Выбрать главу

as 1681, even the wise old men of the traditional elite - led in this instance by Vasilii Golitsyn - were actively searching for a new order to replace what had obviously been broken.[21] They failed, and it would be up to Peter, who personally witnessed the corruption of his father's legacy, to forge a new and profoundly monarchical political system.

The chancelleries

While the boyar and court elite led Muscovy, chancellery personnel - the prikaznye liudi - administered it. They were, as we have seen, distinctly second- class citizens at court, 'employees at will' serving at the pleasure of the tsar - or not. But the state was growing rapidly in the seventeenth century, and with it the administrative burden of far-flung, complex operations. Since the prikaz personnel needed organisational skill and a deep knowledge of affairs, the elite generally kept them employed and reasonably satisfied - the state could not run without them. If a chancellery man performed well and had the proper connections, he could advance, first, through the administrative ranks (pod'iachii to d'iak) and, then, to the duma (though very rarely and almost always to dumnyi d'iak, no further). This cursus honorum was steep: only a small proportion of all clerks (pod'iachie) were made d'iaki (secretaries) and few d'iaki were made dumnye d'iaki.38 As we have noted, late in the century some of the prikaz people occupied important positions in the government, and one served as de facto prime minister. This remarkable shift upward was a reflection of the growing importance of administrative work for the state.

The world of the prikaz people was different from that of any other Muscovite in a number of ways. First, the chancellery employees were literate, a fact that differentiated them from even most members of the elite (Koto- shikhin called the latter 'unlettered and uneducated').[22] As the century drew to a close, a few of them would even develop a taste for something we might sensibly call 'literature' (almost all of it imported), a first for Muscovy.40 Second, the prikaz people worked in offices run in quasi-rational fashion. The chancel­leries had many ofthe trademarks of the classic Weberian bureaucracy: written rules, regular procedures, functional differentiation, reward to merit.41 This is not, of course, to say that prikaz employees were insulated from the winds of nepotism, favouritism and even caprice. Far from it: most prikaz people were the sons of prikaz officials, all had patrons and not a few were summarily dismissed without cause. Nevertheless, the rudiments of the modern adminis­trative office were all present in the prikazy. Finally, chancellery workers lived in Moscow cheek-by-jowl with the elite: the prikazy were located in the Krem­lin and Kitai gorod and their employees lived in the environs. This proximity gave them access to power that was unimaginable for the typical Russian.

As the interests of the state expanded, so too did the ranks of the prikazy.[23]The number of prikaz people grew significantly in the seventeenth century, from a few hundred in 1613 to several thousand in 1689. The vast majority of them were lowly clerks (pod'iachie). These men did most of the work in the offices, and their numbers expanded mightily during the century: in i626 there were around 500 of them in the Moscow offices; by i698 there were nearly 3,000.[24] As in all Muscovite institutions, we find hierarchy among the clerks - junior (mladshii), middle (srednii) and senior (starshii). If a man were partic­ularly lucky, he might be appointed to d'iak. D'iaki ordinarily commanded the chancelleries, serving together with an extra-administrative servitor (usu­ally a man holding duma rank). They could be tapped for other services as well, as Kotoshikhin tells us: 'they [d'iaki] serve as associates of the boyars and okol'nichie and duma men and closest men in the chancelleries in Moscow and in the provinces, and of ambassadors in embassies; and they . . . admin­ister affairs of every kind, and hold trials, and are sent on various missions.'44 Like the pod'iachie, the numbers of d'iaki grew in the seventeenth century: in i626 there were around fifty serving in the chancelleries; by i698, there were roughly twice that many.45 Of the roughly 800 men who served as d'iaki in the century, only forty-seven ever achieved the exalted status of dumnyi d'iak. These men were super-secretaries: they attended the royal council (though they were required to stand during the proceedings), advised the tsar, and administered the most sensitive affairs.46 Of them, thirteen achieved the rank of dumnyi dvorianin; four, okol'nichii; and one, boyar.47 Naturally, all of these men were advanced late in the century, after Aleksei Mikhailovich had 'opened the ranks to merit'.

вернуться

21

A. I. Markevich, Istoriiamestnichestvav Moskovskomgosudarstve v XV-XVIIvekakh(Odessa: Tipografiia Odesskogo Vestnika, 1888), pp. 572ff.; V K. Nikol'skii, 'Boiarskaia popytka 1681 g.', Istoricheskie izvestiia izdavaemye Istoricheskim obshchestvom pri Moskovskom uni- versitete 2 (1917): 57-87; G. Ostrogorsky 'Das Projekt einer Rangtabelle aus der Zeit des Tsaren Fedor Alekseevich', Jahrbiicher fiir Kultur und Geschichte der Slaven 9 (1933): 86­138; M. Ia. Volkov, 'Ob otmene mestnichestva v Rossii', Istoriia SSSR, 1977, no. 2: 53-67; P. V Sedov, 'O boiarskoi popytke uchrezhdeniia namestnichestvav Rossii v 1681-82 gg.', Vestnik LGU 9 (1985): 25-9; Kollmann, By Honor Bound, pp. 226-31; and Bushkovitch, Peter the Great, pp. 118-19.

вернуться

22

Kotosixin, O Rossii, fo. 35v.

This development is discussed in S. I. Nikolaev, 'Poeziia i diplomatiia (iz literaturnoi deiatel'nosti Posol'skogo prikaza v 1670-kh gg.)', TODRL 42 (1989): 143-73, and Edward L. Keenan, The Kurbskii-Groznyi Apocrypha: The Seventeenth-Century Genesis of the 'Corre­spondence' Attributed to Prince A. M. Kurbskiiand Tsar Ivan IV (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971), pp. 84-9.

вернуться

23

On the chancellery personnel and their growth in the seventeenth century, see Demi- dova, Sluzhilaia biurokratiia; N. F. Demidova, 'Gosudarstvennyi apparat Rossii v XVII veke', IZ 108 (1982): 109-54; N. F. Demidova, 'Biurokratizatsiia gosudarstvennogo appa- rata absoliutizma v XVII-XVIII vv.', in N. M. Druzhinin (ed.), AbsoliutizmvRossii (XVII- XVIII vv.). Sbornik statei k semidesiatiletiiu so dnia rozhdeniia i sorokapiatiletiiu nauchnoi i pedagogicheskoi deiatel'nosti B. B. Kafengauza (Moscow: Nauka, 1964), pp. 206-42; and N. F. Demidova, 'Prikaznye liudi XVII v. (Sotsial'nyi sostav i istochniki formirovaniia)', IZ 90 (i972): 332-54.

вернуться

24

Demidova, Sluzhilaia biurokratiia, p. 23.