How the kings of a new dynasty tried to turn a medieval city into a European capital

In the 17th century, elegant churches of Russian pattern, the first water supply system and a stone bridge appeared in Moscow. And the 17th century became a rebellious century, when small and large uprisings in the city were followed by devastating fires. Let's see what the Romanovs' Moscow looked like during this difficult time for them.

Masons at work.
Book miniature of the 16th century

Where Moscow began and ended

By the time Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov began to reign, Moscow had already become a large metropolis. Travelers compare the capital with Paris, London and Constantinople. Moscow seems larger to them than it is, due to the impressive distances and chaotically constructed buildings. There is no single development plan, and most urban space is occupied by gardens, vegetable gardens and vacant lots. Moscow looks like a village.

“... next to most houses there are vast vacant lots and courtyards, many houses are also adjacent to vegetable gardens, fertile gardens, and, in addition, they are separated from each other by quite extensive meadows, interspersed with them, countless, one might say, churches and chapels; therefore, there is not such a large number of people in it, as some believed, deceived by its vastness in appearance.”

A. Meyerberg, Austrian envoy.

"Journey to Muscovy of Baron Augustin Mayerberg"

The population of Moscow consisted mainly of townspeople - artisans and traders. Their courtyards divided the city into settlements, of which there were about 140 by the 17th century. Each settlement had its own specialization: blacksmiths lived in one, tanners in another, potters in the third, and masons in the fourth.

Like others medieval cities Europe at that time, Moscow was built according to the radial-ring principle. In the center was the Kremlin - a princely palace with churches, surrounded by a moat and a wall. Trade and craft settlements crowded around the Kremlin and were connected by a grid of streets. The streets were interrupted by fortifications that ringed the city from the center to the outskirts - the further from the Kremlin, the wider. Circular streets were built along the protective walls.

One of the Moscow settlements in a 17th-century engraving

Masons at work. Book miniature of the 16th century

“Sigismund's Plan” - a map of Moscow compiled by the Poles in 1610

Moscow consisted of four rings: the Kremlin, Kitay-gorod, White and Zemlyanoy cities. This layout had its advantages in the Middle Ages: if the enemy took the Earthen City or a fire destroyed everything wooden houses, they will be stopped by the next line of stone walls. But the further we move from the Middle Ages, the less sense it makes to build a city in a ring. Fortress walls are losing their importance and are expensive to maintain.

In the 17th century, the Kremlin lost its defensive significance and turned into a ceremonial royal residence.

What Moscow looked like: houses, chambers and churches

The foundation of the city in the 17th century was wooden, and this feature would remain in Moscow until the 19th century. But gradually more and more stone churches and chambers are being built. They are crowded into the territory of Kitay-Gorod and White City - wealthy shopping areas of Moscow.

A typical residential building in the 17th century was wooden, with one or two floors. When building houses in craft settlements, the same technology was used. The carpenters connected the crown logs into a log house, covered it with a plank roof and cut out small light windows. Glass production had not yet been established in the 17th century, so window openings were covered with mica or oiled canvas.

The finished log house with windows and roof was called a cage. The cage was placed on the ground or another frame - basement. The basement was used for storing food and belongings. The living quarters - the upper room - were located upstairs. If the house became cramped, a new cage was added to it. Not only residential buildings, but also wooden princely palaces were built according to this principle.

Streets of Moscow of the 17th century in an engraving by Adam Olearius

The princely palace in Kolomenskoye consisted of log cages - the largest wooden structure in Moscow of the 17th century

Chambers of the Romanov boyars in Zaryadye

The stone chambers of boyars and merchants can be counted on one hand. Thanks to durable material, some have survived to this day: the chambers of the Romanov boyars and the old English court in Zaryadye, the chambers of Averky Kirillov on Bersenevskaya embankment and Simeon Ushakov in Ipatievsky Lane.

The chambers of merchants, boyars and princes were distinguished from the houses of artisans not only construction material, but also the size and furnishings. The chambers were built on two or three floors. The first tier, almost without windows, was still used as a warehouse. On the second floor there was a refectory, a library and living quarters for the men's half of the house. The third floor was reserved for women. There was a room with large windows for handicrafts - a light room - and, of course, bedrooms.

Holy Trinity Church
in Nikitniki - an exemplary temple
in patterned style

Churches were the first and tallest stone buildings in Moscow. Their number was amazing even upon entering the city. Domes glittering in the sun lined the horizon and towered above the rest of the buildings.

“There are a lot of churches, chapels and monasteries in the Kremlin and in the city; there are more than 2,000 of them inside and outside the city walls, since now each of the nobles who has some property orders himself to build a special chapel; most of them are made of stone. The stone churches all have round vaults inside.”

Adam Olearius, German traveler.

“Description of a journey to Muscovy and through Muscovy to Persia and back”

In the middle of the century, instead of massive churches with thick walls, architects began to build elegant churches in the patterned style. The facades are decorated with multi-colored tiles, traditional kokoshniks and so far unusual elements of Western European architecture that masons spotted in engravings. Architects follow strict church canons less and experiment more.

Patterning was the first step towards the secularization of architecture. In the 80s of the 17th century, the appearance of churches changed again, and the patterned style was replaced by a new style - the Naryshkin style. It is used in construction at the royal court and in the houses of nobles close to the court. The name of the style is due to the fact that the customers of its most striking monuments were the Naryshkin boyars.

Procession on a donkey. Engraving from the book of Adam Olearius

Church of the Holy Trinity in Nikitniki - an exemplary temple in the pattern style

Church of the Intercession Holy Mother of God in Fili

The composition of the building becomes symmetrical, all tiers tend to the central axis. The skill of masons is growing - now they think not only about decoration, but also about the holistic impression of the building.

Capital buildings in the Naryshkin style will be replaced by Peter the Great's baroque, but this will only happen at the beginning of the next century.

How Moscow lived: urban disasters, life and entertainment

The 17th century was a time of uprisings, fires and epidemics. Slobodas burned at least 10 times in a century, and infections constantly occurred. dirty water from the channels of the Moscow River, and the infrastructure was not developed enough to prevent disasters. Tsars Mikhail Fedorovich and Alexei Mikhailovich begin to develop the city according to the European model.

The water pipeline was installed in the Vodovzvodnaya (Sviblova) tower, into which water flowed
from the Moscow River

Infrastructure

The first water supply system in the Kremlin was designed by the Englishman Christopher Galovey in 1631–1633. Until this point, the Kremlin was supplied by water tankers and a primitive gravity-fed water supply system. Now water is supplied to the lower tier of the Vodovzvodnaya tower by gravity, and a water-lifting machine pumps it into the reservoir of the upper tier of the tower. From there, water flows through pipes to the gardens and palaces of the Kremlin.

The water pipeline was installed in the Vodovzvodnaya (Sviblova) tower, the water into which came from the Moscow River

A. M. Vasnetsov. “The rise of the Kremlin. All Saints Bridge and the Kremlin at the end of the 17th century." In 1680 brick walls The Kremlin was painted with lime White color

The first stone bridge in Moscow took 40 years to build and was inaugurated in the 1680s. It was called All Saints, later - Bolshoi Kamenny. Its wooden predecessors were temporary: they were dismantled along with winter frosts and spring floods, and then reassembled again. “Living” bridges surprised visitors.

“The bridge near the Kremlin, opposite the gate of the second city wall, arouses great surprise; it is level, made of large wooden beams, fitted one to the other and tied with thick ropes of linden bark, the ends of which are attached to the towers and to the opposite bank of the river. When the water rises, the bridge rises, because it is not supported by pillars, but consists of boards lying on the water, and when it decreases, the bridge also lowers.”

Paul of Aleppo, Archdeacon of the Antiochian Orthodox Church.

“The Journey of Patriarch Macarius of Antioch to Russia in the half of the 17th century”

Temporary bridges are easy to assemble and dismantle during an enemy attack. But the need to defend the Kremlin from the water is gradually disappearing. But the royal residence is decorated more and more magnificently - like the elegant Spasskaya Clock Tower, the stone bridge has become the main attraction of the city.

PIK comment

Education and urban entertainment

The life of Muscovites was not limited to hard work and escape from fires. The brisk book trade, higher education and city festivities were also innovations of the 17th century.

The Moscow printing house was restored after being destroyed by the Poles in 1620. If earlier it served only the sovereign's court, then in the 17th century private booksellers and a book row appeared. By the end of the century, reading is becoming an accessible entertainment. Booksellers sell books on military affairs, primers and collections of poetry.

A library was opened at the Printing Yard, and in 1687 the first institution of higher education was opened. The Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy was founded by the Likhud brothers, Greek Orthodox monks. Here, residents of different classes were taught Greek, rhetoric, logic and grammar for 12 years.

Moscow Printing Yard on Nikolskaya Street

City festivities. Engraving from the book of Adam Olearius

During patronal holidays and official spectacles, Muscovites of the 17th century walked along the new stone bridge, watched performances of buffoon and puppet theaters, bought sweets at fairs and watched with curiosity the ceremonial entries of foreign ambassadors.

Already in the next century, Moscow will be unrecognizable: the first oil lanterns and city estates will appear on the streets, and balls and salons will become the favorite entertainment of the citizens.

Go to the 18th century

Nobles, merchants and townspeople: how people of different classes lived in Moscow in the 18th century

View of Red Square in 1783

Moscow has not been a capital for half a century. Vast noble estates are adjacent to shacks and black huts. On the one hand - idleness and social receptions, on the other - potato soup and monotonous daily work.

Upper class city dwellers. They might not have worked anywhere, but they rarely took advantage of it. Men served in the army, state or court. Women also participated in court life, but in Moscow, far from the capital, they did not have such an opportunity.

The standard of living of city merchants varied. Unlike artisans, who traded only the items they produced, merchants enjoyed an advantage and could sell a wide variety of goods, from the scrupulous (underwear and perfumes) to the colonial (tea, coffee and spices).

A new type of urban dwellers. Former residents of craft settlements are gradually becoming hired workers. Instead of engaging in small-scale production, they go to manufactories or to the houses of the nobility for a salary.

Unknown artist.
View of Moscow in the 18th century

At home

The development of Moscow proceeded unevenly. Wide stone-paved streets turned into wooden pavements. Pitiful shacks stood in clusters around the palaces and houses of the nobility. Some areas resembled wastelands, others were crowded with poor houses, and others impressed with the metropolitan splendor.

“Irregular”, “extraordinary”, “contrasting” - this is how foreigners who managed to visit here during the times of Elizabeth and Catherine II described Moscow.

“I was surprised by the strange appearance of Smolensk, but I was much more struck by the immensity and diversity of Moscow. This is something so irregular, peculiar, extraordinary, everything here is so full of contrasts that I have never seen anything like it.”

William Cox, British traveler.

“Travel to Poland, Russia, Switzerland and Denmark”

Nobles

Adolf Bayo. Pashkov's house on Vagankovsky Hill

Adolf Bayo. Pashkov House
on Vagankovsky Hill

Middle-class nobles settled in Moscow, so mansions were often built in wood. They suffered from fires and again lined up along the “red line” - it marked the boundaries of construction on each street. The houses of the richest families were built from stone by famous architects. These buildings have survived to this day. The most impressive example of 18th-century noble housing is the Pashkov House, which is believed to have been built according to the design of the architect Vasily Bazhenov.

Merchants

Unknown artist. View
Ilyinka streets in Moscow in the 18th century

A typical merchant's house was two-story. The first floor could be stone, the second - wooden. The European practice of merchants settling above their own shops had not yet become popular, because the shopping arcades were moved to separate areas of the city. Towards the end of the century, under Catherine II, a new type of housing appeared in Moscow - apartment buildings. On the upper floors of apartment buildings there were merchants' living rooms and apartments for rent, and below there were shops and shops. One of the first apartment buildings of this type in Moscow was Khryashchev’s house on Ilyinka.

Bourgeois

Unknown artist. View of Ilyinka Street in Moscow in the 18th century

Unknown artist. Street view
Ilyinki in Moscow of the 18th century

Like the residents of craft settlements in the 17th century, the townspeople settled in simple wooden houses. Their life changed more slowly than that of the richer classes. The houses of nobles and merchants were built according to the latest fashion, the houses of the burghers - out of habit. The only change has occurred in the internal structure of the house: instead of a common room for the whole family, separate rooms now appear in the houses.

PIK comment

Nobles

Schedule

Nobles

P. Picard. Moscow Kremlin at the beginning of the 18th century

P. Picard. Moscow
The Kremlin at the beginning of the 18th century

Officers arrived at the barracks at 6, officials - at 7–8 in the morning. By noon, the parades and parades ended, and the presence was interrupted for lunch.

The socialite woke up around noon. After breakfast there was a walk in the park or a ride accompanied by a walker - a servant who accompanied the crew on foot. Then - lunch, theater and a ball, which lasted until the morning.

“A nobleman who wants to be a man of the world must have a Danish dog, a walker, a lot of servants (badly dressed) and a French teacher.”

Tesby de Bellecourt, captain of the French service.

“Notes of a Frenchman about Moscow, 1774”

Merchants

B. Kustodiev. Gostiny Dvor

B. Kustodiev. Gostiny Dvor

Trade in Moscow began early, so by 6 am the merchant opened his shop in Gostiny Dvor or on the first floor of a residential building. On the spot, he drank tea, had a hearty lunch, and talked with the merchants in the neighborhood. In the evening he visited a tavern or a fair, and already at nine o’clock he fell asleep.

Bourgeois

Detail of the factory mark of the Bolshoi Yaroslavl Manufactory. Mid-18th century

Factory brand detail Bolshoy
Yaroslavl manufactory. Mid-18th century

Craftsmen worked at home, in living quarters or courtyards. Everyone in the household, even the children, took part in the work. Due to the emergence of factories and organized production, it became unprofitable for some artisans to work for themselves, and they became hired workers: they weaved, built ships, forged metal products and prepared glass. The largest manufactory in Moscow was the Cloth Yard. The working day there began at half past five in the morning, and lasted 13.5 hours in the spring and summer months and 11.5 hours during the rest of the year.

Food

For nobles, eating was an art, for merchants it was a way to pass the time, for the townspeople it was a matter of survival.

Nobles

Unknown artist. Lunch in a noble family

Unknown artist.
Lunch in a noble family

In rich houses they preferred European cuisine. Tea and coffee in the 18th century ceased to be exotic, but were expensive. Since the beginning of the century, there has been a fashion for foreign chefs - the French, less often the British. Some products were ordered from Europe, which Gogol ironized in “The Inspector General,” where “soup in a saucepan arrived from Paris right on the boat” to Khlestakov’s table.

Merchants

B. Kustodiev. Merchant's wife drinking tea

The merchant's table was simpler. Tea from a samovar, which they drank “until the seventh scarf” (until they broke out in sweat), porridge half and half with lard, soups, pies, radishes and vegetable dishes - the main thing in nutrition is not variety, but abundance and satiety.

“The pot-bellied merchants, as before, after drinking tea, practiced their trade, at noon they ate radishes, slurped cabbage soup with wooden or tin spoons, on which tops of lard floated, and drank buckwheat porridge in half with butter.”

Bourgeois

F. Solntsev. Peasant family before dinner. Bourgeois and peasants lived in similar living conditions. The main thing that distinguished them was their daily activities and profession

F. Solntsev. Peasant family in front
lunch. Bourgeois and peasants lived in similar
living conditions. The main thing that distinguished them was
- daily activities and profession

The daily menu included potato soup, cabbage soup, rye pies and steamed turnips. In addition, the townspeople could afford dishes made from peas, vegetables from the garden and cereals. Kvass replaced tea and coffee for them.

City entertainment

The way a resident of Moscow had fun spoke first of all about his social status. Festive life in the city was for every taste: from theaters, balls and music salons to street fairs and fist fights.

Nobles

Reception at a noble house

Reception at a noble house

The life of the Moscow nobility was so idle and leisurely that it irritated Catherine II:

“Moscow is the capital of idleness, and its excessive size will always be the main reason for this. I have made it a rule for myself, when I am there, never to send for anyone; for one visit they spend a whole day in the carriage, and therefore the day is lost.”

Entry from the diary of Catherine II

During the day, nobles walked through parks or streets in smart attire. Then the route was to visit relatives for tea. Family gatherings were not so much entertainment as a necessity: it was social etiquette to maintain family ties.

After dinner, reading and a change of dress, the nobleman went to the theater. In 1757, the Locatelli Opera opened, and later the Petrovsky Theater, in which free and serf actors played. At about 10 o'clock in the evening the balls began, where you could not only dance, but also play cards, charades or burime.

Merchants

V. Surikov. Great masquerade in 1772 on the streets of Moscow with the participation of Peter I and Prince I. F. Romodanovsky

V. Surikov. Great masquerade
in 1772 on the streets of Moscow with the participation
Peter I and Prince I. F. Romodanovsky

Noisy street fairs, puppet theaters, comedies and performances by buffoons - these were the main merchant entertainments.

“The comedy was usually performed by a home-grown troubadour with a bandura, singing and dancing. He did wonderful things with his feet, and every bone in him spoke. And when he jumps up under the very nose of a pretty merchant’s wife, moves his shoulder and splashes her like boiling water with a valiant demand: “Don’t you love her?” - there was no end to the delight.”

Ivan Ivanovich Lazhechnikov, writer.

"White, black and gray"

Merchants spent their evenings in taverns or at home, and on city holidays they went out to watch fireworks. But this is only in the 18th century: from the next century, wealthy merchants will strive to imitate the nobility in everything.

Bourgeois

B. Kustodiev. Fist fight on the Moscow River

B. Kustodiev.
Fist fight on the Moscow River

They couldn’t afford to go to taverns and restaurants, but everyone took part in the street festivities. Among the winter entertainments they loved fist fights, one on one or wall to wall. The teams dispersed along the banks of the frozen Moscow River and fought in the middle. The main battles took place on holidays: St. Nicholas the Winter, Christmastide, Epiphany and Maslenitsa.

In the 19th century, the differences between the urban and rural populations were sharper than between the tradesman and the merchant. Merchants, townspeople and artisans began to be called “city dwellers.” But the gap between the everyday life of the nobility and the “average state of people” remained in next century.

Go to the 19th century

Home and life of a Muscovite in the 19th century

J. Delabart. Red Square at the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th century

What rules did rich and poor families live by, what did they eat and how did they talk?

Moscow in the 19th century was the capital of the retired and elderly. It was more conservative than St. Petersburg, where people went for a career and fashion. In Moscow houses, family hierarchy, kinship, and many other everyday conventions reigned.

Noble life

Moscow nobles became smaller after the war and the fire of 1812. Few could maintain the “open table” and hospitality of the last century. The increasingly impoverished noble families led a nomadic lifestyle and ate in rich houses. There are more officials. They were classified as nobility, but did not have much wealth.

Where did they settle?

Real nobles built houses and city estates on Maroseyka, Pokrovka and the territory between Ostozhenka and Arbat. Officials settled closer to the merchants: in Zamoskvorechye, on Taganka, Sretenka and Devichye Pole. Outside the Garden Ring, dachas and country estates with a garden or park were built.

Home and furnishings

V. Polenov. Grandmother's garden. Typical wooden Moscow mansion

V. Polenov. Grandmother's garden.
Typical wooden Moscow mansion

The middle-income nobility built houses from wood. But they are large, with 7–9 windows, with mezzanines and columns. A park or garden with a linden alley, elderberry and lilac trees was an obligatory attribute of lordly life. The further from the center, the more extensive the garden was.

In the interior decoration of the house, the pursuit of fashion has given way to consistency. Empire style furniture purchased at the beginning of the century stood in the front part of the house along with porcelain trinkets and cabinet bronze sculpture. The cramped living quarters in the mezzanine and on the back side of the house were furnished anyhow.

Table

A. Voloskov. At the tea table

A. Voloskov. At the tea table

Unlike the sophisticated dinners in St. Petersburg, those in Moscow were hearty and plentiful. Cream was added to morning tea and washed down with buttered rolls. The second breakfast was hearty, with scrambled eggs, cheesecakes or meatballs. At about three o'clock the family and frequent guests gathered for a multi-course dinner in the French or Russian style. For afternoon tea we refreshed ourselves with tea and pies, and in the evening we ate the leftovers from lunch or prepared several more courses of dishes, depending on the wealth of the house.

Family life

There were many inhabitants in the noble house. In addition to close relatives, there was a place for aunts, cousins, second cousins, sisters and nephews, as well as the poor and governesses.

The house, as before, was divided into male and female halves. The study, library and smoking room were men's rooms, and the boudoir, sofa and maid's room were women's. Households and servants moved freely between the halves, but received personal guests strictly on their own territory.

Children's rooms were allocated a place away from the adults' bedrooms. The kids lived in shared rooms for several people, teenage children's rooms were divided into male and female halves. Home lessons were conducted in a classroom where a guest teacher came. He gave lessons in social etiquette, music and foreign languages.

Nobleman's Dictionary

Jolle journee - "crazy day", an afternoon ball that began at two o'clock in the afternoon and lasted until night.

Zhurfixes are the days of the week in a noble house, which were allocated for the regular reception of guests.

Voxal is a pleasure garden where performances were staged, balls and fireworks were held.

Merchant life

The merchant class in Moscow in the 19th century was thriving. New families are appearing that are not inferior in wealth to those of the nobility. The Morozovs, Ryabushinskys, and Prokhorovs head the list of the richest entrepreneurs in the Russian Empire. Ambitious merchants strive to reach the level of nobles in terms of living and education and invest their capital in the development of the arts and sciences. The other part carefully protects its customs and avoids everything unusual.

Where did they settle?

The merchant districts were Taganka, Presnya, Lefortovo and Zamoskvorechye. The latter is due to its proximity to the Kitaygorod market. Merchant-manufacturers preferred to build houses closer to production, so they chose the outskirts of the city.

Home and furnishings

V. Perov. Arrival of the governess to the merchant's house

V. Perov.
Arrival of the governess to the merchant's house

While the nobles grew poor, the merchants made fortunes. They built simple but high-quality stone houses or bought former noble estates and furnished them to their taste. Houses usually opened onto a garden with a vegetable garden. The goods that the merchant supplied to the shops were stored in the courtyard.

The merchant's house differed from the noble's in the number of icons and varied decoration: crimson walls in the living rooms, an abundance of pictures and trinkets mixed with expensive pieces of furniture. The unity of style in the furnishings of the house was observed by the rarest, most educated families.

Table

N. Bogdanov-Belsky. Tea party

The merchant's house prepared supplies themselves - the cellars were filled to the ceiling with pickles. The table was set no less richly than the nobles, but the dishes were Russian: pies, porridge. The services did not take root on the merchant's table; all the dishes were of different colors.

The merchant did not always return home for dinner, so the whole family gathered at the table in the evening, around eight o’clock. After a hearty dinner with fatty dishes, everyone at home drank tea for a long time with sugar or jam.

Family life

V. Pukirev. Reception of dowry in a merchant family according to painting

V. Pukirev.
Reception of dowry in a merchant family according to painting

The family life of merchants in the 19th century began with the participation of a matchmaker. The bride's dowry was carefully counted. The marriage took place after a bridesmaid ceremony: the groom looked closely at the merchant’s daughter in a public place, and then came on a personal visit and asked for her hand in marriage. The merchants' wives lived idlely and did almost no housework - they only received guests or organized trips. Children were given to nannies to raise, and the church was relied upon for education. Even at the end of the century, only a few merchant children studied in gymnasiums and universities.

Merchant's Dictionary

Feryaz is a traditional merchant outerwear.

Beardless is a merchant who follows Western fashion. He wears modern clothes instead of a caftan, is clean-shaven, is educated and knows languages.

Forty-bucket barrel- a measure of not only volume, but also beauty. Portly women, the size of a forty-bucket barrel, were the merchant ideal in the 19th century.

Philistine life

In the 19th century, burghers made up the main population of Moscow. There were especially many of them after the reform of 1861, when peasants began to move to the cities in search of work. The bourgeois class included teachers, day laborers, and all other hired workers.

Where did they settle?

Factory workers and craftsmen settled outside the Garden Ring in rented apartments and small houses. Khamovniki, Lefortovo and Gruziny were assigned to them back in the 17th century. Shoemakers, tailors and other small artisans settled in the Moscow “ghetto” - Zaryadye and the dark corners of Kitai-Gorod.

The daily life of nobles at the beginning and first half of the 19th century was very different. Residents of cities and industrialized areas of the country could talk about serious and noticeable changes. Life in the remote province, in the village in particular, went on basically as before. Much depended on the class and property status of people, their place of residence, religion, habits and traditions.

In the first half of the 19th century, the theme of the wealth of the nobles turned out to be closely connected with the theme of their ruin. The debts of the capital's nobility reached astronomical figures. One of the reasons was the idea that had taken root since the time of Catherine II: true noble behavior presupposes a willingness to live beyond one’s means. The desire to “reduce income with expenses” became characteristic only in the mid-30s. But even then, many remembered with sadness about the fun times of the past.

The debts of the nobility grew for another reason. It had a strong need for free money. The income of the landowners consisted mainly of the products of peasant labor. Capital life demanded a loud coins. Landowners for the most part did not know how to sell agricultural products, and were often simply ashamed to do so. It was much easier to go to a bank or lender to borrow or mortgage an estate. It was assumed that for the money received, the nobleman would acquire new estates or increase the profitability of old ones. However, as a rule, the money was spent on building houses, balls, and expensive outfits. Owning private property, representatives of this class, the “leisure class,” could afford leisure worthy of their condition, and with a demonstration of their high position in the social hierarchy and “demonstrative behavior.” For a nobleman, almost all the time free from official affairs turned into leisure. Having such unlimited leisure, the first estate had the most favorable conditions for the transformation and revision of not only all its previous forms, but also a radical change in the relationship between public and private life in favor of the latter. Since the 18th century, leisure has acquired a status that it had never had before. This process went in parallel with the affirmation of the secular nature of the entire culture and the gradual displacement (but not destruction) of sacred values ​​by secular ones. Leisure acquired increasing obvious value for the nobleman as secular culture established itself. The main forms of this leisure time were initially borrowed in the 18th century, and then in the 19th century they were translated into the language of their own national culture. The borrowing of Western European forms of leisure initially occurred under the pressure of government decrees and in opposition to national traditions. The nobleman was a conductor of this culture and an actor, a performer of this theater. He played out his leisure time, be it a holiday, a ball, an appearance in the theater or a card match, as an actor on stage, in full view of the whole society. It is no coincidence that in the 18th century there was enormous interest in theater; theatrical art dominated over all others, included them and even subjugated them. But the main thing was the theatricalization of the nobleman’s entire life. It manifested itself in private life for show, in the publicity of leisure, in which costume, manners, behavior, important skills and abilities were deliberately demonstrated. This entire demonstration was of a spectacular nature, as in the theater, which became the leader of leisure and a model for the theatrical behavior of a nobleman, for his acting in real life. This study identified factors for the great popularity of social leisure in Moscow. Thanks to the preservation of not only Orthodox, but also pagan roots in the consciousness of the Moscow nobility, the perception of Western forms of leisure took place here much faster. This process was also facilitated by the well-known “everyday freedom” of the Moscow nobility.

The Peter the Great era was marked by new traditions of spectacles. The most important innovation was fireworks, which had a publicpolitical in nature. Masquerades were held either in the form of costumed processions or in the form of a display of carnival costumes in a public place. Theatrical performances glorified the tsar and his victories, therefore they became part of official life and made it possible to introduce translated plays and Western European performing arts to a select audience. Under Elizaveta Petrovna, fireworks were extended to the palaces of nobles, masquerades were turned into a costume ball, in which some timid trends were outlined in its evolution towards an entertainment culture. In the first place in the theatrical tastes of the highest aristocracy was the spectacular and musical art of opera. During the reign of Catherine II, state official celebrations with fireworks and masquerades were replaced by private illuminations in noble estates. The flourishing of city and estate theaters during the reign of Catherine II was due to the artistic aesthetics of the Enlightenment and the growing self-awareness of the Russian nobility. With all the variety of genres, comedy remained supreme. In the first half of the 19th century, fireworks became a spectacle of “small forms”, the property of noble estates.

Fireworks, theatrical performances, and ballroom dancing bore the stamp of those artistic styles that existed during this period of development of everyday culture. From colorful baroque fireworks, spectacular pantomimetheatrical productions, from slow and monotonous dances in magnificent outfits gradually moved to strict architectural forms of fireworks, to classical ballets with naturaldances, ancient drama, fast flying waltzes. But in the first half, the ancient classics turned out to be exhausted and gave way first to romanticism, and then to the national style in everyday culture and attitude. This was reflected in the development of music, theater, dance and entertainment culture.

Along with public masquerades that preserved classpartitions, private ones blossomed in full bloom, where all the participants were well acquainted, and incognito intrigue was a thing of the past. The War of 1812 played a great role in the theatrical life of the Moscow nobility. The nobles welcomed popular divertissements, vaudeville and development national opera. Ballet art became the fashion of the highest aristocracy, but interest in Russian dramatic art gradually won out in the tastes of the viewer.

The beginnings of home appearedmusic-making and song art, which existed mainly in the form of lyrical cant and everyday “book songs”. The “Kingdom of Women” on the Russian throne strengthened the role of women in dance culture, and they gradually became the hostesses of the ball. The flourishing of Italian opera and the growth of dance culture contributed to the development of vocal and song art in the noble houses of the Moscow nobility. The reign of Catherine II saw the heyday of private balls and public balls in the Assembly of the Nobility, which became an important part of the self-identification of the Moscow nobility. The salon and ceremony was gradually replaced by the naturalness and relaxedness of the dance culture. Moscow society embraced the musical hobby of playing the piano and vocals. The achievements of this period were serfs, unique horn orchestras, active concert activity, and the spread of song culture. The era of Alexander I and Nicholas I was characterized by the introduction of an entertainment element into ballroom culture. The new dances carried a powerful gender element, a liberated atmosphere and a general emancipation of ballroom culture. The most important factors in the development of performing culture were the flourishing of salons and the distribution of music albums. The nobility became the main contingent among concert listeners. Among the Moscow nobles there appeared real connoisseurs, music experts and even composers. Music became a way of life for the Moscow nobleman.

In the first half of the century, noble children received home education. Usually it consisted of studying two or three foreign languages ​​and the initial mastery of basic sciences. Teachers most often hired foreigners, who in their homeland served as coachmen, drummers, actors, and hairdressers.

Private boarding schools and state schools contrasted home education. Most Russian nobles traditionally prepared their children for the military field. From the age of 7-8, children were enrolled in military schools, and upon completion they entered the higher cadet corps in St. Petersburg. The government considered evasion of service reprehensible. In addition, service was a component of noble honor and was associated with the concept of patriotism.

The home of the average nobleman in the city was decorated at the beginning of the 19th century with Persian carpets, paintings, mirrors in gilded frames, and expensive mahogany furniture. In the summer, the nobles who retained their estates left the stuffy cities. Village manor houses were of the same type and consisted of a wooden building with three or four columns at the front porch andtriangle of pediment above them. In winter, usually before Christmas, the landowners returned to the city. Convoys of 15-20 carts were sent to the cities in advance and carried supplies: geese, chickens, pork hams, dried fish, corned beef, flour, cereals, butter.

The first half of the 19th century - the time of searching for “European” alternativesgrandfather's morals. They were not always successful. The interweaving of “Europeanism” and traditional ideas gavenoble life features features of bright originality and attractiveness.

In the 19th century, the development of men's fashion began to determine the cultural and aesthetic phenomenon of dandyism. Its basis was a tailcoat with good cloth, skillful cut and impeccable tailoring, which was complemented by snow-white linen, a vest, a scarf, a frock coat, trousers, a top hat and gloves. Russian dandies emphasized material wealth, were fond of fashion accessories, and could not wean themselves from their addiction to diamonds and furs. Women's fashion at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries was marked by the rise of ancient fashion. Dressed in light tunics and flowing shawls, the “ancient goddess” of that time with her costume sharply outlined the role of women in life and society. The airy and fragile appearance of the romantic noblewoman of Pushkin's time was replaced by a socialite, whose costume was characterized by a wide crinoline, smooth, muted forms, emphasizing the earthly beauty of the woman.

Nobility. In the first half of the 19th century, the topic of the wealth of the nobles was closely related... In the first half of the century, noble children received home education. ... A strict subordination was maintained in the houses, similar to the requirements of Domostroy. The noble family at all times had a certain, traditional way of life, regulated at the legislative level.

We have already briefly reviewed these regulations, and now it is our turn to look at the noble family through the eyes of its members.

For this purpose, I selected sources of personal origin, namely diaries and memoirs of nobles, covering both the first and second half of the 19th century.

Family structure is a style of family behavior. The family structure depends on the position of the family, its class and level of well-being. Family structure is the rhythm of family life, the dynamics of its development, the stability of spiritual and moral principles, the psychological climate, and emotional well-being.

What were the general features of the noble family structure?

In the first half of the 19th century, the noble family was dominated by patriarchy and hierarchy.

The head of the family was always recognized as the father - through whose efforts the family lived, secured in many ways precisely by his efforts in financial and moral terms.

In the notes of P.I. Golubev, a St. Petersburg official of the 30s, we find that he served diligently, and brought all the means and favors to the family. He called his wife “you” and by her first name and patronymic, but she, in turn, treated him with respect and followed him everywhere.

While he was away at work, his wife took care of the house and children.

They had two children - a boy and a girl. As P.I. writes Golubev:

“I only worked with my son, the mother worked with her daughter.” In the evenings, the family loved to have conversations, they also went to church, diligently invested energy and resources into the future lives of their children - their son was given a university education, their daughter was married off.

The division of the family into male and female hierarchies can be traced in women's memoirs. M.S. Nikoleva and A.Ya. Butkovskaya constantly mentions in her memoirs that their social circle always consisted of either sisters, or cousins, or numerous aunts and acquaintances of their mothers, mothers-in-law, etc. In the family home or at a party, the rooms allocated to them always meant a “female half” and were distant from the men’s quarters.

But this does not mean at all that they shunned male relatives; brothers and cousins ​​also formed their social circle, but to a very small extent. It's all about the role of men - they were busy with business, or were absent on duty. Brothers M.S. Nikoleva spent quite a long time away from her family, as she was in the active army and fought against the French. A similar situation developed among Nikoleva’s other relatives. Here's what she writes about her aunt's son, cousin Pyotr Protopopov:

“Peter Sergeevich, having spent 30 years in the service, was unaccustomed to female society and therefore seemed like a savage and an original. Until the age of 45, he visited his family only occasionally for short periods of time. “The second brother, Nikolai Sergeevich, served in the ministry in St. Petersburg, was devout, belonged to the Masonic lodge, and rarely visited his parents.”

After the death of her husband A.Ya. Butkovskaya wrote:

“In 1848, my husband, who held the rank of lieutenant general engineer and director of the Naval Construction Department, suddenly died of apoplexy. Of course, in the past years we had heavy family losses, but this event was especially sensitive to me and completely changed my life.

I retired to my estate and began to take less part in public life. During the Hungarian campaign, the Eastern War, two of my sons were in the active forces, and I was involuntarily interested in the course of military events.”

Young women, unlike their male relatives, were almost always under the shadow of their parents' home, under the care of their mother, or older relatives or companions, nannies, and governesses. And only after marriage did they throw off such harsh shackles of excessive guardianship, although they came under the wing of their mother-in-law or their husband’s relatives.

Patriarchy in relation to women also had its exceptions to the rules. If a man is the head of the family, then after his death this leadership passed, as a rule, to his widow, or to the eldest son, if he was not busy in the service.

“The behavior of widows, who were entrusted with the responsibilities of the status of head of the family, was freer. Sometimes, having transferred actual control to their son, they were satisfied with the role of the symbolic head of the family. For example, the Moscow general-governor Prince D.V. Golitsyn, even in small things, must ask for the blessing of his mother Natalya Petrovna, who continued to see a minor child in the sixty-year-old military leader.”

Besides the role of the wife, the role of the mother was considered the most important. However, after the birth of a child, a distance immediately arose between him and the mother. This began from the very first days of the baby’s life, when, for reasons of decency, the mother did not dare to breastfeed her child; this responsibility fell on the shoulders of the nurse.

P.I. Golubev wrote that due to the custom of weaning a child from his mother’s breast, he and his wife lost two babies. The first daughter died from improper feeding while they were looking for a wet nurse, the second son died after contracting a disease from his wet nurse.

Taught by bitter experience, they moved away from the custom and his wife, contrary to decency, herself fed the subsequent children, thanks to which they remained alive.

But the custom of weaning children from their mother’s breast continued until the end of the 19th century.

The cooling towards the child as an individual was determined by his social role in the future. The son was alienated from his mother, since he was being prepared to serve his homeland and his circle of interests, activities, acquaintances was under her jurisdiction only until he was seven years old, then he went to his father. The mother could only monitor her son's progress. The girl was seen as a future wife and mother, and this resulted in the family’s special attitude towards her - they tried to make an ideal out of her.

V.N. Karpov wrote in his memoirs:

“In those years, the “women’s question” (the question of changing the role of women, including in the family) did not exist at all. A girl was born into the world - and the task of her life was simple and not difficult. The girl grew and developed so that at the age of seventeen she could blossom into a magnificent flower and get married.”

From this follows another characteristic feature of the noble family structure of the first half of the 19th century - the chilled relationship between children and parents. The generally accepted goal of the family is to prepare its children to serve the fatherland or the family of the spouse. The relationship between parents and children was built on this goal. Duty to society became more important than parental feelings.

In families of wealthy nobles leading a secular lifestyle, where spouses were found either at court, or the spouse held a high-ranking position, visits with children became a rare occurrence. Such children were either left in the care of nannies or sent to prestigious educational boarding schools.

Ah. In his youth he remained in the care of his father's relatives:

“I lived with my uncle, my father’s brother; my aunt, an excellent woman, took all the care of me personally.”

The practice of transferring care of their child to relatives was quite common among the nobility. This happened for various reasons - orphanhood, Savor, or the plight of the parents.

M.S. Nikoleva described the following incident in her aunt’s family:

“Among the Protopopovs’ relatives was a certain Kutuzov with nine daughters and a son. The daughters were all good-looking. The mother, a capricious, self-willed woman, remained a widow, did not like one of her daughters, Sofya Dmitrievna, and did not give her shelter, except for the girls' room, where, in the company of servants, she sat on the window and knitted a stocking. My aunt, seeing the mother’s dislike for the child, took her into her house. Her cousins ​​fell in love with her and began to teach her everything she could...

When brother Peter retired, he found Sonechka, 15, living in his family for years, like her own...

Her mother completely forgot her and did not see her, so even after her aunt’s death she remained in the Protopopovs’ house.”

We can come to the conclusion that during the period of time we are considering, the essence of noble children was inevitable service in the social hierarchy. Patriarchy dictated which unwanted and undeserving emotions of the child should be suppressed. “Not a single emotion - fear, pity, even mother's love- were not considered reliable leaders in education"

Therefore, marriages between nobles were concluded both for love and for convenience. What remained constant was the fact that marriage issues were controlled by parents, guided only by practical benefits and not by the feelings of their children. Hence the early marriages of girls with men two or even three times older.

K.D. Ikskul in “The Marriage of My Grandfather” gives the age of the groom as twenty-nine years old, and the bride as twelve.

M.S. Nikoleva writes that her cousin Peter, out of strong love, married their mother’s pupil Sophia, who was only fifteen years old, but he was twice as old.

AND I. Butkovskaya, in her “stories,” describes how her thirteen-year-old sister became the wife of the chief prosecutor, who was forty-five years old.

In noble culture, marriage was considered a natural need and was one of the meaningful structures of life. Celibate life was condemned in society; it was looked upon as inferiority.

Parents, especially mothers, approached their daughter’s upbringing with full responsibility, both in matters of behavior and in matters of marriage.

Countess Varvara Nikolaevna Golovina wrote in her memoirs regarding her daughter Praskovya Nikolaevna:

“My eldest daughter was almost nineteen years old at that time, and she began to go out into the world...

Her tender and sensitive affection for me protected her from the hobbies so characteristic of youth. Outwardly, she was not particularly attractive, was not distinguished by either beauty or grace and could not inspire dangerous feelings, and her strong moral convictions protected her from everything that could harm her.”

Countess M.F. Kamenskaya, remembering her cousin Varenka, wrote:

“I loved Varenka very much, and she and I were very friendly for many years in a row, but I didn’t like my aunt’s shy, distrustful manner of treating her daughter at all. Ekaterina Vasilievna kept Varenka near her as if on a string, did not let her go one step away from her, did not allow her to speak freely with anyone, and for whole days did not stop training her in a high-society manner.”

E.A. Gan described in her work “The Court of Light” the whole essence of a woman in marriage:

“God gave a woman a wonderful destiny, although not as glorious, not as loud as he indicated to a man - the destiny of being a domestic penate, a comforter to a chosen friend, the mother of his children, to live the life of loved ones and to march with a proud brow and a bright soul towards the end of a useful existence »

While women's attitudes toward marriage changed, men's attitudes remained unchanged throughout the 19th century. A man started a family in order to find heirs and a mistress, a warm friend or a good adviser.

The fate of Lieutenant General Pavel Petrovich Lansky is noteworthy. His first marriage was concluded in 1831 with the ex-wife of a colleague, Nadezhda Nikolaevna Maslova. Lansky's mother was categorically against this union and after the wedding broke off relations with her son. And ten years later, having given birth to two children, his dear wife ran away from him, with her lover, to Europe. It is known that the divorce process lasted about twenty years. And having become free, Pavel Petrovich marries for the second time a poor relative of his former wife, the elderly Evdokia Vasilievna Maslova. The motive for the marriage was the noble heart of Lansky, who wanted to brighten up the loneliness of the old maid.

A.S. Pushkin, in a letter to Pletnev, wrote the famous lines after his marriage to Natalya Nikolaevna Goncharova:

“I’m married and happy; My only wish is that nothing in my life changes - I can’t wait for anything better. This state is so new to me that it seems that I have been reborn.”

A. H. Benckendorff described his feelings in connection with his marriage no less eloquently:

“Finally, nothing else stood in the way of my plans to get married; I had time to think them through during the eight months that I was separated from my betrothed. I often hesitated, fear of losing the freedom to choose love that I had previously enjoyed, fear of causing unhappiness to a wonderful woman whom I respected as much as I loved, doubt that I possessed the qualities required of a faithful and thoughtful husband - all this frightened me me and fought in my head with the feelings of my heart. Nevertheless, a decision had to be made. My indecision was explained only by the fear of causing harm or compromising the woman, whose seductive image followed me along with the dream of happiness.”

“Too two weeks have passed that I have not written to you, my faithful friend,” wrote I.I. Pushchin to his wife.

“My dear friend,” S.P. Trubetskoy and I.I. Pushchin addressed their wives in letters.

If we do not take into account matters of the heart, then for a man, family is also a very expensive matter, since it required considerable material investments. He had to provide his wife and children with shelter, food, clothing and a proper environment. Such was his duty, in the eyes of society.

Therefore, parents always preferred a wealthy candidate with a good reputation.

M.A. Kretchmer in his memoirs describes a similar incident that happened to his father and mother in his youth:

“...I met my mother’s family, people of a good family, the Massalskys, and very rich ones at that. This family had two sons and three daughters; two of them are married, the third is my mother, a girl of 16 years old, with whom my father fell in love and who answered him in the same way. My father planned to get married, but since he led a most extravagant and, at the same time, not entirely commendable life in Krakow, my mother’s parents flatly refused him.”

Relationships in the family were rarely built on mutual respect; they were mainly based on the subordination of the younger to the elders and the veneration of these elders.

The eldest in the family was the father, followed by the mother; we must not forget about the authority of grandmothers, grandfathers, aunts and uncles, as well as godparents; the youngest were always children. Controlling the destinies of children in the hands of irresponsible fathers turned into nightmarish realities, so colorfully picked up by writers.

And if men had at least some chance to deviate from parental care - to enter the service, to leave their father's house for education, then girls in the first half of the 19th century did not have such a chance. They remained in the care of their parents until the very end and did not dare to resist their will, and sometimes sacrificed their personal lives out of deep devotion to their relatives.

M.S. Nikoleva even describes two cases in the family of her relatives, the Protopopovs:

“The Protopopov brothers were, of course, at war; Of the men, only my father and a sick uncle remained with us, with whom, in addition to his wife, the eldest daughter Alexandra was inseparable. She did not leave her father either day or night, and if she left for a minute, the patient began to cry like a child. This went on for many years, and my poor cousin did not see youth (her uncle died when she was already thirty-five years old).”

“Of the five Protopopov sisters, not one married; although the corresponding suitors were approaching, they chose not to separate and live together as one family, and when Pyotr Sergeevich (their brother - S.S.), being a retired colonel, got married, they devoted themselves to raising his children.”

The family structure of the noble family was built not only on patriarchal foundations, but also on reverence for traditions. So, any self-respecting family attended church, was religious, organized family celebrations and gatherings, and also quite often visited relatives living far away, staying with them for months.

Patriarchy, hierarchy, traditionalism, subordination to elders and authorities, the sanctity of marriage and family ties - this is what was formed within family relationships nobility in the first half of the 19th century. The dominance of duty prevailed over feelings, parental power was not unshakable, like the power of the spouse.

But what happens to the family structure in the second half of the 19th century?

The memoirs of nobleman S.E. Trubetskoy vividly depict this junction at the turn of generational change:

“Father and mother, grandfathers and grandmothers were for us in childhood not only sources and centers of love and untouchable authority; they were surrounded in our eyes by some kind of halo that was not familiar to the new generation. We, children, have always seen that our parents, our grandfathers, not only ourselves, but also many other people, primarily numerous household members, are treated with respect...

Our fathers and grandfathers were, in our children’s eyes, both patriarchs and family monarchs, and mothers and grandmothers were family queens.”

From the second half of the 19th century, a number of innovations penetrated the noble family. The role and authority of women increased, the search for new, profitable sources of livelihood increased, new views on marriage and children developed, humanism penetrated into the sphere of family relations

Natalya Goncharova-Lanskaya (widow of A.S. Pushkin), in a letter to her second husband writes regarding the marital fate of her daughters:

“As for settling them down, marrying them off, we are more prudent in this regard than you think. I rely entirely on the will of God, but would it be a crime on my part to think about their happiness. There is no doubt that you can be happy without being married, but this would mean passing by your calling...

By the way, I prepared them for the idea that marriage is not so easy and that one cannot look at it as a game and connect it with the thought of freedom. She said that marriage is a serious responsibility, and one must be very careful in choosing.”

Noble women began to actively engage in the upbringing and education of their daughters, encouraged them to move away from the traditionally assigned role of a wife, closed in the environment of family relationships, aroused in them an interest in social and political life, fostered in their daughters a sense of personality and independence.

As for parental attitudes in general, society advocated

Partnership, humane relations between parents and children.

The child began to be seen as an individual. Corporal punishment began to be condemned and prohibited.

O.P. Verkhovskaya wrote in her memoirs:

“The children no longer felt the same fear of their father. No rods

There was no trace of any punishment, much less torture. Obviously, the serf reform also had an impact on the upbringing of children.”

Relations between spouses began to acquire an egalitarian character, that is, based not on subordination, but on equality.

However, the old generation, brought up in patriarchal traditions, came into conflict with the new generation - their own children, who adopted advanced European ideas:

“...during this period of time, from the early 60s to the early 70s, all intelligent strata of Russian society were occupied with only one issue: family discord between old and young. No matter what noble family you ask about at that time, you will hear the same thing about each:

Parents quarreled with children. And it was not because of any material, material reasons that quarrels arose, but solely because of questions of a purely theoretical, abstract nature.”

Freedom of choice influenced the foundations of noble society - the number of divorces and unequal marriages increased. During this period, women had the opportunity to marry at their own discretion, which was quite often used by noblewomen as a means of achieving independence within the framework of a fictitious marriage.

Marriage gave girls the opportunity to leave the care of their parents, travel abroad, and lead the life they wanted, without being burdened with marital responsibilities.

Noblewoman E.I. Zhukovskaya, in her memoirs, notes that both she and her sister married for convenience, wanting to escape from the care of their parents, but did not live with their husbands.

According to the intra-family structure, relations between spouses could be classified into three types - along with the still dominant “old noble family”, a “new ideological noble family” based on the ideas of humanism, and a “new practical noble family” practicing egalitarianism appeared.

The crisis of generational contradiction also gave rise to three types of parental attitudes - “old parents”, “new ideological” and “new practical”.

We can conclude that the second half of the 19th century is characterized by a crisis of the patriarchal family. The noble family evolves and is divided into “new” and “old”. With the modernization of life, new ideological trends have shaken traditional foundations, forcing most of society to move away from patriarchal norms in family relationships.

The nobility served society, and the family was a means of serving the fatherland. The personality of one family member was lower than the family in the hierarchy of values. The ideal throughout the 19th century remained self-sacrifice for the sake of the interests of the family, especially in matters of love and marriage.
For many centuries in Rus' there were no detailed rules of etiquette for girls. The basic requirements could be summarized in a few lines: to be pious, modest and hardworking, to honor your parents and take care of yourself. In the famous “Domostroy,” which for several centuries was the main instruction on family and household relations, the main requirements for ensuring the proper behavior of girls were placed on the father and, to a much lesser extent, on the mother.

“Domostroy” demanded from the head of the family: “If you have a daughter, and direct your severity towards her, then you will save her from bodily harm: you will not disgrace your face if your daughter walks in obedience, and it is not your fault if, out of stupidity, she violates her virginity, and it will become known to your friends as a mockery, and then you will be put to shame before people. For if you give your daughter immaculate, it’s as if you’ve accomplished a great deed; you’ll be proud in any society, never suffering because of her.”

Even during the period of reforms carried out in the country by Peter I, there were no fundamental changes in the formation of etiquette requirements for girls. In the manual for young nobles “An Honest Mirror of Youth, or Indications for Everyday Conduct,” prepared and published by order of Peter in 1717, recommendations for the behavior of girls remained at the level of the patriarchal “Domostroy.”

The lack of proper regulation of the behavior of girls in society, by the way, did not correspond to the current situation. Thanks to Peter's innovations, the girls received immeasurably more freedoms than they had just a few years ago. They dressed in fashionable European dresses with a low neckline, learned to dance, and began to actively attend various entertainment events and assemblies. Naturally, they now have significantly more opportunities to communicate with gentlemen.

Perhaps, it was during the Peter the Great period that girls were the most liberated, since new rules for the behavior of girls in society had not yet been invented, they were just beginning to emerge, and fathers of families were obliged to take their daughters out into the world, otherwise they could be seriously harmed - the tsar did not tolerate it when the orders were not carried out, and he was quick to punish. There were no age restrictions at that time; Berchholz, describing the St. Petersburg society of the time of Peter, noted that girls 8-9 years old took part in assemblies and entertainment on an equal basis with adults.

The young gentlemen were undoubtedly pleased with the innovations in the behavior of women and girls. But the older generation greeted them with caution. MM. Shcherbatov, who published the book “On the Corruption of Morals in Russia” in the 18th century, noted: “It was pleasant for the female sex, who had almost until now been slaves in their homes, to enjoy all the pleasures of society, to adorn themselves with robes and headdresses that multiply the beauty of their faces and render them good.” camp ... the wives, who had not previously felt their beauty, began to recognize its power, began to try to multiply it with decent attire, and more than their ancestors they spread luxury in decoration.”

For girls, imitation of European rules of behavior was an exciting game, since significant remnants of patriarchal morals still remained in the home circle. Only by breaking away from the home circle to a social reception or assembly could the girl behave as required by European rules. Although in an exaggerated form, this was very accurately noted in the film “The Tale of How Tsar Peter Married a Blackamoor.”

Since for girls and ladies behavior in society has become a kind of game, it was filled with actual game elements. For communication, “languages” appeared: fans, flies, bouquets, poses, a lot of various small conventions that were not regulated by generally accepted rules, but which everyone knew about and tried to follow. It is worth noting that there was no particular effort to officially regulate the behavior of women and girls in society. These rules developed largely spontaneously in imitation of European etiquette. This happened especially actively during the reign of Russian empresses. It is curious that these rules nevertheless intertwined both European courtliness and Russian patriarchy.

Count L.F. Segur, who spent several years in Russia during the reign of Catherine II, wrote that Russian “women have gone further than men on the path of improvement. In society one could meet many elegant ladies, girls of remarkable beauty, who spoke four and five languages, who knew how to play various instruments and were familiar with the works of the most famous novelists of France, Italy and England.”

Noble families now began to pay considerable attention to preparing their daughters for adult life. This didn’t require much – to learn to speak fluently at least one or two foreign languages, be able to read, preferably in French or English, dance and maintain small talk. Mothers practically did not do this, entrusting the care of their daughters to governesses and bonnets. TO family life Girls were rarely prepared purposefully, but they were prepared in detail for communication with future suitors.

If in the time of Peter a girl could be married off at the age of 13-14, then by the 19th century a girl was considered a bride from the age of 16, and less often from the age of 15. It was at this age that girls began to be officially taken out into the world. Girls had been taken to visit before, but their social circle was limited to games with peers or special children's balls and concerts. But at the age of 16, an event took place that all the girls were looking forward to - their first official trip out into the world to a ball, to the theater or to a reception.

For the first time, a girl was usually taken out into the world by her father, less often by her mother or an older relative. The girl had to look elegant, but modest - a light light dress with a small neckline, no or minimal jewelry (small earrings and a string of pearls), a simple hairstyle. They tried to start going out with a ball or reception, when the girl could be officially introduced to acquaintances and family friends. Naturally, many of those to whom the girl was introduced knew her before, but the ritual had to be observed.

From that moment on, the girl became an official participant in social life, they began to send her invitations to various events, just like her mother. In official cases, a girl was accepted in accordance with her father’s rank, which was enshrined in the “Table of Ranks.” If the father had the rank of I class, the daughter received “rank... above all wives who are in rank V. Girls whose fathers are in rank II are over wives who are in rank VI,” etc.

By the beginning of the 19th century, the order of a girl’s behavior at a ball and communication with gentlemen was clearly regulated. Deviations from the rules were not allowed, otherwise it was possible to compromise not only oneself, but also the family. I have already written about this in detail in an article devoted to noble balls - bride fairs. I will only add that until the age of 24-25, a girl could only go out with her parents or relatives. If for some reason it was not possible to get married, then from this age she could travel on her own. But even before the age of 30, a girl (widows and divorcees had their own rules) could not receive men or go to visit them without the presence of an older relative, even if they were old enough to be her grandfather.

A lot of conventions surrounded the matchmaking and the girl’s behavior in communicating with the groom after the engagement. Actually, the girl’s opinion about the potential groom was not often asked; usually the parents made the decision. But it was considered desirable that the groom be introduced to the potential bride in advance and have the opportunity to communicate with her several times, naturally, under the supervision of one of the older family members.

For the grooms, the situation was not easy. Talking about your feelings to a girl, which was allowed only in a veiled form, when the future mother-in-law or aunt of a potential bride stands over your soul, is not an easy task. Involuntarily, you will become tongue-tied, but you need to conduct an elegant small talk, and even allegorically confess your love.

Even after the engagement, the groom could not remain alone with the bride and accompany her to balls or social events. The bride came to all events with one of her relatives, but there the groom could take her under his wing and be with her inseparably; the engaged status allowed this. But the bride went home only with relatives; if the groom was invited to accompany her, he rode in a separate carriage.

After the engagement, the girl entered into new life, now many of the conventions of girlish behavior could be forgotten. Her husband began to manage her social relationships. The behavior of married ladies in society had many of its own characteristics, but more on them in the next article.

The book "Domostroy" first appeared in the 15th century. Under Ivan the Terrible, the book was revised and supplemented by the clergyman Archpriest Sylvester. It was written in an orderly style, with frequent use of sayings. The book described ideal family relationships, home life, recipes, social and religious issues, and norms of behavior.

The book “Domostroy” was popular among boyars, Russian merchants, and then nobles who sought to create a certain way of life in their home in order to somehow organize eating, drinking drinks appropriate for a certain moment, what words to say, how and what things to wear. People from these classes were educated and had every opportunity to read these recommendations and then could afford to implement all this point by point. Domostroy also described in detail the rules of going to church, wedding ceremonies, wedding and funeral ceremonies. And not only Russia used this kind of “Domostroi”. In many other European countries, thick volumes containing advice and statements on housekeeping and family life were distributed.
The fashion for "Domostroy" began to gradually fade in the 19th century, personifying something ancient, useless and patriarchal. Writers of that time used images from Domostroy to more colorfully ridicule the petty-bourgeois, ossified way of life of medieval Russia.
In modern life, there are still similar books with descriptions of ancient Russian recipes from the royal kitchen and with recommendations for performing rituals, but very few turn to these overly inflated delights of that distant era, except perhaps to study what they lived, what they did, what rules they followed our ancestors. The ideal of behavior in the family of a metropolitan nobleman in Russia in the first half of the 19th century: traditions and innovations
In the old days, in noble families, as well as in noble society as a whole, the ability to behave, observe tact, and follow etiquette was considered the first indicator of the degree of aristocracy.

In the old days, in noble families, as well as in noble society as a whole, the ability to behave, observe tact, and follow etiquette was considered the first indicator of the degree of aristocracy. The nobles simply flaunted noble manners in front of each other. In French it was called bon ton, and in Russian it was called good manners. Decent manners were usually instilled from childhood. But it often happened that a person, due to a lack of aesthetic education, could master secular etiquette himself, imitating its skilled bearers or consulting the relevant rules.

It is known that the basis of peaceful, respectable cohabitation of people is love, mutual respect and politeness. A disrespectful attitude towards someone close primarily causes moral damage to that person and negatively affects the reputation of the one who unwisely disregards the rules of etiquette. In the book “Good Form”, published in St. Petersburg in 1889, it is written about this: “We must never forget that the laws of society, like Christian ones, from which they draw their origin, their principles, require love, consent, long-suffering, meekness , kindness, humane treatment and respect for the individual." No matter what feelings people have for each other, they in any case must observe external decency.

An important source of rules of behavior in the family and society as a whole in the pre-Petrine period was the so-called. Domostroy is a set of ancient Russian everyday rules based on the Christian worldview. The head of the family according to Domostroy is certainly a man who is responsible for the entire house before God, is a father and teacher for his household. The wife should take care of the housework, and both spouses should raise children in the fear of God, keeping the commandments of Christ.

In the era of Peter the Great, a manual appeared on the rules of conduct for secular youth, “An Honest Mirror of Youth, or Indications for Everyday Conduct, Collected from Various Authors.” This essay shows the norms of etiquette in conversation - with superiors, with a confessor, with parents, with servants - and the style of behavior in various situations. A young man must rely on himself and respect others, honor his parents, be polite, brave, courageous. He should avoid drunkenness, extravagance, slander, rudeness, etc. Particular importance was attached to knowledge of languages: youths should speak to each other in a foreign language, “so that they could learn the skill.” Along with community instructions, this book also gives specific bonton rules of behavior at the table and in public places, and some hygiene standards.

The final part of this book is devoted to the special norms of behavior of girls, which, moreover, are strictly determined by church morality. These instructions are obviously close to traditional ancient Russian teachings. The virginal virtues are as follows: love for the word of God, humility, prayer, confession of faith, respect for parents, diligence, friendliness, mercy, modesty, bodily purity, abstinence and sobriety, frugality, generosity, fidelity and truthfulness. In public, a girl should behave modestly and humbly, avoid laughter, chatter, and coquetry.

In general, the monument reflects both general ethical norms of behavior and specific features of education related to the period of the most active perception of Russian tradition, Russian culture, and the peculiarities of the lifestyle of Western Europe.

In the 19th century, the importance of tradition was still extremely great. The wife must certainly honor her husband and please his family and friends. This is what the book “Life in the World, at Home and at Court,” published in 1890, teaches the average person. However, in contrast to the recommendations of Domostroy, the spouses often lived separately. Aristocratic families that owned large mansions arranged their homes in such a way that the husband and wife had their own separate chambers - the “female” and “male” halves. Each of these halves had its own special routine. True, there were cases when the house was divided into two parts for other reasons. For example, E.A. Sabaneeva in her book “Memories of the Past: From a Family Chronicle 1770–1838” describes the house of her grandfather Prince P.N. Obolensky in Moscow: “Large on two floors, between the street and the house there is a courtyard, behind the house there is a garden with an alley of acacias on both sides. The house was divided by a large dining room into two halves: one half was called Knyazeva, the other - maid of honor. In the same way, the people in the house, that is, footmen, coachmen, cooks and maids, as well as horses and carriages, were called princes and ladies-in-waiting. There was always a parade on Grandma's half; she had the best part of the house at her disposal; she always had visitors. Grandfather had his own small chambers, above which there was a mezzanine for the children.”

Psychologists note that spouses, often without realizing it, when building their intra-family relationships, are largely guided by the family of their parents. At the same time, sometimes the order that exists in the parental family is perceived by a person as a certain ideal, which he strives to follow at all costs. But since in the parental families of the husband and wife these orders could not be at all similar, such thoughtless adherence to them can ultimately lead to serious complications in the relationship between the spouses.

Prince V.P. Meshchersky considered the behavior of his parents - both in the family and in society - to be standard. Father “was, without exaggeration, I will say, the ideal of a Christian man, namely a man,” the prince writes in his memoirs, “because he lived a full life of light, but at the same time shone, so to speak, with the beauty of Christianity: his soul loved his neighbor too much and good in order to ever think evil, and at the same time, always cheerful, always content, he lived the life of everyone around him; I read everything I could, took an interest in everything and, like my mother, never touched even in passing lies, arrogance, vulgarity, or gossip.”

V.N. Tatishchev in his will - a kind of Domostroy of the 18th century - says that “family legislation still has an extremely patriarchal character. The basis of the family is the unlimited power of the parent, which extends to children of both sexes and of all ages and ends only by natural death or deprivation of all rights of the estate.”

Until at least half of the 19th century, respectful attitude towards parents was a phenomenon, as they would now say, without alternative. However, some “freethinking”, which arose, in particular, under the influence of sentimental and romantic works, appeared. So the main character of the novel D.N. Begicheva’s “Olga: the life of Russian nobles at the beginning of the century” (1840) fiercely resisted her father’s desire to marry her to an unloved man, although she did not dare to contradict him openly.

The Khomyakov family has a tradition that when both sons - Fyodor and Alexey - “came of age,” Marya Alekseevna called them to her and solemnly explained her idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe relationship between a man and a woman. “In today's terms,” she said, “men seem to enjoy freedom. And in a Christian way, a man must maintain his purity just as strictly as a woman. Chastity is the lot of people before marriage. Therefore, I want you to swear to me that you will not enter into a relationship with any woman until you marry, choosing your only one. Swear it." The sons swore.

V.F. Odoevsky in “Excerpts from Masha’s Journal” shows a certain ideal of the relationship between parents and children. On the day Masha turns ten, she is given a journal, where the girl writes down everything that happens to her during the day. Mom gradually accustoms her to housekeeping, dad teaches her geography lessons. Masha treats her parents with great respect, respect, which is reinforced, in addition to general education in the spirit of the Law of God, by positive examples from the lives of some familiar parents. Parents themselves never raise their voices at their children. And if Masha deserves punishment, they, for example, oblige Masha not to leave the room. According to the author, his fairy tale should teach children and their parents to follow this example.

Emperor Nicholas I wrote in 1838 to his son Nicholas: “Love and honor your parents and elder brother and always resort to their advice and with full confidence, and then our blessing will always be over your dear head.”

The first principle in raising a noble child was that he was oriented not towards success, but towards an ideal. He should have been brave, honest, educated, not in order to achieve anything - fame, wealth, high rank - but because he was a nobleman, because he had been given a lot, because that’s what he should be.

Siblings were expected to be respectful of each other, and the eldest son had some authority over the younger children. Boys under 15 and girls under 21 walked ahead of their parents, who “vomited” them. The girl was completely dependent on the will of her parents, while the young man was not subject to their control and was free in his acquaintances. V.F. Odoevsky wrote: “This is our custom: a girl will die of boredom and will not give her hand to a man if he does not have the happiness of being her brother, uncle, or the even more enviable happiness of being eighty years old, because “what will mothers say?”

At the beginning of the 19th century, traditions and customs adopted in the previous century and characterized by a certain patriarchy began to be supplanted by new, more liberal rules. This also applied to the period of mourning. “Now all decency is poorly observed, but in my time they strictly followed everything and according to the proverb: “love to count kinship and give honor to it” - they were considered as if kinship and, when one of the relatives died, they wore mourning for him, depending on proximity or distance , how much was due. And before me it was even stricter. Widows wore mourning for three years: the first year only black wool and crepe, in the second year black silk and black lace could be worn, and in the third year, on ceremonial occasions, it was possible to wear silver mesh on the dress, not gold. This was worn at the end of three years, and the black dress of the widow was not removed, especially by the elderly. And the young woman would not have been praised if she had rushed to take off her mourning. They wore mourning for their father and mother for two years: the first - wool and crepe; on major holidays you could wear something woolen, but not too light. ...When weddings took place in a family where there was deep mourning, the black dress was temporarily removed and a purple one was worn, which was considered mourning for the brides,” wrote D.D. Blagovo in "Granny's Stories". But over time, this standard of behavior begins to disappear.

The behavior of the nobles in Moscow and St. Petersburg was different. As the same D.D. writes. Blagovo, with reference to the memories of his dear grandmother, “those who are more important and richer are all in St. Petersburg, and those who live out their lives in Moscow, or are outdated, or impoverished, sit quietly and live poorly, not in a lordly manner, as it used to be.” , but in a bourgeois way, about themselves. ...There may be good names, but there are no people: they don’t live by name.”

E.A. Sushkova, having first attended a ball in Moscow, finds many differences in the behavior of Moscow and St. Petersburg young ladies. The latter “are more than talkative with young people,” she says in her “Notes,” “they are familiar, they are their friends.” They address each other as “you”, call each other by last name, first name or nickname, and not in French, as was customary in the ancient capital. Life in Moscow was simpler. Yu.N. Tynyanov says that Nadezhda Osipovna Pushkina, for example, could sit unkempt in her bedroom all day long. And Yu.M. Lotman wrote that “military events brought Moscow and the Russian provinces closer together. The Moscow population “spread out” over vast areas. At the end of the war, after the French left Moscow, this gave rise to a reverse movement. ...The rapprochement between the city and the province, so noticeable in Moscow, had almost no effect on the life of St. Petersburg in those years. Moreover, the occupation of Moscow by the enemy cut off many of the threads connecting St. Petersburg with the country.”

Unlike capitals, as V.A. writes. Sollogub in his “Memoirs”, “biblical calm reigned in the life of the old-world landowner of that time (1820s - A.K.). The old man, his children, his servants, his few peasants formed exactly one continuous family with varying degrees of rights.” However, one should also distinguish between villages and cities in the provinces: the distances between neighbors living in their villages were generally enormous and therefore they saw each other much less often than in cities. Thus, the heroine of the novel “Alexandrina” by Fan Dim (E.V. Kologrivova) complained that Christmas time was the only opportunity for girls who saw each other extremely rarely to “go wild”, and they had fun during the entire period of separation, while in the capitals the number of boring visits increased several times.

It is obvious that family relationships are ideally based on mutual respect, piety, obedience of women, children and servants to the head of the family, and observance of the rules of decency. Society existed according to a traditional way of life at its core, which was combined with norms of behavior brought from Europe, which were increasingly taking root among the nobility. Therefore, the ideal of behavior changes over the course of half a century from a more traditional one, carefully preserved by the people of the 18th century, to a more “enlightened” one, which was facilitated by the abundance of foreign tutors, constant conversation in a foreign language, mainly French, and admiration for the West in general.

Marchenko N. Signs of dear old times. Morals and life of the Pushkin era. - M.: Isographus; Eksmo, 2002. - P.92.
Aleshina Yu.E., Gozman L.Ya.. Dubovskaya E.M. Socio-psychological methods for studying marital relationships: Special workshop on social psychology. - M.: Publishing house Mosk. University.. 1987. - P.35.
Koshelev V. Alexey Stepanovich Khomyakov, biography in documents, reasoning and research. - M., 2000. - P. 163.
Odoevsky V.F. Motley tales. Tales of Grandfather Irenaeus / Comp., prepared. text, intro. Art. and comment. V. Grekova. - M.: Artist. lit.. 1993. - P.190-223.
Nicholas I. Husband Father. Emperor / Comp., pred. N.I. Azarova; comment N.I. Azarova, L.V. Gladkova; lane from fr. L.V. Gladkova. - M.: SLOVO / SLOVO, 2000. - P.330.

Internet source:
http://www.pravoslavie.ru/arhiv/051006163916

The epochal reign of Peter I, as well as his numerous reforms aimed at Europeanization and the eradication of medieval remnants in everyday life and politics, had a huge impact on the way of life of all classes of the empire.

Various innovations, actively introduced into the everyday life and customs of Russians in the 18th century, gave a strong impetus to the transformation of Russia into an enlightened European state.

Reforms of Peter I

Peter I, like Catherine II, who replaced him on the throne, considered his main task to be introducing women to secular life and accustoming the upper classes of Russian society to the rules of etiquette. For this purpose, special instructions and guidelines were created; young nobles were taught the rules of court etiquette and went to study in Western countries, from where they returned inspired by the desire to make the people of Russia enlightened and more modern. Basically, the changes affected the secular way of life remained unchanged - the head of the family was a man, the rest of the family members were obliged to obey him.

The life and customs of the 18th century in Russia came into sharp conflict with innovations, because absolutism, which had reached its peak, as well as feudal-serf relations did not allow the plans for Europeanization to be implemented painlessly and quickly. In addition, there was a clear contrast between the lives of the wealthy classes and

Court life in the 18th century

The life and customs of the royal court in the second half of the 18th century were distinguished by unprecedented luxury, surprising even foreigners. The influence of Western trends was increasingly felt: tutors, hairdressers, and milliners appeared in Moscow and St. Petersburg; French became compulsory to study; A special fashion was introduced for ladies who came to the court.

Innovations that appeared in Paris were necessarily adopted by the Russian nobility. resembled a theatrical performance - decorous bows and curtsies were created acute sensation pretense.

Over time, the theater gained great popularity. During this period, the first Russian playwrights appeared (Dmitrievsky, Sumarokov).

Interest in French literature is growing. Representatives of the aristocracy are paying increasing attention to education and the development of a multifaceted personality - this becomes a kind of sign of good taste.

In the 30s - 40s of the 18th century, during the reign of Anna Ioannovna, one of the popular entertainments, in addition to chess and checkers, was playing cards, which had previously been considered indecent.

Life and customs of the 18th century in Russia: the life of nobles

The population of the Russian Empire consisted of several classes.

The nobles of large cities, especially St. Petersburg and Moscow, were in the most advantageous position: material well-being and high position in society allowed them to lead an idle lifestyle, devoting all their time to organizing and attending social events.

Close attention was paid to houses, the arrangement of which was noticeably influenced by Western traditions.

The possessions of the aristocracy were distinguished by luxury and sophistication: large halls, tastefully furnished with European furniture, huge chandeliers with candles, rich libraries with books by Western authors - all this was supposed to show a sense of taste and confirm the nobility of the family. The spacious rooms of the houses allowed the owners to organize crowded balls and social receptions.

The role of education in the 18th century

Life and customs of the second half of the 18th century were even more closely connected with the influence of Western culture on Russia: aristocratic salons became fashionable, where debates about politics, art, literature raged, and debates on philosophical topics took place. The French language gained great popularity, which the children of nobles were taught from childhood by specially hired foreign teachers. Upon reaching the age of 15-17, teenagers were sent to closed educational institutions: boys were taught here girls - the rules of good manners, the ability to play various musical instruments, and the basics of family life.

The Europeanization of life and customs of the urban population was of great importance for the development of the entire country. Innovations in art, architecture, food, and clothing quickly took root in the homes of the nobility. Intertwined with old Russian habits and traditions, they determined the life and customs of the 18th century in Russia.

At the same time, innovations did not spread throughout the country, but covered only its most developed regions, once again emphasizing the gap between the wealthy and the poor.

Life of provincial nobles

Unlike the capital's nobles, representatives of the provincial nobility lived more modestly, although they tried with all their might to resemble the more prosperous aristocracy. At times, this desire from the outside looked quite cartoonish. If the metropolitan nobility lived off their huge estates and the thousands of serfs working on them, then the families of provincial cities and villages received their main income from taxing peasants and income from their small farms. The noble estate was a similarity to the houses of the capital's nobility, but with a significant difference - numerous outbuildings were located next to the house.

The level of education of provincial nobles was very low, training was mainly limited to the basics of grammar and arithmetic. Men spent their leisure time going hunting, and women gossiped about court life and fashion without having a reliable idea about it.

The owners of rural estates were closely connected with the peasants, who served as workers and servants in their houses. Therefore, the rural nobility was much closer to the commoners than the metropolitan aristocrats. In addition, poorly educated nobles, as well as peasants, often found themselves far from the innovations being introduced, and if they tried to keep up with fashion, it turned out to be more comical than elegant.

Peasants: life and customs of the 18th century in Russia

The lowest class of the Russian Empire, the serfs, had the hardest time of all.

Working six days a week for the landowner did not leave the peasant time to organize his daily life. They had to cultivate their own plots of land on holidays and weekends, because the peasant families had many children, and they had to somehow feed them. Constant employment and a lack of free time and money are associated with the simple life of the peasants: wooden huts, rough interiors, meager food and simple clothing. However, all this did not stop them from inventing entertainment: on major holidays, mass games were held, round dances were held, and songs were sung.

The children of peasants, without receiving any education, repeated the fate of their parents, also becoming courtyard servants and servants on noble estates.

The influence of the West on the development of Russia

The life and customs of the Russian people at the end of the 18th century were for the most part completely influenced by the trends of the Western world. Despite the stability and ossification of old Russian traditions, the trends of developed countries gradually entered the life of the population of the Russian Empire, making its wealthy part more educated and literate. This fact is confirmed by the emergence of various institutions, in the service of which were people who had already received a certain level of education (for example, city hospitals).

Cultural development and the gradual Europeanization of the population testify quite clearly to the history of Russia. Life and customs in the 18th century, modified thanks to the enlightenment policies of Peter I, marked the beginning of the global cultural development of Russia and its people.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Introduction: Life and culture

People and ranks

Women's education in the 18th century

Matchmaking. Marriage. Divorce

The Art of Living

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction: Life and culture

Studying the issue of Russian life and culture of the 17th - 18th centuries, we must first of all determine the meaning of the concepts of “life”, “culture”, and their relationships with each other.

Culture, first of all, is a collective concept. An individual can be a carrier of culture, can actively participate in its development, however, by its nature, culture, like language, is a social phenomenon, that is, social. Consequently, culture is something common to any collective - a group of people living simultaneously and connected by a certain social organization. It follows from this that culture is a form of communication between people and is possible only in a group in which people communicate. Any structure serving the sphere of social communication is a language. This means that it forms a certain system of signs used in accordance with the rules known to the members of a given group. We call signs any material expression (words, drawings, things, etc.) that has meaning and, thus, can serve as a means of conveying meaning.

Consequently, culture has, firstly, a communication and, secondly, a symbolic nature. Let's focus on the latter and give some examples. The sword is nothing more than an object. As a thing, it can be forged or broken, it can be placed in a museum display case, and it can kill a person. This is all - using it as an object, but when, attached to a belt or supported by a baldric placed on the hip, the sword symbolizes a free person and is a “sign of freedom”, it already appears as a symbol and belongs to culture.

In the 18th century, a Russian and European nobleman does not carry a sword - a sword hangs on his side (sometimes a tiny, almost toy ceremonial sword, which is practically not a weapon). In this case, the sword is a symbol of a symbol: it means a sword, and the sword means belonging to a privileged class.

Belonging to the nobility also means being bound by certain rules of behavior, principles of honor, even the cut of clothing. We know of cases when “wearing clothes indecent for a nobleman” (that is, peasant dress) or also a beard “indecent for a nobleman” became a matter of concern for the political police and the emperor himself. A sword as a weapon, a sword as a part of clothing, a sword as a symbol, a sign of nobility - all these are different functions of an object in the general context of culture.

In its various incarnations, a symbol can simultaneously be a weapon suitable for direct practical use, or be completely separated from its immediate function. For example, a small sword specially designed for parades excluded practical use, being in fact an image of a weapon, not a weapon. The parade sphere was separated from the battle sphere by emotions, body language and functions. Thus, the sword becomes woven into the system of symbolic language of the era and becomes a fact of its culture.

So, the area of ​​culture is always the area of ​​symbolism.

Let us give another example: in the earliest versions of ancient Russian legislation (“Russkaya Pravda”), the nature of the compensation (“vira”) that the attacker had to pay to the victim was proportional to the material damage (the nature and size of the wound) suffered by him. However, in the future, legal norms develop, it would seem, in an unexpected direction: a wound, even a serious one, if inflicted by the sharp part of a sword, entails less damage than not so dangerous blows with a bare weapon or the handle of a sword, a cup at a feast, or a “body » (back) side of the fist.

How to explain this, from our point of view, paradox? The morality of the military class is being formed, and the concept of honor is being developed. A wound inflicted by the sharp (combat) part of a bladed weapon is painful, but not dishonorable. Moreover, it is even honorable, since they fight only with equals. It is no coincidence that in the everyday life of Western European knighthood, initiation, that is, the transformation of the “lower” into the “higher,” required a real, and subsequently symbolic, blow with a sword. Anyone who was recognized as worthy of a wound (later - a significant blow) was simultaneously recognized as socially equal. A blow with an unsheathed sword, hilt, stick - not a weapon at all - is dishonorable, since this is how one beats a slave.

Characteristically, there is a subtle distinction that is made between an “honest” punch and a “dishonest” one... back side brush or fist. Here there is an inverse relationship between actual damage and the degree of significance. Let us compare the replacement in knightly (and later in dueling) life of a real slap in the face with the symbolic gesture of throwing a glove, as well as in general equating an offensive gesture when challenging to a duel. Material damage, like material wealth, like things in general in their practical value and function, belongs to the realm of practical life, and insult, honor, protection from humiliation, feeling self-esteem, politeness (respect for other people's dignity) belong to the sphere of culture.

Culture is memory. Therefore, it is always connected with history; when we talk about our modern culture, we, perhaps without suspecting it ourselves, talk about the enormous path that this culture has traveled. This path spans thousands of years, crosses the boundaries of historical eras, national cultures and immerses us in one culture - the culture of humanity.

We study literature, read books, and are interested in the fate of heroes. We are happy to pick up a novel written a hundred, two hundred, three hundred years ago, and we see that its heroes are close to us: they love, hate, do good and bad deeds, know honor and dishonor, they are faithful in friendship or traitors - - and all this is clear to us. But at the same time, much in the actions of the heroes is either completely incomprehensible to us, or - what is worse - misunderstood, not fully understood. After all, in order to understand the meaning of the behavior of living people and literary heroes past, you need to know their culture: their simple, ordinary life, their habits, ideas about the world, etc., etc.

Having thus defined the aspects of culture that interest us, we have the right, however, to ask the question: does the expression “culture and life” itself contain a contradiction. Really, what is everyday life? Everyday life is the usual course of life in its real-practical forms; everyday life is the things that surround us, our habits and everyday behavior. Everyday life surrounds us like air, and like air, it is noticeable to us only when it is missing or deteriorates. We notice the features of someone else's life, but our own life is elusive to us - we tend to consider it “just life,” the natural norm of practical existence. So, everyday life is always in the sphere of practice; it is the world of things, first of all. How can he come into contact with the world of symbols and signs that make up the space of culture?

A thing does not exist separately, as something isolated in the context of its time. Things are connected. When we walk into a ridiculously furnished room filled with items of all different styles, we feel as if we are in a marketplace where everyone is shouting and no one is listening to anyone else. But there may be another connection. For example, we say: “These are my grandmother’s things.” Thus, we establish a certain intimate connection between objects, conditioned by the memory of a person dear to us, of his long-gone time, of his childhood. It is no coincidence that there is a custom of giving things “as a keepsake” - things have a memory. These are like words and notes that the past conveys to the future.

On the other hand, things powerfully dictate the gestures, style of behavior and, ultimately, the psychological attitude of their owners. So, for example, since women began to wear trousers, their gait has changed, it has become more sporty, more “masculine”. At the same time, there was an invasion of typically “male” gestures into female behavior (for example, the habit of crossing one’s legs high when sitting is a gesture that is not only masculine, but also “American”; in Europe it was traditionally considered a sign of indecent swagger). Things impose a behavior on us because they create a certain cultural context around them. Anyone who has held both a modern weapon and an old dueling pistol in his hand cannot help but be amazed at how well, how smoothly the latter fits in the hand. Its heaviness is not felt - it becomes, as it were, a continuation of the body. The fact is that ancient household items were made by hand, their shape was perfected over decades, and sometimes centuries, the secrets of production were passed on from master to master. This not only developed the most convenient form, but also inevitably turned the thing into the history of the thing, into the memory of the gestures associated with it.

History is bad at predicting the future, but good at explaining the present. We are now experiencing a time of fascination with history. Instead of studying how it was, we need to know how it should be. Events are made by people. And people act according to the motives and impulses of their era. If you don't know these motives, then people's actions will often seem inexplicable or meaningless.

People and ranks

The Russian nobility, as we meet it in the 18th century, was a product of Peter the Great's reform. Among the various consequences of the reforms of Peter I, the creation of the nobility as the state and culturally dominant class is not the least important. The material from which this class was composed was the pre-Petrine nobility of Moscow Rus'.

The nobility of Muscovite Rus' was a “service class,” that is, it consisted of professional servants of the state, mainly military. Their military labor was paid for by the fact that they were “placed” on the ground for their service, otherwise they were “made up” by villages and peasants. But neither one nor the other was their personal and hereditary property. When ceasing to serve, the nobleman had to return the lands granted to him to the treasury. If he “left for wounds or injury,” his son or daughter’s husband had to go into service; if he was killed, the widow, after a certain period of time, had to marry a man capable of “pulling the service” or give birth to a son. The earth had to serve. True, for special merits she could be given into hereditary possession, and then the “warrior” became a “patrimonial owner.”

Between the “warrior” and the “patrimonial landowner” there was a deep not only social, but also psychological difference. For a patrimonial owner, war and military service to the state was an extraordinary and far from desirable event; for a warrior, it was everyday service. A patrimonial boyar served the Grand Duke and could have died in this service, but the Grand Duke was not a god for him. For him, his attachment to the land, to Rus', was also colored by local patriotism, the memory of the service that his family performed, and the honor that he enjoyed. The patriotism of the warrior-nobleman was closely connected with personal devotion to the sovereign and had a state character. In the eyes of the boyar, the nobleman was a mercenary, a man without family or tribe, and a dangerous rival to the sovereign's throne. A boyar in the eyes of a nobleman is a sloth, evading the sovereign's service, a crafty servant, always secretly ready for sedition. This view has been shared by the Moscow Grand Dukes and Tsars since the 16th century. But it is especially interesting that, judging by folklore, it is also close to the peasant masses.

Peter's reform solved national problems, creating statehood that ensured Russia's two-hundred-year existence among the main European powers and creating one of the most vibrant cultures in the history of human civilization.

Figures of the Petrine era loved to emphasize the national meaning of the reforms carried out through hard work. In a speech dedicated to the Peace of Nystadt, Peter said that “it is necessary to work for the common benefit and profit, from which the people will be relieved.”

Peter's personal work was not fun, a strange quirk - it was a program, an affirmation of the equality of everyone in the service. State service acquired for Peter an almost religious significance of a grandiose, continuous liturgy in the temple of the State. Work was his prayer.

And if among the Old Believers a legend arose about the “replacement king” and the “antichrist king,” then Ivan Pososhkov, a native of the people, undoubtedly reflected not only his personal opinion when he wrote: “Our great monarch... to the mountain... "It's about ten." Those Olonets men who, remembering Peter, said that Peter was a king was hardly an exception! He didn’t eat bread for nothing, he worked harder than a farm laborer. We must not forget about the invariably positive image of Peter in Russian fairy-tale folklore.

The nobility undoubtedly supported the reform. It was from here that urgently needed new workers were drawn: officers for the army and navy, officials and diplomats, administrators and engineers, scientists. They were enthusiasts of labor for the benefit of the state.

The psychology of the service class was the foundation of the self-awareness of the nobleman of the 18th century. It was through service that he recognized himself as part of the class. Peter I stimulated this feeling in every possible way - and personal example, and a number of legislative acts. Their pinnacle was the Table of Ranks, developed over a number of years with the constant and active participation of Peter I and published in January 1722. But the Table of Ranks itself was a realization of more general principle Peter's new statehood - the principle of “regularity”.

The forms of St. Petersburg (and in a sense, the entire Russian city) life were created by Peter I. His ideal was, as he himself put it, a regular - correct state, where all life is regulated, subject to rules. St. Petersburg woke up like a drum: at this sign, soldiers began training, officials fled to the departments. A man of the 18th century lived, as it were, in two dimensions: he devoted half a day, half his life to public service, the time of which was precisely established by regulations, and half a day he was outside it.

First of all, the regulation affected civil service. True, the ranks and positions that existed in pre-Petrine Russia (boyar, stolnik, etc.) were not abolished. They continued to exist, but these ranks ceased to be favored, and gradually, when the old people died out, their ranks disappeared with them. Instead, a new service hierarchy was introduced. Its preparation took a long time. On February 1, 1721, Peter signed a draft decree, but it had not yet entered into force, but was distributed to government officials for discussion. Many comments and proposals were made (though Peter did not agree with any of them; this was his favorite form of democracy: he allowed everything to be discussed, but then did everything his own way). Next, the issue of adopting a decree on the Table was decided. A special commission was created for this purpose, and only in 1722 this law came into force.

The main, first thought of the legislator was, on the whole, quite sober: people should occupy positions according to their abilities and according to their real contribution to state affairs. The table of ranks established the dependence of a person’s social position on his place in the service hierarchy. The latter, ideally, should have corresponded to services to the Tsar and the Fatherland. Peter was worried about the possibility that well-born people who had not served or were careless in their service would challenge the advantages of those who had earned their rank through diligent service.

The great evil in the state structure of pre-Petrine Rus' was appointment to service by birth. The Table of Ranks abolished the distribution of places by blood and nobility, which led to the fact that almost every decision turned out to be a complex, tangled story. It gave rise to many disputes, noisy cases, litigation: does the right this son occupy a given position if his father occupied such and such a position, etc. The order in charge of appointments was overwhelmed with such matters even during hostilities: right on the eve of battles, irreconcilable parochial disputes very often arose over the right by birth to occupy more higher place than the opponent. The counting began with fathers, grandfathers, clan - and this, of course, became a huge obstacle for the business state. Peter's original idea was the desire to harmonize the position and the honor given, and to distribute positions depending on personal merit to the state and abilities, and not on the nobility of the family. True, from the very beginning a significant reservation was made: this did not apply to members royal family who always received superiority in service.

The table of ranks divided all types of service into military, civil and court. The first, in turn, was divided into land and sea (the guard was especially singled out). All ranks were divided into 14 classes, of which the first five constituted the generals (the V class of land military ranks consisted of brigadiers; this rank was subsequently abolished). Classes VI--VIII were staff officers, and IX--XIV were chief officer ranks.

The table of ranks placed military service in a privileged position. This was expressed, in particular, in the fact that all 14 classes in military service gave the right of hereditary nobility, while in civil service such a right was given only starting from the VIII class. This meant that the lowest rank of chief officer in the military service already gave hereditary nobility, while in the civil service for this it was necessary to rise to the rank of collegiate assessor or court councilor.

From this provision subsequently arose the distinction between hereditary (so-called “pillar”) nobles and personal nobles. Subsequently, personal nobility was also given by orders (nobleman “on the cross”) and academic titles. A personal nobleman enjoyed a number of class rights of the nobility: he was exempt from corporal punishment, capitation salary, and conscription. However, he could not transfer these rights to his children, did not have the right to own peasants, participate in noble meetings and hold noble elected positions.

Military service was considered primarily a noble service; civil service was not considered “noble.” It was called the “secretary”; there were always more commoners in it, and it was customary to abhor it. The exception was the diplomatic service, which was also considered “noble.” Only in the Alexander and later in the Nikolaev time did a civil official begin to claim, to a certain extent, public respect next to the officer. And yet, almost until the very end of the “St. Petersburg period”, the government, if an energetic, efficient and preferably honest administrator was required, preferred not a “specialist”, but a guards officer. Thus, Nicholas I appointed cavalry general Count Nikolai Aleksandrovich Protasov as chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod in 1836, that is, he practically put him at the head of the Russian church. And he held this position for twenty years without a year, successfully bringing theological seminaries closer in the nature of training to military schools.

However, the government's inclination towards military administration and the sympathy that the uniform enjoyed in society, in particular among women, stemmed from different sources. The first is due to the general nature of power. Russian emperors were military men and received military training and education. From childhood they were accustomed to look at the army as an ideal organization; their aesthetic ideas were influenced by parades; they wore tailcoats only when traveling abroad. The unreasoning, executive officer seemed to them the most reliable and psychologically understandable figure. Even among the civil servants of the empire, it is difficult to name a person who, at least in his youth, for at least several years, would not wear an officer’s uniform.

The “cult of the uniform” in noble life had a different basis. Of course, especially in the eyes of the fair sex, aesthetic appreciation played an important role: the embroidered, sparkling gold or silver hussar, blue-red Uhlan, white (ceremonial) Horse Guards uniform was more beautiful than the velvet caftan of a dandy or the blue tailcoat of an Anglomaniac. Before romanticism introduced the fashion for disappointment and spleen, daring and the ability to live widely, cheerfully and carefree were valued in a young man. And although mothers preferred respectable grooms in tailcoats, the hearts of their daughters leaned towards dashing lieutenants and captains, whose entire capital consisted of unpaid debts and prospects of inheritance from rich aunts.

And yet, the preference for the military over the civilian had a more compelling reason. The table of ranks created a military-bureaucratic machine of public administration. The power of the state rested on two figures: the officer and the official, but the sociocultural appearance of these two caryatids was different. An official is a person whose very name is derived from the word “rank”. “Chin” in Old Russian means “order”. And although the rank, contrary to Peter’s plans, very soon diverged from the person’s real position, turning into an almost mystical bureaucratic fiction, this fiction at the same time had a completely practical meaning. An official is a salary man, his welfare directly depends on the state. He is tied to the administrative machine and cannot exist without it. This connection roughly reminds itself of itself on the first day of every month, when throughout the territory Russian Empire officials had to be paid salaries.

There was another side to the life of an official, which determined his low social prestige. The confusion of laws and the general spirit of state arbitrariness, most clearly manifested in the bureaucratic service, led (and could not help but lead) to the fact that Russian culture of the 18th century practically did not create images of an impartial judge, a fair administrator - a selfless defender of the weak and oppressed. The official was associated in the public consciousness with a crook and a bribe-taker. It is no coincidence that the exception in public assessment were the officials of the foreign collegium, whose service was not tempting for the bribe-taker, but gave scope to ambitious views. Employees of the Collegium of Foreign Affairs were required to have impeccable manners and good French.

Russian bureaucracy, being an important factor state life, left almost no trace in the spiritual life of Russia: it did not create its own culture, nor its ethics, nor even its ideology. When in post-reform life journalists, figures from the renewed court, and lawyers were needed, they, especially in the first decades after the abolition of serfdom, appeared from a completely different environment, primarily from that which was associated with the church, with the white clergy and which Peter’s reform seemed to be relegated to the background.

Strange as it may seem, it should be said that serfdom had for the history of Russian culture as a whole some positive sides. It was on it that the nobles’ independence from power, albeit perverted in its core, but still certain, rested—that without which culture is impossible. The officer did not serve for the money. His salary barely covered the expenses that military life required, especially in the capital, in the guard. Of course, there were embezzlers: somewhere in an army regiment in the provinces it was possible to save money on hay for horses, on horse repairs, on soldiers’ ammunition, but often the commander of a company, regiment, or chief of a regiment, in order to keep his unit “in order”, I had to pay extra out of my own pocket, especially before royal shows. If we remember that customs required an officer to live a much more riotous life than an official, and that it was considered indecent to lag behind his comrades in this regard, then it will become clear to us that military service could not be considered a profitable occupation. Its obligation for a nobleman was that a person in Russia, if he did not belong to the tax-paying class, could not help but serve. Without service it was impossible to obtain a rank, and a nobleman without rank would seem like something of a black sheep. When preparing any government papers (bills of sale, mortgages, deeds of purchase or sale, when issuing a foreign passport, etc.), it was necessary to indicate not only the last name, but also the rank. However, if a nobleman really never served (and only a magnate, the son of a nobleman who lived most of the time abroad, could afford this), then, as a rule, his relatives arranged for him a fictitious service (most often a court service). He took long-term leave “for treatment” or “to improve household affairs”, in his old age he “raised” (ranks were based on length of service) to some chief chamberlain and retired with the rank of general. In Moscow in the second half of the 1820s, when caring mothers began to be afraid to send their dreamy offspring inclined towards German philosophy to the guards barracks, admission to the Archives of the College of Foreign Affairs became a typical fictitious service. The head of the archive, D. N. Bantysh-Kamensky, willingly enrolled these young people (they began to be ironically called “archive youths” in society) “over the staff,” that is, without salary and without any official duties, simply out of old-Moscow kindness and desire please the ladies.

Simultaneously with the distribution of ranks, there was a distribution of benefits and honors. The bureaucratic state has created a huge ladder of human relations that are completely incomprehensible to us now. The right to respect was distributed by rank. In real life, this was most clearly manifested in the established forms of addressing persons of different ranks in accordance with their class.

The place of rank in the service hierarchy was associated with the receipt (or non-receipt) of many real privileges. According to rank, for example, horses were provided at post stations.

In the 18th century, under Peter I, a “regular” post office was established in Russia. It was a network of stations managed by special officials. The stationmaster had state coachmen, wagons, and horses at his disposal. Those who traveled for state needs - for travel purposes or for their own needs, but on driving post horses, when arriving at the station, they left tired horses and took fresh ones. The cost of travel for couriers was paid by the state. Those traveling “out of their own need” paid for the horses. Therefore, the provincial landowner preferred to ride his own horses, which slowed down the journey, but made it much cheaper.

When receiving horses at the stations, there was a strict procedure: couriers with urgent government packages were allowed to go ahead, without a queue, and the rest were given horses according to rank: persons of classes I-III could take up to twelve horses, from class IV - up to eight, and so on. , down to the poor officials of VI-IX classes, who had to be content with one carriage with two horses. But it often happened differently: all the horses were given to the passing general - the rest sit and wait... And the dashing hussar lieutenant, who arrived at the station drunk, could beat the defenseless station guard and take by force more horses than he was entitled to.

According to ranks in the 18th century, servants carried dishes at dinner parties, and guests sitting at the “lower” end of the table often contemplated only empty plates. At this time, refreshments “according to rank” were part of the obligatory ritual of those huge feasts where complete strangers met at the table, and even the hospitable host could not remember all his guests. Only in the 19th century did this custom begin to be considered obsolete, although it was sometimes maintained in the provinces.

The number of collegiate assessors or senate secretaries who rose to the rank of personal nobility was very large, especially in the 19th century, when the bureaucratic machine grew rapidly. But something else is more important: 1816 marks the end of the decade of Napoleonic wars, which literally wiped out an entire generation of young officers. Naturally, under these conditions, the production of honored non-commissioned officers to chief officer ranks was much higher than the average for the era under consideration. The nobility remained the service class. But the very concept of service has become complexly contradictory. In it one can distinguish the struggle between state-statutory and family-corporate tendencies. The latter significantly complicated the structure of the real life of the noble class of the 18th century.

18th century female education

The question of a woman’s place in society was invariably linked to the attitude towards her education. Knowledge has traditionally been considered the privilege of men; a woman’s education has become a problem for her place in a society created by men. Not only statehood, but also public life was built as if for men: a woman who laid claim to a serious position in the sphere of culture, thereby appropriated for herself part of the “male roles.” In fact, the entire century was marked by a woman’s struggle to ensure that, having won the right to a place in culture, not to lose the right to be a woman. At first, the initiator of introducing women to education was the state. Since the beginning of the century, during the reign of Peter I, such an important issue in women's life as marriage was unexpectedly connected with education. Peter, by a special decree, ordered illiterate noble girls who could not sign at least their last name not to get married. This is how the problem of women's education arises, although for now in an extremely unique form. However, at the beginning of the 18th century, the issue of literacy was posed in a completely new way. And very spicy. The need for female education and its nature became the subject of controversy and was associated with a general revision of the type of life, the type of way of life. The woman’s own attitude towards literacy, books, and education was still very tense.

A real revolution in the pedagogical ideas of Russian society in the 18th century was brought about by the idea of ​​the need for specificity in women's education. We are accustomed to the fact that progressive trends in pedagogy are associated with the desire for the same education of boys and girls. However, “general” education in the 18th century was practically a male education, and the idea of ​​introducing girls to “male education” always meant limiting its availability to them. It was assumed that there could only be happy exceptions - women so gifted that they were able to keep up with men. Now the idea of ​​educating all noble women arose. It was possible to solve this issue practically, and not in an abstract-ideal form, only by developing a system of women's education.

Therefore, the problem of educational institutions immediately arose.

Educational institutions for girls - such was the need of the time - took on a dual character: private boarding schools appeared, but at the same time arose government system education. As a result, an educational institution arose, which then existed for quite a long time and was called the Smolny Institute after the premises where it was located, and its students were called Smolyanka. The Smolny Institute in the Resurrection Convent (in the 18th century - on the then outskirts of St. Petersburg) was conceived as an educational institution with a very broad program. It was assumed that Smolensk students would study at least two languages ​​(besides their native language, German and French; Italian was later added to the plan), as well as physics, mathematics, astronomy, dance and architecture. As it turned out later, all this largely remained on paper.

The general structure of the Smolny Institute was as follows. The bulk were girls of noble origin, but at the Institute there was a “School for young girls” of non-noble origin, who were trained for the roles of future teachers and educators. These two “halves” were at enmity with each other. The “noblewomen” teased the “philistine women”, and they did not remain in debt.

Studying at the Smolny Institute was considered honorable, and among the Smolyans there were girls from very rich and noble families. However, more often than not, college girls came from families that were not very rich, but still retained good connections. There you could also meet your daughters heroically dead generals who were unable to provide their future with a good dowry, and girls from noble but impoverished families, and not at all noble girls, whose fathers, however, earned patronage at court. Studying at the Smolny Institute lasted nine years. Little girls of five or six years old were brought here, and for nine years they lived at the institute, as a rule, not seeing, or almost not seeing, home. While parents living in St. Petersburg could still visit their daughters, poor parents, especially provincial college girls, were separated from their relatives for years. This isolation of the Smolyankas was part of a well-thought-out system. The isolation of girls and young women from their relatives was required for a completely different purpose: court toys were made from Smolyankas. They became mandatory participants in palace balls. All their dreams, hopes, and thoughts were shaped by the court atmosphere. However, in fact, after graduation, few people were interested in their favorite toys. True, some Smolyans were made into maids of honor, others turned into society brides; but often poor girls who graduated from the Smolny Institute became officials, educators or teachers in women's educational institutions, or even just hangers-on. Nine years of study were divided into three stages. Studying at the first stage lasted three years. The lower-level students were called “coffee girls”: they wore coffee-colored dresses with white calico aprons. They lived in dormitories of nine people; in each dormitory there also lived a lady assigned to them. In addition, there was also a classy lady - the supervision was strict, almost monastic. Middle group- “blue” - was famous for its despair. The “blues” were always acting up, teasing teachers, and not doing their homework. These are girls adolescence, and there was no trouble with them. The girls in the older group were called “white,” although they wore green dresses during classes. White dresses are ballroom dresses. These girls were already allowed to organize balls at the institute.

Education at the Smolny Institute, despite its broad plans, was superficial. The only exceptions were languages. Here the requirements continued to be very serious, and the students really achieved great success. Of the other subjects, importance was actually attached only to dancing and needlework. As for the study of all other sciences, so pompously announced in the program, it was very shallow. Physics was reduced to amusing tricks, mathematics to the most elementary knowledge. Only literature was taught a little better. The attitude of Smolyanka women to occupations largely depended on the situation of their families. The poorer girls, as a rule, studied very diligently, because the schoolgirls who took first, second and third places received a “cipher” upon graduation (the so-called monogram of the Empress decorated with diamonds). Smolyanka girls who graduated with a code could hope to become maids of honor, and this, of course, was very important for the poor girl. As for college girls from noble families, after graduating from college they wanted to get married and that’s all. They often studied carelessly. The central event of institute life was the public examination, which, as a rule, was attended by members of the royal family and the emperor himself. Here the questions were given in advance. The girl received one ticket on the eve of the exam, which she had to learn in order to answer it the next day. True, memories show that this ostentatious exam also caused enough excitement among the institutes! The festive side of the life of Smolensk women, associated with court balls, was largely ostentatious. However, the nature of their everyday life and holidays changed depending on court trends. However, holidays were rare. The everyday life of the schoolgirls did not evoke envy. The situation in this privileged educational institution was very difficult. In fact, the children found themselves completely at the mercy of the guards. The composition of the guards was not the same. Many of them were later remembered with gratitude by those who graduated from the institute, but the general mass was different. Matrons were often recruited from among women whose own destinies had been unfortunate. The very need to remain on a salary until old age was considered anomalous in that era. And, as often happens with people for whom teaching activity is not determined by vocation and interest, but is only a consequence of chance or failures in life, teachers often used power over children as an opportunity for a kind of psychological compensation.

It was especially hard on girls and young women from poor families. Passions were constantly in full swing at the institute; the intrigues inevitably dragged in the students as well. In their memoirs dedicated to these years, former Smolensk students often spoke about the institute with bitterness or mockery, calling their teachers “real witches.” And since the parents did not come to the girls, the despotism of these guards was felt especially strongly. But the most difficult thing for the institute girls was the severity of the routine. Rising at six o'clock in the morning, six or eight lessons daily (though they often did little during the lessons, but attendance was mandatory). The time allotted for games was strictly limited. The teachers, on whom the real regime of life at the institute depended, as a rule, did not have teacher education and the way of life of a monastery shelter or the barracks regime was chosen as a model. Against this background, the isolation of the college girls from the outside world and the artificiality of the environment in which they spent many years were especially striking. The girls left the institute with absolutely no idea about real life. It seemed to them that an endless celebration, a court ball, awaited them outside the walls of the institute. The diet of Smolyankas was also poor. The authorities, especially the housekeepers, abused their position, profiting at the expense of the pupils. Once, at a masquerade ball, one of the former institutes told Nicholas I about this. The Tsar did not believe it. Then she told him to come from the back porch, straight to the kitchen, without warning. Nicholas I, in practice multiplying the bureaucracy, loved spectacular scenes of the direct intervention of the tsar, who punishes evil, deals with the unworthy and rewards the worthy. He actually came into the kitchen and personally tasted the mud that filled the cauldron. Some kind of brew was boiling in the cauldron. "What is this?" - Nikolai asked angrily. They answered him: “Uha.” Indeed, several small fish were swimming in the soup... However, the spectacular scene did not change the situation: the housekeeper eventually got out of it, and everything ended well for him. The situation of rich girls was a little better. Those who had money, firstly, could, by paying a special fee, drink tea in the morning in the teachers’ room, separately from other institute girls. In addition, they bribed the watchman, and he would run to the shop and bring sweets in his pockets, which were slowly eaten.

The morals of the schoolgirls were also nurtured by an atmosphere of complete isolation from life. The first thing the “coffee shop” girls heard when they got to the Smolny Institute was the older students’ instructions about the custom of “adoring” someone. This institute manner consisted in the fact that girls had to choose an object of love and worship. As a rule, these were girls from the “white” group. When one simple-minded girl (who later spoke about this in her memoirs) asked what it meant to “adore,” they explained to her: she had to choose an “object” of adoration and, when the “object” passed by, whisper: “Delightful!”, “Adored!” , “Angel,” write it on books, etc. Only the “gays,” as a rule, were not adored by anyone: they pulled the younger ones by the hair and teased them. In the most senior group As a rule, members of the royal family were “adored”—this was cultivated. They “adored” the empress, but especially the emperor. Under Nicholas I, “adoration” took on the character of ecstatic worship. Nikolai was, especially from a young age, handsome: tall, with a regular, although motionless, face. Many Smolensk women transferred their hysterical worship of the sovereign beyond the walls of the educational institution, into the court environment, especially among the circle of ladies-in-waiting. The attention of the court extended not only to the students of the Smolny Institute, but also to the female teachers, and in general to the entire environment of the institute. The strictness even affected the daughters of the teachers, who were also required to comply with all the conventions of St. Petersburg society.

The concern of the courtyard and teachers for the well-being of the Smolyans turned out to be, in fact, a hypocritical game. One of the former college students recalled with bitterness that after the death of one of her friends, a girl from a poor family, no one even bothered to buy a painted coffin. The girls had to raise the money themselves and somehow organize the funeral. The broken toy turned out to be of no use to anyone. Even in the Nicholas era, Smolyankas were famous for their special “institutional” sensitivity. Such sensitivity was not the invention of Smolyans. Feelings belong not only to nature, but also to culture. A noble woman of the late 18th century combined not only two upbringings, but also two psychological types. Although they were opposites and gave rise to polar types of behavior, both were sincere. Raised by a serf nanny, raised in the village, or at least spending a significant part of the year on her parents’ estate, the girl learned certain norms for the expression of feelings and emotional behavior accepted among the people. These norms were characterized by a certain restraint, but in a different cultural context the same noblewomen might faint or burst into tears. This behavior was perceived as “educated”; this is how European ladies behaved.

The Smolny Institute was by no means the only women's educational institution in Russia. Private boarding houses arose. The level of training was often very low. Only language and dance were systematically taught. The teachers were, as a rule, French or German. In French boarding schools, students were introduced in a rough and simplified form to the manners of French society of the pre-revolutionary era, in German boarding schools - to the skills of burgher housekeeping and education. Thus, the boarding system turned out to be aimed at ensuring that the girl gets married and becomes (whether according to French or German ideas) a good wife.

The third type of female education is home education. The girl came under the supervision of a governess - most often a French woman. In general, the education of a young noblewoman was, as a rule, more superficial and much more often than for young men, home-based. It was usually limited to the skill of everyday conversation in one or two foreign languages ​​(most often French or German; knowledge in English indicated a higher than average level of education), the ability to dance and behave in society, basic skills in drawing, singing and playing a musical instrument, and the very rudiments of history, geography and literature. With the start of going out into the world, training stopped. Of course, there were exceptions. The goals and quality of education depended not only on the teachers, but also on the wealth of the family and its spiritual orientation. The type of Russian educated woman, especially in the capitals, began to take shape already in the 30s of the 18th century. However, in general, female education in Russia in the 18th century did not have its own Lyceum, nor its own Moscow or Dorpat universities. That type of highly spiritual Russian woman developed under the influence of Russian literature and culture of the era.

Dancing was an important structural element of noble life. Their role was significantly different from both the function of dances in the folk life of that time and from the modern one. In the life of a Russian metropolitan nobleman of the 18th century, time was divided into two halves: staying at home was devoted to family and economic concerns; here the nobleman acted as a private person; the other half was occupied by service - military or civil, in which the nobleman acted as a loyal subject, serving the sovereign and the state, as a representative of the nobility in the face of other classes.

The contrast between these two forms of behavior was filmed in the “meeting” that crowned the day - at a ball or evening party. Here the social life of a nobleman was realized: he was neither a private person in private life, nor a serving man in public service; he was a nobleman in an assembly of nobles, a man of his class among his own. Thus, the ball turned out, on the one hand, to be an area opposite to the service - an area of ​​relaxed communication, social recreation, a place where the boundaries of the official hierarchy were weakened. The presence of ladies, dancing, and social norms introduced extra-official value criteria, and a young lieutenant who danced deftly and knew how to make the ladies laugh could feel superior to an aging colonel who had been in battle. On the other hand, the ball was an area of ​​public representation, a form of social organization, one of the few forms of collective life allowed in Russia at that time. In this sense, secular life received the value of a public cause. The internal organization of the ball was made a task of exceptional cultural importance, since it was intended to give forms of communication between “gentlemen” and “ladies”, to determine the type social behavior within the noble culture. This entailed the ritualization of the ball, the creation of a strict sequence of parts, and the identification of stable and obligatory elements. The grammar of the ball arose, and it itself developed into some kind of holistic theatrical performance, in which each element (from entering the hall to leaving) corresponded to typical emotions, fixed meanings, and styles of behavior. The main element of the ball as a social and aesthetic event was dancing. They served as the organizing core of the evening, setting the type and style of conversation. “Mazur chat” required superficial, shallow topics, but also entertaining and sharp conversation, and the ability to quickly respond epigrammatically.

Dance training began early - from the age of five or six. Early learning to dance was painful and resembled the tough training of an athlete. Long-term training gave the young man not only dexterity during dancing, but also confidence in his movements, freedom and ease in posing his figure, which in a certain way influenced the person’s mental structure: in the conventional world of social communication, he felt confident and free, like an experienced actor on the stage. Grace, reflected in the precision of movements, was a sign of good upbringing.

The ball at the beginning of the 19th century began with a Polish (polonaise), which replaced the minuet in the ceremonial function of the first dance. The second ballroom dance is the waltz. The waltz consisted of the same constantly repeated movements. The feeling of monotony was also enhanced by the fact that “at that time the waltz was danced in two steps, and not in three steps, as now.” The waltz created a particularly comfortable environment for gentle explanations: the proximity of the dancers contributed to intimacy, and the touching of hands made it possible to pass notes. The waltz was danced for a long time, you could interrupt it, sit down and then start again in the next round. Thus, the dance created the ideal conditions for gentle explanations. The waltz was admitted to European balls as a tribute to the new times. It was a fashionable and youth dance. The sequence of dances during the ball formed a dynamic composition. Each dance, having its own intonation and tempo, set a certain style of not only movement, but also conversation. The chain of dances also organized the sequence of moods. Each dance entailed topics of conversation suitable for him. It should be borne in mind that conversation was no less a part of the dance than movement and music. The expression “mazurka chatter” was not disparaging. Involuntary jokes, tender confessions and decisive explanations were distributed throughout the composition of successive dances. The mazurka formed the center of the ball and marked its culmination. The Mazurka was danced with numerous fancy fshuras and a male solo, which constituted the climax of the dance. Both the soloist and the conductor of the mazurka had to show ingenuity and the ability to improvise. Within the mazurka there were several distinct styles. The difference between the capital and the provinces was expressed in the contrast between “exquisite” and “bravura” performance of the mazurka. Choosing a partner was perceived as a sign of interest, favor or love (two ladies (or gentlemen) are brought to a gentleman (or lady) with an offer to choose). In some cases, the choice involved guessing the qualities envisioned by the dancers. The cotillion - a type of quadrille, one of the dances that concludes the ball - was danced to the tune of a waltz and was a dance-game, the most relaxed, varied and playful dance.

The ball was not the only opportunity for young people to have a fun and noisy night. An alternative to it were: games of riotous young men, thunderstorms of guard patrols: single drinking bouts in the company of young revelers, brigand officers, famous “naughty people” and drunkards. The ball, as a decent and completely secular pastime, was contrasted with this revelry, which, although cultivated in certain guards circles, was generally perceived as a manifestation of “bad taste”, acceptable for a young man only within certain, moderate limits. Late drinking sessions, starting in one of the St. Petersburg restaurants, ended somewhere in the “Red Zucchini”, which stood about seven miles along the St. Petersburg road and was a favorite place for officers’ revelry. A brutal card game and noisy walks through the streets of St. Petersburg at night completed the picture.

The ball had a harmonious composition. It was like some kind of festive whole, subordinated to the movement from the strict form of ceremonial ballet to variable forms of choreographic acting. However, in order to understand the meaning of the ball as a whole, it should be understood in contrast to the two extreme poles: the parade and the masquerade. The parade was a unique, carefully thought out ritual. It was the opposite of battle, the parade was the opposite of submission, turning the army into a ballet. In relation to the parade, the ball acted as something exactly the opposite. The ball contrasted subordination and discipline with fun and freedom, and the harsh depression of a person with its joyful excitement. And yet, the fact that the ball presupposed composition and strict internal organization limited the freedom within it. This necessitated another element, planned and foreseen chaos. The masquerade took on this role. Masquerade dressing, in principle, contradicted deep church traditions. In the Orthodox consciousness, this was one of the most stable signs of demonism. Dressing up and elements of masquerade in folk culture were allowed only in those ritual actions of the Christmas and spring cycles that were supposed to imitate the exorcism of demons and in which the remnants of pagan ideas found refuge. Therefore, the European tradition of masquerade penetrated into the nobility life XVIII centuries with difficulty or merged with folklore mummers. The parade and masquerade formed the brilliant frame of the picture, in the center of which was the ball.

Matchmaking. Marriage. Divorce

The ritual of marriage in the noble society of the 18th century bears traces of the same contradictions as all everyday life. Traditional Russian customs came into conflict with ideas about Europeanism. But this “Europeanism” itself was very far from European reality. In the 18th century, traditional forms of marriage were still dominant in Russian noble life: the groom sought the consent of his parents, after which an explanation with the bride followed. Preliminary declarations of love, and indeed romantic relationships between young people, although they interfered with the practice, were considered optional or even undesirable by the standards of decency. Young people condemned the severity of parental demands, considering them the result of lack of education and contrasting them with “European enlightenment.” However, the “European enlightenment” was not the reality of the West, but ideas inspired by novels. Thus, novel situations invaded that Russian way of life, which was recognized as “enlightened” and “Western”. It is interesting to note that “Western” forms of marriage have in fact constantly existed in Russian society since the most archaic times, but were perceived first as pagan, and then as “immoral”, forbidden. Violation of parental will and abduction of the bride were not part of the norms of European behavior, but were a common place in romantic plots. What practically existed in Ancient Rus', but was perceived as a crime, for the romantic consciousness at the turn of the 17th-18th centuries it unexpectedly appeared as a “European” alternative to ancestral mores.

Similar documents

Historical stages in the development of the noble class in Russia, its originality and distinctive features. The state of the nobility in post-reform Russia. Historical prerequisites for the creation of the life of a noblewoman in the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century.

test, added 12/27/2009


Features of Russian life. Arrangement of a nobleman's estate. A wooden peasant hut as the main dwelling of the Russian population, the construction of a Russian stove. Leisure and customs, main family rituals, Christian holidays. Clothing, staple foods.

presentation, added 10/24/2013


Study of the model and practice of noble life, education and public service. Identification in these three areas of life general characteristics, based on which, one can imagine the main line of development of the noble class in the 18th-19th centuries.

course work, added 09/07/2017


Life and customs of the royal court before Peter's reforms: everyday pictures, entertainment and amusements. "Europeanization" of the culture and life of the Russian nobility in the era of Peter the Great: entertainment, clothing and jewelry. Life and customs of the family of Peter the Great and his entourage.

course work, added 11/20/2008


External forms of behavior of the Russian nobility in the 19th century, the moral side of secular education and the culture of the Russian feast. Hospitality of Russian nobles, serving a feast. Belief in omens and superstitions among the landowners and metropolitan nobility.

test, added 11/06/2009


The development and achievements of science in Russia at the beginning of the 18th century, discoveries in the field of industry, pharmaceuticals, and medicine. Peter's reforms in the field of medicine, the opening of schools with foreign teaching methods. Ways to reform everyday life and develop new types of arts.

presentation, added 11/12/2009


The Amur issue in the 18th century, international relations in Far East. Russia in the Far East in mid-19th century. The role of N.N. Muravyov and G.I. Nevelsky in the return of the Far Eastern territories. Russian Cossacks. Russian-Chinese treaties of the 19th century.

abstract, added 03/07/2009


The formation of the Old Russian state and the question of the origin of the state in historiography. Theories of tribal, communal and friendship life of Russian tribes in the middle of the 9th century. Norman and anti-Norman theories of the origin of the Kievan state.

test, added 09/01/2011


The influence of the natural environment on urban life. The connection between everyday living conditions and urban development. Social structure and morals of townspeople. Noble society of a provincial city. Peculiarities of life of a merchant. Paradoxes of city administration.

thesis, added 04/07/2015


Characteristics of Russian history of the 19th century. The process of democratization of culture. Mutual influence of class cultures in the city and countryside, capitals and provinces, in the atmosphere of “rarefied air” of the estate. Similarities, differences and achievements of urban and rural life.