Order huts in the 17th century. Command hut. "The clerk's hut" in books
Appointment of a voivode
Voivodship positions were usually filled by retired servicemen. Applicants for the position of governor - boyars, nobles and boyar children - filed a petition in the name of the tsar, in which they asked to be appointed to the voivodeship in order to "feed". However, officially the voivode for his service received, in addition to estates, local cash salaries. The voivode was appointed by a discharge order, approved by the tsar and the Boyar Duma, and obeyed the order that was in charge of the corresponding city with the county.
The term of service of the governor usually lasted one to three years.
Several governors were appointed to large cities; one of them was considered the main one. In small towns there was one governor. In the settlements and volosts, the governor exercised his power with the help of clerks.
Command hut
All matters related to the management of the city and the county were carried out in a command or congress hut, headed by a deacon sent from Moscow. The sovereign's letters and seals, receipt and expenditure books and paintings of various taxes and fees, the fees themselves (the sovereign's treasury) were stored here. In large cities, clerk's huts were divided into tables run by clerks. The number of clerks in the huts was different. In the command hut there were also bailiffs, allotters, messengers and watchmen who carried out the orders of the voivode.
When changing the governor, all cases and state property were surrendered according to inventories and books (delivery inventories or painted lists). One copy of the inventory was sent to the order, which was in charge of the city with the county.
Voivode functions
The administrative and police supervision of the governor extended to personal life local population. The governors were obliged to take measures against forbidden games and seductive spectacles, had to eradicate the schism, make sure that the parishioners attended church and fasted in a timely manner. In large cities, police supervision of the population, fortifications and guards was carried out by the mayor (former city clerk) subordinate to the voivode.
The financial powers of the governor were wide. The scribe books, which were compiled for financial reports, contained descriptions of land in terms of quantity and quality, profitability of land (yield), duties in favor of the feudal landowner. Where yards (in cities) were taken as the basis for calculation, information about them was also entered into scribe books.
After the end of the Polish-Swedish intervention, watchmen were sent from Moscow to all parts of the state to determine the solvency of the population, compiling watch books. The governors were obliged to render all possible assistance to these financial agents from the center.
Collections of state taxes were carried out by elected persons: elders, heads and kissers. The governors exercised financial control over the activities of these elected authorities. All the collected money was usually brought to the moving house.
The governor had great military-administrative functions. He recruited service people - nobles and boyar children, kept their lists indicating the estate, salary, serviceability of each, made periodic reviews and sent them to the service at the first request of the Discharge Order.
The voivode and local servicemen were in charge "according to the instrument": archers, gunners, collars, etc.
The governor was responsible for all city institutions, fortress cannons, various military and edible state supplies, which he accepted and handed over according to the inventory.
In varying degrees of subordination, the voivode had a number of officials: the siege head (commandant of the fortress), secession, guard, archery, Cossack, Pushkar, bypass, barn and pit heads.
Disadvantages of voivodeship administration
The scope of power of the governor was very wide. However, the power of the governor was not strong, capable of quickly and efficiently performing its functions. The governors did not have a sufficiently strong apparatus at their disposal, and in every way important issues should have been debited from the Moscow order. At the same time, there was no real control over the activities of the governor. The orders that the governors received from the orders were vague and not very specific: “how comely”, depending on “the case there”, “as God will enlighten”. This led to the arbitrariness of the governors, who identified management with feeding, which, although it was abolished, actually flourished. Voivods, not content with voluntary donations, were engaged in extortions from the urban population, and this was the main and most profitable object and source of voivodship enrichment. In addition, insufficient preparedness to resolve administrative issues, and sometimes simply illiteracy, especially in the first half of the 17th century, served as a serious obstacle to the performance of various duties by governors.
For the reasons stated, the voivodship authorities were not strong enough to implement a firm political line. In the first quarter of the 18th century, when it was necessary to quickly and decisively deal with various manifestations of discontent, collect taxes, recruit into the army, carry out the transformations prescribed from the center, a provincial reform was carried out: the huts were liquidated, their functions were distributed between the provincial and voivodship offices, magistrates, courts and other newly created institutions.
Literature
- Eroshkin N. P. History of state institutions of pre-revolutionary Russia. - M., 1968. - S. 70 - 72, 95.
- Essays on the history of the USSR. 17th century - M., 1955. - S. 384-391.
- Brockhaus F., Efron I. encyclopedic Dictionary. - St. Petersburg, 1892. - T. VI a. - S. 828-829.
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .
See what the "Provincial Administration" is in other dictionaries:
Voivodship Office Encyclopedia of Law
Voivodship Administration, a local (uyezd) link in the system of government bodies of Russia in the 2nd half of the 16th century. 1775. Consisted of city governors, who together with clerks headed clerks or congress huts, and from the end of the 17th century. in large ... ... Russian history
PROVISIONAL DEPARTMENT- a local link in the system of government bodies of Russia in the 2nd half of the 16th century. - 1775. Initially introduced in border towns, as well as in territories annexed to Russia (Volga region, Siberia). It consisted of city governors, ... ... Russian statehood in terms. IX - beginning of XX century
Voivodship Office- in Russia from the 2nd half of the XVI V. local (county) link in the system of state administration, introduced in the border towns and territories annexed to Russia (Volga region, Siberia) and formed by the 20s of the 17th century. Consisted of... Big Law Dictionary
One of the forms of local government (see) Ancient Rus', which was both a privilege and a duty of the communities to administer a criminal court and monitor the security of the gubernia district. The labial administration was established by the so-called labial ... ... Russian history
Military regional administration- MILITARY REGIONAL ADMINISTRATION, in the broadest sense of the word, subordination of administrative authorities. devices of some loose parts of the Empire military. min. In present. time in one form or another in the subordination of the military. Ministry of Justice is admin. device 14 reg. and oh wah…… Military Encyclopedia
Coat of arms of the county center Coat of arms of the province ... Wikipedia
VOEVODA, military leader, ruler of the Slavic peoples. In Rus' since the 10th century. In the Russian state at the head of a regiment, detachment (late 15th early 18th centuries), city (mid-16th century 1775), province (1719-75).
st. Spasskaya, 4 b
The "Drinking House with a Basement", now also known as the "Prikazhnaya Hut", is one of the few monuments of civil architecture of Vyatka-Khlynov that has survived from the time of its pre-regular building. The exact date of construction and the name of the architect have not yet been established. It is most probable that this building appeared after one of the great fires of the first half of the 18th century. It was first mentioned in the list of "public buildings" compiled by the mayor Yakov Mashkovtsev in 1771.
"Drinking House" is a one-story building on a high basement, inscribed in complex relief slope of the Zasorny ravine. The characteristic three-part layout of the house goes back to the traditions of the 17th century, which passed into stone architecture from wooden architecture. The uncomplicated decoration of the monument is made in the provincial baroque style. The façades are modestly decorated with window architraves in the form of frames, pilasters on pedestals and a row of croutons at the base of the cornice. The building is covered with a steep plank pitched roof.
"Drinking House" in 2014
The stone house with a basement belonged to the treasury until the abolition of the drinking system in 1864. In that year, the building was ceded by the city authorities for 300 rubles, and from 1865 the house began to be rented out. In 1877, one of the taverns of the merchant Pyotr Savintsev was located here, since 1889 - Pyotr Shvetsov, since 1895 - the merchants Alexandrovs. In 1890, Shvetsov, mentioned above, asked the city government to allow him to break through 2 windows on the north side of the house, and in the rooms "arrange a few windows on the ceiling". A special commission headed by a member of the council Bronnikov and city architect Kurapov allowed this to be done.
In 1901–1907 the building housed an overnight house, which at its own expense was supported by a charitable society. In 1909, the drinking establishment returned to the house, this time of the merchant Zagoskin. In 1918 stone house with a basement was occupied by a military guardhouse. In 1924, it was municipalized and transferred to the Leningrad Consumer Society as communal property No. 432. In 1932, the building housed the molasses factory of the Record artel.
"Prikaznaya hut" in 1957
According to the established tradition, since Soviet times, the name “Prikaznaya izba” has been preserved behind the building, although throughout its history the house has been used as a drinking establishment. The architect and local historian A. G. Tinsky believed that “the source of the error is one phrase from a description made in 1895 by a member of the city council N. Bronnikov: “There is a legend that there was a command hut in this house”. Perhaps that is why the house for many years received the name "Prikaznaya Izba". However, today both names are used to designate it.
The building was restored and handed over to the local history museum for the celebration of the 600th anniversary of the city of Kirov in 1974. The restoration was preceded by a note about the house of the authors of the publication “By the Roads of the Vyatka Land” (B.V. Gnedovsky and E.D. Dobrovolskaya), who described the unsatisfactory physical condition ancient monument of Vyatka history. In particular, the architects stated: “Behind a high wooden fence, in the depths of the household yard of kvass production, stands a neglected long one-story brick building... The earliest surviving stone civil structure, not only in Kirov, but, perhaps, in the entire Kirov region, deserves a better fate...”. The monument was restored in 1973–1975. designed by Moscow architects B.V. Gnedovsky and L.D. Lapkina by the Kirov Special Scientific and Restoration Production Workshop.
"Prikaznaya hut" in 1983
Today, the building of the Drinking House houses the department of folk art crafts of the Kirov Regional Museum of Local Lore.
Photo: GAKO, pastvu.com, L. Kalinina
Voivodship Office- administrative building . Also known as the command hut, the first stone building in.
Irkutsk Voivodship Office: encyclopedic reference
It was built in 1703–1704 under the direction and with the direct participation of a Moscow apprentice stonemason. Dimensions - 10 × 20 × 10 m.
Initially, it had a defensive value, so the northern wall was made without windows. On the ground floor there were pantries with separate entrances. iron doors and internal locks. On the second floor, where the staircase on the western facade led, there were a vestibule and two separate chambers for the voivode and clerks. On the wall of one of the chambers, contemporaries recorded the inscription: “The city of the great king, we know God is in gravity", which used to decorate the entrance to the command hut. Above the entrance to the voivodship office there was an inscription: “ By the grace of God, in the years of salvation in 1704, by decree of the Grand Sovereign Tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, Autocrat of All Great and Small and White Russia, this chamber was built under the steward and governor Yuri Fedorovich Shishkin and his comrades».
According to the description, the building was painted on the outside, inside the chambers the ceilings were covered with canvas, primed with gesso and painted. oil paint. The interior decoration is typical for clerical institutions of Russia at the end of the 17th - beginning of the 18th century. The voivodship office has been significantly rebuilt. Instead of an external wooden staircase, an internal stone staircase was folded, a part of doorways, windows were cut through on the western and northern facades of the second floor.
By the beginning of the 19th century, it ceased to be the residence of the rulers of the province and the city and was used to house the treasury. There is a drawing of the facade and floor plans of the building, drawn up in 1800 by the provincial architect.
In the first quarter of the 19th century, the building fell into disrepair. Demolished in 1823 in connection with the installation of a wooden stump to strengthen the bank of the river. . A stone slab with a message about the date of construction was transferred to, was lost over time.
Irkutsk. Historical and local lore dictionary. - Irkutsk: Sib. book, 2011
Application. Command hut - the first brick building in Irkutsk
The first brick building is the voivodship command hut, built in 1704 on the territory. The building closely adjoined the fortress wall on the north side, had 2 floors.
The wooden cities of old Rus' were often devastated by fires. After another devastating fire, Metropolitan Pavel I of Tobolsk turned to the tsar with a request to build a stone cathedral. The year 1680 turned out to be especially fiery: in addition to the Siberian Tobolsk, Oryol was burning that year, the Volga Balakhna was burning, and in the Kremlin itself the Church of the Twelve Apostles, which is part of the Patriarchal Palace, was on fire. Probably, that is why the sovereign heeded the request of the metropolitan and in the same 1680 signed a royal decree, which ordered the Siberian governors to build state-owned buildings - order huts, churches, customs, powder and grain barns, guest yards - from brick.
But issuing a decree is one thing, but executing it is a completely different matter. If wooden architecture was familiar to Siberians, and building material there was an abundance of stone construction around, then stone construction required not only trained specialists, but also the creation of brick workshops, a kind of first enterprises in the construction industry. Tobolsk mastered the first brick business, followed by Tyumen - and only in 1701, the third of the Siberian cities, Irkutsk began to build brick buildings.
The first mention of the fact that there are brick-makers in Irkutsk can be found in the Irkutsk account book for 1700: “Given from the treasury of the great sovereign to the stove-maker, Irkutsk townsman Ivan Kirpishnik, for 1468 bricks, for 20 samples and from laying furnaces in the sovereign’s court where the governors live. The money went to the expense of 5 p. 19 Altyn. As the historian Nadezhda Polunina explains in her book “At the Origins of the Stone City”, Ivan Kirpishnik made the stove not simple, but front, and decorated it with multi-color ceramic tiles- tiles (“samples”) of their own manufacture, which means that they were an experienced craftsman. He was not a visitor, but his own, a townsman, and, judging by the lists, he lived in his own court, with his two-year-old son Afonka, and paid rent to the treasury 10 altyns. Later you can meet the mention of another master - Ivan Ilyin, who “The great sovereign was issued from the treasury from the beer sale of money for the work of the brickmaker Ivan Ilyin, that he dressed up again to cover the large cauldron with his brick. Money is given 2 rubles.
Brick production was located in four sheds for. From the inventories, we know the entire "factory supply": a caddy for water, two tubs, four water-bearing buckets, thirty benches, nine stretchers and thirty brick machines. The technology was simple: in one of the sheds there was a kiln, in the other three the raw material was dried and the finished brick was sorted. A pit was dug near the sheds, where clay was kneaded, and sheds were placed for firewood. Under the supervision of master bricklayers, apprentices from the townspeople worked here - orderlies, dryers, roasters. The orderlies prepared the clay, crushed it, and put it into a mold. The forms were large, the clay in them was crushed with bare heels, which is why the brick was called underfoot. The form was removed from the compacted workpiece, and the raw brick itself was placed in rows on benches (hence the name of the apprentice - “orderman”. The dryers watched how the raw material dried. It should not warp, wrinkle, crumble. it was kept in a draft. When the brick cooled down, became dark gray and durable, it was laid in a herringbone pattern on the grates in the oven and a light "steam" fire was lit, which evaporated water in three or four days. , and two days later the fire was extinguished.The scarlet and red brick was considered the best - it went to the laying of walls and vaults, and worse, "white with steam", was suitable for stoves.
By the middle of 1701, the first batch of fifty thousand bricks was ready. From Verkhoturye, by order of the Duma clerk Andrei Vinius - an outstanding statesman, talented administrator, military engineer, diplomat and politician, who headed the Siberian order in 1694 - 1703, "two stone craftsmen" arrived and "a stone office on the shore began to be built" . By the way, Andrei Andreevich Vinius, by origin a descendant of the Dutch, did a lot for the development of industrial construction in the Urals and beyond the Urals. Later, he would become one of Peter the Great's close associates and, already as the head of the Artillery Order, he would actually re-create Russian artillery after the defeat near Narva, thereby preparing a brilliant victory for Russian weapons near Poltava.
Unfortunately, the first stone building has not survived to this day. Appearance and the interior decoration of the office, or the clerk's hut - and in fact, the premises for the regional administration, we can restore according to the inventory of 1704 made by the clerk Aleksashka Kurdyukov when transferring Yuri Shishkin's affairs to his successor Larion Senyavin:
“In the city wall of the great sovereign, there is a stone hut with three dwellings: the first is where the governors sit, the other is the middle one with clerk's tables, the third is the front one with hewn smooth ceilings and lined with canvases and tarnished, and on them the ceilings are rolled on mats. At the front chamber there is an iron door on the porch, and above those doors on the stone there is a carved chronicle and a transom and gzymza painted with different colors, and above that chronicle is the image of the miracle worker Nicholas ... the doors are painted with different colors ... from the courtyard there are iron shutters ... the windows are mica windows , but inserted from the inside ... three chambers of pantries with brick vaults and with opening connections and with iron squares, and in those three chambers there are iron doors and interior locks, and iron bars and shutters in the windows. And those pantry chambers were made and on them the above-described stone command hut was made by decree of the great sovereign and according to letters from the stolniks and governors Yury Fedorovich Shishkin and his comrades in the past in 1703 and in the current 1704 and are covered with a hemp zalininami ".
The command hut was placed in the fence (part of the fortress wall between two towers) of the northern wall, that is, between the passing Spasskaya tower and the corner northeast. The building appears to have been modeled after wooden buildings, and the first floor, like a cellar in a hut, was used for household purposes. The treasury, goods of the Chinese caravan trade, as well as other valuables, from weapons to scarce iron items, were stored here. It is not surprising that the pantries were equipped with a multitude of iron doors, bolts and bars on the windows.
On the second floor there was an office with rooms for the governor and clerks. The description of the ceiling is interesting: as in an ordinary hut, the ceiling was made in the form of a solid log flooring on mats, but in the Irkutsk command hut the ceiling was upholstered with canvas and smeared with gesso, a special primer traditional for Russian icons, made from powdered chalk mixed with fish glue .
The windows in the command chamber were made of mica plates in lead bindings (in Russia, glass will appear in wide use only in a century). The mica plates at the top of the windows were painted with paints and created a kind of stained-glass window.
Of course, icons were always hanging in the voivodeship chambers. In the governor's room there was an image of the Vladimir Mother of God in a chased silver setting with gilded margins, and the clerks had an image of Archangel Michael. One must think that the interior of the command hut, with a smooth white ceiling, with floors covered with crimson carpets, with icons in expensive frames mysteriously flickering in the twilight, favorably emphasized the significance and solemnity of this public place, it was very different from the Spartan decoration of other city huts.
A commemorative inscription was carved above the wooden porch of the chamber:
“By the grace of God, in the years of salvation in 1704, by decree of the Great Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Duke Peter Alekseevich, the Autocrat of all great and small and white Russia, this chamber was built under the steward and governor Yuri Fedorovich Shishkin and his comrades.”
Interestingly, at the same time as the Irkutsk command hut, a command hut was erected in Tobolsk. Both buildings were made according to the same plan prescribed by the Siberian order. In the design of the facade of the Tobolsk command hut, built according to the project of a Russian architect, there were features inspired by Italian architecture. The design of the Irkutsk command hut was simpler and more practical, but it became a kind of standard for the stone architecture of Siberia. According to her model, a stone command hut was erected in Yakutsk, similar in interior decoration and external design facade, up to the presence of a commemorative inscription above the front door.
The stone command hut survived Irkutsk jail- in 1790, after another flood, the prison was dismantled by order of the Irkutsk military governor. By that time, it had finally lost its military-administrative significance and represented “a dilapidated wooden fortification, which was subject to complete decay and from time to time fell apart and disfigured the whole surrounding place”. The hut stood until about 1823, when, during the capital strengthening of the shore, all the houses adjacent close to the water were demolished, and a public garden was laid out on the resulting wasteland.
Lyustritsky D. Beginning of stone affairs // : newspaper. - September 2, 2006.
Notes
- Polunina N.M. At the source of the stone city. - Irkutsk, 1979. - P.14.
- Manasein V.S. Irkutsk prison / Historical and archaeological essay // Proceedings of the Society for the Study of the East Siberian Territory. - 1936. - V.1. - P.19.
Literature
- Polunina N. M. At the source of the stone city. - Irkutsk, 1979.
- Polunina N. M. Living old Angara. - M., 1990.
Appears Smolensk discharge order.
Ivan IV
Time of Troubles
After the death of Boris Godunov, no new orders were established before the election of Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov to the throne, due to the general devastation, some ceased their activities. So, with the loss of Smolensk for Russia, the Smolensk discharge order was destroyed, and Dmitrovsky and Ryazan court orders are also not found.
Mikhail Fedorovich
Alexey Mikhailovich
Fedor Alekseevich
Regency of Princess Sophia
During the reign of Sofya Alekseevna (-), the Panikhida Order was closed and the Great Russian Order was re-established.
After the reign of Princess Sophia until the establishment of colleges
Location of orders
Composition of orders, their department and structure
Each order consisted of two parts: one dealt with the solution of cases, the other - the written part. The first were called judges, the second - clerks and clerks.
There were one judges in orders, and two or more in more important ones. One of the judges was in charge. One of the members of the boyar duma was usually appointed as the chief judge, sometimes a stolnik or nobleman. The rest of the judges were mostly duma or simple clerks. An exception to general rule was the order of secret affairs, which consisted only of clerks and clerks. This is due to the special nature of this order, which was, as it were, the king's own office.
Judges, clerks and clerks were appointed and dismissed by the supreme power. To enforce various orders and orders, there were interpreters in the embassy order, in the palace - pipe workers, in other orders - boyar children, weekly workers, batmen, gunners. Their duty was to call litigants to court and bail the accused, to keep them under their supervision until the trial, to collect debts, to carry out punishments, to deliver correspondence of orders according to their affiliation.
Departments of orders were not strictly demarcated; sometimes so many heterogeneous cases were concentrated in the order that it almost did not live up to its title. The judicial part was not separated in orders from the administrative; it can almost be taken as a rule that the order was a judicial place for those persons whom he, by the nature of his affairs, had in his administration. Orders acted in the name of the sovereign and were the highest government and judicial places; complaints about their decisions were brought to the sovereign and considered in the royal duma.
Judges, clerks and clerks met in orders daily, except for Sundays and public holidays, and had to practice a certain number of hours. In urgent cases, they were to meet on Sundays as well. Professor V. I. Sergeevich believed that the cases in the orders were decided, in all likelihood, unanimously; Nevolin and Professor M.F. Vladimirsky-Budanov thought differently. “Although according to the law,” says the first, “in those orders where there were several judges, the cases were to be decided by all the judges together, but in fact the primordial judge had such power that he did what he wanted” (“Coll.”, VI, 141). “Even in the case of a plurality of members,” Vladimirsky-Budanov noted, “the presence did not constitute a collegium and matters were not decided by a majority of votes.” This opinion is based on the decree of Peter I of December 22, 1718 (Poln. Sobr. Zak., 3261), which, regarding the establishment of collegiums, says that they will not decide matters in the same way as in the old orders, where what the boyar ordered, then comrades performed it. In the hands of the clerks, according to Vladimirsky-Budanov, “virtually the entire administration of the state was; they extremely abused their position due to the lack of higher and secondary education and the insufficient definition in the law of the conditions of public service.
office work
The offices of some orders were divided into howl And tables who were in charge of a certain kind of affairs or a certain branch of government. Cases in orders were made on columns of plain paper. Prior to the publication of the Code, it is not clear that cases, as they become available, are entered into any register. They were reported in their entirety or as a special note with the addition of the necessary certificates and legalizations. The decisions of the judges were written on original papers, or on notes, or entered into special books. The "Code" prescribed in each order to have a special book signed by the clerk, where clerks were to record court cases and court state duties immediately after the end of the trial. In 1680, it was decreed that in decrees and in general in the affairs of the order, only the chief judge should be indicated by name. Clerks and clerks fastened and marked the deeds; the boyars and, in general, the judges of the order did not put their hands anywhere; only ambassadors signed treaty records in international relations.
The interrelation of orders between themselves took place through memories. The only exception was one Discharge: until 1677, in the order where the Duma people sat, the Discharge wrote in memory, and in other orders - by decrees. In 1677, it was ordered that in all cases, without exception, the Discharge wrote orders only by decrees. Memory and decrees were written in the name of the judges, and later - in the name of the chief judge with his comrades; the name of the order itself was indicated only on the envelope.
Decrees that were sent from orders to cities to boyars, governors and orderly people about various matters, according to Kotoshikhin, were written in this form: “from the tsar and Grand Duke Alexei Mikhailovich, all Great and Small and White Russia, the autocrat, to our boyar such- That". In the same way, they wrote to the middle governors: first they designated the rank, if the person to whom they wrote was a prince, steward or solicitor, then the name; addressing a simple nobleman, they wrote only his name, patronymic and nickname. If the boyar, governor, clerks, ambassadors, envoys, messengers, etc. wrote replies on various matters that they were in charge of to the tsar in order, then there was such a form for this: “to the sovereign tsar and the grand duke”, then the title followed, and after the title: “your slave Yanka Cherkaska (Ivashko Vorotynskaya) with his comrades (if they were) beat him with his forehead (he beats him with his forehead). In unsubscribes, these persons did not indicate their title and rank. The replies were addressed not to an order, but to such and such persons (judges) or to such and such a person (chief judge) with comrades, in such and such an order.
The same form was observed in petitions to orders. A simple person was written in a petition with the same half-name as the prince; townspeople and peasants were written not as serfs, but as "slaves and orphans." In the same way, wives and daughters of various ranks wrote themselves with a half-name and “slaves and orphans”, although their fathers and husbands were called in petitions by their full names, meaning their nickname and rank (Kotoshikhin, ch. VIII, p. 5).
The interaction of orders with cities before the establishment of the post office in 1666 was carried out by way of courier. In 1649, in order to avoid sending several messengers in the same direction, as was often the case, it was decided that orders should communicate with each other before sending a messenger anywhere. The answer to the papers sent from the governor and did not require a speedy decision was sent not by express messenger, but on occasion. In the same way, governors with clerks were not supposed to send unimportant papers to Moscow with express messengers, but to wait for messengers from Moscow and through them already pass the papers. Cases in orders were sometimes, by special order of the sovereign, subject to revisions, but this happened rarely and only in special cases.
Litigation in orders
Separate orders were in charge of the court of those persons who were subordinate to them. If the defendant found that the judge was an enemy to him or he had some business with him, then he turned to the king with a petition and the latter appointed his case for analysis in another order. The defendant should have done this before the trial; otherwise, his petition remained without result and the court was recognized as correct. The claim to the order was filed by filing by the plaintiff to the judges of the attached memory, so named because it led to the sending of the bailiff to summon the defendant to court. The clerks consolidated this memory, wrote it down in books, and then sent bailiffs to the defendant so that he, his wife, son, or attorney (“the person who goes about business,” as Kotoshikhin puts it) would be held accountable in the order. When they found the defendant or his attorney, they took written notes on him and on the plaintiff that they would appear on time for the trial. This term was appointed by the judges or by the plaintiff and the defendant by mutual agreement. If for some reason the appointed term turned out to be inconvenient for them, then, according to their petition, it could be pushed further. While the plaintiff did not represent guarantors in a debt case, it was not understood; if the defendant did not represent them, then he was placed under the supervision of the bailiffs or kept chained in the order until the guarantors were presented to them or until the end of the court case. If the plaintiff did not appear at the time appointed for the consideration of the case, then he would be denied a claim; if the defendant did not appear, then he was considered guilty without trial and the case was decided in favor of the plaintiff. Sometimes warrant notes were taken from the plaintiff and defendant so that they would not leave Moscow until the end of the case. In the event of a violation of this record by the plaintiff, he lost his claim, and the royal court duties were taken on his guarantors; in the event of the defendant's departure from Moscow, the claim and fees were forwarded without trial from his guarantors, even though the defendant was not guilty. When the time set for the hearing of the case came, the plaintiff and the defendant appeared in court. The plaintiff filed a petition with the judge; the judge, after reading it, asked the defendant if he was ready to answer? If he was not ready, then he was given a certain period for this, but in this case the plaintiff's petition was not read to him and was not given to him. If the plaintiff declared that he was ready to answer the plaintiff's petition, then the latter was read to him and he had to object to it. He could make objections personally or through attorneys. During the trial, the clerks wrote down the speeches of the parties, and at the end of the judgment they read what was written to them, and the parties put their hands to the court case; for the illiterate, the one whom he believed signed. After that, the plaintiff and the defendant were again bailed out, and the clerks wrote out briefly what who said, as well as legalizations on the basis of which it was possible to decide this case, and the judges decided it; if the case could not be resolved in the order where the judgment took place, then it was sent to the tsar and the boyars, who made the decision. Cases were ordered to be resolved according to the Code and royal decrees, and in case of any difficulties, seek clarification from the Duma or the Tsar himself. The evidence in the lawsuits was the kissing of the cross, testimonies and written documents. In cases of monetary, loan, commodity, etc., in which written evidence, bondage and records could be used, the latter were decisive (Code X, 169; XIV Art. 16), and if anyone had bondage or records in some way destroyed, then at least he represented, says Kotoshikhin, and 20 people of witnesses, the testimony of the latter was put into nothing. The statute of limitations for bondage and recordings was 15 years. If the claim was found to be correct, the money was collected in favor of the plaintiff from the defendant; in addition, he was charged a royal duty, 10 money from the ruble, and legal costs (“squander, red tape and losses”) in favor of the plaintiff. If the defendant did not pay the debt, he was forced to do so by right; then, in the event of the insolvency of the defendant and the impossibility on his part to satisfy the amount of the claim, he was “issued in the head” to the plaintiff, that is, he was given for some time on known, determined by the code, conditions in the service of the plaintiff; royal duties in this case were collected from the plaintiff. After the time specified for repayment of the debt, the plaintiff was obliged to bring the person who was in his service to the very order that gave him this person "head", and the order set him free. No one could keep more than a certain period of persons issued by the head. In cases of dishonor, money was exacted from the guilty person in the amount in which the offended received a salary from the king; for dishonoring the wife was punished twice, the daughter - four times, the son who was not in the service - half against the father. In case of insolvency, the perpetrator was beaten with a whip. Cases in the orders were ordered to be resolved without delay, but this was never carried out, and the orders were known for the slowness of their decisions, which became proverbial under the name of "Moscow red tape". If the defendant, during the hearing of the case, filed a claim against his plaintiff, his case should have been examined immediately, without leaving the court, even if there were two and three claims on different petitions. Each of these claims constituted an independent case, and the clerks could not combine them into one. This procedure for reviewing the defendant's claims was established to reduce red tape. In criminal cases, which were in charge of the Razboyny and Zemsky orders, the orders carried out the investigative process - the search.
List and division system of orders
The total number of orders is still unknown with accuracy and is determined differently. Kotoshikhin in the 1660s indicates 42 orders, Professor Vladimirsky-Budanov counts only 39 of them, other researchers - 40, 47 and more than 60. The difference in the score comes mainly from the fact that scientists did not agree, firstly, regarding the time for which they want to set the total number of orders; secondly, some consider as independent orders such, for example, as order of the gold and silver business, royal And Tsaritsyn workshops, etc., while others (Vladimirsky-Budanov) see them only as economic and industrial establishments; in the same way, some rank among the total number temporary orders, which were soon, after the need had passed, and were destroyed, while others do not rank them.
Since the departments of orders were not strictly demarcated, the system of division of orders generally mixes up three bases: by type of business, by classes of the population, and by territory. Often one and the same kind of affairs was in charge of many orders (for example, a court); often one order was in charge of a well-known city in one respect, others were in charge of it in other respects; one order was in charge of one category of the population, other orders - another, etc. This presented a lot of difficulties; often subjects did not know at all which order they were subordinate to in this or that case. Despite the diversity and uncertainty of the department of individual orders, the latest scientists are trying, for the convenience of review, to reduce orders to several specific groups, taking into account major subjects their departments. In view of the artificiality of such a division, each scientist usually creates his own system of orders. This division is simpler for M.F. Vladimirsky-Budanov (“Review”, p. 177 et seq.), More precisely, for Nevolin. The latter distinguishes between two kinds of orders: some were in charge of a certain category of affairs in the whole state in general, or at least in a significant part of it; others were in charge of only a certain part of the state, moreover, either in different branches of government, or only in the judiciary (Soch., vol. VI, p. 143). In the future, we adhere to the list of orders compiled by Nevolin as more complete.
Anticipating the list of orders, we note as the main and most important institution that crowned the entire administrative system Moscow kingdom:
For the production of cases subject to direct consideration of the king
Palace
- Palace court order (1664-1709). He was in charge of the court affairs of the palace people.
On the management of military affairs
- Order of German feed - mentioned in the notebooks of 1636-1638. (according to other sources in 1632-1640) Nothing is known about his department: probably, his duties were to support foreigners who were in the Russian service. Some researchers believe that the order was created only during the Smolensk War and was in charge of collecting grain supplies for mercenary troops. In 1626-38. the judge of the order of the German feed was Ivan Ogarev, the son of Foma-Nelyub Vasilievich Ogarev, the Samara voivode. Actually, the collection of German fodder was carried out earlier, so in March 1612, Grigory Muravyov complained in a petition addressed to Jacob Delagardi and Prince I.N.
- The order of cash distribution - repeatedly established order under Mikhail Fedorovich and Alexei Mikhailovich, temporarily - for the distribution of salaries to military people.
- Military naval order (since 1698)
On the management of state property, income and expenditure
Control and revision functions
On the management of affairs of state improvement
- The order for the construction of almshouses is listed in the notebooks from the 1680s. Its purpose was purely charitable.
Industry
- The order of official affairs - “The order that they beat the strong with a forehead and the order of official affairs” (1622-1660s). Several times stood out from the detective order and united with him. He was the court of appeal for court cases of the Local and Kholopye orders.
Territorial
quarters see also: Zemsky orders. Initially, large territorial units of the Grand Duchy of Moscow were called quarters, which were in charge of four districts: Vladimir, Novgorod, Ryazan and Kazan. Later, with the growth of the territory of the state, the number of institutions increased, but the usual name remained - a quarter.
see also:
Orders
This may also include judicial territorial orders:
History and circle of the department of individual orders
Pan order
Mentioned in 1620. Nevolin thinks that "its origin is hidden in Russia's relations with Lithuania and Poland, which developed from the events that preceded the accession to the throne of Mikhail Feodorovich"("Coll.", VI, 173). It was probably closed after the conclusion of peace with Poland and Sweden.
Zemstvo orders or yards
See resp. article.
Novgorod quarter
bears this name since 1618; in the reign of John IV, it existed under the name of the Novgorod order of Novgorod-Nizhny. Since 1657, it was under the authority of the Posolsky Prikaz; in it sat the embassy's Duma clerk and a simple clerk. Managed the cities of Veliky Novgorod, Pskov, Nizhny Novgorod, Arkhangelsk, Vologda, Pomeranian and border cities with Sweden. Revenues from these cities collected up to 100 thousand rubles. In 1670, the Novgorod quarter was renamed the Novgorod Prikaz, under Peter the Great, it came under the control of the Posolsky Prikaz.
Ustyug quarter
appeared instead of those that existed at the end of the 16th century. quarters of the clerk Petelin, and a little later - the clerk Vakhromeev. The first time occurs in 1611; in the notebooks it appears continuously from 1627 to 1680. A boyar and 2-3 clerks sat in it; she was in charge of the cities of Bezhetsky Verkh, Venev, Vyazma, Zvenigorod, Klin, Mozhaisk, Poshekhony, Rzheva Volodimerova, Ruza, Salt Vychegodskaya, Staritsa, Totma, Veliky Ustyug, Zheleznopolskaya Ustyug and others. Income from these cities collected up to 20 thousand rubles. In 1680, the Ustyug quarter was renamed into an order and subordinated to the Ambassadorial order.
Kostroma quarter
See resp. article.
Galician quarter
See resp. article.
Vladimir quarter
existed since 1629, although it appears in the notebooks since 1642. The cities of Vereya, Vladimir, Volokolumsk, Zaraisk, Kaluga, Krapivna, Likhvin, Mikhailov, Orel, Pereyaslav Ryazansky, Putivl, Ryazhsk, Rzheva Empty, Sapozhok, Tarusa, Tver, Torzhok, Tula, etc. In 1681, the Vladimir quarter was given over to the embassy's office.
Smolensk order
or the order of the Smolensk Principality. The Smolensk discharge has been mentioned since 1514, but then, with the loss of Smolensk, it was destroyed. The Smolensk order arose, probably, under Alexei Mikhailovich, along with the return of Smolensk to Russian rule; in the affairs of the Ambassadorial order, he has been listed since 1657. In 1680, the Smolensk order was subordinated to the Ambassadorial order.
Order of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania
was established in 1656 to manage the cities conquered from Poland - Vilna, Polotsk, Mogilev, etc. Since most of these cities were again returned to Poland under the Andrusov Treaty, the order itself was destroyed already in 1667, although according to the notebooks of the case it appears as early as 1669. In 1670, it was ordered that the affairs of the Lithuanian order be sent to the Novgorod order, which also included all the cities that had not been returned to Poland and had been in charge of the Lithuanian order until then.
Little Russian order
or the order of Little Russia. The exact date of its establishment is not known. In the affairs of the Ambassadorial order, he has been listed since 1649; according to Vivliofika, it was established when Little Russia was united with Russia, that is, in 1654; it appears in the notebooks from 1663. The same boyar was sitting on this order as in the Galician quarter, and with him the clerk. He was in charge of the order of the Zaporizhzhya army, the cities of Kiev, Chernihiv, Nizhyn, Pereyaslav, Novobogoroditsk in Samara, as well as the affairs of the arrival of spiritual and secular people from Little Russia and correspondence with the hetmans on Polish, Turkish and Tatar border affairs. No income was received for this order. At the end of the XVII century. Little Russian order was placed under the control of the Posolsky order. With the establishment of collegiums, he was subordinated to the collegium of foreign affairs, and in 1722 - to the Senate.
After the conquest of Siberia, its management was entrusted to the Posolsky Prikaz; then for this from 1596 to 1599. there was a special quarter of the clerk Varfolomey Ivanov, named after the clerk who was in charge of it. Since 1599, Siberia was ruled by the Kazan Palace, and since 1637, the Siberian order was listed in the notebooks. They were in charge of the same boyar as the Kazan Palace; there were 2 clerks with him. The order was in charge of Siberia in the same way as the Kazan Palace was in charge of the Kazan and Astrakhan kingdoms; through him there was a link to Siberia for a settlement; furs came here, which came from Siberian foreigners in the form of yasak; from here letters were issued for travel to Siberia, and later - to China and, in general, to the states bordering China. Under the Siberian order, there was a special sable treasury, in which furs received from Siberia were kept. To manage it, evaluate and sell furs, there was a special department of heads and kissers. The first was chosen from the guests, the last - from the living room and the cloth hundreds. The Siberian order existed throughout the reign of Peter the Great, but the range of its department was significantly limited. After the death of Peter the Great, it was destroyed, restored in 1730 and finally closed until 1755.
Moscow court order
The names court order, court hut, court are found under John IV, while the Moscow court order has been known in bit books since 1598. A boyar, a stolnik and 1 or 2 clerks sat in it. The lawsuits of residents of Moscow, the Moscow district and, perhaps, some other cities, were subordinated to his office, with the exception of cases of murder, robbery and red-handed theft. In 1681, it was merged into one order with the petition, serf and Vladimir court order, but then it again began to exist separately, along with the Vladimir court order, and when the latter was destroyed in 1699, the items of its department were transferred to the Moscow court order. In 1714, this order was transferred from Moscow to St. Petersburg and has not been found in acts since.
Vladimir Judgment Order
First mentioned in 1582/83 as the "Vladimir Chamber of Judgment". Under its jurisdiction were initially out-of-Moscow cities (including Vladimir; hence the name of the order) and Novgorod, and later some other territories. The Vladimir court order was considered the “senior” among the court orders (it was followed by the Moscow, Ryazan, Dmitrovsky court orders in the hierarchy), was the appellate instance for other court orders, service in it was the most honorable
Known since 1591. The authority of these orders can be concluded only by analogy with other court orders. Kotoshikhin and in the decrees of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich do not mention them; they were probably destroyed in the first half of the 17th century.
Other orders
This list, to which one can add more orders for nourishing, fodder, bread and grain, subordinate to the Order of the Grand Palace, the order of the money court, which was administered by the order of the Great Treasury, and the order of the upper printing house that did not last long - cannot be considered complete list orders that ever existed in Muscovite Rus'. This does not include, for example, patriarchal orders (see), which, however, had special meaning and a special circle of departments. Solovyov names, in addition, another order of the policeman, stone granaries, merchant affairs. The latter was established in the late 1660s. according to the project of Ordyn-Nashchokin to manage merchants and was supposed to serve "merchant people in all border cities from other states with defense, and in all cities from voivodship tax protection and administration." This order is also listed in the list of clerks on the orders of 1675, placed in the appendix to Volume XIII of Solovyov's History of Russia. In this list, there are also orders that are not shown in Nevolin's list: an order for the collection of archery bread, the Moscow large customs, a measuring hut, an otdatochny yard; washing hut. In general, the number of orders that ever existed in Russia has not been established with accuracy, and the range of departments of individual orders is little known.
See also “On ancient ranks in Russia and on Moscow and other ancient orders” (“Ancient Russian Vivliofika”, XX part);. - 1870.
Cabin hut or moving out- see Governor. Subsequently, the moving house I., the moving house or simply the moving house was called the police massacre in every part of the city, with firemen at it.
Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron. - St. Petersburg: Brockhaus-Efron. 1890-1907 .
See what "Kazman's hut" is in other dictionaries:
hut- hut, dial. in general meaning. – A small wooden peasant house with a Russian stove (STSG 2.143; for other meanings see SRNG 12.85 89). Sl.RYa XI XVII 6. 92 93: hut, only with def. A room intended for various works (in 2 m value); ... ... Dictionary of the trilogy "The Sovereign's Estate"
I 1. Log heated peasant house (usually four-walled). 2. The interior living quarters of such a house. II well. Administrative Police Office; command hut (in Rus' in the 16th–17th centuries). Explanatory Dictionary of Ephraim. T. F. Efremova ... Modern Dictionary Russian language Efremova
J. outdated. Office, administrative police office, command hut. Explanatory Dictionary of Ephraim. T. F. Efremova. 2000... Modern explanatory dictionary of the Russian language Efremova
- (mandatory), in Russia of the 17th century. office of the voivode, where the service people of the county gathered for reviews and before campaigns. The term "moving out" was used in the XVIII-XIX centuries. to the city police. * * * MOVING OUT THE HOUSE (mandatory), in Russia ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
