Abstract
The evolution of clerical work and the development of the administrative apparatus in the Moscow principality from the 14th century to the early 16th century are discussed. A characteristic feature of the Muscovite state, the basis of its administrative apparatus, was the prikaz system. Of interest is the stage of its “hidden” functioning, the period of its origin, and the causes and prerequisites for its appearance. The forerunners of the state apparatus of the Muscovite period were the princely treasury and the chancellery. The study of the activities of these institutions and their evolution can go in two directions: an analysis of their direct product, that is, the documents originating from these chancelleries, or clarification of the biographies of the employees of chancelleries and their areas of competence, social ties, and status. The systematization of this information shows that the development of clerical work in Moscow was more intensive than in the other principalities of the region. During the 14th–15th centuries, significant changes took place in almost all areas related to clerical work. Some of the innovations were accepted in the chancelleries of other principalities, some were never implemented. The key to Moscow’s success in the struggle for dominance in Northeastern Russia was the intensive search for new solutions that increased the efficiency of clerical work, information protection, and attention to the distribution of areas of competence and specialization. During the 14th–15th centuries we see the examples of the implementation and use of various certification technologies and options for improving or optimizing clerical work processes. The appearance of paper in Russia was the key moment, the starting point for the implementation of these experiments and the introduction of innovations. Cheap writing material made it possible to benefit more than in the past from the expansion of controlled territories. Taken together, all the consequences of the emergence of paper and increased management efficiency led to the dominance of the Kalitovichs in Northeastern Russia and the creation of a strong, effective regular state.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
The construction of regular state structures is impossible without document circulation, and the development of the administrative apparatus in the late Middle Ages is associated with the strengthening of the role of clerical work and its bureaucratization. In the Grand Principality of Moscow, the components of these processes were the introduction of document management standards into the daily practice of government bodies, the emergence of archiving, the development of new writing systems, the development of document certification techniques, the distinguishing of special social categories or strata involved in the activities of the state apparatus, and the division of labor within these strata. In the conditions of the Muscovite state, these are the principles the characteristic features of which were embodied in the prikaz system and the institutionalization of which took place in the middle of the 16th century, while the initial stage of existence in historiography can be traced from the end of the 15th century.Footnote 1 Of interest is the period of the “hidden” functioning of the prikaz system, when it de facto existed, but had not yet received a terminological designation (as the patrimony system in the earlier period), the period of its origin, as well as the reasons and preconditions for its emergence.
As far as one can judge, the prikaz system was formed on the basis of sectoral specialization (temporary or permanent) of individual representatives of a special stratum of the Grand Prince’s Court—clerks. Clerks are known throughout the 15th century as people who served princes and were associated with clerical work and a number of other areas of civil administration. The direct activity of clerks in the 15th century proceeded within the framework of the functioning of princely chancelleries. The term chancellery is well known and is consistently used in Russian historiography in relation to the governing bodies of the Moscow Grand Principality of the 15th century, although it is not known in Russian sources of that time. If we try to reveal the content of this term in relation to the situation in Russia in the 15th century, we can single out several of its most characteristic features. The princely chancellery was a permanent institution that united a group of people involved in the design, storage, and ordering of documents, which were both issued by one prince or another and were received by him. In the realities of the 15th century, we can conditionally speak of the chancellery, which was part of the princely treasury and was not a legally separate institution. The employees of the princely chancellery were clerks and scriveners. Serving people (both boyars and boyar children, as well as representatives of the bureaucracy and servants of the court) served personally to the prince. Accordingly, when we speak of service in the chancellery, we have in mind the service relations that arise personally between the prince and his subjects, in this case, bureaucrats of all levels.Footnote 2 The institutions under consideration include the chancelleries of not only secular rulers, but also church princes. In any case, as far as surviving sources allow us to judge, the chancelleries of Russian metropolitans and bishops had the same structure and performed similar functions as the chancelleries of secular rulers.
Direct information about the princely chancelleries and the treasury of the 15th century is extremely fragmentary; however, the study of the activities of these institutions and their evolution can go in two directions, as an analysis of their direct products, that is, the documents originating from these chancelleries (published by the order of the prince or on his behalf), and as a clarification of the biographies of the employees of the chancelleries, the spheres of their competence, social ties, and status.
How can we trace, or at least outline the trajectories of the development of princely chancelleries? The traditional approach is the chronological approach, when we first study the earliest period of the existence of the process or phenomenon under consideration and then the subsequent ones. This approach has been repeatedly implemented in relation to the princely chancelleries. In this case, it is possible to identify the most significant changes that have fallen into the field of view of surviving sources and to trace the main directions of the evolution of the institution under study. To date, the most detailed study of this kind is the monograph by Yu.G. Alekseev, which pays due attention to both the methods of processing documents and the social status and role of clerical employees in public administration.Footnote 3 The study of documents originating from the princely chancelleries is the focus of attention in the works of S.M. Kashtanov.Footnote 4
Direct appeal to the original documents of the 14th–15th centuries revealed their great unrealized information potential. In particular, their study makes it possible to obtain additional information about the methods of processing documents and the system of their certification, as well as to expand the array of data on clerical employees and to trace their official biographies in more detail. A preliminary analysis of this information has shown that it would be quite justified to turn again to the topic of studying the history and evolution of the state apparatus of the 15th century. Given the existing set of sources and taking into account previous studies, it seems optimal to first create the most detailed static picture for the period best provided with sources, which is the end of the 15th century and the beginning of the 16th century. Then, relying on this relatively complete picture, we can reconstruct the situation in an earlier period. This approach will allow us to trace the specific changes that have taken place in public administration and place them in time.
THE CHANCELLERY OF THE MOSCOW PRINCES AT THE TURN OF THE 15TH–16TH CENTURIES: THE PRINCELY CHANCELLERY IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE TREASURY
Ivan III’s spiritual charter directly states that clerks were engaged in accounting for the prince’s personal property and jewelry.Footnote 5 The treasury kept originals and copies of documents, including scribe books, from which certain clerks were to issue certificates.Footnote 6 The accession of new territories to the possessions of the Grand Prince was accompanied by a revision of the ownership documents in these territories and the removal of the original documents to the Grand Prince’s treasury. For example, such revisions were carried out after adding Yaroslavl, Rostov, and Beloozero to the possessions of the Grand Prince.
The appanages have their own chancelleries, which perform similar functions.
The personnel composition of appanage chancelleries and their clerical work have been relatively fully studied.Footnote 7 Clerks, scriveners, and treasurers are mentioned to be in the service of appanage princes. The nomenclature of documents issued by appanage princes and their content and design do not differ from those originating from the grand prince’s chancellery. The activity of appanage clerks takes place in the same areas as the activities of those of grand princes. They also certify the charters of their princes, represent them in land transactions. The charters of princes Andrei Bolshoi and Andrei Menshoi speak of clerks who carried out the work of scribes.Footnote 8 Employees of appanage chancelleries were involved in land surveying and participated in the analysis of land litigation.Footnote 9
The Structure of Chancelleries
There are several categories of clerical employees that can be divided into several strata in accordance with their social status or occupation.
A significant number of clerks are employed in all areas of management related to the preparation of documents. These are foreign policy relations, scribe descriptions, legal proceedings, and land relations. About 70 people are personally mentioned at the rank of clerk during the reign of Ivan III.Footnote 10 People with this status are mentioned in acts, annals, embassy books, and output records on handwritten books.
There is a separate category of clerks who simultaneously manage the grand prince’s archive and manage the prince’s personal property and prince’s finances. There is a limited circle of clerks mentioned in the rank documents. Here the clerks act as a separate rank within the grand prince’s court.Footnote 11 This group intersects with the circle of clerks who certified princely charters. In total, they number about 10–15 people.
The terminology used reflects the specialization of managers in certain areas. Yamsky and state and palace clerks are mentioned.Footnote 12
The lower stratum of clerical employees was scriveners. They were engaged in the direct production of documents and were junior comrades in judicial boards and scribal commissions. In quantitative terms, there were several times more of them than clerks, but only a few of them are mentioned by name in sources.
Scribal work is carried out by commissions in a certain composition. The competence of the scribal commission included not only the compilation of a description of land estates in a specific district, but also the solution of land disputes in the territory under the jurisdiction. It was in the court documents drawn up as a result (court cases and legal letters) that the personal composition of the scribal commissions was recorded. The head of the team was usually a service person (most often, he did not have the rank of a boyar, but rather a lower rank). Clerks were indicated in the second or third places in the documents. The direct executors of the scribe work were several scriveners.Footnote 13
The participation of clerks in the embassies is obligatory. The principle of the formation of embassies was apparently close to the principle of the formation of scribal commissions. As a rule, the head and face of the embassy was a representative of the service class. A representative of the bureaucracy was appointed as his comrade. Situations are known when a clerk was the head of an embassy. Clerks also took part in the reception of foreign delegations in the capital. There is a specialization of representatives of clerical employees in the foreign policy area.Footnote 14
When an appanage chancellery was formed, its staff was recruited from the employees of the grand prince’s chancellery. Thanks to this, the prevailing clerical tradition in appanages is the same as in Moscow. In any case, in the first years of the existence of new chancelleries, we observe continuity with the chancellery of the previous ruler in the personal respect. In addition, new chancelleries were apparently formed maintaining a balance between experienced clerks and young ones, since new faces begin to come to the fore after a while.
The Personal Composition of Chancelleries
The service of clerks can last for more than one decade. The most high-ranking clerks appear in a wide variety of sources, which makes it possible to compose a quite detailed biography, starting with serving as a scrivener (like for Vasilii Beda, Vasilii Dolmatov, or Oladya Klimentyev) up to becoming a monk and making a will (like for Andrei Yarlyk).
The origin of clerks was the most diverse. It varied from the sons of priests and other unprivileged strata to representatives of the boyar and princely families. The proportion of representatives of nonnoble families was the most significant. In any case, people with new surnames or without them at all predominated among clerks. Nevertheless, there are quite a few cases of people serving as clerks from among representatives of the regional nobility,Footnote 15 for whom administrative work was an opportunity to rise faster and higher in the social hierarchy.
When an appanage was liquidated, clerks and scriveners joined the grand prince’s chancellery or transferred to serve in other appanages. The unity of clerical practices in the chancelleries of the princes of the Moscow House allowed clerical employees to change their address of service without losing their status. Even in the case of the forcible liquidation of an appanage, appanage clerks and scriveners could transfer to the grand prince’s service or to another appanage without losing their status.
The upper strata of clerks had significant material resources. Regardless of their origin, representatives of the administrative elite possessed not only significant power, but also significant material resources. This was naturally transformed into the acquisition of estates, often large ones.Footnote 16
A significant stratum of clerical employees was formed in Moscow and in appanages. This group has its own hierarchy; professional and personal ties are maintained. A significant number of marriages within this stratum are recorded.Footnote 17 Clerk dynasties are being formed,Footnote 18 but there is no rigid closure within this stratum, its composition is dynamic, open to new faces and surnames that have shown their worth in the administrative field.
The children of clerks join the lower strata of the Sovereign’s court and serve on par with the young representatives of the old service families. The sons of part of clerks joined the layers of clerical employees (they became clerks and scriveners) or the lower and middle layers of the grand prince’s court (bed-makers, boyar children).Footnote 19 At the end of the 15th century, part of the clerks became the ancestors of service families entrenched in the composition of the Sovereign’s court. This was facilitated by marriage alliances with representatives of service families and the receipt of estates on an equal basis with other service people.
Designing of Documents
At the beginning of the 16th century, charters had a ceremonial appearance. They were made leaving margins on all sides and using handwriting with elements of cursive writing. Charters often had not an affixed seal, but had a large pendant of the grand prince’s seal. All signs point to the fact that charters performed a representative function. In addition to using seals, charters were certified by the prince’s signature on the back (“Grand Prince of All Russia”), which was made by clerks of the highest category. If necessary, confirmations of granting were also put there (in full or with exceptions) and were certified by the signatures of the clerks (indicating their first and last names). This procedure applies only to awards made by the descendants of Ivan Kalita.
The established form of court documents is used throughout the territory of the possessions of the princes of the Muscovite dynasty.Footnote 20 Judicial lists and title deeds have a different format than letters of grant (as a rule, this is an expanded sheet). Their making is accompanied by a special procedure, which includes several stages, including a report on the essence of the case under consideration to the prince or his representative.
Princely letters of exchange were also drawn up according to the form developed in Moscow. The final protocol indicated the boyar who was present at the exchange. The date and scribe were not indicated. At the end of the letter, next to the place where the seal was attached, the clerk put a signature: “signed by the clerk.” The back side had no marks; there was neither a monogram nor a princely signature.Footnote 21
The form of various types of documents drawn up in the grand prince’s chancellery was not fully developed. In addition to letters of grant and letters of exchange, these are decree, fied-office,Footnote 22 fortified,Footnote 23 full,Footnote 24 and other charters.
The book format is used for certain categories of documents. Scribe, rank, and embassy books, which contain information from the 1470s (rank and embassy books) and the end of the 15th century (scribe books), have been preserved.
In private acts, handwritten signatures of witnesses on the back of the letter were used as a certificate. The main means of confirming the authenticity of a document is the handwriting of witnesses. In disputable cases, a handwriting examination was carried out.Footnote 25 Seals were used to certify personal documents, such as letters and administrative documents.Footnote 26 The wide use of affixed seals is evidenced by archaeological finds throughout Northeastern Russia, both in cities and in rural areas.
In general, the period from the late 15th century to the early 16th century is characterized by a rather large volume and nomenclature of documents of the second order, i.e., documents drawn up on the basis of other documents, which indicates the level of clerical work, the organization of storage, and the use of documents created in the chancellery. The purposeful work on copying documents was carried out in the grand prince’s archive. Copies of princely spiritual and contractual letters were made (those of both grand princes and appanage prices). During the revision of the owner’s documents in the annexed territories, the originals of the letters were confiscated, and copies were issued instead. If necessary, thematic collections of documents were compiled. Traces of various registration documents of members of the grand prince’s court are found in the rank records.Footnote 27
By compiling this clear picture, it becomes possible to identify the changes that took place in clerical practice and the organization of clerical work in Moscow in the previous period.
THE CHANCELLERY OF THE MOSCOW PRINCES IN THE MIDDLE AND SECOND HALF OF THE 15TH CENTURY
Composition of the Princely Chancellery
The sources mention princely clerks and scriveners. For scriveners of this period, there are no clear indications of the nature of their activities within the framework of the functioning of princely chancelleries. Nevertheless, the most famous mention of a scrivener from the time of Vasilii II clearly indicates the coincidence of the role and status of scriveners and the etymology of the term itself, which is derived from the term “clerk.” It was a scrivener who delivered the message to Vasilii Temnyi about the successful completion of the operation of removal of Dmitrii Shemyaka by the clerk Stefan Borodatyi; i.e., the scrivener was a member of the group headed by the clerk and fulfilled his instructions. In addition, scriveners repeatedly appear in private records as scribes of letters or witnesses. This shows the demand for both their professional skills related to making and designing documents and their social status, which is close to the position of the middle strata of secular landowners.
Clerks are in a completely different weight category. A number of representatives of clerks are mentioned in chronicles and participate in the events of the dynastic war. As a trustee of Vasilii II, clerk Stefan Borodatyi organized the poisoning of Dmitrii Shemyaka, whose clerk Ivan Kotov was also involved in this operation, and scrivener Vasilii Beda delivered a message about the success of the mission to the Grand Prince. Here we see a vivid demonstration of the close contacts of clerks within their professional group and their ability to fulfill nonstandard orders. Clerk Aleksei Stromilov was assigned to guard disgraced Nikita Dobrynskii, but Stromilov helped him escape.Footnote 28 During the conflict of Ivan III with his brothers Andrei and Boris, clerks of Ivan III and the widow Grand Princess Maria Yaroslavna took part in the missions to the appanage princes.Footnote 29
In general, the activities of clerks are associated with the performance of diplomatic missions, the compilation of scribe books, the implementation of land-surveying works, the representation of their prince in transactions (exchange and buying transactions), and the certification of documents (mainly letters of grant and decrees, in the form of affixing a prince’s signature).
One can see the high material security of clerks (at least their highest stratum) and their high social status. Chancellery workers are involved in the preparation of private documents, as witnesses. They become related to each other and representatives of service families.
A high level of official mobility can be traced for the highest category of clerks. They can change two or three service addresses, passing both from the service of a grand prince to the appanage and in the opposite direction.Footnote 30
In the social respect, the origin of most clerks is rather unclear.Footnote 31 Until the second half of the 15th century, there were relatively few representatives of service families among them.
The Activities of the Princely Chancellery
Representatives of the Grand Prince’s administration carried out a revision of ownership documents after joining Yaroslavl and Rostov. Part of the documents was confiscated to the Grand Prince’s treasury. Apparently, Prince Boris Volotskii acted in a similar way after the liquidation of the independence of Novgorod. In the Volokolamsk Patericon, Dosifei Toporkov speaks about the Volotsk prince seizing the ancient letters of the Vozmishchskii monastery for his treasury.Footnote 32
Just like in the future period, clerks and in some cases scriveners carry out scribe descriptions and land-surveying works, represent their prince in land transactions, certify letters of exchange, and put the prince’s signature on letters of grant and decree charters.
Based on the materials of the Grand Prince’s archive, thematic collections of documents were compiled. These include collections containing assemblies of spiritual and contractual letters of the princes of the Moscow dynastyFootnote 33 and documents concerning the relations of the Moscow princes with Novgorod.Footnote 34
Designing of Documents
The appearance of charters of the middle and second half of the 15th century speaks of their appointment as an important document representing princely power. One can see the desire for a symmetrical design of the fields; however, the right one is not always kept even. Blots and corrections are not allowed, although in some cases the remains of letters from the cut off text are visible in the upper margins. Texts are written using a clerical semi-charter style, a characteristic feature of which is thin lines and small letter sizes, which made it possible to write relatively quickly (so-called fluency of writing).
The vast majority of charters are written on paper. The paper format is half a standard sheet (14–16 cm) for letters of grant and a whole sheet for judicial charters and title deeds. The height of the sheet of paper used corresponds to the volume of the charter text.
The designing of court documents and exchange charters is similar to that described for a later period. The form of fied-office charters is found to have more archaic features in comparison with charters of a later period.Footnote 35
Certification of Documents
For princely charters, a seal is used on the front side (mainly a wax seal). Clerks put the prince’s signature on the back of charters. For appanage princes, this is the title, name, and patronymic (for example, “Prince Andrei Vasilyevich”), and the charters of the Grand Prince and Princess indicate only their title: “Grand Prince” or “Grand Princess.” Beginning in 1485, the title “Grand Prince” in the prince’s signature on the back of charters was supplemented with the element “of All Russia.”Footnote 36 The use of clerk monograms, which are usually placed on the back of charters, is widespread. The monograms themselves are composed of Cyrillic letters.Footnote 37
Private acts are certified by a seal; the names of witnesses are indicated in a separate clause as in later times.
THE CHANCELLERY OF THE MOSCOW PRINCES IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE 15TH CENTURY
Composition of the Prince’s Chancellery
The personal composition of the prince’s chancellery is restored with great difficulty. Nevertheless, individual clerks of grand princes are mentioned in private documents as scribesFootnote 38 or witnesses.Footnote 39 Among scribes of private charters, there are also grand prince’s scriveners.Footnote 40 The fact that the term scrivener was formed precisely at this time is indicated, for example, by the naming of one of scribes as a scrivener (“And scrivener Olekseiko wrote the letter”).Footnote 41
Designing of Documents
Paper is mainly used as the material for writing. Documents are texts that are completely different in size. In some cases, these are orders that fit on 3–4 lines. Accordingly, in these cases the size of letters does not exceed a few centimeters in height. The appearance of documents also speaks of their purely utilitarian nature. Margins are rarely kept even; the text can often be significantly inclined. The size of letters is relatively small, which indicates a transition to more fluent writing and, hence, an increase in the requirements for the speed of compiling documents. This is not yet the clerical semi-charter style of the middle and the second half of the 15th century, but the distinction from the traditional book writing of this and previous periods is quite clear. In contrast to private acts, princely charters are written in just such a handwriting. Texts written by a professional clerk are distinguished from documents drawn up by people who have not undergone clerical training.Footnote 42
Certification of Documents
Affixed wax seals were mainly used to certify documents, with the exception of the grand prince’s spiritual letters, to which silver seals of the grand prince and in some cases wax seals of appanage princes were hung.
The greatest changes are noticeable in the princely signature. More precisely, the princely signature was not yet in use at the beginning of the 15th century. Its predecessor was the so-called boyar signature, an indication of the name of the boyar on the back of the charter (more often one, in some cases two) on whose recommendation or order the award indicated in the charter was made. The first accurately dated charters with the prince’s own signature (such as “grand prince”) appeared after 1433.Footnote 43 Prior to that, not a single Moscow charter preserved in the original or in a copy had a princely signature. For some time, boyar signatures still continued to be put on individual charters of Vasilii II or Sophia Vitovtovna, but the bulk of grand prince’s charters were already certified by the princely signature. Some of them still indicate the name of the boyar who ordered them.Footnote 44
Apparently, the princely signature itself is not a Moscow invention. The earliest surviving charter in which this technology was applied was the charter of the Mozhaisk prince Andrei Dmitrievich for land in Belozerye,Footnote 45 which dates back to 1428–1432. A clerical monogram made in imitation of the Uyghur graphics is found here for the first time. This bouquet of innovations is complemented by an indication made in the same handwriting and ink that clerk Zakharia signed the charter. It is still difficult to judge whether the prince’s signature was the invention of the clerk Zakharia, or whether it was a well-established Belozerskii clerical tradition (since Zakharia apparently came from the family of a local boyar), as this charter is the earliest charter of Prince Andrei Dmitrievich preserved in the original. For some time, the princely signature used at Belozerye was of the same type as on the first charter (“Prince Andrei Dmitrievich himself”), but in the 1440s–1450s, during the reign of his son Prince Mikhail Andreevich, the practice of boyar signatures penetrated there. In Moscow, boyar signatures were already falling into disuse at that time; they did not gain a foothold at Belozerye either, and the princely signature took on the standard form for other Moscow appanages—“Prince Mikhail Andreevich.”
Simultaneously with the princely signature, clerk monograms became widespread. They are outwardly similar to the records of the Uyghur writing, which was used in the clerical work of the Mongolian states. Each type of monogram is associated with a specific clerk, which is revealed by the handwriting of the records that were accompanied by these monograms. Clerks put their signatures with their names and/or monograms on the documents coming from the princely chancellery, including inter-prince treaty charters.Footnote 46
CHANCELLERY OF THE MOSCOW PRINCES IN THE 14TH CENTURY
The Staff of the Office
The personal composition of the princely chancellery is restored only fragmentarily. The “clerk of the Grand Prince Kostroma” was called the scribe of the spiritual charter of Ivan Kalita.Footnote 47 The spiritual charter of Ivan Krasnyi was written by Nesterko.Footnote 48 Apparently, he had already written the first spiritual charter of Dmitrii Donskoi as the clerk Nester.Footnote 49
In earlier times, the compilers of documents are often referred to as scribes or mentioned only by name, but for the 14th century the division of clerks and scribes can be traced. The former deal with clerical work, and the later deal with book writing. The term scrivener seems to not yet have been known from sources, but a clerk as a compiler of charters and part of the administrative apparatus of the governor is mentioned in the Dvina charter.
Designing of Documents
Parchment is used as the material for writing in the first half and the middle of the 14th century. From the middle of the 14th century, paper comes into use, but parchment remains the predominant material for writing. The most indicative in terms of the ratio of parchment and paper in clerical practice is the Kremlin treasure of 1843, which consists of 21 documents of very different content (from letters of grants to lists). Only two documents of this collection were written on paper. The rest were written on parchment.Footnote 50
Comparison of original documents of the 14th century with acts of the 15th century shows a fundamental difference in their appearance. Most of the charters of the 14th century, even princely spiritual and contractual charters, have an irregular form. The placement of the text itself is close to the edge, follows the shape of the sheet, trying to fit all the text in the available space of a parchment sheet, which is usually limited. Documents that are small in size were written on obvious scraps. Voluminous texts were written using lining as in books. The writing itself is bookish in appearance.
An important difference from the clerical practice of the 15th century is the involvement of representatives of the nobility and clergy as testifiers and witnesses in concluding inter-prince treaty charters and preparing spiritual charters.
Due to the insignificant volume of the corpus of surviving texts of acts of the 14th century, it is very difficult to catch any tendencies that directly developed at this time. However, one important observation can still be made. The lists preserved two letters of grant from Ivan Kalita. One was addressed to individualsFootnote 51 and the other related to a spiritual corporation.Footnote 52 These documents belonged to different territories and their recipients were not connected in any way. Nevertheless, the initial protocol of both letters is identical: “I, the grand prince Ivan Danilovich of all Russia, have granted to… ”. This circumstance can be considered as evidence that the initial protocol of letters of grant was already fully developed during the reign of Ivan Kalita, and samples and possibly formularies (widely used in the 15th century) were used to draw up charters in the princely chancellery.
Certification of Documents
In the second half of the 14th century, the grand prince’s chancellery used three types of seals: lead, wax, and silver with gilding. For example, 12 metal seals that belonged to Dmitry Donskoi are currently known. There are nine lead and three silver gilded silver seals.Footnote 53
Suspended lead seals were mainly used to certify charters, but there are exceptions. A silver seal was attached to the charter of the new trader Mikula Smolin.Footnote 54
Inter-princely treaty charters were certified with pendant wax seals. In any case, there are no metal seals on copies of surviving treaty charters of the 14th century. On the other hand, there are wax seals on the treaty of Simeon Gordyi with his brothers,Footnote 55 the treaty of Dmitry Donskoi with Vladimir Andreevich,Footnote 56 and the charters of the end of the 14th–the first half of the 15th centuries.Footnote 57
Princely spiritual charters were certified by argirovuls.Footnote 58
At the end of the 14th century, a special pattern was developed in Moscow for attaching seals of spiritual hierarchs (metropolitan, bishops, and archbishops). O.L. Novikova established that this practice developed under Metropolitan Cyprian.Footnote 59
The back side of the charter to the new trader Mikula Smolin had the signature of Timofei Vasilievich and an indication that he “ruled” was located on the front side.Footnote 60 Therefore, the practice of granting existed even then. The boyar signature was located on the back, and the indication of granting was still on the front side of the document.
Researchers have noticed a growing trend towards the expansion of the use of wax seals in Northeastern Russia beginning in the 1480s, naturally attributing this phenomenon to the use of paper in clerical practice.Footnote 61
***
In general, it can be seen that significant and, in most cases, even dramatic changes occurred during the 14th–15th centuries in almost all areas related to clerical work. There were changes in the material for writing,Footnote 62 its format,Footnote 63 the writing system used,Footnote 64 the method of certification,Footnote 65 the designations of the powers of the clerk,Footnote 66 and the approach to confirming awards.Footnote 67
If we speak directly of types of documents that came from princely chancelleries, we should note that more and more new types of documents were gradually added to the traditional spiritual, contractual, and grant charters. The tradition of developing and issuing statutory charters for new territories is traced from the 14th century. The first information about swearing charters is recorded from the 1430s.Footnote 68 The highest point of clerical practice is scribe books, which contain a huge amount of information collected and processed in a very short period of time. The organization of these scribe books made it possible to operate the information contained in them in the interests of day-to-day management and, possibly, strategic planning. Obviously, one of the consequences of compiling scribe books was the appearance of sotnia district charters, which were extracts from the scribe book for a certain territory and were handed over to sotnia district governors upon taking office.Footnote 69 It is obvious that the number of sotnia district charters issued was very large (according to the number of sotnia district governors operating at the same time). An even greater volume of clerical work is associated with the publication of fied-office charters issued to service people when they were appointed to fied offices. They were drawn up more often than sotnia charters, since the fied-office period was limited to several years (by the 16th century, the fied-office period was standardized and limited to 2–3 years). Fied-office departments themselves were smaller than sotnia districts and covered a city or one or two volosts. Thus, given that the territory controlled by the prince of the Muscovite dynasty included about 700 volosts and several dozen cities, the princely chancellery was to issue at least 2–3 fied-office charters daily. By the beginning of the 16th century, it was required to draw up decree charters in no less volume and they were sent to the provinces within the framework of the current administration (including with the order to obey the appointed fied officers).
In general, according to the most minimal estimates, the daily “production” of outgoing documents in the grand prince’s chancellery was at least a dozen documents (provided that the workload was evenly distributed throughout the year). Is it possible to confirm the correctness of such an estimate? One of the most illustrative examples is the work on the conclusion of treaties of Ivan III with his brothers Andrei Uglichskii and Boris Volotskii in 1481. Within one day, three rounds of negotiations were held and four versions of the treaty with Andrei and three versions of the treaty with Boris were drawn up. This intensive work was carried out by the staff of the grand-prince’s and appanage chancelleries, and several people worked on compiling and rewriting the texts.Footnote 70 Even more indicative is the example of the letters of grant of Prince Andrei Vologodskii. The young prince arrived in his appanage capital in December 1471 and began issuing letters of grant to local landowners. Eight letters of grant to the Kirillo-Belozerskii Monastery have been preserved; they are dated one day, December 6.Footnote 71 Most importantly, their text was written by the same scrivener and they were certified by the same clerk.Footnote 72 The fact that the date of December 6 reflects the real picture of issuing letters of grant rather than affixing the date, for example, post factum, is evidenced by the dates of other documents compiled by the same pair of clerical employees. One letter of grant was issued to the Kirillo-Belozerskii Monastery the next day, on December 7,Footnote 73 and another preserved letter is dated December 19 and was addressed to the Spaso-Prilutskii Monastery.Footnote 74 In this case, we see that the issuing of a significant number of documents is ensured with minimal effort even in field conditions. If we take into account that the staff of appanage chancelleries of the middle of the 15th and the beginning of the 16th century included 3–5 clerks simultaneously, and the staff of the grand prince’s chancellery included several dozen clerks, it becomes obvious that the amount of documents that the chancellery could produce was very significant (even taking into account the specialization of individual clerks in narrow areas of activity).
A separate point that needs to be discussed is that the clerical practice of the 14th–15th centuries was based on an ancient Russian tradition, with the almost complete absence of Horde influence. With the exception of clerk monograms imitating the Uyghur script, no other signs of the Tatar world are found either in the vocabulary or in the design of charters (for example, ink seals were not used). The types of documents used in a given period of time are based on those that existed in the previous time.
The intensification of clerical work, which is visible in each period under study, was expressed in the increase in the range and volume of documents produced by the chancelleries. The principles of describing the land changed. In the earlier period, scribe books were compiled for individual categories of land. At the end of the 15th century, a general description of all categories of land was introduced (with the exception of palace volosts). At the end of the 15th century, the tasks of scribes included not only the actual compilation of cadastres, but also the analysis of land disputes.
Work on control over property rights took on a systemic character. Ownership documents for real estate were confiscated in the annexed territories. Their legitimacy was confirmed. Control over transactions was strengthened (which resulted in the mandatory recording of transactions in patrimonial books in the middle of the 16th century). The grand prince’s archive performed the functions of the cadastral chamber.
Many changes in the clerical work of the Moscow princely chancelleries traced during the 14th–15th centuries are interrelated. The most obvious cause-and-effect relationships can be formulated in a simplified form as follows:
The appearance of paper caused a transition to wax seals (paper could not withstand the weight of metal seals). Its cheapness relative to parchment made it possible to increase the number and volume of documents produced by the chancellery. The increase in the number and volume of documents required the acceleration of work on them, which led to changes in the writing system and the development of the first clerical writing and then the appearance of cursive elements in writing at the turn of the 15th–16th centuries. The availability of paper and its cheapness relative to parchment made it possible to expand the range of documents, the work on which required an increase in the number of clerical employees. The increase in the staff of the chancellery led to the differentiation of its composition, the distinguishing of the highest stratum, clerks, and employees of a lower rank, scriveners. The complication of documents circulation led to the development of the system for certifying documents and pushing boyars out of the sphere of clerical work.
The reduction in the cost of writing material made it more cost-effective to draw up detailed cadastral documents, which led to an increase in the collection of taxes received by the princely treasury. This increased the material resources available to the Moscow princes, including those allocated for external expansion (by both diplomatic and military methods). The expansion of the state made it necessary to delegate the powers of the prince to a permanent administration. Not only the accounting of taxpayers and the collection of taxes, but also, for example, the distribution of fied-offices among the princely vassals came under the jurisdiction of this administration. The concentration of control over land grants, the distribution of fied-offices, and the collection of taxes in the hands of the highest stratum of the clergy led to the increased role of the bureaucracy in the state apparatus and to the natural growth in the social status of clerks.
In general, the systematized materials allow us to consider from a new angle the question of the reasons for the victory of the Moscow principality in the struggle for leadership in Northeastern Russia.
In Moscow, the development of clerical work was more intensive than in other principalities of the region. Some of the innovations were accepted in the chancelleries of other principalities, and some were never implemented.
In addition, we can see a larger staff of clerical employees and the high social status of a significant part of them. This is due to the large amount of work performed and bureaucratization, which developed in a spiral.
Apparently, the initial reason was that the Moscow princes took the territory of the great reign under their control. The management of such a large territory and the organization of the collection of tribute required an increase in the staff of specialists in matters related to clerical work. The prince ceased to deal with the daily and routine spheres of government. The expansion of possessions required an even greater increase in document flow and the staff of the chancellery. The alienation of the prince from direct government required the introduction of the protection and control system. This is how boyar signatures and then princely signatures appeared and the specialization of the upper layer of clerks in certain areas of activity took place. Apparently, the volume of clerical work increased multiple times with each decade. Accordingly, the size of the administrative apparatus grew, its structure became more complicated, and the functionality expanded. New technologies were introduced.
The key to Moscow’s success was not only the introduction of certain innovations, but an intensive search for new solutions that increased the efficiency of clerical work, information protection, and attention to the distribution of areas of competence and specialization. During the 14th–15th centuries, we see intensive attempts to introduce and use different technologies for certification of chartersFootnote 75 and options for improving or optimizing clerical processes.Footnote 76 The appearance of paper in Russia was the key moment, the starting point for the implementation of these experiments and the introduction of innovations.
The advent of cheap writing material made it possible to benefit more than in the past from the expansion of controlled territories. Taken together, all the consequences of the emergence of paper and increased management efficiency led to the dominance of the Kalitovichs in Northeastern Russia and the creation of a strong, effective regular state.
Notes
Petrov, A.K., The Prikaz System of Management in Russia in the Late 15th–17th Centuries, Moscow, 2005, p. 48, pp. 115–116.
Gryaznov, A.L. and Moshkova, L.V., The Chancellery of the Uglich Prince Andrei Bolshoi, History and Culture of the Rostov Land, 2020, Rostov, 2021, pp. 29–30.
Alekseev, Yu.G., At the Helm of the Russian State: An Outline of the Development of the Administrative Apparatus of the 14th–15th Centuries, St. Petersburg, 1998.
Kashtanov, S.M., From the History of a Russian Medieval Source (Acts of the 10th–16th Centuries), Moscow, 1996; Kashtanov, S.M., Research on the History of Princely Chancelleries of Medieval Russia, Moscow, 2014.
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 89, pp. 362–363.
At the request of the judge of Grand Prince Vasilii Ivanovich, certificates from the grand prince’s treasury were issued by the clerk Nikifor (Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 540, p. 475; Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th – Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 590, p. 482).
Gryaznov, A.L., Belozerskii Acts of the 14th–15th Centuries: Research and List, Vologda, 2019, pp. 115–135; Gryaznov, A.L. and Moshkova, L.V., The Chancellery of the Uglich Prince Andrei Bolshoi, pp. 29–45; Gryaznov, A.L., The Chancellery of Prince Andrei Vasilyevich Menshoi, History and Culture of the Rostov Land. 2021, Rostov, 2022; Gryaznov, A.L., Chancellery of Prince Yuri Vasilievich Dmitrovskii, Auxiliary Historical Disciplines in Modern Scientific Knowledge: Proceedings of the XXXIV All-Russia Scientific Conference with International Participation. Moscow, April 7–8, 2022. Moscow, 2022, pp. 91–93; Korzinin, A.L., The Court of the Grand Princess Maria Yaroslavna, Bulletin of St. Petersburg University: History, 2020, vol. 65, issue 1, pp. 26–34.
Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. II, no. 433, p. 476; Rykov, Yu.D., New Acts of the Spaso-Prilutsky Monastery of the 15th Century, Notes of the Department of Manuscripts of the V.I. Lenin State Library, Issue 43, Moscow, 1982, no. 4, p. 98.
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 77, pp. 290–292; Acts of Feudal Landownership and Economy, part 2, no. 49, pp. 49–51.
Alekseev, Yu.G., At the Helm of the Russian State, pp. 289–294; Savosichev, A.Yu., Clerks and Scriveners of the 14th–the First Third of the 15th Century: Origin and Social Ties. Experience of Prosopographic Research, Orel, 2013, pp. 126–128.
For the first time, clerks were singled out as a separate rank in the 1475 rank record about the campaign of Ivan III to Novgorod (Rank Book of 1475–1598, Moscow, 1966, p. 17).
Liseytsev, D.V., Rogozhin, N.M., and Eskin, Yu.M., Departments of the Moscow State of the 16th–17th Centuries, Moscow, 2015, p. 11.
For more details about the organization of scribe works at the turn of the 15th–16th centuries, see Frolov, A.A., Novgorod Scribe Books: Sources and Research Methods, Moscow, St. Petersburg, 2017, pp. 346–352.
Alekseev, Yu.G., At the Helm of the Russian State, 1998, pp. 189–194.
Nazarov, V.D., On the Suzdal Origins of Clerk Surnames in the Russian State from the End of the 15th to the Middle of the 16th Centuries, Zubov Readings: Collection of Articles, Issue 6, Aleksandrov, 2012, pp. 27–36; Gryaznov, A.L., Belozerskii Acts, pp. 116, 119–120, 122–123; Gryaznov, A.L., The Chancellery of Prince Andrei Menshoi.
According to the genealogical libel, the motive for the return of clerk Aleksei Stromilov to Moscow was the threat of losing his large patrimony. Documents have been preserved on the presence of a large patrimony of clerk Roman Alekseev in the Rostov district, which then passed to his children. Metropolitan clerk Levash Konshin held a metropolitan village in the Yuryevskii district and his patrimony exceeded the size of the patrimony of metropolitan boyars (Acts of Feudal Landownership and Economy, part 1, no. 165, p. 149). For more details, see Gryaznov, A.L., “Signed by Clerk Levash”: Administrator and Diplomat in the Service of the Russian Metropolitans, Akroterius, Problems of History, Art History, Architecture and Restoration. Collection of Articles on the 70th Anniversary of Aleksander Gavrilovich Melnik, Moscow, 2022).
These data are systematized in the study by A.Yu. Savosichev (Savosichev, A.Yu., Clerks and Scriveners from the 14th Century to the First Third of the 16th Century, pp. 249–254).
The dynasty of clerks of Tsyplyatevs is the most famous. Its founder, Ivan Tsyplya Monastyrev, was for a long time the clerk of the Belozerskii Prince Mikhail Andreevich. After the liquidation of the appanage, his son Elizary Tsyplyatev appeared in the service of the grand prince’s chancellery and occupied one of the upper steps in the clergy hierarchy during the reign of Vasilii III. His son Ivan Elizaryevich Tsyplyatev was a prominent clerk during the reign of Ivan the Terrible.
Nazarov, V.D., The Genealogical Composition of Ivan III’s Bed-makers (According to the List of the Court of 1495), Eastern Europe in Antiquity and the Middle Ages: Genealogy as a Form of Historical Memory, Moscow, 2001, pp. 144–146.
Kalashnikova, A.A., Russian Court Documents of the 15th and the First Half of the 16th Century as a Historical Source. Dr. Sci. Dissertation in History, St. Petersburg, 2021.
The examples of such charters are as follows: Acts of the Socio-Economic History of North-Eastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 550, p. 428; Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 624, pp. 534–525; Acts of Feudal Landownership and Economy, part 2, no. 49, pp. 49–51.
Florya, B.N., Fied-office Charters of the 15th–16th Centuries as a Historical Source // Archeographic Yearbook for 1970, Moscow, 1971, pp. 109–126; Antonov, A.V., From the History of the Grand Prince’s Chancellery: Fied-office Charters of the 15th–mid-16th Centuries // Russian Diploma Collection, Issue 3, Moscow, 1998, pp. 91–155.
Ponomareva, I.G., On the origin of Moscow fortified charters, Archaeographic Yearbook for 2012, Moscow, 2016, pp. 64–75.
Kolycheva, E.I., Full and report charters of the 15th–16th centuries, Archaeographic Yearbook for 1961, Moscow, 1962, pp. 41–81.
For example, at the trial for the case about the village of Gridinskoye Kodoboy, the princes Kemskie provided the judge with several original documents containing samples of the handwriting of already deceased or missing witnesses and a scribe of the letter, thanks to which the decision was made in their favor (Acts Relating to the Legal Life of Ancient Russia, no. 13, pp. 25– 27).
Acts Relating to the Legal Life of Ancient Russia, no. 13, p. 26.
Nazarov, V.D., Genealogical Composition of Ivan III’s Bed-makers (According to the List of the Court of 1495), pp. 140–141.
Russian Feudal Archive of the 14th–the First Third of the 16th Centuries, Moscow, 2008, р. 523.
Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles, vol. 26, p. 263.
In this regard, the official biography of Kuludar Irezhskii, who was originally a grand prince’s clerk, is characteristic. After being disgraced, he moved to the service of Prince Ivan Andreevich Mozhaiskii and then his brother Prince Mikhail Andreevich Belozerskii. The biography of his colleague Ivan Kotov is no less rich in twists and turns. He first appeared in the sources as a clerk of Dmitrii Shemyaka, then he served Vasilii II and later passed into the appanage of the Belozerskii Prince Mikhail Andreevich (Gryaznov, A.L., Belozerskii Acts of the 14th–16th Centuries, pp. 119–120).
The most famous source is the genealogical information about the origin of the ancestor of the Sholokhovs and the Chertovs clerk Aleksei Stromilov from the Brenbol clerk, which was entered into the metropolitan formulary (Russian Feudal Archive of the 14th–the First Third of the 16th Century, p. 523).
Volokolamsk Patericon, Library of Literature of Ancient Russia, St. Petersburg, 2006, vol. 9, p. 22.
Department of Manuscripts of the Russian National Library. F. 550. Q.XVII.58. For more information about this collection, see Cherepnin, L.V., Russian Feudal Archives. Part. 2. Moscow, 1951, pp. 351–358; Alekseev, Yu.G., “Zapis chto tyanet dushegubstvom k Moskve”: Some Questions of Dating and Content, Russian Autocracy and Bureaucracy: A Collection of Articles in Honor of N.F. Demidova, Moscow; Novosibirsk, 2000, pp. 50–63.
Department of Manuscripts of the Russian National Library. F. 550. D. O.IV.14.
Antonov, A.V., From the History of the Grand Prince’s Chancellery: Fied-Office Charters of the 15th–Mid-16th Centuries, pp. 103–105.
For the first time, the prince’s signature in the format “Grand Prince of All Russia” is used in a charter dated June 1485 (Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 516, pp. 390–391). A little earlier, this title appeared in the letter of a treaty of Ivan III with Mikhail Borisovich Tverskoi (Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 79, p. 295) and in a letter to Boris Volotskii on the delimitation of lands in the Rzhev region as of October 20, 1483 (Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 77, p. 290). For more details about the problem and its historiography, see Bogdanov, S.V., On the Definition of “All Russia” in the Grand Princely Titles of the 14th–15th Centuries (Based on the Materials of the Acts of the 14th–15th Centuries), Ancient Russia: Questions of Medieval Studies, 2008, no. 4, pp. 30–49.
Gryaznov, A.L. and Moshkova, L.V., Principles of Reading Clerical Monograms on Acts of the 15th–early 16th Centuries, Bulletin “Alliance-Archeo.” Issue 19, Moscow–St. Petersburg, 2017, pp. 3–24.
Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 116, p. 93; Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. II, no. 64, p. 42; no. 93, p. 56.
Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 124, p. 97.
Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 52, p. 54; no. 100, p. 80.
Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 86, p. 72.
See the reproduction of charters written by scribes of the first and second group in the cycle of articles by L.V. Moshkova in the journal Bulletin “Alliance-Archeo”: Moshkova, L.V., Charters of the 15th–the first third of the 16th century from f. 281 of the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts: Paleographic Notes. Article one, Issue 17. Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2016, pp. 40–89; Article two, Issue 19. Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2017, pp. 55–81; Article three, Issue 20. Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2017, pp. 52–108; Article four, Issue 31. Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2020, pp. 53–122; Article five, Issue 33. Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2020, pp. 3–60; Article six, Issue 36. Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2021, pp. 3–81.
The first dated letter of a grant with the Grand Prince’s signature was issued in September 1433 (Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 74, pp. 65–66). A significant number of letters of grant with a princely signature date back to the period 1432–1445 (Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, nos. 92, 93, 97, 98, 101, 104).
For example, the name of Nikita Konstantinovich: Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 84, p. 71; Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. I, no. 95, p. 78.
Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. II, no. 51, pp. 34–35.
Gryaznov, A.L., Clerk Monograms on the Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Moscow Princes of the 15th Century, Auxiliary and Special Sciences of History in the 10th–Early 21st Centuries: Vocation, Creativity, Scientific Service of the Historian: Materials of the XXVI International Scientific Conference. Moscow, April 14–15, 2014, pp. 152–155; Gryaznov, A.L., Clerk Monograms on Acts from the Fund of the Diplomas of the College of Economy, Bulletin “Alliance-Archeo,” Issue 18, Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2017, pp. 31–84; Gryaznov, A.L., Clerk Monograms on Acts from the Funds of P.M. Stroev and N.G. Golovin, Bulletin “Alliance-Archeo,” Issue 37, Moscow– St. Petersburg, 2021, pp. 3–36.
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 1, p. 8. Two spiritual charters of Prince Ivan Danilovich have been preserved. The name of the clerk who wrote them is indicated only in one of them. This clause is omitted in the second charter. Analyzing both versions of the spiritual charter, V.A. Kuchkin came to the conclusion that the charters were written in different handwriting, but he did not indicate specific differences in the writing of the letters, pointing out several differences in orthography (Kuchkin, V.A., How Many Spiritual Charters of Ivan Kalita Have Been Preserved?, Source Studies of Russian History, Moscow, 1989, pp. 214–215). Nevertheless, the handwriting of both spiritual charters of Ivan Kalita is completely identical both in the general appearance of letters (see, for example, the characteristic “m”) and in the smallest details (for example, “d”, “z”, “u”).
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 4, p. 17, 19.
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 8, p. 25.
For more information about this find, see Berednikov, Ya.I., Note on the Antiquities Discovered in the Moscow Kremlin, St. Petersburg, 1844 (Note on the antiquities discovered in the Moscow Kremlin presented to the second department of the Imperial Academy of Sciences by Adjutant Ya.I. Berednikov, Bulletin de la classe des sciences historiques, philologiques et politiques de l’Académie impériale des sciences de Saint-Petersbourg, vol. II, nos. 4–5, pp. 49–60); Kuchkin, V.A., The Kremlin Find of 1843, Bulletin of History, Literature, Art, vol. VII, Moscow, 2010, pp. 299–312.
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 84, p. 142; Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. III, no. 2, p. 15.
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 86, p. 143.
Lavrentiev, A.V., The Seal of the Grand Prince Dmitry Ivanovich Donskoi and Russian Phobias of the 14th Century, Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana. Petersburg Slavic and Balkan Studies, 2016, no. 1 (19), pp. 110–111.
Kuchkin, V.A., An Autograph of an Zssociate of Dmitry Donskoi, Motherland, 1995, no. 2, p. 38.
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 2, pp. 11–13.
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 11, pp. 30–33. To date, only the seal of Prince Vladimir Andreevich has survived; the seals of Dmitrii Donskoi and the metropolitan had already been badly damaged in the 18th century and have now been lost (Ancient Russian Vivliofika, St. Petersburg, 1775, ed. 1, part 8, p. 227).
Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 13, p. 39; no. 16, p. 45; no. 24, p. 67; no. 30, p. 80; no. 34, p. 89.
Silver seals certified two spiritual charters of Ivan Kalita, one charter of Simeon Gordyi, one charter of Ivan Krasnyi, and two charters of Dmitrii Donskoi.
Novikova, O.L., Features of Attaching Pending Seals of the Hierarchs of Northeastern Russia in the Late 14th–16th Centuries // Bulletin “Alliance-Archeo,” Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2014, issue 5, pp. 3–19.
Kuchkin, V.A., Autograph of an Associate of Dmitrii Donskoi, Motherland, 1995, no. 2, pp. 25–26.
Soboleva, N.A., Russian Seals, Moscow, 1991, pp. 125, 133; Soboleva, N.A., Essays on the History of Russian Symbolics: From Tamga to Symbols of State Sovereignty, Moscow, 2006, p. 91.
Parchment to paper.
The nonstandardized format to a narrow band in accordance with the text volume to a column.
Semi-charter style to clerical writing to cursive writing.
Indication of the initiator of the award to boyar signature to princely signature “grand prince” to signature of the format “Grand Prince of All Russia.”
The clerical monograms of the Uyghur graphics to Cyrillic monograms to the signature of the clerk with a clearly readable name and surname.
Issuance of new letters of grant to a record of confirmation of the award on the back side of a previously issued letter of grant.
In any case, this is how one can interpret the clause of the treaty of Vasilii II with Dmitrii Shemyaka and Dmitrii Krasnyi in 1434, which stated that 50 rubles were taken from some Peter, who vouched for Prince Dmitrii Ryapolovskii, and Prince Ivan Zaseka stood a bail of 100 rubles (Spiritual and Contractual Letters of the Grand and Appanage Princes of the 14th–16th Centuries, no. 34, p. 88).
See, for example, Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. II, no. 404, p. 415. For more details, see Pokrovsky, N.N., Act Sources on the History of Taxed Land Ownership in Russia in the 14th–Early 16th Centuries, Novosibirsk, 1973, pp. 103–104.
Moshkova, L.V., Treaty of Ivan III with Andrei Bolshoi: Stages of Compiling, Bulletin “Alliance-Archeo,” Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2021, pp. 37–53.
Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. II, no. 191–198, pp. 122–128.
Gryaznov, A.L., The Chancellery of Prince Andrei Vasilievich Menshoi.
Acts of the Socio-Economic History of Northeastern Russia of the Late 14th–Early 16th Centuries, vol. II, no. 199, p. 129.
The original of this letter is currently divided into several parts. Most of it was published by Yu.D. Rykov (Rykov, Yu.D., New Acts of the Spaso-Prilutskii Monastery of the 15th Century, no. 3, pp. 96–97). The last third of the document containing the date was discovered by A.V. Deduk in the Department of Written Sources of the State Historical Museum (Department of Written Sources of the State Historical Museum. F. 389. Inv. 1. D. 1) and has not yet been published.
Boyar and princely signatures, clerical monograms, changes to these monograms (the use of Uygur graphics in them, switching to Cyrillic), and an indication of the clerk’s name in confirmation.
In the content of documents (new elements are introduced, perhaps unnecessary ones are removed), design (date, place of compilation), and the introduction of charter confirmation instead of issuing new charters.
Funding
This study was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project no. 20-09-00360.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
The author declares that he has no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Translated by L. Solovyova
Rights and permissions
Open Access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Gryaznov, A. Moscow Clerical Culture of the 14th–15th Centuries: Development Trajectory. Her. Russ. Acad. Sci. 92 (Suppl 5), S407–S418 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1019331622110065
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1019331622110065