. Meeting Finnish tribes while moving from south to north, they lived peacefully, since there was a lot of land and there was enough space for everyone. Gradually the Slavs penetrated further into the East, inhabiting desert spaces.

Both N.M. Karamzin and S.M. Solovyov discuss why the northern people, forced to live among harsh and less generous nature than the southern peoples, are more practical and active. “Nature, stingy with its gifts, requiring constant and hard work on the part of man,” says S.M. Solovyov, “keeps the latter always in an excited state: ... he constantly works with his mind, steadily strives towards his goal; It is clear that a population with such a character is extremely capable of laying among itself strong foundations of state life and subordinating tribes with an opposite character to its influence.”

In harsh conditions, the people become more severe, they do not strive for decoration, they are less inclined to honor and idolize women, and this in turn forms even more severe morals.

According to the Byzantine historian Procopius of Caesarea 2
Procopius of Caesarea (end of the 5th century - 562) - Byzantine historian, author of many works. He provides especially valuable information about the ancient Slavs in his work “History of Wars.”

And the Byzantine writer Mauritius Strategist 3
Mauritius Strategius (Pseudo-Mauritius) (VI – VII centuries) – Byzantine writer of the VI – early VII centuries, author of the military treatise “Strategikon”. Previously, authorship was attributed to the Byzantine Emperor Mauritius (582-602), to whom the historian erroneously refers.

Who knew the Slavs and Antes in the 6th century, the ancient Slavs, inhabitants of the northern (midnight) lands, were very mobile, preferred work to rest and steadfastly endured harsh climatic conditions.

The ancient Slavs easily endured hunger, eating coarse, raw food, and the Greeks were amazed at how easily they climbed steep slopes, how boldly they crossed swampy swamps and deep rivers.

The Slavs cared little about their appearance, believing that the main beauty of a man was the strength of his body. The Greeks condemned the dirty, unkempt clothes of the Slavs. Procopius says that they, like the Massagetae 4
The Massagetae are a Scythian tribe that occupied in the 8th – 4th centuries. BC. lower reaches of the Syr-Darya and Amur-Darya in Central Asia. In the III–I centuries. BC. became part of other tribes and since then ancient sources have not mentioned them.

They were covered with dirt and all kinds of uncleanness. However, contemporaries noted that the Slavs were healthy, strong, tall, distinguished by their stature and masculine attractiveness. The Slavs had dark skin, their hair was long, dark brown, and in appearance they were like all other Europeans.

Rule by the Slavs

The ancient Slavs did not have state government, and they did not have a ruler. They did not have slaves, but they had freedom, which they considered good and valued.

Each owner built himself a separate hut, away from others, and each family was independent and isolated. Even in special cases, when fellow tribesmen gathered together in council and chose leaders for military campaigns, they often did not obey them in battles, because not accustomed to any kind of coercion.

Nestor, and after him foreign writers, speaking about the morals and customs of the Slavs, noted that the tribal way of life caused enmity between them. Nestor notes that as soon as the tribes began to govern themselves, they had no truth; they did not have a charter that needed to be followed, and there was no authority that could force them to carry out the charter.

According to N.M. Karamzin, after several centuries the popular rule of the Slavs turned into aristocratic rule. The first rulers were the leaders, i.e. people who distinguished themselves by military skill and personal courage. But the leaders were only first among equals. The squad said: “We elect you as a leader, and wherever your fate leads you, we will follow you there; but what will be acquired by our common forces must be divided among all of us, depending on the dignity of each.”

The power of the Slavs was called boyar, governor, prince. “Boyarin” comes from “battle” (if the word “boyarin” is derived from the word “bolyarin”, then it should mean “big”), and at first it simply meant a brave warrior, and then it turned into a dignity 5
In the “History of Russia” (corresponding member A. N. Sakharov), the term “boyar” is explained as a derivative of a term from the Iranian language, in which it means something like a master.

In Oleg’s treaty with the Greeks in 911, the great Russian boyars are already mentioned as a dignity, as a sign of military glory, which was introduced into Russia not by the Varangians, but by the ancient Slavs. Previously, only military commanders were called voivodes, but later this acquired a broader meaning.

The word “prince,” according to N.M. Karamzin, could come from a horse or from the German Konig. At least, it is known that among the Slavs horses were considered expensive property and someone who, for example, had 30 horses, was considered a rich person.

In contrast to the prince, the rest of the population was called “smerds.” Smerd meant a common man. The common man was also called "liudin". People's cases were tried in a meeting of elders, often in the forest, because the Slavs imagined that the god of justice, Prove, lived in the shadow of old, dense forests. These places, just like the princely houses, were considered sacred; no one had the right to enter there with weapons, and even a criminal could safely hide there without fear of being caught.

The Slavs observed the law of their fathers, as well as ancient customs, which had the force of written laws for them.

Slavic warrior spirit

According to the Greek chronicles, the Slavs did not have one permanent commander; they chose leaders for individual cases.

The bravery of the Slavs was their natural feature. At first they avoided battles in open spaces, but, realizing that a quick and bold attack could easily upset and confuse the ranks of the legions, they no longer refused to fight. The Slavs did not fight in orderly ranks, but in a scattered crowd and always on foot, neglecting caution and relying only on their courage.

According to Byzantine historians, the Slavs fought especially skillfully in impassable places, in gorges, and hiding in the grass. They also loved to fight in the forests, where they lured the enemy, as if running away from him, and then suddenly attacked and captured the enemy. The same Mauritius (see above) advised attacking the Slavs in winter, when they could not hide behind bare trees, and snow prevented them from running.

The Slavs could also hide in water, breathing through a hollow reed or hollowed out reed. The weapons of the ancient Slavs were swords, darts and arrows, the tips of which were smeared with poison, as well as large, heavy shields. Procopius, to whom S. M. Solovyov refers, writes that the Slavs in the 6th century did not have armor and fought without caftans, some even without shirts in some ports.

When the Slavs could not save their loot, pursued by the Roman legions, they burned it, leaving only a pile of ashes for their enemies. It is interesting that they did not need the jewelry that they mined, not sparing their lives. They did not use them, but simply buried them in the ground.

Trade.

Trade among the pagan Slavs was predominantly barter and was limited only to the exchange of things; they did not use money, but looked at foreign gold as a commodity.

Arab writers 6
Ibn Fodlan, Ahmed (birth and death unknown) - Arab traveler and writer of the first half of the 10th century; Later Arab writers and travelers Yakut, ibn Abdallah (1178 - 1229) and Ibn Battuta, Muhammad (1304 - 1377) also mentioned barter trade.

They left descriptions of this barter trade of the Bulgarians with all 7
Ves is one of the oldest tribes that lived in the north of the European part of Russia around White Lake. In the 10th – 12th centuries it assimilated with Russian tribes.

Bulgarian merchants visited the people all on boats up the Volga and Sheksna to purchase furs. They arrived at a certain place, where they left their goods and left. After this, the other party (all) laid out their goods, which they considered possible to exchange for Bulgarian ones, after which they also left. The Bulgarians assessed the goods and, if they considered the exchange profitable, they took all the goods of the tribe, left theirs and, thus, the exchange was considered completed. If the Bulgarians considered the goods unequal to theirs, they left again, making it clear that they were not satisfied with this exchange and that they demanded an increase. Local merchants add goods until it suits the Bulgarians

The cruelty of the Slavs

Chroniclers of that time noted the cruelty of the Slavs, but forgot that it was also revenge for the fact that the Greeks mercilessly dealt with the Slavs who fell into their hands. To the credit of the Slavs, they endured the torment stoically, without groaning, did not name the number of troops, did not reveal their plans.

Among the cruel customs of the pagan Slavs, there was a custom when a mother had the right to kill her newborn daughter if the family became too numerous, but she was obliged to protect the life of her son, born for military affairs. But the Slavs also had an even more cruel custom, when children could also kill their parents, who had become a burden to the family and were useless to society due to old age and illness. And this despite the fact that the children of the Slavs were famous for their respect for their parents and care for them.

S. M. Soloviev says in this regard that such behavior, which horrifies us, was due to peculiar concepts of kindred compassion, and not because of barbaric cruelty. A purely practical side prevailed here: the weak were considered an unhappy person, and killing him was a natural act of compassion. This applied more to the warlike Western tribes, who did not have the right to have among themselves the weak and crippled, unable to fight. Such customs were not observed among peaceful, agricultural peoples, as well as among the Eastern Slavs, who treated elderly and weak relatives more humanely.

Kindness and hospitality

While showing cruelty on campaigns, the Slavs at home were distinguished by their natural good nature. With their morality, the pagan Slavs made a good impression on their foreign contemporaries, and the simplicity of their morals compared favorably with the corrupted morals of other, more educated peoples. Both S. M. Solovyov and N. M. Karamzin, referring to historians of that time, note that the ancient Slavs knew neither guile nor anger; Unlike the Greeks, they treated prisoners friendly and always determined the duration of their slavery, giving them the opportunity to either ransom themselves and return home or stay with them and live freely as free people or friends. The Slavs were accustomed to being content with little, their clothes and homes were not luxurious, they were ready to leave their homes under any threat from enemies, and slaves in this case only interfered with them, and therefore were of no particular value to them. Among the customs of the Slavs, chroniclers note hospitality, rare for that time. They greeted any traveler kindly, treated them and saw them off with good parting words. If someone could not ensure the safety of a guest and keep him out of trouble, then this was considered an insult to all neighbors. The Slavs did not lock the doors of their houses and always left ready-made food for the wanderer in the house. There were no thieves or robbers among the Slavs, however, if a poor person did not have the opportunity to treat a foreigner well, he was allowed to steal everything necessary for this from a rich neighbor, and this was not considered a crime, because the duty of hospitality was more important.

Chastity of Russian Slavs

Ancient writers note the chastity of the Slavs. Moreover, this chastity was inherent not only in women, but also in men, who, demanding proof of innocence from brides, considered themselves obligated to remain sacredly faithful to their wives.

Slavic wives considered it a dishonor for themselves to live after the death of their husband; they voluntarily went to the stake and were burned along with their corpses. S. M. Solovyov considers it probable that the Slavs believed that a man could more easily achieve bliss in the afterlife if he went there accompanied by a woman. On the other hand, a woman came into someone else’s family and the only person who could give her protection in a different environment was her husband, and after his death she was deprived of this support, and her position became unbearable. This custom disappeared only with the adoption of Christianity, as barbaric.

Slav women sometimes went to war with their fathers and husbands (during the siege of Constantinople in 626, the Greeks found many female corpses among the killed Slavs).

The Slavs considered it shameful to forget an insult, so the mother had to raise children as warriors who could take revenge on those who insulted their neighbors. Fear of retaliation often stopped murders because... in this case, the children of the murdered person took revenge not only on the criminal, but also on the entire clan of the murderer.

N. M. Karamzin, however, referring to Nestor 8
Nestor (born and see unknown) is an outstanding ancient Russian writer of the 11th - early 11th centuries. He is considered the author of the ancient Russian chronicle monument “The Tale of Bygone Years”.

He notes that all this is inherent in the morals of the Russian Slavs, because the glades, for example, were more educated, more meek and quiet in their customs, their wives were bashful, and peace and harmony reigned in their families. This is confirmed by the Laurentian Chronicle, from which we learn that “the glades have their customs to be meek and quiet, and they have shame towards their daughters-in-law and sisters... and towards their parents, towards their mothers-in-law and towards their brothers-in-law, there is great shame for them, marriage customs for them....” The Drevlyans had wild customs and lived in dark forests, “living in an animal way, bestially, killing each other... and they never married, but kidnapped girls...”, i.e. marriages were unknown to them, and they simply kidnapped girls. The same customs existed among the northerners, Rodimichs, Vyatichi, who also lived in the forests like animals, cursed in the presence of their relatives and lived in celibacy, i.e. without any rituals.